‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
chronicle.com
chronicle.com
If this college claims to maintain christian values, then they will always be behind LGBT rights because they directly contradict biblical scripture. This argument is void for any christian university.
Also, most students have a choice as to where they attend school. Any student that is planning to attend OKWU has ample opportunity to understand what they're getting into. If they don't like the rules, they should pick a different school.
As per the interpretation of Wesleyans, yes...but there are any number of denominations who don't hold to that interpretation. Even so, Christians are generally called to treat LGBT persons with respect and dignity, and at least a few LGBT rights would actually fall under that umbrella, I'd say.
OKWU is seemingly fearful that allowing that culture into their student body would affect it in a way they deem negative or counter productive.
As far as LGBT not contradicting scripture, I have a hard time coming to that interpretation. From what I've read it seems clear that the bible is against that.
Plus, the title doesn't make any sense, not being gay friendly doesn't make this institution a day care, this is idiotic.
"Most college students are allowed to leave their rooms whenever they want. You might say it’s one of the hallmarks of life outside day care. And Oklahoma Wesleyan does generously allow you to come and go as you please — during the day. But coming in late after curfew, or "sneaking out at night," in the handbook’s wording, is another minor violation of school policy."
and
"Better be careful, you wild and crazy kids. Pranks — even "non-destructive" pranks — are also a minor violation of school policy."
As far as evangelical college policies go, these are relatively tame. For instance, the largest of these institutions, Liberty university, would until very recently fine students for watching R-rated movies or not keeping their dorm rooms tidy.
Pointing out that the uni treats students as children is a valid response.
The author seems too smart not to understand what "day-care" meant in the original post he is criticizing.
All institutions have rules, the author seems to fake a misunderstanding of what was meant by "day care" in the original post, that is "protect students' feelings at all cost". This has nothing to do with the rules in the institution.
Idk if it counts as the point of the article, but it does seem wrong that any amount of tax money ends up funding a discriminating institution such as this. 12.6 million is just one school, I wonder how much of our money goes towards religious "education" in total.
Plus, this has nothing to do with the day-care controversy.
Don't you mean some students get an education? They openly discriminate.
As far as the quality of the "education" goes. I will tentatively give you liberal arts, why not. However with STEM it seems way less legitimate. How many times have we had to stop the evangelical brand of "Science" from getting into public schools? I agree with you that the article didn't really have much to do with the daycare thing, but the whole tax funded religion thing did make me pause.