Boston College: Laboratory of Subsidiarity?

I tend to agree with Michael's response to Steve's Question of the Day, but I want to raise one other aspect of Boston College's decision-making regarding the military's on-campus recruiting. From the perspective of subsidiarity, it is crucial that the school recognize its discretion to make nuanced moral judgments on this issue. It becomes much more difficult for an institution to exercise its own moral agency if its options are limited (either in fact or in perception) to an embrace of the unfettered moral marketplace (i.e., allowing all employers on campus, regardless of their views and practices) or the imposition of a one-size-fits-all moral orthodoxy (i.e., banning any employers who discriminate against any class for any reason in any context). Especially when one discriminating employer is a public institution and the other is a religious institution, it seems that there is some obvious middle ground to explore. Of course, if Boston College is raising the prospect of banning the military simply as a knee-jerk reaction aimed at conforming with the top-down norms of the AALS, that's a different story. But as long as the school is seeking a path by which to express its own identity against the background of these hotly contested moral norms, I believe it is seeking the path of moral agency, which is the bedrock of subsidiarity.

Rob