Welcome to the Nonprofits the thrice weekly show, where we address news and current events through the lens of atheism and secular humanism. For our first segment this week, we look at a Baptist university that's turning down free money. Cynthy MacDonald tell us all about it.
Thank you, Scott, I will tell you all about it. So Lips is me telling you all about it, and also Allan and all of your viewers out there. So at Baylor University, a major research opportunity was met, not with curiosity, because that's not the word it's curiosity, but
with cancelation. The school was awarded a six hundred and forty three thousand dollars grant to study the experiences of the LGBTQ plus people in religious spaces, an initiative that would have fostered understanding and perhaps even healing, an initiative that could have even brought in all of these things. But instead of embracing the chance to explore how faith communities can better serve all members, the university returned the
money after backlash from its conservative religious circles. Ain't that about a blip. This was not about theology. It was about fear. Fear of honest inquiry, fear of upsetting those who see compassion as compromise, and in the process, Baylor sent a message loud and clear that appeasing fundamentalism takes
priority over academic freedom and human dignity. As humanists and skeptics, we believe in the power of knowledge, in the value of inclusive research, and in the moral imperative to challenge systems that harm. So tonight we ask, what does it say when a university won't even study inclusion and who suffers when facts are silenced to preserve comfort. Let's open the conversation. The story is from The Friendly Atheist by Hamet Metta, published on July seventeenth, twenty twenty five.
Back to you, Scott, absolutely absolutely, Thank you so much, Cynthia. Cynthia, I want to direct my first question at you, as long as you're already in a talking kind of mood here. As an educator, I know that it's really difficult in these days for schools to get funding. You know, they need funding for all these different programs, and it's not easy to come by in many cases. So what could be motivating Baylor to refuse grants that they've already won.
You know, Scott, what really stands out to me about this story isn't just that Baylor turned down over six hundred thousand dollars in funding, is that they rejected the opportunity to better understand the very people their policies often marginalized. So if we can, let's just be clear, I'm getting my I'm getting my uh oh, I can't say her name, darn it. I was about to say I'm getting my jc on but that's cool.
But let let me be clear.
Okay, this grant wasn't about pushing an agenda. It was actually designed to study the real life experiences of LGBTQ plus individuals in religious spaces, many whom are students, their alumni, their staff, and they all are at Baylor. You cannot tell me that there is not one LGBTQ plus student and or professor, teacher, or teachers assistant that does not attend that university. And you know, as I was mentioning in my introduction about that loud and clear message, what
the university response was says a lot. We don't want to know that is what they're saying, or maybe more accurately, we are afraid to find out what we'll find, because if you let the data speak, you might have to reckon with some uncomfortable.
Truths totally like reality in other words, part like you're saying that they're not trying to push an agenda, but I think they are.
They're trying to push the agenda of humanizing marginalized people, and that is an uncomfortable position for a lot of and we can't do.
That, Stephen oh dare no, no, no, Well, and when I meant about an agenda, you know how we are hearing a lot from the right that you know, the LGBTQ plus community is pushing an agenda when we are seeing curriculums that actually talk about LGBTQ plus history, when we're talking about actually introducing literature written and buy people
from the queer community. Where we're even talking about naming a person that ran for Congress whose name was going to be on a ship, but his name is taken off of the ship so it can be actually put back with the Confederate officer.
Those things, you know, and it's like what kills me if I could just have a little room, is that when we are highlighting people or highlighting issues from marginalized communities.
Just because we're actually saying this thing exists. They say, oh, now that you're talking about it, it's an agenda.
Right right right, we can't have that. We can't have that. Let's jump over to Stephen real quick here. So, I, as I was mentioning Cynthia, I'm just kind of I'm kind of baffled at this whole thing. I just can't really get my I mean, I understand the idea that they don't want to have to deal with certain realities that will that will follow from accepting this money, but really, I mean, come on, what I mean, what's your take on all this?
Like, like, I was only at Bible College for seven years, so I'm not an expert on what student life in that setting is. This is not surprising, and like obviously my my my time was in a small, conservative, Evangelical Mennonite Bible college, So that isn't you know, uh, you know that doesn't you know? It's not a carbon copy
onto what these bigger institutions are. But this does not this this is all a part of the playbook in my mind, you know, you know, a faith institute has an end in mind it already and especially ones that are Christian in nature, like they already have to have certain end pieces in mind and the not to not to speak too broadly here, but they need to find their way to that will lead to that end. Like in the end, the Bible has to be worthwhile, there has to be weight behind it, even if it's not
literally true. And I believe a place like Baylor would believe if they are Baptist in their pedagogy, then they have to believe that the Bible is true and it is important and Jesus and God da da da da da and anything that isn't going to support that is antithetical to who they are in their identity. Any school that offers apologetics is already tipping its hand because apologetics says that, Okay, this is what we need to protect,
and we are going to teach you. We're going to train you on how to protect that, not how to interrogate it, not to how to understand it better or how to synthesize it into our modern world. It's about protecting what's already established.
For sure for sure. Yeah, yeah, thanks for that.
Let's jump back to Cynthia now, where so we're all surprised slash not surprised, right, you know, it's kind of it's one of those things that you you you hope you're imagining, but you're seeing it happen in front of you in real time. But let's talk some brass tacks here. Let's look at where the rubber meets the road. What is the real effect here for the loss of the I mean, it's not just money that they're losing here. They're losing the entire research project that the money was supporting.
So I mean, what really is is being set aside here?
So I know that Baylor put back the money, right, they gave back to six hundred and forty three million dollars.
On thousand, thousand, thousand.
I said that is it close to ten o'clock yet?
Now a thousand with a thuughhh.
Yes yes, Lika, thank you, teacher Scott, my pleasure. Yeah, no problem, okay, So they okay, so they gave back the money. But can we really talk about who pays the price?
Can we?
Can we really? You know, especially since we're talking about where the rubber meets the road, it's not the administrators, it's not the trustees. It's actually the queer students. Wondering if they actually belong. Yeah, it's the teenager sitting in the chapel feeling unseen, ill assisted, and unworthy. It is the person of faith who is also LGBTQ plus trying to reconcile both parts of who they are while their school tells them one must be denied or hitden.
That's painful to hear. That's painful to hear.
I mean, it's it's hard to imagine students being well, it's if they're college that they're going to, they've been they've committed a portion of their life to go there, not to mention a portion of their money right at, a lot of dough going into it there.
And then for the.
For the college to not only say we don't know you, but saying we don't want to know you. You know, that's that's kind of the message that's happening here. And it's really tragic. I mean, they're really they're pissing on people basically, and and it's it's really really really frustrating, Steven. I know, as a member of the LGBTQ community yourself, how do you see this affecting that community at large, or you know, even on the small scale too. Is there a silver lining to be had here at all?
Or I mean is this all just awful horrible things?
Yeah, like it's all par for the course. Like like Baylor University, they what is it that they make you sign a statement of faith saying that you will not participate in homosexual YadA YadA yadas. But it doesn't say anything about you know, the celibate queer person you know, so long that you know, their statement of faith doesn't cover that. But those students still aren't protected from harassment, right if you if you are harassed for being queer,
then the school is okay with that. So to answer your question, yeah, Like in the long run, I think this is a good thing. Like what, I'm so curious what we're what what exactly what we do with the findings that they found? Could we actually trust what they were discovering? I think it'd be highly sus already. And honestly, like, in the short run, yes, this will fuel anti queer talking points for a long time, there's nothing new about that. But in fifty, in one hundred years, it'll be become
increasingly obvious that Baylor is just bending over for Christian authoritarianism. Uh, and like and take that for what it is, like my, yeah, my heart breaks for the students who are so committed to their faith and they are looking for Baylor to help them, you know, find their place in the world, and for Baylor to be slapping them upside the head with this by you know, not accepting them. That does suck. And that is you know, that's that's the pudding. That
is what they're that's what they're about. And so like, yeah, it is awful. Why are you giving them your money?
Like that's a good question, that's a good question, and I maybe this can you know, put a fine point on that, you know, and then and kind of really show them, Okay, here's what you're getting into. Here's what here's the direction that you're going. Here's the path you're taking. Why you know, why why why do that? There's so many other options available to you. Let's I want to jump back over to Cynthia for a little bit here. Uh.
You know, Baylor, of course is a private college.
Uh, and it's not under any requirement to take money from the government or from any or you know of these grant uh grant granting organizations. But let's let's compare this with the idea of school of vouchers, which many people, myself included, believe to be a way of funneling public funds into private religious schools. So, in some twisted way, could this be seen as a virtue.
On the part of Baylor.
I mean, they aren't putting their money where their mouth is, you know, to borrow a phrase there, They're refusing the money rather than accepting the money and then not living up to the expectations on the other end, I mean, is this a could this be seen as a virtuous act by Baylor University?
Well, the reason why they gave back the money is because they were getting smoke from the fundamentalist community around them.
Okay, you know, I would think about how we talked about school voucher systems and basically how they suck and how a lot of them are races in nature. Because the reason why we even had more people going into homeschooling, especially like around the late sixties early seventies, is because of well one a reaction to Brown versus the Board of Education where they were integrating schools, and then the early seventies is when you saw schools being forced to integrate students by busting them into.
Other urban communities. So we already know that this is a bus policy that the religious right want to push is school vouchers so that people can be able to get government assistance in order for them to send their kids to private schools. And the majority of private schools in the United States happen to be Christian.
So so, so do you think they're Do you think they're you know, living what they're saying, or do you think they're Do you think this was a lost opportunity or both?
I suppose it could be, and it's both.
In my opinion, I believe that it's both because even though I may not understand, and I think that I would be very confident to say that all of us on this panel may not quite understand why an lgbt Q person would even approach, let alone attend a school like Baylor or Die.
Yeah.
Well, I can understand people who are closeted, Okay, who maybe feeling the need to fight against their nature.
And that's the thing, right, I suppose there could be some parental pressure and pure pressure all that all that.
Excuse me, I'll do apologize so I can see this, but in your own mind making a decision to go to a university that makes you not only sign these whole things that I.
Will not do this, I will not do that. I will live my life X, Y and Z and and and everything about you and your inside of you is screaming this is not me, but you do it anyway. I don't understand that. But then again, I'm no longer eighteen. I'm I'm a woman of a certain age, and I'm far, far far from eighteen, right, So I guess like, depending on the age of the time, would definitely be the
thing that would inform my decisions. Regardless of that these people are in the university, they and I know that they have a community of people who happen to be queer, who were raised Christian, who heard all the things, and we do know that there are institutions, religious institutions, faith
based institutions that actually affirm queer people. So actually saying, well, ooh, how many people happen to be queerness on our campus, how many of them may feel othered bullied because they may be out queer on our campus, knowing that the as you I'm going to start saying this word more often. Stephen pedagogy is going against your better nature as who you are, because the Bible says so that would have
been worth studying. But I have to agree with you, Steven, then maybe this is a good thing only because I don't feel that Baylor in of itself, with its ideology, would be objective when they do to study, if anything, they would have to hire outside researchers in order for them to get data that was the closest thing to fact is possible.
That's insisting probably straight researchers. And what's what I find interesting My understanding is that this money was coming from a private foundation. So this is money that's been you know, earmarked for you know, supporting things. And the board according to my what I read, that the board of that foundation are all alumni of Baylor. So the idea that we graduated from here and we want to use this money, we want to gift this money for you to understand
queer Christians better. Just like Wolf, that's m that is really bowing to uh. And in this case, it isn't even like bowing to money. It's well, I guess like conservative donors. I guess, yeah, like bowing to conservative donors over their own alumni.
They didn't say that specifically in the in the article, but they kind of hinted at it there that the it wasn't just people getting angry on Twitter, right, These were people that donate significant amounts of money to Baylor every year, and so I think there was I think it was a question of who, you know, we're going to lose this amount of money, but we're going to maintain larger donations after that.
At least that's the impression I got. Let me just do a quick bit of research. Oh yeah, it was straight white guys. They weren't happy about it. So I never never even occurred to me to think about.
It's always straight white guys.
Speaking of straight white guys.
We're running a little long time here, But Stephen, I wanted to ask you a question here, so from I'm going to read a little quote here from the article, and this is him at meta saying this. Importantly, nothing about the study would have changed the underlying beliefs among conservative Christians that same sex relationships are sinful, that marriage equality must be opposed at all costs, that homosexuality ex self is a sin, that trans people are just lying
to themselves, et cetera. And then he puts in parentheses, everyone could have saved a lot of money just by urging those churches to not be so damn bigoted. And I want to focus on that last word. They're bigoted. Okay, we use that word a lot on this show. We talk a lot about bigotry in many different varieties and flavors.
Where do you draw the line.
Between an organization pursuing and supporting their religious beliefs and then saying no, no, that is now cross the line into bigotry where we know where what's the difference there?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Like I think this word comes up so frequently in conversations that deal with especially like in the intersect of closed mindedness and oppression. Like if minority is closed minded about you know, the the ruling class above them, it's hard to you know, label that as big did because they are already being punched down,
like what are they going to do about it? But when it's when it's the system that is empowered that is closed minded and is like closed off to the possibility of giving the people that they're oppressing extra latitude and you know, increasing their humanity, I think that's where that word should be coming into play, which is certainly
a case in point here. So, yeah, like when when people in power refuse to consider that they're that can, refuse to evolve, refuse to grow, that's when I think that's when that word comes into play.
Cynthia, what's what are your last thoughts on here? Do you do you agree with the Steven's take on that on that word bigotry?
Yeah?
All right, all right, very uh, very well said. And if you appreciate, uh, Cynthia McDonald's conciseness, uh, you can always find her more here on the nonprofit.
So just