Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 169
Thanks Tree50Thanks

Thread: Christian Colleges, Religious Liberty, and SB 1146

  1. #1
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    49,928
    Thanks
    2735

    From
    Washington state

    Christian Colleges, Religious Liberty, and SB 1146

    1. What is the basic premise of SB 1146?
    SB 1146 prohibits private/religious colleges and universities in California from “discriminating” against LGBT students, faculty, or staff members, even if LGBT lifestyles run contrary to that institution’s religious beliefs.
    Students, faculty, or staff who think they have been the object of discrimination based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression can sue the institution for discrimination. Because the Bible identifies homosexuality as a sin, it is not difficult to see how Bible-teaching colleges and universities will be accused of discrimination under the new law.

    First, SB 1146 will require religious colleges and universities to adopt policies of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in order for students to receive state-funded scholarships under the Cal Grant program. Secondly, SB 1146 will require these institutions to give notice if they have requested an exemption to Title IX. Thirdly, SB 1146 will permit lawsuits against institutions that are perceived to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation regardless of whether they accept the Cal-Grant scholarships.


    2. What is the stated rationale behind the bill?
    Supporters of the bill contend that this is a civil rights issue. The argument is basically as follows: in the same way that race-based discrimination should have no place in institutions of higher learning, so also discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression should not be tolerated. Institutions in which such discrimination is reportedly found will be subject to punitive litigation.
    Supporters of the bill are primarily targeting schools in which students receive federal and state financial aid (such as the Cal-Grant). They argue that such money should not be used to provide assistance to institutions that do not fully comply with anti-discrimination laws (specifically as those laws currently relate to those who identify as LGBT).
    By contrast, opponents of SB 1146 contend that this legislation violates the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment—namely, the free exercise of religion—by requiring religious institutions to violate their moral principles in the name of tolerance. As Eric Metaxas points out, the California state government is using anti-discrimination laws as “a license to discriminate” against religious institutions.
    https://www.tms.edu/preachersandprea...berty-sb-1146/

    California is making government a tool for limiting religious freedoms within their Colleges by the threat of withholding financial aid. I have been saying for a long time that government initiated a law a couple years ago that prevents free exercise, SB1146 is even more evidence that a government run by Progressives is hostile to religious freedoms. The question is this. Is religious beliefs discriminatory when they simply study the Bible in their college class rooms. Sounds like California thinks so.

  2. #2
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    55,162
    Thanks
    10072

    From
    By the wall
    Stupid.

    Forcing homosexuality down everyone's throats.

    Gotta love liberals.

  3. #3
    NWO Toilet Cleaner Blues63's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    5,153
    Thanks
    3351

    From
    An NWO Lunch Room
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Stupid.

    Forcing homosexuality down everyone's throats.

    Gotta love liberals.
    Well if the churches stopped harbouring paedophiles, then no-one would be so concerned over what went down their kids' throats.

  4. #4
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    47,953
    Thanks
    22509

    From
    Vulcan
    Religious freedom does not mean the right to limit other people's freedom. And there is no right to receive public money. If the institution wants public money, it has to follow the public's rules.

  5. #5
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    35,756
    Thanks
    37855

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Religious freedom does not mean the right to limit other people's freedom. And there is no right to receive public money. If the institution wants public money, it has to follow the public's rules.
    Some believe in the old Orwellian line, all religions are equal, but some religions are more equal than others.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey and Isalexi

  6. #6
    Veteran Member Moorhuhn Wanted Champion Hollywood's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    64,301
    Thanks
    29955

    From
    Memphis, Tn.
    Quote Originally Posted by aboutenough View Post
    1. What is the basic premise of SB 1146?
    SB 1146 prohibits private/religious colleges and universities in California from “discriminating” against LGBT students, faculty, or staff members, even if LGBT lifestyles run contrary to that institution’s religious beliefs.
    Students, faculty, or staff who think they have been the object of discrimination based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression can sue the institution for discrimination. Because the Bible identifies homosexuality as a sin, it is not difficult to see how Bible-teaching colleges and universities will be accused of discrimination under the new law.

    First, SB 1146 will require religious colleges and universities to adopt policies of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in order for students to receive state-funded scholarships under the Cal Grant program. Secondly, SB 1146 will require these institutions to give notice if they have requested an exemption to Title IX. Thirdly, SB 1146 will permit lawsuits against institutions that are perceived to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation regardless of whether they accept the Cal-Grant scholarships.


    2. What is the stated rationale behind the bill?
    Supporters of the bill contend that this is a civil rights issue. The argument is basically as follows: in the same way that race-based discrimination should have no place in institutions of higher learning, so also discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression should not be tolerated. Institutions in which such discrimination is reportedly found will be subject to punitive litigation.
    Supporters of the bill are primarily targeting schools in which students receive federal and state financial aid (such as the Cal-Grant). They argue that such money should not be used to provide assistance to institutions that do not fully comply with anti-discrimination laws (specifically as those laws currently relate to those who identify as LGBT).
    By contrast, opponents of SB 1146 contend that this legislation violates the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment—namely, the free exercise of religion—by requiring religious institutions to violate their moral principles in the name of tolerance. As Eric Metaxas points out, the California state government is using anti-discrimination laws as “a license to discriminate” against religious institutions.
    https://www.tms.edu/preachersandprea...berty-sb-1146/

    California is making government a tool for limiting religious freedoms within their Colleges by the threat of withholding financial aid. I have been saying for a long time that government initiated a law a couple years ago that prevents free exercise, SB1146 is even more evidence that a government run by Progressives is hostile to religious freedoms. The question is this. Is religious beliefs discriminatory when they simply study the Bible in their college class rooms. Sounds like California thinks so.
    So refuse to accept public money in protest. What's the problem?
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey and MaryAnne

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Moorhuhn Wanted Champion Hollywood's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    64,301
    Thanks
    29955

    From
    Memphis, Tn.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Stupid.

    Forcing homosexuality down everyone's throats.

    Gotta love liberals.
    WHAT??? Someone has FORCED you so suck a dick?
    Pretty sure that would be illegal, report it immediately!
    Thanks from OldGaffer, Blues63, NiteGuy and 1 others

  8. #8
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    49,928
    Thanks
    2735

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Religious freedom does not mean the right to limit other people's freedom. And there is no right to receive public money. If the institution wants public money, it has to follow the public's rules.
    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

  9. #9
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    35,756
    Thanks
    37855

    From
    Nashville, TN
    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?
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  10. #10
    Veteran Member aboutenough's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    49,928
    Thanks
    2735

    From
    Washington state
    Quote Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
    So refuse to accept public money in protest. What's the problem?
    That is the point of this thread. California government forcing Christian colleges to comply with Liberal thinking or lose funding. That is similar to Trump refusing to support California if they continue with Sanctuary cities.

Page 1 of 17 12311 ... 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