“Liberty” “University” Dress Code

A kind soul over at The Commentariat posted, in the comments, the “Liberty” “University” dress code for men (which is password-protected on its website) in response to my post. It is as follows:

Give me “Liberty”…or give me death?

I felt a response to the last post was neccesary because it kind of missed the point pretty badly in a way.

Smith v. Allwright…alright?

Of course, the last developments of forum analysis didn’t end with the New Deal. In fact, there have been a number of state Supreme Court decisions, especially in New Jersey, which has had a number of such decisions. In The Green Party of New Jersey v. Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. and New Jersey Coalition Against War in The Middle East, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that “non-commercial speech” in malls — despite their status as private property — fell under the protection of the First Amendment.

In State v. Schmid, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that Princeton University constituted a public forum and was therefore unable to expel persons making use of expressive speech, regardless of their affiliation (or lack thereof) with the University or the fact that Princeton University is essentially private property.

The thing that I think is missed by this quotation is that “Liberty” is not banning free speech on its campus. I feel that if Liberty made a decree that liberal minded groups could not meet on its campus or would be expelled if they associated with liberal minded individuals, that FIRE would take issue even though “Liberty” is a private organization because that would be a far too gross a violation to ignore. Liberty is merely denying its official approval to a campus group.

Does the Bible violate Liberty University’s Policies?

Ezekiel 23:19-20 (New International Version)

19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Liberty University’s “LU Distinctives” prohibit:

Behavioral standards which include the prohibition of drug, alcohol and tobacco use, coed residence halls, and sexual promiscuity.

Its on campus living guide, available here:

Derogatory comments of a sexual, religious or racial nature will not be tolerated.

Considering that video games and movies with sexual content are prohibited, I cannot understand why the Bible would not also be prohibited.  After all, this storly clearly contains sexual content.  Liberty should ban the Bible on its campus in the interest of shielding its “students” from its filthy sexual content.

My take on Liberty University

This case has created a tremendous amount of debate in our office.  I codified my beliefs in a blog entry response to Noah’s, which is the topic of this post.

Over the past three weeks, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has taken a stance regarding Liberty University’s derecognition of their student organization, the “College Democrats.”  The FIRE’s stance has been consistent with their evaluation of other cases involving private institutions of higher learning that make clear in their literature that they value other things over individual liberties.  As deplorable as this may sound to some, the ability for an institution like Liberty to choose associate only with persons who share its values is a protected right under the First Amendment to the constitution and an extension of its right to property.  FIRE calls this “Institutional Freedom of Association,” and this right is essential to the mission of an institution like Liberty.  FIRE’s position on freedom of association in this case is consistent with other, similar cases and is codified on their website.  The Virginia ACLU has taken the same position on this issue as well, which was covered on FIRE’s blog, The Torch, this week.