Recommendations to the Task Force to Study the Effects of Cult Activities

1.  The University of Maryland System should seek to insure an environment in which the free exchange of ideas occurs. In the University of Maryland System, each campus has a specific educational mission geared to the vocational and professional needs of the students and the society at large. At the same time the University traditionally fulfills a broader goal of providing an environment in which students, both young and old, define their understanding of the world in which we live and their role in it. While students are shaping their understanding of the world and deciding their career choices, they are also forming associations and making choices concerning their politics, their religious ideas, etc. In this sense, the university is one of the central focal points of the "marketplace of ideas." It has been one of the great strengths of American culture that we have maintained that freedom is essential to the quest for truth and that abridgements of such freedom are not only a precursor to oppression by that they also stifle the creativity and flow of ideas which are essential to a progressive and prosperous nation.
   
   
2. Rules and guidelines regarding behavior in the University of Maryland System should be general to all students and organizations and such rules and regulations should not target particular groups or organizations. Of course, laws that apply to the general society concerning protection of persons and property also apply to the University of Maryland System. In addition, in order to promote harmony and reasonable use of university facilities, it may be necessary for campuses to maintain certain regulations and ethical guidelines and to provide sanctions to groups or individuals that violate these. Such regulations and guidelines should not be targeted at unpopular or controversial groups but should be applicable to all. Ideas do not exist in a vacuum; they involve practices. So long as those practices do not violate any existing laws or regulations that apply to all parties evenly and fairly, those practices should not be prohibited.
   
   
3. The University should seek to insure that the rights of students to make their own decisions concerning religious affiliation, political preference, and vocation are protected. University students who are 18 years old or older have the legal right to enter into contracts, to join the armed forces without parental consent, to determine their political affiliations and vote, and to decide their religious affiliation. These rights should not be abridged in any way. Increasingly, a larger percentage of students at University of Maryland campuses are continuing students and the average age of students in higher. Yet, even for those students who are entering college directly from high school, almost all of them are of an age of majority. It is during their time at school that individuals are developing their ideological perspectives, choosing their lifestyles, and making their career choices. Undoubtedly, such choices are made with the greatest felicity if there is healthy communication and concurrence with the parents and family of the students. Yet this is often not the case. Parents often disagree with lifestyle choices, choice of major, political choices and religious decisions that their now-adult children make while they are attending school. In cases of extreme disagreement, intense conflict may arise. This is often painful for both parents and children. Usually, in time, they come to work out their differences or at least to accept each other as their relationship matures. As long as adult students are not violating the law, their rights as adults to make these decisions should not be interfered with, rather they should be upheld. Parents need to recognize that their children are now adults and have the right and the responsibility to make their own decisions. If a parent disagrees so strongly with a decision that their child has made that they not longer want to pay for their college, they have that right. That is a decision that needs to be worked out between the parent and the child. They certainly do not have the right to try to force their child to go through some form of "de-programming" or "exit-counseling" in order to try to change their beliefs.
   
   
4. The University should be wary of forming any contractual relationships with any organizations or affiliates of organizations who have a record of using coercive or highly questionable techniques to interfere with a student's choice of religious or other associations. I am referring specifically to so-called "anticult experts" associated with organizations such as the American Family Foundation. The scientific community, after extensive study, has not accepted Anticult theories such as "mind-control". Furthermore, intervention of self-proclaimed "experts" associated with the Anticult Movement has generally aggravated difficulties between students and parents, and the highly questionable "deprogramming" or "exit-counseling" techniques utilized by such quasi-professionals have caused severe disorientation and confusion in many young adults' lives severely impairing their confidence in their ability to make their own choices in determining their future.
   
   
5. The Task Force, having uncovered little or no substantial evidence of any "dangerous cult activity" or "dangerous group activity" on Maryland campuses should recommend that no further action regarding HJ 22 be taken and that any such future resolutions be avoided by the legislature and the State of Maryland.

Return to task force index