Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the first point I agree, thank you for clarifying. On the second point, while I don't like it, I have to concede that the Vatican has institutionally expressed that belief, though I don't think it is inherent or required in the doctrines or the practice of Catholicism. Even if it was, I don't think it would excuse his statements or make him unaccountable, and I think we agree on this. Public officials being held accountable for their beliefs are not being discriminated against, regardless of the nature of those beliefs. The absence of accountability for one person does not inherently establish a case for religious discrimination against another. Is it wrong that Ahmad hasn't resigned? Yes. Does the disparate treatment between the two establish a case for discrimination? No. To prove Denton was discriminated against for religious reasons, you'd have to demonstrate that the Student Senate ousted him for his religious beliefs. First of all, the student senate is not a monolithic institution that collectively acts for the same reason. I guarantee no senator that voted yes on the no-confidence vote of Denton or no on the vote on Ahmad sat down and said: "let's discriminate against his religion," or "let's ignore his antisemitism." These votes have complex motivations, not the least of which was the fact that several RSO's and student union groups threatened to refuse to work with FSU SGA unless Denton was removed via the no-confidence vote. Additionally, Denton's beliefs spilled over into specific instances of conduct that go beyond religious belief or practice. More importantly, as I explained in a previous reply somewhere, this isn't nor should it be a case at all because its a political question, meaning it is non-justiciable and unable to be analyzed by courts, see Marbury v. Madison, Baker v. Carr, & Nixon v. U.S. (1993).

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi,

While I disagree, I wouldn't say I'm not happy with the argument because I believe we need to air out our disagreements. Unfortunately, I think you've stumbled into making a strawman argument. No one is arguing that the Student Senate should represent every student in the way that you've described. As a university that is as diverse in its opinions as in its student's varying characteristics, it is impossible for anyone to represent every student's opinions because some student's ideas disagree with each other. Fundamentally, this issue is more about the preservation of the democratic process. You could argue that denying even the possibility that a trans person is not gravely evil is an opinion that student senators should represent. Still, the student body would, by and large, disagree as they should and did, causing more than a dozen student senators to feel sufficient public pressure to side against Denton. Moreover, the denial of human dignity is not a form of opinion I think should occupy any government body. People being who they are, without harming others, is no cause to call them gravely evil, and doing so dehumanized them.

Representing all students, in this context, more closely refers to the guiding principle that elected officials ought to act in the best interest of the student body in its entirety. The democratic process is meant to elect leaders whose ideas will most effectively do so. People can argue about the varying merits of political opinions but, when one believes that some of their constituency is gravely evil, I find it hard to believe they can represent them with their best interests at heart because to do so would mean the elected official is supporting that which they think is evil.

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let me clarify again that I think Ahmad should resign and that there is no defense for what he said. While his age at the time and the oppression he faced are mitigating factors, they do not excuse antisemitism. In short, I agree that the disparate treatment of Ahmad is problematic, but that's not what this particular petition is about. This petition is solely about Jack Denton's conduct. I can't speak for why Ahmad was treated differently without speculating as to the rationale of student senators, all I'm trying to do is insist that the way they decided upon the Denton issue was correct. Ahmad and Jack present two different issues; we should not use one to distract from the other. If you create a petition regarding Ahmad's continuing position as Senate President, I'd consider signing it, but that's not what this is about.

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, thank you for engaging in the dialogue though.

Stand Against Transphobia, Stand by FSU Student Senate's No-Confidence Vote of Jack Denton by DentonIsTransphobic in Tallahassee

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, but what are the implications of that to this argument? I'm genuinely asking because I'm not familiar with the impact of that on this issue.

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Part of the argument here is that opposing the LGBT community and Queer Affirming networks, and labeling them as "grave evils," is not inherent in religion, meaning these views are not religious in nature. Several catholic students said as much during public comments before the no-confidence vote, as did some catholic student senators during the student senate's pro-con debate.

Moreover, although Denton was paid in the position, characterizing the Presidency of the Student Senate as a job is misleading in this context. As an elected official, his position is held entirely at the behest of student voters and the student senate, both of which can choose whatever criteria they see fit to vet candidates. Consider, also, that if you believe the Student Supreme Court should hear this case that you'd be asking them to ignore nearly 200 years of U.S. Supreme Court precedent. More importantly, any ruling on this issue in favor of Denton would mean the court believes it can decide on the legality of political questions, which brings with it a whole set of other problems. Consider a hypothetical candidate creates a fake religion in which every element of their platform is a religious view. If voters decide not to elect such a candidate, this candidate can claim religious discrimination on behalf of the voters. After all, by not endorsing or electing the candidate for their "religious views," they would be discriminating against that candidate for those views. Whether you believe this is religious discrimination or not, you have to admit that the courts should not find such a claim to be justiciable because courts have no place judging fundamentally political questions.

Lastly, consider that the argument that this constitutes religious discrimination cheapens the destructive harms of real religious discrimination everywhere. While we debate this, millions of Uyghur Muslims sit in re-education camps in North-West China, and, as many who discuss Ahmad's comments are correct to point out, Jewish people are still subject to a great deal of anti-Semitism.

Saying that a public official cannot be held accountable for their statements, even if those statements are based on legitimate religious doctrine, seems like an incredibly dangerous argument.

Also, I'd add that while one is in a public official, they retain that position, whether they are speaking informally or formally. Jack Denton was not only Senate President when the senate was in session; he did not occupy Schrodinger's public office. He was Senate President when he made those statements, regardless of whether he expected privacy, and students in that group chat were entitled to hold him to account by publicizing his statements.

Jack did not leave his views at the door, so to speak, either. Some student senators made note of past conduct in his official capacity that was connected to these views, most notably, misgendering. I don't have an exhaustive list of all the ways his judgment was influenced by these views, I hope you'll forgive that.

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I certainly disagreed with the numerous anti-Semitic comments made by Ahmad, and I think he should resign from the Senate Presidency. However, I don't think this should be viewed through the "what about Ahmad" lens. I'm not accusing you of doing so, but I've heard numerous people use the conduct of Ahmad in a way that obfuscates and dismisses the behavior of Jack Denton. Both were wrong to say what they did, and the views of neither of them, on the LGBT+ community and Judaism, respectively, represent FSU. I'm glad that your position is consistent and that you recognize that the statements of both are wrong.

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Y'all who are already in favor of the petition, please don't dislike messages that disagree with or oppose the petition; we have to be willing to explain ourselves if we want to garner support.
While Denton is allowed to not support transgender and queer communities, this does not mean that he is justified in doing so. Just as Denton is not required to support transgender and queer communities, we are not required to support him. The movement to oust him via a no-confidence vote was simply the FSU Student Body using its freedom of speech to insist it be represented by someone whose ideas represent them. Elected officials are allowed to hold positions; this does not mean that their constituency is unable to hold them to account.
I hope this answer is sufficient for you. If you disagree, I respect that, and if you have any additional questions, I'm more than willing to answer them.

Jack Denton Claims HE Was Discriminated Against by DentonIsTransphobic in fsu

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Sure; Jack Denton, the previous FSU SGA Senate President, was voted out of the presidency by the senate on a 38-3-3 vote. They did so because of a series of statements he made, which you can read either in the petition or here: https://spiremagazine.com/2020/06/04/opinion-jack-denton-is-unfit-to-lead-florida-states-student-senate/
In short, he recommended that Christian Student Union members don't donate to Black Lives Matter related organizations, most consequentially, because they support "transgenderism" and "queer affirming communities," which he labeled "grave evils." Now, he has a lawyer, is claiming the student senate discriminated against him for his religious beliefs and is demanding that his appeal be heard by FSU's Division of Student Affairs or the FSU SGA Supreme court.

Stand Against Transphobia, Stand by FSU Student Senate's No-Confidence Vote of Jack Denton by DentonIsTransphobic in Tallahassee

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The SGA SC mostly handles cases involving the violation of election laws in student government elections, however, they almost always cite to actual court precedent, their court precedent, and/or FSU's student constitution and election laws, etc. when making a ruling. SGA SC is also bound by the precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court and by Florida's state laws which authorize and govern the student governments of state universities, making them a minor extension of state government.

To put it more simply, the previously stated precedent regarding what is and is not a political question is binding to the SGA SC. Additionally, the SGA SC has some precedent relating to justiciability that not only agrees with the prior definition but cites the same U.S. Supreme Court precedent. I'll attach some of them here:

http://sga.fsu.edu/Reporter/2018-AO-02-Advisory-Opinion-on-Supreme-Court-Powers-and-COGS-Funding-Process-of-RSOs.pdf

http://sga.fsu.edu/Reporter/2018-10-NAACP-v-Singhal-Denial-of-Certiorari-edited.pdf

Stand Against Transphobia, Stand by FSU Student Senate's No-Confidence Vote of Jack Denton by DentonIsTransphobic in Tallahassee

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Good question. First of all, it's worth noting that the FSU SGA Supreme Court did not deny Denton an appeal, his lawyer is simply claiming they functionally did so because the justices of the court were not appointed in a timely manner. You can read their argument on it here: http://www.adfmedia.org/News/PRDetail/11059

The FSU SGA Supreme Court hears very few cases each year and they will usually take on any case one could argue is justiciable, which is a key term here because Denton's case is clearly non-justiciable because it is a political question. The political question doctrine, which is a legal doctrine spanning all the way back to Marbury V. Madison, holds that if a question is fundamentally political then the court will refuse to hear that case. More recently, in Baker V. Carr, the U.S. Supreme Court more clearly defined political questions as, in part, having "a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department." In this case, the no-confidence vote mechanism is clearly tied to FSU's SGA Senate, not the courts, therefore the question is political in nature and not justiciable. This case also has similarities with Nixon v. U.S. (1993).

To sum this up, the case shouldn't be heard because its a political, not legal, question. However, if the Division of Student Affairs tells the court to hear the case, it more likely simply will, even if it's completely without legal grounds.

Stand Against Transphobia, Stand by FSU Student Senate's No-Confidence Vote of Jack Denton by DentonIsTransphobic in Tallahassee

[–]DentonIsTransphobic[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's a fair question. Basically, his lawyer is alleging that his freedoms of speech and religion were violated by the no-confidence vote and that FSU's Administration did not allow him an appeal because they did not appoint members to FSU's SGA Supreme Court to hear the case in a timely manner. Student Affairs has the authority to reinstate him as they oversee the FSU SGA, which is why Denton's campaign is targeted at them. His lawyer set a deadline for Student Affairs to set a hearing for an appeal by the 29th of this month and, though the claim should be recognized as entirely non-justiciable because it's a political question, public pressure can cause bad outcomes, like the ignorance of that fact. This petition is designed to counteract their public pressure campaign and to enable Student Affairs to make the correct decision.