Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.
Article Source: The Smirking Chimp"I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!"
-- The Rev. Jerry Falwell, America Can Be Saved
Since it doesn't get much more religiously oriented than Liberty University, a fair question to ask is: Should a private sectarian institution be receiving federal funds?
During the last fiscal year alone, Liberty received about $445 million in federal financial aid money, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Over the past few years, Liberty University has raked in so much taxpayer money from the federal government that is now ranked among the top ten universities in the United States receiving federal dollars. It is also Virginia's top recipient of federal money.
For the sake of accuracy:
In the span of a year, Liberty’s experienced about a 56 percent spike in federal student aid, from $284 million in 2008-2009 to $445 million in 2009-2010, according to Department of Education data compiled by The News & Advance.
The feds just didn't give Liberty the cash, it was for student aid.
Explanation accepted, however---NO federal student aid should be granted to attend a purely religious institution for those monies do indeed fill the coffers of that University! If student aid is to be granted using public tax dollars then the applying student will have to go to either a public university or a private one not affiliated with any religious order! No exceptions for this does indeed blur the lines between separation of church and state!
NO federal student aid should be granted to attend a purely religious institution...
What you are advocating just might be unconstitutional. Liberty is not a purely religious institution. It's not a Bob Jones operation.
Hmmm. No wonder the site is about to go under. Liberty university funds are for student grants/loans for them to attend school. To not allow student aid would be blatantly unconstitutional.
I may not like money going to Berkley or Wellsley to pay for leftist indoctrination but that is the student's choice and they have a right to that student aid, just as students going to liberty do.
"NO federal student aid should be granted to attend a purely religious institution..."
Isn't that like being a little bit pregnant? If Gettysburg College ( Private Religious-Presbyterian, I think) has a chapel & offers Sunday services, and a full-time Chaplin, How MUCH of it is a religious institution? Or Notre Dame? In other words, where's the dividing line between purely religious, somewhat religious & non-religious colleges? Slippery Slope!
I may be misinformed, but I thought Bob Jones & Liberty were in the same league.
I object because LU is a sectarian university. Any religious school should never receive tax payer funds. When I got financial aid, I had to say where I was going to attend school. If it was a private religious school then I should not receive funds. A private school that is not religious is different. It just means it's run without taxpayer money. But LU is a religious school. I don't care if they are open to the public. They require religious attendance and that makes them a religious institution. No money should be given to them.
There's a book about a guy who attend liberty u for a semester or year, (I'll find the title) he recalls being pressured into attending church. Having a chapel means the students can choose to go. Pressuring students into attending and requiring they take classes in evangelism and creation is totally different. Not such a slippery slope.
Found it! The Unlikely Disciple: A Sinner's Semester at America's Holiest University by Kevin Roose.
In what could be described as religious gonzo journalism, Roose documents his experiences as a student for a semester at Liberty University, the largest Christian fundamentalist university in the United States. Coming from progressive Brown University, the author admits that the transition to Liberty, with its iron-clad attempts at controlling student behavior, came with much anxiety. He trains himself to control his foul language and even begins to pray and study the Bible regularly, much to the bewilderment of his liberal Quaker parents. He suffers his way through a course debunking evolution, but finds enjoyment in a Scripture class. Roose may be young—he's a 19-year-old college sophomore—but he writes like a seasoned veteran and obviously enjoys his work. He quickly makes friends at Liberty, but is naïvely stunned and not a little disgusted by their antigay rhetoric. School founder Rev. Jerry Falwell granted Roose an interview for the student newspaper shortly before the famous evangelical's death in May 2007. "Complicated" is how Roose describes Falwell, which is a good descriptor for his undercover student experience.
It doesn't condemn LU so don't bash it but it does show that LU is a religiously doctrinaire university. Which is why it shouldn't recieve funds!
. . . Their non-profit Christian Heritage Foundation of Forest, Va., snapped up a big chunk of Liberty's debt for $2.5 million, a fraction of its face value. Thousands of small religious investors who had bought church construction bonds through a Texas company were the big losers. But Falwell shed no tears. He told local reporters that the moment was 'the greatest single day of financial advantage' in the school's history.
Left unmentioned . . . was the identity of the bigger guardian angel who had been protecting Falwell's financial interests -- from a distance and without publicity. That secret benefactor was the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the self-proclaimed South Korean messiah who is controversial with many fundamentalist Christians because of his bizarre Biblical interpretations and his brainwashing tactics that have torn thousands of young people from their families. Moon also has grown harshly anti-American in recent years.
Covertly, Moon helped bail out Liberty University through one of his front groups which funneled $3.5 million to the Reber-Thomas Christian Heritage Foundation, the non-profit that had purchased the school's debt.
So-called 'charismatic' religious leaders like David Koresh of the Texas-based Branch Davidians, Arkansas evangelist and convicted sex felon [sentenced in 2009 to 175 years in prison for violations of the Mann Act and child molestation] Tony Alamo, and jailed polygamist leader Warren Jeffs, also of Texas — who took over in 2002 as prophet of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), which broke off from the Mormon church in the 1930s over the issue of polygamy — all sought, secured and enjoyed tax-free status.
In their cases it was, first and foremost, child abuse, statutory rape and weapons violations that incurred the wrath of the federal government, primarily through the actions of the FBI and the ATF (now the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives). It is thus no coincidence that religious cultists of this type rail not only against the Vatican, other Christian denominations and Islam as being their arch enemies, but against federal law enforcement and watchdog agencies as well.
More 'mainstream' Christian 'universities and institutions of higher learning' are playing a very cagey shell game. As long as their leaders don't get tripped up by their own sexual peccadilloes, the shell game will go on and on.
I'm about as liberal as they come and I have no problem with fed student loans and grants going to students attending religious universities. Having an educated population is a good investment of tax money. Increasing the earning potential of the population increases the tax base and reduces dependence on things like welfare.
It is not a University.
It is a cult.
According to you. According to the following agencies, they are a fully accredited University:
Any religious school should never receive tax payer funds.
The school isn't, the students receive the funds and use it to pay for their education.
Are we so ignorant as a nation that this concept is even questioned?
I thought the repugs were against student handouts?
I'm not sure who "repugs" are, but Republicans are (for the most part) against any non-essential federal spending. However, as the federal government is currently in the business of handing out student loans, they should not be able to discriminate based on a student's choice of college.
Liberty University is "accredited" with what body, fedupwithliberals....the unintelligible Teletubby For Proper Palin Syntax League?
Seriously, is a corpus callosum required for graduation?
Republicans are (for the most part) against any non-essential federal spending.
Unless of course (for the most part)....IOKIYAR......( It's OK If You Are Republican).....
Could not resist!!!
Liberty University is "accredited" with what body, fedupwithliberals....the unintelligible Teletubby For Proper Palin Syntax League?
More like the American Bar Association. You might try looking at the links I've provided in other posts showing with whom they are accredited. I'll post it again, so you won't even have to look very hard:
Should a private sectarian institution be receiving federal funds?
NO!!! Not if you are Liberty University. This is more political than religious (even though it blends both). Politics and federal money do not mix.
Excuse me for noticing, but this can't be blamed on Obama and the Democrats. Liberty University is thoroughly a Republican issue, our alleged spending cut experts. This university has been right wing Republican since the beginning but somehow for many years it has been raking in hundreds of millions of dollars from the Republicans.
As a manner of principle, any sectarian group that is involved in politics should lose their tax exempt status and absolutely no get government money. That goes directly against the separation of church and state.
The right wing nuts dream need anyone say more.
"I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!"
-- The Rev. Jerry Falwell, America Can Be Saved
We need to tax the HELL out of these sinners.....Amen brother
#2 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:19 AM EDTexactly ! especially with this agenda ...
real christian terrorism in the US . snaking it's way into our government ... grooming it's self . No different than Iran.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/books/review/Easton-t.html
Patrick Henry College
From SourceWatch
The mission of Patrick Henry College, as adopted by the Board of Trustees September 28, 2002, is "to train Christian men and women who will lead our nation and shape our culture with timeless biblical values and fidelity to the spirit of the American founding. In order to accomplish this mission, the College provides academically excellent higher education with a biblical worldview using classical liberal arts core curriculum and apprenticeship methodology." The College's vision is "to aid in the transformation of American society by training Christian students to serve God and mankind with a passion for righteousness, justice and mercy, through careers of public service and cultural influence." [1]
The College's "Statement of Faith" includes, but is not limited to, the acknowledgment that "Jesus Christ literally will come to earth again in the Second Advent" and that "Satan exists as a personal, malevolent being who acts as tempter and accuser, for whom Hell, the place of eternal punishment, was prepared, where all who die outside of Christ shall be confined in conscious torment for eternity."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_Henry_College
04 God's Next Army
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzCIduBvl1I&p=596B2A143DC53EB4&playnext=1&index=29
and to help them in their evil endeavor ??
Conservative Bible Project Cuts Out Liberal Passages
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/05/conservative-bible-projec_n_310037.html
Student aid. =. Profit for colleges
Any way you spin this curriculum is not a liberal arts degree. It is a religious degree specific to christanity.
So we will have to pay to train pastors for a specific religion that adds no value to our society.
In reality it opposes our society and our republic.
Any way you spin this curriculum is not a liberal arts degree. It is a religious degree specific to christanity.
Do you even know what curriculum they offer? They offer degree programs in everything from Aeronautics to Business to Law. I'm pretty sure that a Bachelor's degree in Math is not specific to Christianity.
Do a little research next time.
I'm pretty sure that a Bachelor's degree in Math is not specific to Christianity
I bet this university has made it as specific as possible.
When to get that degree you have to take a Mandatory class in evangelicalism and Biblical history, it is.
Should a private sectarian institution be receiving federal funds?
No, absolutely not. There needs to be strict separation between religious organizations and our government at all times.
#3 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:29 AM EDTSo... why aren't the Democrats raking the Republicans over the coals for this??? The Republicans are the holier than thou spending cutters, yet here we have a blatant misuse of taxpayer money for a right wing activist Republican organization.
a right wing activist Republican organization.
Berkley
Wellsley
Harvard
Yale
UC Santa Cruz
University of San Francisco
Just saying that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. There are a lot of colleges I would love to see money cut for.
However, I defend liberal student rights to go where they chose and be indoctrinated however they want to be indoctrinated. Same with Liberty.
The level of ignorance in this thread of any sense of fairness is chiling.
Well so much for the "Separation of Church and State", eh. He and his organization should immediately lose their tax free status and be forced to return US Taxpayer dollars, every one of them since he has crossed way over the line! I would also want someone representing the Feds be put on the hot seat for allowing this to even happen in the first place. I wonder if Billy Graham's university is also receiving tax dollars?
#4 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:32 AM EDTThey all are to some degree.
No church, or religious organization should be tax exempt. None. Anyone who thinks it would then be "taxation without representation", go cry me a river. They all vote don't they? Yet their income is all tax free, along with the fortunes they make off the poor saps they have suckered in, not to mention a portion of our tax dollars to support their religious cause. They get a say in our government and who represents us without buying a ticket like the rest of us do. WE PAY TAXES.
You are mistaken, the incomes of those who vote (the employees) is not tax exempt. How many people have gotten in trouble for trying to hide income to not pay the taxes on it, this couple for example.
And no we shouldn't tax the hell out of any of them. Although I'm all for them being taxed the same as any other cooperative. Although prepare for them to put up a fight when they don't get the same tax-exemptions for all of their outreach work as a purely non-religious group would get. Or are you saying all "charitable" organizations should lose tax-exemption status.
A penalty for being a church is just as against the Constitution as showing preference to any particular religion.
Since churches are run like businesses and they make political maneuvers why treat them different than any other business... tax them. They can still speak all they want. Other businesses have employees who pay taxes and the business they work for pay taxes as well. So if you are going to analogize the church as the business it is, then why shouldn't it pay taxes as well?
How is taxing political activist chuch's a "penalty" when all other political activist groups are taxed???
Gotta find a way to bend over backwards to justify taxpayers supporting evangelical Christianity? And who would be screaming if Jewish, Buddhist or Hindu organizations got tax exempt status plus hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars each year.
This is an outrage for the party that claims to be spending cut experts to overlook this use of taxpayer money.
if you are going to analogize the church as the business it is, then why shouldn't it pay taxes as well?
Actually I didn't.
they make political maneuvers why treat them different than any other business
Is Planned Parenthood tax exempt? Actually lets go for someone less volatile. Is Habitat for Humanity tax exempt, do they engage in political maneuvering, are you willing to revoke their tax exempt status too?
How is taxing political activist chuch's a "penalty" when all other political activist groups are taxed?
Well I guess if you read only my closing sentence, and not the preceding sentences it might look like I said something like that. Here is the important bit again:
no we shouldn't tax the hell out of any of them (In response to someone saying tax the hell out of them). Although I'm all for them being taxed the same as any other cooperative. Although prepare for them to put up a fight when they don't get the same tax-exemptions for all of their outreach work as a purely non-religious group would get.
So, read that again and tell me where I said a church should not be taxed. I said they should pay taxes. Although if you are going to give tax exempt status to organizations that do charity type work then you had better offer the same to Churches, otherwise you are penalizing them by not granting those same exemptions.
Perhaps simply exclude all income used for the charitable works then? Or they could set up a separate 501 like Planned Parenthood did, so they got to use the name, and links from the 501 c 3 website, but didn't technically violate the law, only the spirit of it.
And no we shouldn't tax the hell out of any of them. Although I'm all for them being taxed the same as any other cooperative. Although prepare for them to put up a fight when they don't get the same tax-exemptions for all of their outreach work as a purely non-religious group would get. Or are you saying all "charitable" organizations should lose tax-exemption status.
Any charity that tells people who to vote for or how to vote on issues should be taxed as they are being political arms.
A penalty for being a church is just as against the Constitution as showing preference to any particular religion.
No one claimed it was for being a church. For being a political arm and for being a business.
Planned parenthood while the focus of political manuevers is not politicking. They are providing health care. They go out and try to get people healthy. As for Habitat for humanity, are they telling people who to vote for? Are they telling people how they should vote? No... they build homes.
or how to vote on issues
And just what do you think Habitat for Humanity does with their lobbying that I linked to? Personally I don't have a problem with it since they tend to be talking about issues that directly affect them.
Of course the problem is that when it comes to religions that are so all encompassing of life as the Abrahamic are they tend to have an opinion on everything.
That's the problem because now we're saying okay, you can talk, but not about anything where we might want to have a law. If you do we're going to tax you.
Please tell me why that doesn't immediately strike you as being a tax on their speech. And since I don't see anyone here advocating for it to be done to the secular orgs also why it isn't a penalty for being a church.
Planned parenthood while the focus of political manuevers is not politicking. They are providing health care.
You really believe that? As I said in my own comment, PP did setup a independent branch to do their politicking, but do you really think there is any real difference between their PAC and the rest of PP?
As for Habitat for humanity, are they telling people who to vote for? Are they telling people how they should vote? No.
Actually yes, they do. Why do you think they spent just south of $600,000 on lobbying? Or here where they did exactly and explicitly what you said they don't do. And on their website they do advocate and encourage others to do the same.
So, revoke their status or no?
I vote no. But I understand if you're consistent and want to tax them. That is unless there is some reason they shouldn't be taxed after having been a "charity that tells people ... how to vote on issues" like you said.
Good news on that front by the way, they are a christian organization, not secular, so bring on that outrage.
I am disgusted by the entire "College Inc." system. Its not just Liberty, its ALL of them. Especially those colleges taking huge sums of tax payer money to benefit the military industrial complex.
This article is all about partisan politics. Universities in general are milking the system for big money not just Liberty.
The left is just fine with tax payer money being fed to colleges that support their ideology. Colleges are more about indoctrination of the students mind and not their education,
#5 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:53 AM EDTColleges are more about indoctrination of the students mind and not their education,
oh sure...they have gestapo teaching them the values of marx and lennon, just us a break vette, that is so untrue.
Now Liberty? They make it pretty clear what their objective is, so no foul there except they should not be getting fed $
Colleges are more about indoctrination of the students mind and not their education,
LMAO! That sounds tin-foil-hatish.
The left is just fine with tax payer money being fed to colleges that support their ideology.
And what college would that be, VetteLover?
Or do you assume that any college that doesn't teach their students through the fog of Christianity should be marked a liberal institution?
Really we can't be filling up all those young minds with actual facts and knowledge and book learnin'.
Those elitist scum!
Why are people looked down upon (by the repugs) as elitist when they obtain a decent education????????
Why are people looked down upon (by the repugs) as elitist when they obtain a decent education????????
Because they prefer deliberate ignorance?
Colleges are more about indoctrination of the students mind and not their education,
Don't know what college you went to. My time at The U of Texas in horticulture was very non ideology. Of course plants could care less was a Dem or Rep or TB thinks.
#6 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:01 AM EDTjaguartx:
Which reminds me of the adage: "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think." ;-)
That was not intended to be personal in any way. Just kidding around. ;-)
None taken, the way we said it was You can lead a horticulturist to water but you can't make them think.
It disgusts me that religion -especially this group of theological boobs - is getting any federal money. These institutions are private and should live or die by the credo they support - the free market.
#7 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:01 AM EDTNo University, whether public or private should receive federal funds. Get a job.
#8 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:03 AM EDTThey are academically accredited and religious bigotry by liberals is what should be outlawed. This is purely religious hatred.
#9 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:06 AM EDTThey are academically accredited and religious bigotry by liberals is what should be outlawed
You can't outlaw elitism.
sure they are! LOL
Are you referring to their Accreditation? If so, here you go:
I bet the taxpayers would be upset if I started an Islamic University and received tax dollars. However, if it were a Christian based university, not so much.
#10 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:17 AM EDTI bet the taxpayers would be upset if I started an Islamic University and received tax dollars.
or one that worships the fly spaghetti monster!
I bet the taxpayers would be upset if I started an Islamic University and received tax dollars.
Not if it were a student receiving financial aid to pursue a college (not seminary) degree.
Not if it were a student receiving financial aid to pursue a college (not seminary) degree.
But you would be okay with a student receiving federal financial aid to pursue a college (seminary) degree at a Christian university?
Should a private sectarian institution be receiving federal funds?
Of course not and religious groups that meddle in politics should not be getting tax breaks, either.
#11 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:24 AM EDTArticle....Smirking Chimp.... it seems just a bit hypocritical for so many Liberty University students to be bellying up to the federal trough and for the school to behave as a ward of the state."
As Rachel Maddow would say.......IOKIYAR.......( It's OK If You Are Republican ) Purely massive abuse and hypocrisy of the rightwing and T/baggers.....Disgusting abuse of tax $$$$$...for any religious college..
#12 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:30 AM EDTI wouldn't blame Liberty University for taking federal funds. They're just taking advantage of the stupidity of the federal government that gives money away. It's the same thing with Planned Parenthood. Liberals have been in charge of the congress for years. They had the power to cut off any organization they want to cut off. Why didn't they do it? After all, Nancy did promise NO NEW DEFICIT SPENDING. You don't like religious schools, send a letter to your congressman and cut them off. Good luck with that.
#13 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:25 AM EDTIf I see "Liberty University" on a resume, it hits the trash immediately.
#14 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:42 AM EDTWow...thanks for being so up-front about your illegal use of religious discrimination in hiring.
There is a huge difference between discriminating against religion and opting to not consider a candidate that most likely has a degree in 'women's ministries'.
A bible college, that lets 99% of applicants in, and has a graduation rate of 28% would not be my choice of a competant job applicant.... Unless you are hiring a preacher or wife.
There is a huge difference between discriminating against religion and opting to not consider a candidate that most likely has a degree in 'women's ministries'
So if the candidate happened to have a nursing, math or business degree, you dismiss them out of hand because the college they went to happens to be Christian? I would say there's not much of a difference between opting to trash a college graduate because you don't like their religious preference and outright religious discrimination.
A bible college,
No, a fully accredited university that, in addition to its arts, science and business programs, also offers classes in Bible.
would not be my choice of a competant job applicant.... Unless you are hiring a preacher or wife.
Sad (and illegal) that you may be passing up a highly qualified applicant because of your anti-Christian bias.
In the conservative world, conservative institutions living on the government dole are acceptable. In the conservative world, only those like single parents receiving WIC benefits should be barred from receiving government assistance.
#15 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:42 AM EDTWith the Religious Right so adamantly against government programs, American United's Rob Boston pointed out that "The more interesting question appears to be a non-legal one," since "it has become an article of faith among the Religious Right that government programs are always bad and that reliance on public forms of assistance breeds dependency. In light of this, it seems just a bit hypocritical for so many Liberty University students to be bellying up to the federal trough and for the school to behave as a ward of the state."
This is a quote from further into the article. The article also describes how students are too often unable to pay off their government loans, eventually sticking the taxpayer with the debt. This dynamic exists in other for-profit schools, such as University of Phoenix, which deliver a poor product at a very high price, leaving their customers with no means to repay the loan.
A scam is a scam, whether religious or secular. By any acceptable and honest academic standards, Falwell U, and U. Phoenix, are scams.
#16 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:43 AM EDTA scam is a scam, whether religious or secular
I agree, like Planned Parenthood University.
Bubba says hip hip hooray for an uneducated population where womens health is kicked to the curb... I can't see how you're "Permanent" Majority collapsed :^)
uneducated population where womens health is kicked to the curb
I betting Bubba can relate.
I've permanently collapsed Bubba by putting him on ignore.
Bubba is what we edumacated folks call a Teabaggerus Moronicus...
That last Bubba nonsense is about all I can take of the unmitigated stupidity that comes with parroting right-wing propaganda. Bubba joins the Great Ignored. Bye bye, Bubba.
I've permanently collapsed Bubba by putting him on ignore.
I like laughing at his comments too much to put him on ignore.
Then you are better equipped at handling your temper than I am.
I've had Bubba on ignore for so long that I didn't know that he was still a Viner.
Private school students account for about half of all federal student loan defaults yet these institutions account for about a quarter of federal financial aid while enrolling only about 10 percent of college students."
Looks like a place all tea-publicans can agree to start cutting.///sc
#17 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:48 AM EDTDoes Liberty have the right to accept the money? Yes. Are they being moral and ethical hypocrites in accepting the funds? Absolutely.
This is just another case of a religious ideologue saying one thing and doing something entirely different. It is hypocrisy of the highest order.
#18 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:06 PM EDTSo by accepting a student who has borrowed money from the government (with the assumption they will pay it back to the federal government, with interest), they are "moral and ethical hypocrites"?
They are hypocrites when they bash the very programs that they are accepting money from. If you are anti-Washington, you should announce to your students that, as a private Christian University, you accept no public funding. Allow students to apply for loans through your endowments which are bountiful.
It is the same hypocrisy that is in evidence when a governor says on Tuesday that he wants nothing to do with the federal government's stimulus funds, and then takes a 330m check the next day and brags about how he brings the bacon back to his state. Hypocrisy of the highest order. IF YOU HATE THE GOVERNMENT, DON'T TAKE THEIR MONEY!
I have to disagree that federal money is going directly to this "school". The money is going to students for them to use on their education, and those individuals have the freedom to be taught at the school of their choice (as long as the school qualifies of course).
Telling them (the students) how they can spend their education money would be like telling a government worker how they can spend their paycheck. Just because the money comes from taxes does not negate the personal freedoms of the person who rightfully receives it, and uses it.
#19 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:11 PM EDTNot really. When I applied for financial aid, I had to list the school I was going to. The funds were sent to that school first. They paid the tuition, room/board, then gave me the overage. The school I work at, it goes the same way. So yes the school gets the funds first. Not only that but the funds are being spent to support a religious institution. That's my only objection, same as vouchers for private schools.
Not really. When I applied for financial aid, I had to list the school I was going to. The funds were sent to that school first. They paid the tuition, room/board, then gave me the overage.
Oh come on, same thing, different name on the check. I'm not saying that this school is anything but an evil scar, but it does qualify for students using aid money. Why is it ok to tell that student that they can not have their money sent to this "school" just because we don't like it?
What would you say if when you applied to have that check sent to the school you choose, you got a letter telling you no, you can't go to that school, even though it is accredited, because some people don't like it.
I get what you are upset about, but I mean really, are we next going to tell people on welfare that they can't give money to their church?
No but most times it's a loan, do you get a loan from the bank to support your church?
No it is not the same, because they default on the loan, in essence, they do not pay it back. So tax money has gone to a religious institution and the person doesn't pay back the loan so the government is in essence funding it.
If you borrow money from me to pay your church tithe and never pay me back... who paid the church? Wasn't you!
So now it's assumed that the loan will not be paid back? Or that there aren't grants involved?
I've seen arguments from tea party supporters on how taxpayer money should not be used to support state worker unions, now that argument is bull@!$%#, because that money is paid to the government employees who then pay their union dues (and I'm willing to bet that they have direct withdrawals for their dues). But the tea party folks insist that their tax money is directly supporting unions. How is this any different? Because sometimes it's a loan and it might not be paid back? That's stretching it.
Whether you like it or not (I know I don't) it is a "school" that qualifies for students to use their federal funding at.
Instead of taking away the freedom of choice for the individuals using the money, perhaps work to change the qualifications for federal student aid. As long as it does not discriminate against any group and is the same across all schools, and can disqualify this "university" from receiving federal student aid, I'm all for it.
No federal money should ever support a religious institution. I don't care how you got it. If we can't use fed money to pay for abortion then we shouldn't support any religion. I don't approve of vouchers to religious schools either.
That money has strings on it, that says it has to be used at a school that fits the restrictions. I can't see Liberty University where the student are compelled to attend religious classes as not violating separation.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree, I can only stomach talking or thinking about this "school" so much, no matter how I feel about the larger principal.
DocPhil............It is hypocrisy of the highest order.
It all boils down to..... "IOKIYAR" ......
#20 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:12 PM EDTFake christians will take any kind of welfare from our country's taxpayers but will raise hell if they are asked to contribute anything to the country including taxes. They want to run the country but not contribute anything. We have too many fake christians in our congress and senate. If you don't claim to be a christian, you will never get elected in this country in 90 percent of districts. You don't have to be a christian, just pretend to be one so you can get the votes of the other fake chistians. Go to church on Sunday and tell everyone there you hate gays and lesbians and you get all the vote of that church. No tax money should be given to anyone attending an anti American universtiy like liberty or pat robertson university. The fake christians will not stop until they control everything, so we had better wake up to that fact.
#21 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 1:16 PM EDTFake christians
I love that term. I have absolutley no idea what a fake christian is but it sure makes a great sound bite to scare the intolerant left.
Go to church on Sunday and tell everyone there you hate gays and lesbians and you get all the vote of that church.
I sure am glad that I do not attend your church. If that is your definition of a "fake" christian I suppose you could find a "fake" christian in those ranks.
Fake christians will take any kind of welfare from our country's taxpayers but will raise hell if they are asked to contribute anything to the country including taxes.
I'm a Christian and I pay my taxes. Which makes me a...wait for it...taxpayer. I'm not entirely clear on what you think a "fake Christian" is, though.
Go to church on Sunday and tell everyone there you hate gays and lesbians and you get all the vote of that church.
My church doesn't teach me to hate anyone. If it did, I would find a new church.
Mr. Fedup, if you didn't pay your taxes you would be in prison and therefore not posting on this seed. So sorry, that argument doesn't fly.
Well, to me, you provided some interesting information. Yet, this particular article, reads more like a 'hit piece'. I would like to find more neutral information.
So Liberty gets funds, it must be operating within the boundaries they can operate. Oh, like ACORN, for instance. Are you fussing about that tremendously corrupt organization involved in felonies? MMMMmmmm, guess not.
#23 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 2:50 PM EDTIt's common knowledge, and has been in the news months ago about guilty rulings against ACORN in different state(s). I should't have to post that info this late in the game. You are intelligent, enough, to do your own research.
Now, most importantly and scarily, corrupt ACORN has re-organized, and will be back to felonize 2012.
Good to hear they are on their way back. Can't keep the peoples right to orginize down to long. Even if the right attempts to eliminate it.. Thanks right is right..
Jake, you are glad to like a corrupt organization? How 'bout endorsing one not corrupt?
Bill Wisdom, I don't what you are saying. Voter fraud was proven, and ACORN folks charged.
It's not my fault you and Jake don't want to do your own research.
Just fight for commmunity groups representing your party, who show integrity. Then, all is well with the world.
No, wrong... voter registration fraud was proven. It was proven by ACORN, who turned the people in. Just like they were supposed to. For someone with two rights in your name, you prove to be wrong much of the time.
The McCain-Palin campaign accuses ACORN, a community activist group that operates nationwide, of perpetrating "massive voter fraud." It says Obama has “long and deep” ties to the group. We find both claims to be exaggerated. But we also find Obama has understated the extent of his work with the group.
- Neither ACORN nor its employees have been found guilty of, or even charged with, casting fraudulent votes. What a McCain-Palin Web ad calls "voter fraud" is actually voter registration fraud. Several ACORN canvassers have been found guilty of faking registration forms and others are being investigated. But the evidence that has surfaced so far shows they faked forms to get paid for work they didn’t do, not to stuff ballot boxes.
The best book I have read to understand Liberty University is "An Unlikely Disciple". It is eye opening. It is the far right of the right. They do not teach history that you and I know. Often after graduation they have to go to a public university for science courses because they have gapping holes in they're education. No global warming concerns, as the world is going to end very soon. So why teach it? The earth is only 6,000 years old, so no need to teach anything pre-historic. (The dinosaurs rode on the arc..they were in a sleep state so no additional food needed for them..) Huh?? Yes, that is where I want my tax payer dollars to go for education. And the main goal of the university is to send they're minions out to infect our politics and business.
#24 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:04 PM EDTbecause they have gapping holes in they're education
Oh, the irony...
It is a university like any other that has to abide by federal "regulations" in order to receive federal funding of any type. This boat sailed years ago try to keep up.
#25 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:51 PM EDTFake christians
I love that term. I have absolutley no idea what a fake christian is but it sure makes a great sound bite to scare the intolerant left.
Go to church on Sunday and tell everyone there you hate gays and lesbians and you get all the vote of that church.
I sure am glad that I do not attend your church because if that is your definition of a "fake" christian I suppose you could find quite a few "fake" christians in your church.
#26 - Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:57 PM EDTMore than likely you are a fake Christian, if you don't know the difference.
More than likely a non-Christian (or rabid anti-Christian like many on this post) doesn't understand the difference, but throws out the phrase like they have some insight others don't.
CTOSN, I deleted your comment because it had nothing to do with what a fake Christian is.
CTOSN, why are you stalking me? You not only go on my treads and leave comments unrelated to the topic, you also do the same to others.
Enough is enough!
I'm reporting you to Newsvine staff.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Log In | Register
