In the United States, a country whose history is fraught with all kinds of discrimination, the value of nondiscrimination is important but also a sensitive issue. In order to amend the wrongs of the past and prevent wrongs in the futre, our government goes to great lengths to protect groups and individuals from discrimination, although such measures sometimes conflict with the realities of our society.Of course, our government is not the only institution that sees nondiscrimination as an ideal. Colleges across the country strive to protect their students, faculty and staff from discrimination as well. Some colleges are also trying to reconcile wrongs of the past, but many simply see nondiscrimination as an ideal social state that should be achieved and maintained in order to preserve amity and tolerance on campus.

Cornell University is one of these many colleges. Like at Brandeis, student groups at Cornell must abide by nondiscrimination rules in order to receive recognition and university funding. However, according to an Inside Higher Ed article printed April 7, the student assembly of Cornell has drafted policies that would oblige religious student organizations to allow anyone to hold leadership positions regardless of their religious practices or religious values.

Under the current nondiscrimination clause of the Cornell Student Assembly, student organizations are only prohibited from discriminating "on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, disability, gender, citizenship, sexual orientation, or age when determining its membership."

The clause makes no mention of leadership or of religious practice, and it was generally understood that religious organizations could choose leadership based upon one's religious values and practices. However, the amended nondiscrimination clause makes specific reference to nondiscrimination for religious practice, and has been extended to include "voting for, seeking, and holding positions." within the organization.

Understandably so, some of the religious groups were a little peeved by this revised nondiscrimination policy. Of course, there is something to be said for nondiscrimination, but it seems rather unrealistic and impractical to ask religious groups to allow anyone to hold a leadership position regardless of that person's practices.

Students should, and do, have the right to practice any religion they choose. In addition, members of a particular faith should, and do, have the right to form groups based upon that faith. In order to protect students' rights to practice religion freely, the leadership of religious groups needs to be exempt from nondiscrimination rules. A religious group cannot properly adhere to its religion if the group's leaders are not of that religion, do not understand the central tenets of the religion and do not align themselves with the particular values of that religion. The same idea might apply to a political group or any other group that is based around a particular set of beliefs and ideologies. If the leader does not share the beliefs and ideologies that the organization is based upon, he or she cannot properly govern the organization.

Furthermore, withholding funds and recognition from campus religious groups because they are "discriminatory" is highly unreasonable.

On the national scale, no one could reasonably deny recognition or the use of public space to say, a church group because the said group refused to allow non-Christians to hold leadership positions. Asking the group to allow a non-Christian, or someone whose practices were not aligned with Christianity to do something, is a request that probably wouldn't even be taken seriously. True, a church is different from a campus religious group in that it is funded on private initiative, but the reality is the same. A church is meant for Christians to practice Christianity, and Christian leaders are needed in order to do so. Campus religious groups might be supported by university funds, but they serve the same purpose and should not be treated any differently.

Our country, and consequently, the colleges and universities of our country have made great efforts to build upon the principles of tolerance and nondiscrimination. But the fact remains that campus religious groups are formed to serve a specific population of students, namely the students belonging to that particular religion.

Ideally, these religious groups should be welcoming to general members of all religions, especially in order to foster greater religious tolerance. However, religious groups cannot be expected to open their leadership positions to students outside their religion. Doing so could potentially harm students' ability to practice their religion of choice. And perhaps denying funding, recognition or the use of university space to religious groups that want to keep to their faith could be seen as a form of discrimination of its own.