Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by jbob2000 on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:51PM
(#10665714)
This whole article is one big ad hominem attack on the school. The author didn't really discredit any of the points the university president made, just attacked the school for being christian.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by CrimsnBlade on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:59PM
(#10665758)
>To put it mildly, then, Oklahoma Wesleyan is behind the curve when it comes to LGBT rights.
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.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by cholantesh on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @06:00PM
(#10666531)
>LGBT rights [...] contradict biblical scripture.
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.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by CrimsnBlade on Thursday December 03, 2015 @12:37PM
(#10671036)
If you're saying Christians are called not to condemn LGBT persons, I would agree with that. Forgiveness is supposed to be prevalent in Christianity. People that are LGBT should still be treated as people, and as far as Christianity goes, everyone is a sinner, and everyone has their own temptations and battles.
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.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by joshstrange on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:12PM
(#10665851)
Well that's not completely true "Also, most students have a choice as to where they attend school." not when mom and dad are paying... I had a number of friends who parents pushed them into christian schools. Also these colleges (and this one in particular) accepts federal funding which I think changes the rules a little on how backwards they are allowed to be.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by api on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:30PM
(#10665579)
The whole thing has smelled like a manufactured controversy for a long time. But then again, most major controversies these days that hit this kind of pop culture attention are manufactured. You could probably dig into this a little and find a media or PR company.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by joesmo on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:02PM
(#10665783)
So if the original article and 'not a daycare' phrase had come from any non-religious institution it'd have meant something/more. That seems to be the premise for this critique. It's not an invalid point.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by dudul on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:38PM
(#10665624)
Hum, I don't really get the point of the article. This is a Christian college, of course they don't support transexualism, or gay relationships, or LGBT rights. Just like a muslim school would not promote gay rights or eating ham. When you join a christian school you are expected to follow christian beliefs, if it's a problem for you go somewhere else. It's like these people complaining that the Pope doesn't promote condom usage, he's the freaking pope, how can you ask him to promote sex outside of wedlock?
Plus, the title doesn't make any sense, not being gay friendly doesn't make this institution a day care, this is idiotic.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by maldusiecle on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:52PM
(#10665715)
Regarding the title, I think it has more to do with passages like these:
"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.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by thieving_magpie on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @03:55PM
(#10665731)
So the university has rules to govern student behavior. Why do we have to take everything to an extreme and refer to them as a "day care". This is stupid.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by dudul on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:00PM
(#10665762)
Well, again I would put that under the Christian influence of the school. Are military schools day-cares? I don't think you're allowed to walk around during the night or keep your barracks dirty and messy.
The author seems too smart not to understand what "day-care" meant in the original post he is criticizing.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by splawn on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:08PM
(#10665822)
Oklahoma Wesleyan raked in $12.6 million in federal student loans and grants in 2013-14. In other words, your tax money is helping students attend a college that not only discriminates against legally married gay students, but also forbids students from dancing.
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.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by dudul on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:12PM
(#10665853)
Our tax money is helping students get an education. These are loans, students can take loans to attend any school they want. If they decide to take a loan to attend a religious school it's their choice, what makes it less legitimate than liberal arts or STEM?
Plus, this has nothing to do with the day-care controversy.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by splawn on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:37PM
(#10666020)
Our tax money is helping students get an education.
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.
Re:‘Not a Day Care’? Really?
by dudul on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:21PM
(#10665923)
What is childish to you or me may not be to someone else. Yes, I think a curfew is childish, but so is, for example, not allowing people under 21 to drink alcohol, is America a big day-care?
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.
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.
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.
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.