Good guys win one. Looks like the president of the college is still too shell-shocked to realize what he just won. This is great news. A religious college should have the right to set standards on the type of people they want attending their college.
1 posted on
12/13/2015 10:28:25 PM PST by
NKP_Vet
To: NKP_Vet
2 posted on
12/13/2015 10:39:48 PM PST by
Politicalkiddo
("How many observe Christ's birthday! How few, his precepts!"- Benjamin Franklin)
To: NKP_Vet
I expect the uniparty to act like nazis and denounce religious freedom.
Now that lefties have used the word nazi and hiter its ok to use it against them
3 posted on
12/13/2015 10:51:56 PM PST by
RginTN
To: NKP_Vet
Does this college receive any subsidies from the gov’t, such as federal tuition aid to its students?
If not, then it should have the right to set these standards for admission.
To: NKP_Vet
For the record, I support the idea that a private educational institution, religious or otherwise, should be able to discriminate as it pleases on issues related to sex and morality. Yet, we no longer live in the Victorian age but in the twenty-first century in which alien cultures can arrive on our shores with the speed of a jet plane. Like other actions we would like to take in opposition to Barack Obama, these matters present a two edged sword, if we permit discrimination by Baptists we are constitutionally forced to permit discrimination by Muslims.
It is important not to stand by while our culture is destroyed by a series of cells operating around mosques or Muslim schools. Yet we are in a constitutional box.
The only solution which preserves the culture and observes the Constitution is to halt Muslim immigration into the country.
5 posted on
12/13/2015 10:59:06 PM PST by
nathanbedford
("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
To: NKP_Vet
That’s quite a feat to pull off in today’s world, and legally too! This is from an Attorney who thinks defensively,and outside the box. Most adult Christians are unaccustomed to having to defend their right to believe.
To: NKP_Vet
to let them know that the values that Carson-Newman now represents are not mine," Champion said
He needs to change that last name also. I think "Loser" would be far more appropriate. In addition, I will stand away from him at the Judgement seat when his turn comes. Listening to himself say that again in front of his Lord and Master will not be an enjoyable sight.
7 posted on
12/14/2015 12:27:42 AM PST by
wbarmy
(I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
To: NKP_Vet
This is great news. A religious college should have the right to set standards on the type of people they want attending their college. Agree. Except I believe the only reason the government allowed this is to support Muslim institutions and their invocation of Sharia law - but now they can say "Christians did it first."
8 posted on
12/14/2015 12:32:46 AM PST by
Talisker
(One who commands, must obey.)
To: NKP_Vet; All
The whole “no one can discriminate” nonsense is a direct attack on freedom of association for any entity other than a government agency.
The law should be colorblind, but private individuals have an absolute right to freedom of association.
9 posted on
12/14/2015 12:41:53 AM PST by
marktwain
To: NKP_Vet
It’s like owning a gun for PD. You hope you never have to use it but you are glad you have it in case you do. It may keep the mentally disabled from applying to your college.
10 posted on
12/14/2015 3:28:39 AM PST by
bjorn14
(Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
To: NKP_Vet
"... Wins the right..."
Well, how nice. But what if the court had ruled the other way? Would that right have then been deemed retroactively non-existent?
I don't at all like the concept of "exemptions." It presupposes the condition that but for a specific, allowable harmless action, specified by a government, you would be illegally "discriminating." This put the existence of constitutional rights on its head. It makes the individual/entity prove that they are not breaking the law instead of this burden of proof falling completely on the governent.
No one should have the obligation in the least to defend it's "right to discrimination." Discrimination DEFINES freedom. This should be beyond the purview of any court to decide, and I wouldn't even subject myself to their decision.
11 posted on
12/14/2015 3:37:13 AM PST by
fwdude
To: NKP_Vet
12 posted on
12/14/2015 3:53:47 AM PST by
jmaroneps37
(Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.VE)
To: NKP_Vet
‘’A religious college should have the right to set standards on the type of people they want attending their college.’’
Hooray, Tennessee! That type of attitude is why we left CA and came to TN.
To: NKP_Vet
20 posted on
12/14/2015 7:43:18 AM PST by
Albion Wilde
("Look, the establishment doesn't want me, because I don't need the establishment." --Donald Trump)
To: NKP_Vet
The fact that they have to apply for the government exemption shows this battle is already lost. There will come a time when no exemptions are allowed.
21 posted on
12/14/2015 9:33:31 AM PST by
aimhigh
(1 John 3:21)
To: NKP_Vet
the gay gestapo feels betrayed by obama allowing christian schools to gain exemptions. the gay gestapo wants christians to bake the cake and bless them.
22 posted on
12/14/2015 10:27:06 AM PST by
yongin
To: NKP_Vet
The law allows for any school "controlled by a religious organization" to seek an exemption if complying "would not be consistent with the religious tenants tenets of such organization."
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson