Hey they are a private university so i guess they can run it in the past. Try running a “meat eaters club” in Berkley. You will get a Molotov cocktail thrown in your window on a daily basis. If you drive thru compton playing Barry Manilow you get your tires shot out after the first block.

Yanny, its a university. a private one. that means that no one who doesnt want to be there has to be there. which means those people who go there choose to be there, and probably like the rules set forth, otherwise they wouldnt be there. they arent doing anything wrong, and if they have those rules, and can continue to operate, so be it. the interracial part is troubling, but again, private institution. i dont know why anyone would go there if the rules would cause problems for them anyway. sadly, the only way to eliminate places like this with their rules is to fight it societally. tell a private institution to stop its banning of interracial dating, you will only fan the flames for the rascist people.

It is a “prestigious” southern school and that was the 60’s what do YOU EXPECT!!! So your first posts about the Interracial Marriage junk that they tried to keep doesn’t count… ya, they were mindless idiots… I agree… And they still have some stupid policies

As for the rest define what A “Conservative Christian University” might look like and post it here… Otherwise I don’t see the difference in judging any other school and getting “well that is because your a mindless conservative stuff”… btw I have taken some Abeka Courses via Homeschooling… and no I would never go to BJU…

GG

Just a quick point, but banning interracial marriage wasn’t made illegal throughout the United States until 1973.  I don’t think the fact that it was in the 60s matters all that much, since it was a minority of states that had laws prohibiting the practice.  They had plenty of examples of how it worked well and fine, but chose not to go that route.  In that regard, I think it’s fine to question their judgment.

Yanny,

A couple of questions,

1. Are you sure these rules are accurate?  Note the following link where wikipedia was either inadvertently or even perhaps intentionally wrong to the detriment of an individual:

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20051205-091148-6438r

Wikipedia’s accuracy challenged again
NEW YORK, Dec. 5 (UPI) – A former Tennessee newspaper publisher has challenged the accuracy and ethics of the free, user-written Wikipedia online encyclopedia.

John Seigenthaler, 78, said he was shocked to see the write-up on him by an anonymous contributor that claimed he “was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both John and his brother Bobby.”
Seigenthaler, the former editor of The Tennessean newspaper, wrote in USA Today he had learned that the writer was a customer of BellSouth Internet, but that federal privacy laws shield the identity of Internet customers, even if they disseminate defamatory material. And the laws protect online corporations from libel suits.

Seigenthaler decided against going to court, but wrote “that Wikipedia is a flawed and irresponsible research tool.”

His biography has since been corrected, The New York Times reported.

The non-profit enterprise was launched in January 2001, the brainchild of Jimmy Wales, 39, a former futures and options trader who lives in Florida. The site receives 2.5 billion page views a month, and offers at least 1,000 articles in 82 languages.

2. If this is an accurate code of conduct for the school, is it todays version or a version from 1975?  While its fine to fault them for their beliefs at that time, its also possible they have changed since then.  If they have “liberalized” their stance since then, they should be held in higher regard.

It is a students choice to go there, so it doesnt seem like these restrictions are unwanted. They seem a little to protective to me.

clearly, people would, or it would not continue to operate, or it would have changed its rules.