[17922] in APO-L
Re: Open Membership Apology
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeremy Licata)
Thu Dec 11 18:13:54 1997
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 14:37:56 PST
Reply-To: Jeremy Licata <dcnblus@HOTMAIL.COM>
From: Jeremy Licata <dcnblus@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Brothers,
I was attempting to point out that the National Bylaws does not have a
clear statement for Open Membership that is enforceable by the National
Convention.
"Article III. Membership
Section 1. Open Membership.
Membership in Alpha Phi Omega shall be open to all students, upon the
approval of the respective collegiate chapter and after fulfilling the
membership requirements prescribed by the National Fraternity and by
that chapter."
"Open"-ness is subject to conditions involving requirements prescribed
by the Fraternity and the chapter - it is not an absolute. The "Open
Membership requirements" (Art III, Sect 1) prescribed by the National
Fraternity specifically states that membership is open to all students,
with the approval of the chapter and subject to the requirements of the
Fraternity and the chapter.
But what is the requirement of the Fraternity?? That membership is open
to all students, with the approval of the chapter and subject to the
requirements of the Fraternity and the chapter.
The Fraternity, without an enforceable policy, gets lost in the argument
and the chapter is left to determine its own membership, within the
confines of Article III Section 2 of the National Bylaws.
The circular nature of this requirement does not present an enforceable
National Fraternity requirement. Furthermore, according to
the Alpha Phi Omega Membership Policies, Section III (b):
"Because all people have the potential to be of service and to be
leaders and friends, active membership is open to all students and
should represent a cross section of the student body.
_Chapters have the right to determine their own membership._
Active membership shall be granted only within the context of the
National Bylaws, the Standard Chapter Articles of Association, and the
rules and regulations of the school involved."
"Should" is more a recommendation than anything else... perhaps to
accomodate the Educational Amendments of 1972 (Title IX)?
* "Should" is NOT "Must."
* "Should" is NOT "Shall."
* "Should" IS "Should."
This is what I tried to present in my original "Open Membership
Apology." I know several of you have very strong opinions against
discrimination, but it appears to me that the work from 1976 is still
not quite done and that the All-Male chapters have a much stronger
argument to maintain their practices than their opponents have of
changing them...
In Leadership, Friendship and Service to the Fraternity
:jeremy (AKA Tanner)
EM #939
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
