Imagine this hypothetical: A student councilman at the University of Moral Certainty — who happens to be a leader of Students for Fetal Life — pounds his gavel. “Honorable senators,” he declares, “We have learned that our institution once passed on a donor-advised gift to Planned Parenthood. This is morally outrageous! We must condemn all donations to organizations that perform abortions.”

Another senator raises a hand: “But, didn’t this vote fail last week?”

“Ah, but progress requires persistence,” the first senator replies. “We can call it double jeopardy for justice. We will keep voting until righteousness wins out, or until the dissenters drop the debate.”

What might sound like an absurd spectacle became reality at Yale over the weekend. This week, two weeks after a very similar proposal failed, the Yale College Council voted to condemn Yale’s donor-advised gift to the Friends of the Israel Defense Forces — a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit that provides education, housing, therapy and family support to Israeli soldiers and their children. 

By condemning a lawful charity because it offends certain political sensibilities, the YCC has gone down a slippery slope. If we normalize moral gatekeeping over philanthropy, what’s to stop another campus from attempting to ban donations to Planned Parenthood or the American Civil Liberties Union? The logic works both ways.

And, by voting again on almost the same failed measure until it passed, the YCC modeled activism — not democracy. In the two weeks between the votes, a YCC senator showed me several harassing messages he received that shamed him for voting “no.” Those messages might have been enough to make the average person vote “yes” in the double jeopardy trial. That’s not moral leadership; it’s moral coercion.

If supporters of the resolution point to last year’s referendum as proof of student will, let’s be clear: The undergraduate referendum addressed Yale’s “investments” in “weapons manufacturers.” Investments and donations are fundamentally different. When Yale invests, it does so for its own financial gain, using University-controlled funds. Donor-advised gifts, by contrast, come from individuals who contribute to Yale with the understanding that their money will be passed on to other registered nonprofits of their choosing.

FIDF is not a weapons manufacturer, nor does it supply arms or even defensive vests or helmets. The organization itself acknowledges that American nonprofits are prohibited from donating military equipment of any kind. Instead, it’s a nonprofit that supports soldiers’ education and well-being within U.S. law. 

Blocking Yale from passing on the donation would also likely not prevent the money from being given; the individual who wished to make the donation through Yale might simply put it through another donor-advised fund, or donate directly, accomplishing nothing but hurting Yale’s credibility and our culture of open debate. Furthermore, as one senator noted, condemning this donation implies that every future gift not condemned is tacitly approved. Though, predictably, only those involving Israel seem to invite debate.

To Yale’s international students: I sincerely hope the YCC’s actions do not lead to federal attention that threatens your visa status. To everyone on financial aid: I pray that this motion will not lead the federal government to withhold more funding and lead Yale to cut back on providing vital aid. 

Let’s return to our fictional “University of Moral Certainty.” The motion passes easily this retrial, 19-7 — perhaps all the abstentions of senators who had run for office to plan Spring Fling turned to yeses to get over with the debate. Applause erupts. The senators congratulate themselves on standing for human life, truth and selective compassion.

The chamber adjourns until the next week when they move from condemning Planned Parenthood to condemning climate change prevention charities, global human rights groups and more. If it doesn’t pass the following week, they can and will try again and again. Soon, ‘justice’ is achieved. What began as moral conviction ends as moral control. What began as conscience ends as censorship. And in the silence that follows, diversity of opinion disappears.

Student government should make life better for students, not play foreign-policy referee. When it forgets that, we come outstandingly close to the “University of Moral Certainty.”

EYTAN ISRAEL is a senior in Saybrook College studying Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. He can be reached at eytan.israel@yale.edu.