Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 169
Thanks Tree50Thanks

Thread: Christian Colleges, Religious Liberty, and SB 1146

  1. #11
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    44,424
    Thanks
    2494

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    Are you saying if Christians want to teach that homosexuality is a sin and dooms them to hell unless they repent, the government should pay for them to do so?
    The Bible has been saying what Sins are for the last 3000 years or more. Colleges are not going to change what the Bible says every time Society decides to try a new social experiment. Current thinking by the California government is the Bible and what it says about Homosexuality leads to discrimination therefore funding should be stopped until the college changes its teachings.

  2. #12
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    37,551
    Thanks
    22736

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    Do you believe a Christian college should refrain from teaching its students in order to receive funding? That is really what this proposed law is telling colleges. The law wants to protect one groups rights at the expense of the college losing their freedoms to teach. The law is proposing discrimination toward Christians. The law targets religious beliefs=discrimination towards Gays. That is a clear violation of the First Amendment passing a law that prevents free exercise
    If the school wants to remain wholly private, they are free to discriminate using their own money.

  3. #13
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    29,929
    Thanks
    32135

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    The Bible has been saying what Sins are for the last 3000 years or more. Colleges are not going to change what the Bible says every time Society decides to try a new social experiment. Current thinking by the California government is the Bible and what it says about Homosexuality leads to discrimination therefore funding should be stopped until the college changes its teachings.
    And the government should pay?
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  4. #14
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    40,129
    Thanks
    18796

    From
    Depends on what year....
    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    Do you believe a Christian college should refrain from teaching its students in order to receive funding? That is really what this proposed law is telling colleges.
    So the school should refuse to take the public money. What can possibly be the problem? Private schools are not entitled to be supported by the general public.
    Thanks from OldGaffer, Hollywood and MaryAnne

  5. #15
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    29,929
    Thanks
    32135

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    So the school should refuse to take the public money. What can possibly be the problem? Private schools are not entitled to be supported by the general public.
    I wonder if he would feel the same about a Jewish or Muslim University? I think not.

  6. #16
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    44,424
    Thanks
    2494

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    If the school wants to remain wholly private, they are free to discriminate using their own money.
    Religious schools teach what the Bible says and part of that is that it identifies sin. Government has no authority to pass laws to prevent free exercise as stated in the First Amendment. Are you saying an exception should be made because religious teachings equals discrimination? What is to keep a College from suing the California government for discriminating against Christians. They are a religious group that they are threatening to take actions or else drop your teachings. That is selecting one group to favor while attacking another group the state disapproves of.

  7. #17
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    44,424
    Thanks
    2494

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    I wonder if he would feel the same about a Jewish or Muslim University? I think not.
    Government has no business in dictating what a religious college should and should not teach unless Muslims are promoting a Jihad on American citizens or something of that nature

  8. #18
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    44,424
    Thanks
    2494

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    So the school should refuse to take the public money. What can possibly be the problem? Private schools are not entitled to be supported by the general public.
    That's true. It may come down to private Universities relying on private grants to have freedoms to teach religion at least in California.

  9. #19
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    44,424
    Thanks
    2494

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    And the government should pay?
    They have in the past, but it looks like California is trying to promote equality with the group they support and punish the group they don't. Selective Equality

  10. #20
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    40,129
    Thanks
    18796

    From
    Depends on what year....
    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    Government has no authority to pass laws to prevent free exercise as stated in the First Amendment.
    The government is doing no such thing here. If it proposed a law that said it could not be taught at all, then it would be a violation of the First Amendment. What the proposed law would do is make conditions on accepting public money, which does not violate Free Exercise. The school is not entitled to public money, and is not required to accept it. If it is completely privately funded, it can teach what it wants; but it is not entitled to have the public pay to teach discrimination.

    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    What is to keep a College from suing the California government for discriminating against Christians[?]
    The college can file any suit it wants, but it would not succeed. Since the law would apply to all private religious colleges that accept public money, not the private colleges of just one religion, there is no discrimination against any one religion. Note that, for example, private Jewish and Muslim educational facilities also teach that homosexual activity is sinful, and the proposed law would apply to them, too.

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Where's your religious liberty now, Texas?
    By Rasselas in forum Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 20th March 2017, 12:41 PM
  2. ::: Supreme Court Holds 8-1 for Religious Liberty :::
    By DebateDrone in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 1st June 2015, 07:04 PM
  3. Is Your 'Religious Liberty' Being Threatened?
    By Friday13 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 7th April 2015, 07:44 PM
  4. Replies: 358
    Last Post: 1st April 2015, 05:26 PM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22nd February 2012, 10:17 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed