[Ed Dantes]

Wait, hold on: As I said a few pages back:

#1) Regarding the issue of homosexual marriage, Barack Obama has the same views as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton... and John McCain, Sarah Palin and Carrie Prejean.
#2) While campaigning, Obama argued that his policies would reduce abortions (see his Matthew 25 Network), saying social funding would reduce the need for abortions. (Remember, abortions fell more during the Clinton admin than during the Bush admin). It was within reason to believe, during the campaign, that Obama had a plan to reduce abortions.

That being said, the Liberty Democrats could reasonably argue that Obama would be better on the abortion issue, under the guise that a "legal and rare" policy is better than "illegal yet prevalent" one.

(I know, i know, what Obama has done since being inaugurated basically throws that to the wind. He is the most pro-abortion president in history. We knew he was vehemently pro-abortion based upon his track record. But stupid people -- the backbone of the Democrat Party -- didn't. They figured he'd ultimately be pro-life. I'm not arguing about Obama's track record, I'm arguing that pro-life Democrats could reasonably believe, based upon Obama's own rhetoric, that he'd help reduce the abortion numbers in this country).

[SuperJon]

Ed, you're missing the point. You've got it all confused. You think they lost the funding because of the candidate they supported. In reality, what has been said is that they lost their funding because of their 100% backing of the DNC, meaning they contradicted their constitution. The candidates they supported may not have been pro-gay or pro-choice, but the parent organization that they threw their support behind 100% was.

They can be Democrats and vote for Barack Obama and keep their funding.

They cannot support the DNC (who is outwardly pro-choice and pro-gay) and keep their funding.

[Liberty Freelance]

But did the faculty help draft their constitution? Isn't the underlying problem that the Democratic social platform was gutted from the beginning? That is, at Liberty, a point of view that a few administrators opine is wrong is not on equal ground with competing ideas? In other words, the school is not free to go where the evidence leads. They're bound to the conclusions a few administrators have decided is correct?

So to say that violated their constitution might be correct, but it doesn't exactly tell the whole story.

[phoenix]

Of course, at a private university, those are not rights. But why are so many of you so apathetic about a few university administrators effectively choosing which points of view you're mature enough to be exposed to?

Because, having been a student at both state and Christian schools, I was exposed to far more at Liberty than anywhere else. Because I realize that students are exposed to other points of view regularly outside of college, and that it's not the job of the university to make sure that all points of view are acknowledged in the classroom -- otherwise, Brown and Harvard and Yale and everyone else would offer a creation studies course (even if it was in their sociology department). Otherwise Jerry Falwell would have been invited to speak regularly at state and secular schools. Otherwise, every major university would be doing what you expect Liberty to do. But guess what?

They don't do it. They won't do it. Because it seems that recognizing the conservative Chrisitan POV would upset their donors, and would be the "intolerant" thing to do.

You're right -- at a private university, they're not rights. The rules are made available to anyone who applies to Liberty. Liberty's reputation is very well known. If you can't deal with that reputation and those rules, why do you attend? There are other schools, there are cheaper schools. What is the motivation to go to Liberty if you can't deal with the things that the school notoriously stands for? If it's an evangelical education you want, Baylor and Wheaton are options for you.

[Liberty Freelance]

Phoenix,

The argument that you can go somewhere else is beside the point. People, including myself, go to Liberty for a lot of reasons. People mature in college. People don't always recognize or think about these things until they're already at Liberty or until they've graduated. It's my, or anyone else's, right, as an alumnus, to criticize my own university. There's room for improvement. And I will criticize it until it improves. Just as I criticize the government, yet have no interest in living out of the country, I can criticize Liberty.

Also, you're probably right about a lot of other schools. But that, too, is beside the point. They should change, too. But they're not my alma mater. It's dangerous to say that because they're suppressing free speech, it's OK for Liberty to suppress free speech. To quote Jerry Falwell, "If it's Christian, it ought to be better."

You should be more worried about the people who are dumb and happy, the people who are completely apathetic, or the people who are myopically deferential to the school on issues this important than you should be worried about people who are arguing for improvements.

[Hold My Own]

How is the "you can go somewhere else" beside the point? If LU isnt what you are wanting and doesnt allow enough "Free market ideas" then leaving is the only option. I wont go work at Ford trying to make it Honda...just go work there.

[Liberty Freelance]

Hold My Own,

I just explained why. I'll explain it again. Someone could go to Liberty for another reason. But they could be unhappy about Liberty's suppression of free speech, censorship, and assumption that everyone should fall in line with the campus conventional wisdom. So they could criticize the aspects they're unhappy with.

Or they could be apathetic about it and mature while in college, and have a different perspective as an alumnus.

You don't need me to keep listing the reasons do you? You could probably even think of a few on your own. Why don't you spend the afternoon doing that and give us a full report?

[BJWilliams]

Why is it that every time something happens with Liberty LF is the first to come riding in and then it degenerates into God knows how many pages of LF vs pretty much th erest of the board...

[Liberty Freelance]

My way or the highway is a pretty shaky foundation on which to build an academic institution. You guys are willing to settle for that?

[Ed Dantes]

Ed, you're missing the point. You've got it all confused. You think they lost the funding because of the candidate they supported. In reality, what has been said is that they lost their funding because of their 100% backing of the DNC, meaning they contradicted their constitution. The candidates they supported may not have been pro-gay or pro-choice, but the parent organization that they threw their support behind 100% was.

They can be Democrats and vote for Barack Obama and keep their funding.

They cannot support the DNC (who is outwardly pro-choice and pro-gay) and keep their funding.

THAT'S what this was all about? Really? It took us 8 pages for that?

[Ed Dantes]

Why is it that every time something happens with Liberty LF is the first to come riding in and then it degenerates into God knows how many pages of LF vs pretty much th erest of the board...

LF is fair and balanced, and he's not here to trash Liberty, right? Which is why he's such an active poster on every "non-makes LU look bad" topic.

[Ed Dantes]

People, including myself, go to Liberty for a lot of reasons. People mature in college.

It'll happen to you to.

[SuperJon]

Pretty much. It was their alignment with an organization that was pro-gay and pro-choice that got them in trouble.

[Hold My Own]

Hold My Own,

I just explained why. I'll explain it again. Someone could go to Liberty for another reason. But they could be unhappy about Liberty's suppression of free speech, censorship, and assumption that everyone should fall in line with the campus conventional wisdom. So they could criticize the aspects they're unhappy with.

Or they could be apathetic about it and mature while in college, and have a different perspective as an alumnus.

You don't need me to keep listing the reasons do you? You could probably even think of a few on your own. Why don't you spend the afternoon doing that and give us a full report?

Oh I got your reasons the first time but again I come back to the car example. Sure I may buy a Honda b/c I like the reliability but I cant expect many people to listen to me whine and complain when I start listing off all the features I wish my car had...bc in the end I did BUY the Honda.

Again, if you came to Liberty b/c it was a Christian school but you were unhappy with the censorship or whatever else you keep talking about then there are plenty of other Christian schools out there.

[Ed Dantes]

Pretty much. It was their alignment with an organization that was pro-gay and pro-choice that got them in trouble.

So they can be Democrats, vote for Democrats, support Democrats, encourage others to give money to Democrats, ALL under the Liberty banner... they just couldn't explicitly say that they believed in the cause of the DNC?

To LU Dems: Meet them halfway!

[Liberty Freelance]

BJWilliams,

The people commenting here give deference to Liberty's administration on most of their decisions. Whenever the administration makes a decision, it's presumed to be right. I don't give the administration deference. I don't have a presumption one way or the other. So I even sometimes question Liberty's decisions. That seems to be the crux of all our disagreements.

[Ed Dantes]

Hold My Own,

I just explained why. I'll explain it again. Someone could go to Liberty for another reason. But they could be unhappy about Liberty's suppression of free speech, censorship, and assumption that everyone should fall in line with the campus conventional wisdom. So they could criticize the aspects they're unhappy with.

Or they could be apathetic about it and mature while in college, and have a different perspective as an alumnus.

You don't need me to keep listing the reasons do you? You could probably even think of a few on your own. Why don't you spend the afternoon doing that and give us a full report?

Oh I got your reasons the first time but again I come back to the car example. Sure I may buy a Honda b/c I like the reliability but I cant expect many people to listen to me whine and complain when I start listing off all the features I wish my car had...bc in the end I did BUY the Honda.

Again, if you came to Liberty b/c it was a Christian school but you were unhappy with the censorship or whatever else you keep talking about then there are plenty of other Christian schools out there.

Actually, it's like buying a Honda, whining and complaining about everything, yadda yadda... then saying 'why are you questioning my loyalty to my Honda'.

[SuperJon]

Did you not read the first few pages of this thread? We were ripping the school. Then the facts of students and advisors lying came out and we learned more of the full story and decided the school wasn't nearly as wrong as we thought.

[Liberty Freelance]

Hold My Own,

You're too focused on the individual people making the argument. You need to focus on the arguments. Liberty can't brush away arguments by saying, go somewhere else. It has to address the issues head on. That's why it's irrelevant whether someone decides to transfer or stay.

The analogy is akin to liking an Accord because you like how it looks, you like it's steering, you like it's stereo, you like it's size. But you don't like, say, that it doesn't have AC. So you criticize Honda until they improve the Accord. And then you buy another one. That's called constructive criticism, and it improves the product.

I love Liberty. I just want to see it improve. Why is that taboo?

[vabills]

My way or the highway is a pretty shaky foundation on which to build an academic institution. You guys are willing to settle for that?

Why not? You're a Christian, where Jesus pretty much said, his way or the highway. You don't do what he want's, you pay for the results.

[BJWilliams]

This is true but it seems like the only time you post is when there's bad news about Liberty. I mean why cant we talk about the good things the school has done. Like all the missions teams we send out to share the gospel with people who are very much in need of it...or how the student body basically paid for a family to adopt three Ethiopian siblings and keep them together. This school is by no means perfect but Im sick and tired of people like you who only seem to make appearances when there is bad news about the school and then every discussion turns into trench warfare

[SuperJon]

I love Liberty. I just want to see it improve. Why is that taboo?

Because you only criticize.

[Ed Dantes]

Did you not read the first few pages of this thread? We were ripping the school. Then the facts of students and advisors lying came out and we learned more of the full story and decided the school wasn't nearly as wrong as we thought.

I was on the same page as everyone else -- I bashed the school, and then when that one girl wouldn't answer the question about whether or not Hine said what she said he said... I changed my opinion. But there was a ton of crap that hadn't been sorted out (which is why I posted that thing at the end of page 7). I was trying to get to the bottom of things.

[Liberty Freelance]

SuperJon,

Every time I've gotten on here, you defend the school. You quit the debate before you would ever agree with me. You defended, of all things, a ski slope on a college campus. You don't expect me to take your point seriously do you? You're of course free to defend whatever you want. But that you're willing to defend something so obnoxious as a campus ski slope, demonstrates how much you're willing to defer to Liberty's administration.

Sure, I was impressed (and surprised) with the first few pages of this thread when I read them last week. But most people on here ultimately came around. I had little doubt this is how it would end up. Most people here give LU's administration the benefit of the doubt on most things, but does anyone ever give me the benefit of the doubt? You can't be serious . . .

[Ed Dantes]

SuperJon,

Every time I've gotten on here, you defend the school. You quit the debate before you would ever agree with me. You defended, of all things, a ski slope on a college campus. You don't expect me to take your point seriously do you? You're of course free to defend whatever you want. But that you're willing to defend something so obnoxious as a campus ski slope, demonstrates how much you're willing to defer to Liberty's administration.

Sure, I was impressed (and surprised) with the first few pages of this thread when I read them last week. But most people on here ultimately came around. I had little doubt this is how it would end up. Most people here give LU's administration the benefit of the doubt on most things, but does anyone ever give me the benefit of the doubt? You can't be serious . . .

Didn't we get the ski slope from a donor for free, with the specific request that we use it to get a ski slope? What the heck is wrong with that?