Like all Christian universities, Patrick Henry College has its share of LGBT students — invisible as they may be, by necessity — some of whom write a blog called “queerphc.” Several current students and alumni contribute to it using pseudonyms because the campus prohibits “the practice of homosexual conduct” or any advocacy on its behalf by students. Over the weekend, PHC Chancellor Michael Farris took to Queer at Patrick Henry College’s Facebook page to threaten the group with a lawsuit (and outing) if they do not stop using the school’s name:

This page is in violation of our copyright of the name Patrick Henry College. You are hereby notified that you must remove this page at once. On Monday, we will began [sic] the legal steps to seek removal from Facebook and from the courts if necessary. In the process of this matter we can seek discovery from Facebook to learn your identity and seek damages from you as permitted by law. The best thing for all concerned is for you to simply remove this page.

Find another way to communicate your message without using the term “Patrick Henry College” in any manner.

Queerphc was unfazed, recognizing their mission to support other LGBT students at PHC:

There’s not much to add, except that our message is intrinsically tied to the name Patrick Henry College. We are students of Patrick Henry College. We share about our experiences at Patrick Henry College. We reach out to other students at Patrick Henry College. The demand that we stop using the school’s name is really a thinly disguised demand that we shut up.

Contribute “Kate Kane” told New York Magazine that the threat was “incredibly disappointing” and constituted an “attempt to bully and censor us through the misapplication of copyright and trademark laws.” By Monday afternoon, Farris had realized his mistake and posted this brief follow-up to his original comment on the queerphc Facebook page:

After further consultation, I withdraw my note from yesterday. While we believe in the inappropriate nature of the use of our trademarked name, we believe that litigation is not appropriate.

Patrick Henry College is not the first Christian university to threaten students and alumni with legal action over support for LGBT issues. In August, Franciscan University similarly threatened a group of alumni who had exposed a class description that taught homosexuality as a “deviant behavior” alongside murder, rape, prostitution, mental illness, and drug use. One prominent LGBT alumni group, One Wheaton, has been a particularly visible model for efforts to support students at unwelcoming schools.

Last week, a Michigan Senate committee advanced a bill that would allow healthcare providers to discriminate against individuals or object to providing any services if it violated their conscience. Now, a Michigan House committee has advanced two bills that provide a similar “license to discriminate” for adoption agencies. Introduced by Rep. Kenneth Kurtz (R), HB 5763 and HB 5764 allow any child placement agency to discriminate based on “religious or moral convictions” without fear of financial retribution from the state:

A child placing agency is not required to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, facilitate, refer, or participate in a placement that violates the child placing agency’s written or moral convictions or policies. A state or local government entity may not deny a child placing agency a grant, contract, or participation in a government program because of the child placing agency’s objection to performing, assisting, counseling, recommending, facilitating, referring, or participating in a placement that violates the child placing agency’s written or moral convictions or policies.

If the blatant invitation to use state funding to discriminate against Michigan families weren’t odious enough, the bills even acknowledge that the policy has nothing to do with what’s best for the children involved:

Refusal by a child placing agency to perform, assist, counsel, recommend, facilitate, refer, or participate in a placement that violates the child placing agency’s written or moral convictions or policies does not constitute a determination that the proposed adoption is not in the best interests of the adoptee.

Equality Michigan notes that Michigan has 14,000 children in foster care, including 5,000 whose biological parents’ rights have been terminated. These young people could find safe, loving families with same-sex couples, but not if the state’s agencies are free to discriminate for no legitimate purpose other than bigoted beliefs or unfounded stereotypes about the legitimacy of such families. Taxpayer money should not be spent according to the whims of Catholic Charities or other discriminatory agencies.

Conservatives often claim that it’s LGBT activists who are putting their “adult” needs over those of children, but this legislation shows that it’s those who oppose equality who care the least about the fate of children.

The University of Notre Dame has refused to allow an organization for LGBT students to form at least 15 times, and for 15 years has refused to add sexual orientation to its nondiscrimination statement. Now, the university has announced a new comprehensive plan called, “Beloved Friends and Allies: A Pastoral Plan for the Support and Holistic Development of GLBTQ and Heterosexual Students at the University of Notre Dame.” The plan, to be implemented by next summer, includes hiring a full-time student affairs professional who will serve as advisor to a new LGBT student organization that will be a permanent part of the university (as opposed to a club that would only be temporary). Unfortunately, the news is not all good.

According to university President Fr. John Jenkins, the organization’s roots will be based in Catholic teaching, and in an interview with The Observer, glossed over the implications of what that really means:

JENKINS: It’s a rich teaching about the role of sexuality, about intimacy, about human relations, about responsibilities to the community, about relationships to the Church and I’m not evading the question but to put this in a ‘well you can do this, you can’t do that,’ is to distort the issue. I would just invite those who are wondering about it to look at this plan to reflect upon catholic teachings about these issues because I think this can be an opportunity for all of us to think about this more deeply, and at least that, that’s a wanted result.

But the “Beloved Friends and Allies” plan does specify what students can or cannot do. In accordance with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it is based on a foundation that God demands chastity of people who are LGBT:

Thus the call to chastity represents a divine invitation to develop relationships characterized by equality, mutuality, and respect, qualities of a deeply spiritual nature, beckoning us “to follow and imitate the one who has chosen us as his friends, who has given himself totally to us and allows us to participate in his divine estate” (CCC, 2347). In beautiful terms, the Catechism proclaims that the virtue of chastity, “blossoms in friendship” and “leads to spiritual communion.” Indeed, “chastity is expressed notably in friendship with one’s neighbor. Whether it develops between persons of the same or opposite sex, friendship represents a great good for all” (CCC, 2347). [...]

At the same time, the University also adheres to the Church’s teaching concerning homosexual actions. As a result, “Homosexual persons are called to chastity” and to “friendship,” and should cultivate “the virtues of self‐mastery that teach them inner freedom” (CCC, 2359). Indeed, each and every student at Notre Dame is called to nothing less. All Notre Dame students are urged to understand and live the teachings of the Church relative to their lives and expressions of sexual intimacy.

This is particularly troubling for a university to endorse. Rather than progress for LGBT students, the new plan is more as a lateral move from ignoring them to condemning them. Catholic teaching is nothing short of a life sentence of sexual repression, denying those with same-sex orientations from ever having the opportunity to love or be loved. The Church’s Courage ministry, which promotes this chastity teaching, utilizes the same shaming tactics as ex-gay therapy to produce the same harmful and ineffective results.

Notre Dame students and their allies made national news this year with a campaign demanding that “It Needs To Get Better” on their campus. Perhaps they shouldn’t change their messaging anytime soon.

When Susan Johnson played “Same Love” by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis for her performing arts class, she believed she was helping students improve their tolerance of diversity. The song discusses marriage equality and mistreatment of people who are gay. But after a student complained about the song, South Lyon’s Centennial Middle School suspended her for three days, including two without pay, claiming she violated a policy requiring administrative review of all video clips before they’re played in a class. Now, she has been reinstated and her pay was restored. Superintendent William Pearson explained the decision:

I am willing to not uphold the suspension, but the violation of the district practice regarding web-based clips and our expectations for instructions previewing materials under this will remain in writing. [...]

If students believe this discipline is a form of bullying, will encourage bullying, or most importantly, causes any member of our school community to feel they do not belong, then I have sent the wrong message and must correct that. We want all students to feel they belong and that they are valued, and our policies and procedures must support this.

What remains a mystery is to what extent the content of the song played into the school’s overreaction. The ACLU is continuing its investigation “to make sure they’re not trying to censure a message of tolerance for gay people.”

When Macklemore heard about Johnson’s suspension, he responded on his blog that “this incident is just one of tens of thousands that have happened across the country where schools have exposed a latent homophobia, preventing safe space for all young people to feel confident in being themselves.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who has called for the Republican Party to be more inclusive of minorities, said Wednesday that while his faith teaches homosexuality is a sin, he does not judge sinners. But his record on LGBT rights stands in stark contrast to this words.

Speaking to Politico’s Mike Allen, Rubio sought to adopt what he must have viewed as a moderate position on LGBT equality:

ALLEN: Is homosexuality a sin?

RUBIO: Well, I can tell you what faith teaches and faith teaches that it is. And that’s what the Bible teaches and that’s what faith teaches. But it also teaches that there area bunch of other sins that are no less. For example, it teaches that lying is a sin. It teaches that disrespecting your parents is a sin. It teaches that stealing is a sin. It teaches that coveting your neighbor and what your neighbor has is a sin. So there isn’t a person in this room that isn’t guilty of sin. So, I don’t go around pointing fingers in that regard. I’m responsible for my salvation and I’m responsible for my family’s, and for inculcating in my family what our faith teaches, and they’ll become adults and decide how they want to apply that in life. As a policy maker, I could just tell you that I’m informed by my faith. And my faith informs me in who I am as a person — but not as a way to pass judgment on people.

Watch the video:

While these may indeed be Rubio’s deeply held beliefs, his suggestion that as a policy maker he does not “pass judgment” is not backed up by his deeds. Rubio opposed allowing same-sex couples in Florida to adopt children. He opposed allowing gay and lesbian members of the Armed Services to serve openly. He opposes making it illegal to fire someone just for being LGBT.

Worse than his rigid opposition to legal recognition for same-sex couples, he recorded a robocall for the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) last month. His message was part of an unsuccessful $500,000 campaign by the anti-LGBT group to encourage voters to oppose pro-equality candidates and ballot initiatives in the November elections. Despite Rubio’s efforts, voters rejected NOM’s positions in every single race and all four ballot questions.

As happened last year, the Senate has approved the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) without including the multiple anti-gay provisions advanced by the House. Among the provisions House Republicans added this year was Rep. Todd Akin’s (R-MO) “license to bully” provision, which would have justified anti-gay discrimination and harassment based on religious beliefs or moral principles. Another would have prevented same-sex marriages on any military property, even in states where they are legally recognized.

OutServe-SLDN Executive Director Allyson Robinson applauded the decision:

ROBINSON: The Department of Defense has already made it clear – and appropriately so – that decisions about the use of facilities should be made on a sexual orientation neutral basis. Anything else is discrimination, pure and simple.

The House and Senate must still approve a conference report, but that process will hopefully follow last year’s model of leaving the anti-gay provisions out as passed by the Senate.