Wilfrid Laurier University

GRADE EXPLANATION: The University earns a D for its policies. There isn't a clearly stated commitment to free speech. The university has an anti-disruption policy which prohibits students (and other people) from blocking, obstructing, disrupting or interrupting speech (e.g. events, displays) on campus. The University has at least one speech code. The university provides funding and other resources to groups, departments, committees, commissions or other bodies that engage in ideological advocacy. The University earns an F for its practices. The University reprimanded graduate student and teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd for sharing a televised debate clip about gender-neutral pronouns. The University also charged Ms. Shepherd's group, Laurier Society for Open Inquiry, over $5,000 in security fees in order to hold a lecture event on campus.

University policies

Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU) states on its “Values, Vision, Mission and Guiding Principles” webpage that it is committed to the teaching and learning of “scholarly exploration and the application of new ideas”.  WLU’s mission statement reads:

Wilfrid Laurier University is devoted to excellence in learning, research, scholarship and creativity.  It challenges people to become engaged and aware citizens of an increasingly complex world. It fulfills its mission by advancing knowledge, supporting and enhancing high-quality undergraduate, graduate and professional education, and emphasizing co-curricular development of the whole student.

Wilfrid Laurier University passed a new policy, Freedom of Expression on Campus, on May 29, 2018. The Policy states:

The Role of Free Expression

Wilfrid Laurier University’s purpose is to extend and deepen understanding of the world and ourselves through open-ended, disciplined, and critical enquiry. Freedom of thought, association, and expression are fundamental principles of an open, fair, and inclusive campus, and are core to the discovery, critical assessment, and effective dissemination of knowledge. As history clearly demonstrates, these freedoms establish conditions necessary for critical thought, and for diverse voices to be heard without the fear of repression or reprisal. They are vital to the creation of knowledge, and to challenging the improper use of power. The Wilfrid Laurier University Act upholds these freedoms in defining the objects of the university as “the pursuit of learning through scholarship, teaching, and research within a spirit of free enquiry and expression.”

Laurier unequivocally embraces the principles of free expression required in an academic environment. The university supports the expression, testing, and challenging of a range of perspectives and ideas, including those that may be deemed difficult, controversial, extreme, or even wrong-headed. As an institution of higher learning, Laurier strives to instill throughout its community the ability to think critically, express ideas clearly and persuasively, and articulate positions that are based on reason, evidence, and frameworks of knowledge. The university is distinct from a public square, or an online forum; as an academic institution it is committed to advancing intellectual excellence rooted in diversity of thought in an inclusive learning environment.

Inclusive Freedom

As an institution that is deeply committed to free expression, and to diversity, equity, and inclusion, the Laurier community will sometimes be divided over ethical, social, and pedagogical obligations. These disagreements reflect the profound differences of opinion that exist regarding the tension between free expression and other fundamental values and principles. The university acknowledges that members of its community will sometimes struggle with these issues and will even voice dissent about the merit of particular speakers or subject matter in advancing intellectual enquiry or critical discourse and dialogue. Nonetheless, Laurier challenges the idea that free expression and the goals of diversity, equity, and inclusion must be at odds with one another. Instead, the university embraces the concept of “inclusive freedom” which espouses a commitment to the robust protection of free expression, and the assurance that all members – including those who could be marginalized, silenced, or excluded from full participation – have an opportunity to meaningfully engage in free expression, enquiry, and learning.

Laurier recognizes that at times free expression may harm and/or further marginalize community members from visible and invisible minority groups, including, but not limited to those from groups based on Indigeneity, class, race, ethnicity, place of origin, religious creed, spiritual belief, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age, and ability. In such cases, the university encourages its community members to respond with an educational and intellectual approach that increases awareness and consideration of diverse positions. The university reaffirms its commitment to creating an inclusive environment for all Laurier community members, and to providing access to services that support well-being and safety from physical harm.

Some challenging cases of free expression will have to be navigated, but it is not the role of the university to censor speech. To grant the institution such power would set a dangerous precedent. Even if institutional censorship were deemed acceptable in one context, there is no guarantee that such restriction would be applied fairly or wisely in other contexts, or as power changes hands over time. Rather than restricting speech, Laurier is committed to supporting an open and inclusive environment that also protects free expression. Community members are free to reject and vigorously contest ideas while still recognizing the right to express or hear those ideas. The university aspires for its community to engage in better speech whereby members strive for a high ethical and intellectual standard for open and constructive discourse.

Limits and Considerations

Free expression is never without limits. Canada’s legal frameworks restrict illegal forms of expression such as threats, defamation, discrimination, harassment, unjustified and substantial invasion of privacy and confidentiality, and hate speech. These limits apply to speech on campus in the same way as they apply elsewhere. The university reserves the right to reasonably manage the time, place, and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt the ordinary activities of its community, or impinge upon the physical safety of its members. However, this administrative discretion should not be exercised in a manner inconsistent with Laurier’s overarching commitment to free expression. Other context-specific boundaries to free expression apply and are set out in the terms of employment for university staff and faculty, including the university’s faculty collective agreements.

Campus Contexts

Context is an important consideration in matters of free expression. Inside the classroom, the primary focus is teaching and learning, which must align with the fundamental principles of academic freedom as articulated in Article 7 of the university’s full-time and part-time faculty collective agreements. The commitment to inclusive freedom extends into the classroom, where all students should feel engaged, included, and heard. In an environment that emphasizes intellectually challenging content, there may be times when instructional material or discussions challenge students’ worldviews and identities. However, these moments can be mitigated by strong and balanced pedagogy where openness and respect for human dignity prevail. Students also have the right to expect classrooms that are free from personally directed attacks on their individual character, motives, or attributes.

In campus spaces outside of the classroom, Laurier community members can actively participate in events, forums, and discussions at their own discretion. When confronted with ideas or viewpoints with which they disagree, community members may choose to dissent through, for example, participating in debate, hosting alternative events, inviting speakers to express opposing views, and/or engaging in non-violent protests. The development of such constructive strategies contributes to individual intellectual growth and serves as preparation for ongoing civic engagement. At the university, all forms of expression should be undertaken in a manner that also recognizes the free expression rights of others.

Our Collective Responsibility

All members of the Laurier community including administrators, faculty, staff, and students share a collective responsibility to build, maintain, and continuously protect an inclusive and respectful institutional culture that champions free expression in the pursuit of knowledge. By supporting free expression in this constructive and pedagogically sound way the university can fulfill its mission, preparing graduates to engage with difficult ideas and challenge the world in all its complexity.

…

Inclusive Freedom: Framework for speech on campus that takes seriously the importance of a free and open exchange as a necessary condition for the pursuit of knowledge, and as a contributing condition to the development of civic and democratic capacities. It lends similar weight to the related demand that all members of the campus community be able to participate in this free and open exchange (Ben-Porath, Sigal, Free Speech on Campus, 2017).

Laurier’s Guiding Principles also focus on building community citizenship, “learning and advancing knowledge across boundaries”, and an “openness to change”.

The preamble of the WLU Student Code of Conduct and Discipline (Section 12.2.I) states that students are allowed to pursue their learning through “free enquiry and free expression” and any intellectual and personal interests without interference.  The University “recognizes academic freedom…acknowledging that the common good of society depends upon the search for knowledge.”

The Code’s Introduction lays the groundwork for how the administration at WLU views freedom on campus, and describes it as being free from interference, providing one’s actions do not limit the rights of others:

Members of the Laurier community enjoy the freedom to pursue their intellectual and personal interests without interference, provided that their actions do not limit the rights of other members of the University or the community in which it is situated. The objects of the University are the pursuit of learning through scholarship, teaching, and research within a spirit of free enquiry and expression. The University recognizes academic freedom and the right to peaceful protest, acknowledging that the common good of society depends upon the search for knowledge, and its free expression.

The Student Code of Conduct and Discipline states in Section 6.1 (last updated in February 2011):

Wilfrid Laurier University is devoted to learning, research, scholarship, creativity, professional expertise, and personal development in a student-centred environment. The University is committed to providing an environment for study, teaching, research work and recreation for all members of the University community that is supportive of professional and personal development and free from all forms of harassment and/or discrimination as outlined in the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Section 6.1 of the Student Code of Conduct and Discipline seeks to eradicate a “negative environment”, in addition to discrimination and harassment.  “Negative Environment” is defined as follows:

One or a series of comments or conduct that creates a negative environment for individuals or groups and are related to the prohibited grounds. The comments or conduct must be of a significant nature or degree and have the effect of "poisoning" the work or study environment. A complainant does not have to be a direct target to be adversely affected by a negative environment. It includes conduct or comments that create and maintain an offensive, hostile, or intimidating climate for study or work. Examples include but are not limited to exposure to graffiti, signs, cartoons, remarks, exclusion, or adverse treatment related to one or more of the prohibited grounds.

Section A.1 of Section 4.10 in the WLU Student Code of Conduct states:

1. Academic and General University Users

There will be no charges to University departments and student organizations for the use of space. There will be charges, however, for deploying of staff for duties outside of normal responsibilities; services such as food, refreshments, and equipment rental; and for special set-up and unusual maintenance costs.

Wilfrid Laurier University revised its Booking of University Space and Facilities Policy in December 2017. The Policy now states that:

POLICY

4.00 University space and facilities are primarily for the academic, administrative and research use of the University.

4.01 Laurier reserves the right to impose conditions and/or limitations on the use of University Space and Facilities and to withdraw or deny access to use University Space and Facilities if it determines that the use may interfere with the University’s operations or activities or the safety and security of persons and facilities.

4.02 The University may assess and collect fees or costs for the use of University Space and Facilities and to take action to pursue any remedies or damages, as available at law, if its policies and procedures or booking or use agreements are not followed.

The Non-Academic Student Code of Conduct states:

Students are expected to model good citizenship, and to engage in responsible and respectful conduct which reflects positively on Laurier students, the University and the broader community. The following list sets out examples of prohibited conduct. It is not intended to be exhaustive or exclusive.

1. Disruption or Interference

(a) Disruption or obstruction by action, threat or otherwise, of any University activity including teaching, learning, research, administration, disciplinary proceedings, events, or any behaviour or conduct that disrupts the normal operations of the University and infringes on the rights of other members of the University community;

(b) Interfering with, obstructing, disrupting, misleading, or failing to comply with the directions of any University official or Special Constable Service, or their designate (e.g. Police, Fire, or Ambulance response) acting in the performance of their duties and in the scope of their employment.

Wilfrid Laurier University supports a Diversity and Equity Office, which describes its vision and purpose as follows:

The Diversity and Equity Office, affectionately known as the DEO, works to cultivate a culture on campus that respects and promotes diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice in all aspects of Laurier – from classrooms to residence communities. The office provides support to all students, staff, and faculty on all campuses.

MISSION

As members of the Laurier community, we are committed to leading lives of leadership and purpose. To this end the, Diversity and Equity Office (DEO) provides wraparound support to students, faculty and staff at Laurier. Together we can meaningfully engage with equity, diversity and inclusion on all Laurier campuses and their communities.

VISION

Cultivate a culture of inclusion across all campuses and wider Kitchener, Waterloo and Brantford communities

Provide meaningful and ongoing support for students, staff and faculty.

Encourage institutionalized support for students, staff and faculty who experience and/or are affected by gendered violence on or off Laurier campuses

Through social innovation and creativity, continue to do diversity differently – creatively, effectively and meaningfully.

University practices

On November 1, 2017, Laurier graduate student and teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd showed a short-clip to her Communication Studies class of University of Toronto Professor Jordan Peterson speaking during a televised debate regarding the use of alternative pronouns. On November 8, Ms. Shepherd attended a meeting where she was then interrogated by Laurier professors Nathan Rambukkana and Herbert Pimlott and a staff member of Laurier’s “Gendered Violence Prevention and Support” office. Ms. Shepherd was told that showing the clip was “problematic” and “transphobic”; had made some students feel “unsafe”, and that alternative pronouns were “not up for debate”.

Ms. Shepherd recorded the meeting, and the recording was released to the public on November 20, 2017, sparking international media attention and widespread public condemnation of the University’s decision.

On November 21, following the backlash, Laurier president Deborah McClatchey and Prof. Rambukkana sent an email to all Laurier students, which was released to the public, apologizing for the University’s mistreatment of Ms. Shepherd. The University also committed to developing a new Policy on Freedom of Expression, which was enacted on May 29, 2018.

In March 2018, Ms. Shepherd’s student group, Laurier Society for Open Inquiry (LSOI), hosted a talk by public commentator Faith Goldy on the subject of immigration. Ms Goldy’s talk was disrupted by protestors, who chanted and then pulled a fire alarm, forcing the event to be moved off-campus. The University has not taken steps to investigate and prosecute the students involved in disrupting this sanctioned on-campus event.

In May 2018, Wilfrid Laurier University charged LSOI with a $5,473 “security fee” in order to host an event on campus titled “Does University Indigenization Threaten Open Inquiry?” LSOI was able to raise the required funds through crowdfunding, and the event was able to proceed.

On October 20, 2016, a display of small blue and pink flags were planted in the ground in the Quad, a high-traffic outdoor space on campus. The flags were meant to represent the quantity of abortions being administered in Canada. The display was created by Laurier LifeLink, a registered pro-life student group.

By the afternoon of October 20, the University’s Diversity and Equity Office placed a sign on the walkway leading to the display which read, “Warning: Anti-Choice display ahead.”

According to Stephanie Breukelman, president of Laurier LifeLink, some students who passed by the display began to pull the flags out of the ground. The University’s Special Constable Services spoke to the protestors and explained to them that they needed to tolerate the rights of the student group hosting the display, which had been sanctioned by the University. One of the students admitted to pulling out the flags to the student newspaper, The Cord:

Daniel Quintia, a third-year music student, said he was appalled when he heard about the display.

“I came down here and started pulling [the flags] out and spat on their banner,” said Quintia. “I can’t imagine what it’s like for women, or even more so women who have had a personal experience with abortion, so I’m just frankly kind of pissed.”

Special Constable Services were also called to talk to those who were protesting the display.

“The officers are here [telling me] you have to respect their rights and I’m like, but I don’t, I don’t have to respect their opinion. I don’t because frankly, this is harmful,” said Quintia.

On October 21, 2016, the Wilfrid Laurier University Students’ Union and the Graduate Students’ Association, along with the university, released their joint response to the October 20, 2016 display and protests against it. Their post reads as follows:

An event held by a student club in the Quad on Laurier’s Waterloo campus Thursday afternoon has raised a number of important issues. These include the question of how we, as a university community, accommodate civil discourse of divergent opinions while meeting our obligation to provide individuals with a safe campus environment. The University, the Wilfrid Laurier University Students’ Union, the Graduate Students Association, and the Diversity and Equity Office, take these issues very seriously. Together, we are currently examining all aspects of Thursday’s event with the intention of better understanding the issues involved and what future actions might be needed to ensure an appropriate balance between freedom of expression and the provision of a safe campus environment.

On March 21, 2012, WLU administration forced the Laurier Students’ Public Interest Research Group (LSPIRG) to take down posters regarding “Israel Apartheid Week”.  WLU enforced its decision by sending a Special Constable Supervisor to ask the LSPIRG sub-committee, Laurier 4 Palestine, to take down three posters deemed “offensive.” The officer justified WLU’s request on the grounds that the posters “incited hate”.  The posters in question had been displayed as part of a gallery event hosted by Laurier 4 Palestine in the Solarium, an area on campus for students to use as they please, which can be booked by student groups for various functions. (Source: The Cord, March 21, 2012)

“Laurier’s 100 Words Drabble Contest” was launched in February of 2011, one of several events held in conjunction with WLU’s 100^th anniversary.  This contest provided the following caveat when explaining the rules for acceptable content:

Laurier values free speech and freedom of expression and will accept entries containing a wide variety of content. However, entries will be deemed ineligible if they contain content that is threatening, abusive, contains commercial solicitations, is erroneous/libelous, sexist, racist, homophobic or is for any reason deemed inappropriate, as bound by Wilfrid Laurier University privacy policies and the Wilfrid Laurier University Discrimination and Harassment Policy, Section 6.1. We reserve the right to remove ineligible entries from the contest without notice.

In the fall of 2009, Dr. Tom Flanagan spoke to the WLU Political Science Association (PSA).  The organizers raised significant concerns about protesters trying to prevent him from speaking.  The administration made the effort to ensure Dr. Flanagan could give his lecture, and was willing to provide security free of charge if any incidents arose.  PSA Treasurer Rico Vipari made arrangements for additional security, but “[i]t ended up that they were not needed and protesters allowed the event to proceed without incident”. (Source: Interview with Rico Vipari, July 26, 2012)

GRADE EXPLANATION: The student union earns a D for its policies. The student union does not have an express commitment to free speech on campus; the student union has at least one speech code; the student union’s policies in regard to club certification enable unequal treatment of clubs based on beliefs and opinions; the student union’s rules and regulations for elections and referenda impose unfair restrictions on campaign speech and literature; the student union does not take political positions on issues outside its mandate. The student union earns a F for its practices for having failed to condemn the disruption of one of its student groups displays, and later made efforts to ensure further displays could not take place

Student union policies

The Wilfrid Laurier University Students’ Union (WLUSU) does not mention free expression in its mission or vision statements. Under Guiding Principles, WLUSU states:

The Students’ Union shall be a Community Conscious organization.  We will strive to promote and foster a culture of inclusivity and safety within the greater Laurier community.  We will remain cognizant of our unique Laurier culture and make decisions accordingly.

WLUSU’s Elections & Referenda Policies place quantity restrictions on campaign materials.

WLUSU has a “Diversity and Equity Office” (DEO) to foster inclusiveness and promote equality on campus through many avenues, including seminars on topics including LGBT and inclusive language issues.  The front page of the DEO’s website provides its mission statement and purpose:

We promote empowerment and education as means of creating an open and accepting quality of life for all students, staff, faculty, and community members.  We believe in eradicating the barriers that inhibit access to equal opportunities, and we advocate for the inclusion and equal treatment of everyone, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexuality, religion, age, ability, or socio-economic background.

In conjunction with the DEO, WLUSU also promotes “inclusive language” on campus and throughout its subsidiaries and services, defined as:

…language that does not exclude, insult, trivialize or stereotype on the basis of gender, disability, and race.  It means avoiding any language that could offend, demean, or promote stereotypes about a particular group.  It is not ‘political correctness’ but merely choosing language that is welcoming and acceptable to people of all genders, races, and disabilities.

While there is no “ban” on a particular topic, there is an expectation that everyone will adhere to the “inclusive language” concept.  This means refraining from using phrases that could be misconstrued as racist, “homophobic,” or discriminatory.  Commonly used “un-inclusive” words or phrases, according to WLUSU, include…

-“That’s so gay”
-“That’s what she said”
-“You’re so retarded”
-“That test raped me”
-“Gypped” or “Jewed”
-Boyfriend or Girlfriend (use “partner” instead)

WLUSU’s Clubs and Associations Department manages club ratification and oversight. In its Policies, under Club Approval, the Clubs and Associations Department states:

5. The Clubs and Associations Department will not ratify any club or association that practices any form of coercive techniques on their membership, nor any clubs or association that are found to be associated with an outside body which practices coercion or knowingly violates any of the procedures contained herein;
6. The Clubs and Associations Department will not recognize any club that practices discrimination of any kind in the acceptance of its members, the Laurier community, or the community-at-large;

Under Social Media, the Clubs and Associations Department Policies state:

1. All clubs and associations shall;
2. Not post content that does not act in accordance with the Wilfrid Laurier University Harassment & Discrimination Policy, The Gendered and Sexual Violence Policies & Procedures, and the Student Code of Conduct. This includes, but is not limited to, content that is inaccurate, graphic, hostile, threatening, abusive, sexist, racist, homophobic, or transphobic;
3. Graphic imagery is defined as anything depicted in a realistic or vivid manner that can cause a strong negative reaction;
4. Graphic imagery includes, but is not limited to, inappropriate depictions of the human body or anything inside of the human body, violence, gore, death, nudity and pornographic imagery.
5. Not advertise or promote anything illegal;
6. Not use Wilfrid Laurier University’s name, official logo, or The Hawk attached to anything that has not had prior approval from the University;
7. Understand that, adhering to the above guidelines, I am encourage to create content that reflects the brand of my club;
8. Understand that, adhering to the above guidelines, I am encouraged to engage in social media in a manner that is authentic to my brand, which does not negatively affect the Students’ Union or Wilfrid Laurier University’s brand;
9. Understand that if I request content to be posted on official Clubs and Associations social media profiles (including websites and blog posts) on behalf of my club, that I am responsible for;
10. The accuracy of information posted;
11. Providing the materials to be included in the post (videos, photos, links, etc.);

iii. Giving at least two days’ notice of when the post should be shared.

WLUSU does not take positions on political issues outside its mandate.

Student union practices

On October 21, 2016, in response to a pro-life display of blue and pink flags in the campus Quad area, the Wilfrid Laurier University Students’ Union and the Graduate Students’ Association, along with the university, released their joint response to the October 20, 2016 display and protests against it. Their post reads as follows:

An event held by a student club in the Quad on Laurier’s Waterloo campus Thursday afternoon has raised a number of important issues. These include the question of how we, as a university community, accommodate civil discourse of divergent opinions while meeting our obligation to provide individuals with a safe campus environment. The University, the Wilfrid Laurier University Students’ Union, the Graduate Students Association, and the Diversity and Equity Office, take these issues very seriously. Together, we are currently examining all aspects of Thursday’s event with the intention of better understanding the issues involved and what future actions might be needed to ensure an appropriate balance between freedom of expression and the provision of a safe campus environment.

The Students’ Union also stated that they “also want to remind students that your opinions matter and can be voiced at anytime, on anything that affects your Laurier experience.”

On December 6, 2016, the WLUSU president issued another response to the October 20 event, stating:

On October 20, 2016, Laurier LifeLink, a campus club that encourages dialogue about contemporary bio-ethical issues, held an event in the Quad that was intended to profile pro-life options. While this demonstration was solely to raise awareness, the visceral nature of the display interfered with the ability of some members of the Laurier community to safely attend class, travel to work or remain on campus to study. The way this issue politicizes the body, in this instance, through vocal opposition to the legislated right of abortion in Canada, perpetuated significant feelings of judgement, exclusion, and fear.

The Students’ Union is committed to ensuring that your undergraduate experience takes place in a diverse and inclusive campus community. This does not suggest discussion of controversial issues should be avoided; however, having a productive debate must emphasize the importance of disagreement without condemnation. The adversarial tone of the event evoked a confrontation which eliminated the possibility of respectful dialogue and created an unsafe environment for all students. We are working in conjunction with the Graduate Students’ Association, the Diversity and Equity Office, and the Office of Student Affairs to ensure this does not happen again.

Clubs offer a unique opportunity to engage in the extracurricular activities we are passionate about, while enhancing our academic experience. The Students’ Union is revising several clubs policies to ensure future events, particularly those engaging in controversial or polarizing topics, respect the multitude of personal experiences and perspectives on campus. We remain dedicated to supporting the fundamental freedoms all Canadians share, including the ability to openly express opinions and beliefs. As a result of the aforementioned activities, an on-campus event form was created to ensure events are coordinated in close collaboration with the Clubs and Associations’ department. This enhanced oversight now extends to the booking of larger campus spaces as well, in an effort to carefully manage the suitability of event locations. Furthermore, the Clubs and Associations’ department implemented new guidelines around the use of social media for all clubs.

In the days following the event, representatives of the Students’ Union met with the leaders of Laurier LifeLink. The concerns expressed by Laurier community members were discussed and clear expectations were set for any future events. It is my commitment to ensure all Laurier students can pursue their education in an environment, which encourages intellectual and social inquiry, while also valuing the existence of a variety of viewpoints and opinions.

Should you have further questions or comments regarding this matter, please fill out our Customer Satisfaction Feedback Form.

Sincerely yours,

Tyler Van Herzele
Students’ Union President & CEO

It is not clear whether WLUSU condoned the university administration’s actions when it ordered the removal of posters regarding Israeli Apartheid Week. During the 2011-2012 school year, WLUSU President Gibson commented on the role of WLUSU during the incident, saying “…administration and the Student Union kept an eye on it to ensure there were no incidents of people inciting violence, etc.”  Gibson’s remarks demonstrate that WLUSU was aware of the actions taken by the administration, but that WLUSU itself was not a catalyst in removing the posters.  This indicates that, although WLUSU was consulted by WLU on how they handled Israel Apartheid Week, it was WLU that made the decision to violate students’ freedom of expression by taking down their posters in the on campus Solarium.

In 2008, a group called “Laurier Free-thought Alliance” (LFA) was registered as a student club.  The vision of the club was “to promote a fulfilling life without religion and superstition”.  WLUSU denied the club official certification and equal access to resources “due to the need to respect and tolerate the views of others”.  However, after many protests and angry letters/emails to the administration, Campus Clubs (the subsidiary of WLUSU that approves campus clubs and their funding) eventually allowed the LFA to be approved for club status provided they change the wording in their vision statement.  A compromise was reached on this matter and the LFA was ultimately approved by Campus Clubs.