Church-State Watchdog Seeks IRS Probe Over School's Democrats 'Ban'

By Eric Young|Christian Post Reporter

E-mail
Print
RSS
digg Facebook Twitter Stumble Reddit del.ico.us Buzz Share
Text

According to LU’s news agency, Staver’s legal group, Liberty Counsel, plans to file a complaint on Monday against AU on behalf of the school in response to the organization’s claims.

“Americans United has a history of filing complaints like this against Liberty University and conservative churches and organizations. We are not aware of any adverse action resulting from these complaints. We’ve always been careful to abide by all the laws and regulations of the Internal Revenue code,” Falwell commented.

Staver, meanwhile, said his legal group planned to reveal AU’s long history of “biased complaints” with the IRS.

“We will point out the biased and partisan history,” he said. “Americans United has never been successful in filing their baseless attacks. When they filed this most recent complaint, it was the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back. Now we will fight back.”

Founded in 1971 by the late Dr. Jerry Falwell Sr., Liberty University touts itself as the largest and fastest growing Christian Evangelical university in the world.

Notable alumni include evangelist Franklin Graham, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, and Christian music artists tobyMac, Michael Tait, and Phil Stacey.

Pages: 12

View article on single page

Next Story : Saberi Felt God Still With Her; Recanted Confession

Most Popular

Viewed
Commented
Blogged

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.

thepenitent »

Fri May 29, 2009 7:37 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 10

"I think it's a shame that LU can only see the Democratic party as representative of only 2 narrow social issues. Many people support Democratic candidates in spite of their stand on abortion and gay rights because they are on the right side of so many other issues. LU is missing the forest for the trees."

That would be like a German in 1940 Nazi Germany saying, "Hey, I'm not down with this gassing the Jews thing but the Nazis make the trains run on time and the streets are much safer. So I'm going to vote for Adolph because it's silly to base a vote on a single issue."
thepenitent »

Fri May 29, 2009 7:33 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 2

This organization has requested the IRS to revoke the tax exampt status of literally hundreds of organizations based on these same reasons. They have never, ever been successful. This is merely a fundraising effort.
Blacksho89 »

Fri May 29, 2009 2:47 pm Agree: 2 Disagree: 0

Reuben: It's generally considered in poor taste to use these boards to promote a commercial enterprise. Could you consider deleting your post?

Thanks!
weekenderman »

Fri May 29, 2009 2:20 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 8

" You can't set up circumstances in a private institution that violate the law, like Country clubs excluding blacks."

More crazy talk from the Left. How is LU violating the law??
weekenderman »

Fri May 29, 2009 2:18 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 3

"It's not completely a private university when federal tax dollars are used to fund scholarships and grants."

Chicago: So if I get a tax return the government can tell me what I can and cannot do? That's crazy talk. The students are the ones getting the scholarships and grants and using them to voluntarily pay for their tuition (otherwise they can't attend classes).
reubenshow »

Fri May 29, 2009 2:16 pm Agree: 3 Disagree: 0

Flagged as inappropriate. show NEW BOOK- CROOKS AND HOMOS IN THE PULPIT WWW.REUBENARMSTRONGSHOW.COM JOEL OSTEEN, T.D. JAKES EXPOSED hide
Blacksho89 »

Fri May 29, 2009 1:59 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0

http://www.au.org/
Daniel Paul »

Fri May 29, 2009 11:11 am Agree: 1 Disagree: 4

"I think it's a shame that LU can only see the Democratic party as representative of only 2 narrow social issues."

I've found it is the narrow minded people who call those issues "narrow".

"Students' rights extend to private institutions in the same way that members' rights applied to segregated country clubs. You can't set up circumstances in a private institution that violate the law, like Country clubs excluding blacks.

They are not being excluded. They still have the right to meet just like any other group. LU has simply said that what this group stands for and supports does not line up with what LU stands for. This group has not been told to shut up or anything of the sort. For LU to do otherwise would be to give their blessing on positions which violate the Bible.

Just FYI, private institutions can have any list of rules and positions and they can expect their students to follow them. Christian schools routinely have rules against alchohol and tabacco use. Even the public schools are tabacco free zones even though it is legal for adults to smoke.

Blacks were discriminated against for how they were born. This is a matter of what the students believe. Quite different from a legal perspective not to mention a moral one.
Cheisa »

Fri May 29, 2009 10:45 am Agree: 2 Disagree: 1

I think it's a shame that LU can only see the Democratic party as representative of only 2 narrow social issues. Many people support Democratic candidates in spite of their stand on abortion and gay rights because they are on the right side of so many other issues. LU is missing the forest for the trees.

I dont buy the private school argument, either. Students' rights extend to private institutions in the same way that members' rights applied to segregated country clubs. You can't set up circumstances in a private institution that violate the law, like Country clubs excluding blacks.

I believe the tax exempt status of LU and their acceptance of federal dollars does create certain obligations on the university's part, including the obligation to be politically nuetral or jeopardize
their status. If they are funding one party on campus, they must fund the other. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I'm hoping the Deomocrats are reinstated in the interest of fairness to the students.
Cheisa »

Fri May 29, 2009 10:43 am Agree: 2 Disagree: 1

I think it's a shame that LU can only see the Democratic party as representative of only 2 narrow social issues. Many people support Democratic candidates in spite of their stand on abortion and gay rights because they are on the right side of so many other issues. LU is missing the forest for the trees.

I believe the tax exempt status of LU and their acceptance of federal dollars does create certain obligations on the university's part, including the obligation to be politically nuetral or jeopardize
their status. If they are funding one party on campus, they must fund the other. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I'm hoping the Deomocrats are reinstated in the interest of fairness to the students.
ID4234 »

Fri May 29, 2009 10:12 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 3

To Daniel Paul

Way to go. Their argument is indeed circular and self defeating. It commits suicide on its own.

To Chicago 24

True so far as I know. The money helps fund the education of a student who is a citizen of this country. Since the Feds choose to do this, okay. That does not entitle them to, therefore, run a private university and tell them what they will and will not do and which groups they will and will not fund. That would not be government; it would be tyranny.
Daniel Paul »

Fri May 29, 2009 9:54 am Agree: 2 Disagree: 2

Let me see if I understand this....

The "Americans United for Separation of Church and State" are asking the "State" to investigate a "Church". Does that just about sum it up?

...and they say we're the hypocrites....
chicago24 »

Fri May 29, 2009 9:43 am Agree: 3 Disagree: 1

ID4232: It's not completely a private university when federal tax dollars are used to fund scholarships and grants. Such is the case with Liberty
ID4234 »

Fri May 29, 2009 9:07 am Agree: 1 Disagree: 5

More harassment by the loud left. But pretty easily dispatched of. It's a private university. Private. Not public.
FlaGator »

Fri May 29, 2009 8:11 am Agree: 1 Disagree: 2

Didn't Liberty just separate church and state with the ban?
weekenderman »

Fri May 29, 2009 12:54 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 1

LOLOLOLOL!

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.

Comment on this story