Religious Law Schools Forum

[JusticeHarlan]

What about Boston College? I was thinking about throwing a transfer app out to them, but the idea of an overtly religious university bothers me (Been at only state schools). I know they're a Jesuit school, but I haven't heard of any real religious overtones permeating from them.

Non-Christian at BC here. Walking around the law school, you'd probably have no idea it was a religious school if you didn't know beforehand. Jesuits rule.

Edit: well, maybe that's not true, I think there's a picture of Thomas Moore hanging somewhere. No crosses hanging on the walls or anything though.

[UnamSanctam]

What about Boston College? I was thinking about throwing a transfer app out to them, but the idea of an overtly religious university bothers me (Been at only state schools). I know they're a Jesuit school, but I haven't heard of any real religious overtones permeating from them.

Non-Christian at BC here. Walking around the law school, you'd probably have no idea it was a religious school if you didn't know beforehand. Jesuits rule.

Edit: well, maybe that's not true, I think there's a picture of Thomas Moore hanging somewhere. No crosses hanging on the walls or anything though.

St. Thomas More was one of the most badass men to have ever lived. I now love BC.

[ndirish2010]

Went to BC for a year in UG and lived on Newton Campus where BCLS is. Quite a few of the undergrads were shocked to find out that BC is Jesuit when they arrived at their orientation. That says all you need to know about BC.

[Nate895]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

[vpintz]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

Damn, y u mad tho?

[Nate895]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

Damn, y u mad tho?

Why? Because I'm sick of all the people coming here and complaining about something they knew was going to happen. It's like joining the army and getting angry when the drill sergeant yells into your face. If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to come here.

Furthermore, this "offender" and "imposing" language makes it seem like these school's compel students to attend and become Christians or something. Last I checked, there was no Regent Law Kidnapping Squad that took unsuspecting 0Ls and forced them to go to their law school and start bowing at the altar of Pat Robertson. You might not like these school's religious bents, but there is no way you can accuse them of imposing things on people when they tell you upfront "Hey, at our law school, we try to teach from an Evangelical Christian worldview and create a Christian environment."

[mattviphky]

I'll agree with the rant. If you think that the religious aspect of a school will be a distraction, then don't go. However, some schools are very different in how pervasive the religious influence can be on campus. Georgetown is nominally Catholic, while Notre Dame is VERY Catholic. Chapel in the Law School and priests as professors, and this is something on which they pride themselves.

[Tom Joad]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

I assume he was referring to the inherent hypocrisy in the idea of a "religious academic institution."

[TommyK]

Agree with the rant 100%. However, if a school uses "teaching law from a Christian perspective" to just use leviticus and slippery slope fallacies to rail against an oppressed group or create an unwelcoming environment for some students, I'm not opposed to calling those schools "offenders"... But that was not the question that OP raised and it would be an overly generous interpretation of dtl's post to infer that.

And vpintz- why nate is mad is because dtl automatically implied that a religion-infused environment was necessarily a bad thing. dtl assailed one of nate's most salient characteristics of his identity.

[TommyK]

I assume he was referring to the inherent hypocrisy in the idea of a "religious academic institution."

I assume you're trolling. I don't see an inherent hypocrisy in that. We're not studying theoretical phyiscs, where a disposition of how the universe works may hinder your approach to scientific inquiry. We're studying law. A strongly held belief of what is right and wrong and the idea that there is an omnipotent creator will not impair your ability understand the components of a contract.

[2LT_CPG]

It's like joining the army and getting angry when the drill sergeant yells into your face. If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to come here.

I don't take issue with your analogy, its main point is more or less on point for schools like Liberty, Regent, and BYU. But having been yelled at by drill sergeants, I can literally remember my inner monologue saying, "This is crap, I'm so angry at this situation."


I dunno though man. It was kind of a big deal at my undergrad last year. I went to one of those liberal Catholic/Jesuit schools in the Northeast (I might as well say Fordham at this point - people seemed to have sussed it out), and it's gotten a lot of flak for how it treats free speech and women's healthcare on campus. The sole reason for a free speech zone on campus (somewhat similar to Georgetown's 'Red Square') proposal failing was that the administration was worried about students handing out free condoms in it. And no student groups whose primary focus is supporting the pro-choice movement were allowed to charter on campus, whereas the Respect For Life club was given elevated status and allowed to hold a bunch of demonstrations every year.

Which you could argue is fine, because it's a private institution nominally run by the Jesuits. But schools like BC and Fordham intentionally minimize their Catholicism, partly because of their national reputation, and it's almost completely absent in the classroom. Some of the other outwardly religious schools like BYU, Regent, and Liberty specifically target Mormons and evangelicals, and incorporate their theology in non-theology classes. I met some Liberty ROTC cadets at Fort Bragg once at a joint-training when I was an undergrad, and they met literally every stereotype you would have of a Liberty student. Not saying that's a bad thing, but I bet you couldn't tell a BC, Fordham, or Georgetown student apart. That's because of the people opting into a religious university education, which students of the three aforementioned schools aren't. Bottom line, there's a scale for these schools. Liberty, BYU, and Regent are on one end, places like St. John's, Notre Dame, and Villanova are somewhat closer to the middle, and Fordham, BC, the Loyolas, Seattle, Gonzaga, etc are on the other end.

[UnamSanctam]

Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you.

I assume he was referring to the inherent hypocrisy in the idea of a "religious academic institution."

False dichotomy and lolwut post?

ಠ_ಠ

[mattviphky]

It's like joining the army and getting angry when the drill sergeant yells into your face. If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to come here.

I don't take issue with your analogy, its main point is more or less on point for schools like Liberty, Regent, and BYU. But having been yelled at by drill sergeants, I can literally remember my inner monologue saying, "This is crap, I'm so angry at this situation."


I dunno though man. It was kind of a big deal at my undergrad last year. I went to one of those liberal Catholic/Jesuit schools in the Northeast (I might as well say Fordham at this point - people seemed to have sussed it out), and it's gotten a lot of flak for how it treats free speech and women's healthcare on campus. The sole reason for a free speech zone on campus (somewhat similar to Georgetown's 'Red Square') proposal failing was that the administration was worried about students handing out free condoms in it. And no student groups whose primary focus is supporting the pro-choice movement were allowed to charter on campus, whereas the Respect For Life club was given elevated status and allowed to hold a bunch of demonstrations every year.
Which you could argue is fine, because it's a private institution nominally run by the Jesuits. But schools like BC and Fordham intentionally minimize their Catholicism, partly because of their national reputation, and it's almost completely absent in the classroom. Some of the other outwardly religious schools like BYU, Regent, and Liberty specifically target Mormons and evangelicals, and incorporate their theology in non-theology classes. I met some Liberty ROTC cadets at Fort Bragg once at a joint-training when I was an undergrad, and they met literally every stereotype you would have of a Liberty student. Not saying that's a bad thing, but I bet you couldn't tell a BC, Fordham, or Georgetown student apart. That's because of the people opting into a religious university education, which students of the three aforementioned schools aren't. Bottom line, there's a scale for these schools. Liberty, BYU, and Regent are on one end, places like St. John's, Notre Dame, and Villanova are somewhat closer to the middle, and Fordham, BC, the Loyolas, Seattle, Gonzaga, etc are on the other end.

This is a big issue for Catholicism, and it isn't surprising that this happened. However, I think fewer schools are against condoms and LGBT organizations. I don't know for sure about free condoms, but I know that Notre Dame is very much opposed to allowing an LGBT organization.

[Nate895]

Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you.

False dichotomy and lolwut post?

ಠ_ಠ

If you are accusing me of making a false dichotomy, I would say not considering the fact that their Evangelical/Christian/Roman Catholic distinctives are both fairly well known and well advertised in their material. If you do not know that, then you have not done your due diligence to learn about the service you are purchasing, and that makes you an ignoramus.

It's like joining the army and getting angry when the drill sergeant yells into your face. If you don't like it, no one is forcing you to come here.

I don't take issue with your analogy, its main point is more or less on point for schools like Liberty, Regent, and BYU. But having been yelled at by drill sergeants, I can literally remember my inner monologue saying, "This is crap, I'm so angry at this situation."


I dunno though man. It was kind of a big deal at my undergrad last year. I went to one of those liberal Catholic/Jesuit schools in the Northeast (I might as well say Fordham at this point - people seemed to have sussed it out), and it's gotten a lot of flak for how it treats free speech and women's healthcare on campus. The sole reason for a free speech zone on campus (somewhat similar to Georgetown's 'Red Square') proposal failing was that the administration was worried about students handing out free condoms in it. And no student groups whose primary focus is supporting the pro-choice movement were allowed to charter on campus, whereas the Respect For Life club was given elevated status and allowed to hold a bunch of demonstrations every year.

Which you could argue is fine, because it's a private institution nominally run by the Jesuits. But schools like BC and Fordham intentionally minimize their Catholicism, partly because of their national reputation, and it's almost completely absent in the classroom. Some of the other outwardly religious schools like BYU, Regent, and Liberty specifically target Mormons and evangelicals, and incorporate their theology in non-theology classes. I met some Liberty ROTC cadets at Fort Bragg once at a joint-training when I was an undergrad, and they met literally every stereotype you would have of a Liberty student. Not saying that's a bad thing, but I bet you couldn't tell a BC, Fordham, or Georgetown student apart. That's because of the people opting into a religious university education, which students of the three aforementioned schools aren't. Bottom line, there's a scale for these schools. Liberty, BYU, and Regent are on one end, places like St. John's, Notre Dame, and Villanova are somewhat closer to the middle, and Fordham, BC, the Loyolas, Seattle, Gonzaga, etc are on the other end.

First, as far as the analogy goes, I didn't mean not having anger at all, I just meant not having anger and then directing your frustration at your peers or acting like it was somehow unexpected.

Secondly, I know what you're talking about with our ROTC guys, lol. I remember I went to this military "gala" last semester and I was subjected to this long political rant, which I probably mostly agreed with, but it was presented so bad I was just like "this is stupid." Not all Liberty students meet the stereotypes, but government majors (I don't know an ROTC guy who isn't also a government major) tend to meet them more than usual. Because of our niche and absurdly low admissions standards, we tend to have people from all across the spectrum as far as intelligence goes, and that translates into some students going out there and acting like idiots because they always were idiots and did just enough to skate to graduation.

As far as the school (UG, law, or otherwise) goes, we make no bones about the fact we believe Jesus is the Lord over every aspect of our lives, even political and legal affairs. That doesn't mean that we read contracts or statutes differently than anyone else, per se, but it does affect how we would practice law professionally, and might cause us to, in extremely rare cases, act according to our conscious differently than other lawyers. If someone is considering coming here or any school like us, this is something he/she would obviously need to consider very heavily. You will be taught Christian ethics, which is where our Evangelical distinctives come out most clearly. Also keep in mind that it's not like you will be taught torts or contracts much differently than any other school. Constitutional law will also be taught with an originalist understanding, though other points of view are taught (I know a conlaw prof from my church). Also, if you feel bound by conscious due to the agreement you make when you matriculate, you will be unable to drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, or have sex outside of the covenant of marriage. Really, though, I can see absolutely no reason to attend Liberty or Regent if you aren't an Evangelical considering the horrible job prospects.

[2LT_CPG]

As far as the school (UG, law, or otherwise) goes, we make no bones about the fact we believe Jesus is the Lord over every aspect of our lives, even political and legal affairs. That doesn't mean that we read contracts or statutes differently than anyone else, per se, but it does affect how we would practice law professionally, and might cause us to, in extremely rare cases, act according to our conscious differently than other lawyers. If someone is considering coming here or any school like us, this is something he/she would obviously need to consider very heavily. You will be taught Christian ethics, which is where our Evangelical distinctives come out most clearly. Also keep in mind that it's not like you will be taught torts or contracts much differently than any other school. Constitutional law will also be taught with an originalist understanding, though other points of view are taught (I know a conlaw prof from my church). Also, if you feel bound by conscious due to the agreement you make when you matriculate, you will be unable to drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, or have sex outside of the covenant of marriage. Really, though, I can see absolutely no reason to attend Liberty or Regent if you aren't an Evangelical considering the horrible job prospects.

All good points. But I direct you to that NYT piece about Michele Bachmann's school, which was is Regent in its current incarnation:

"But where secular law professors tend to analyze court decisions in the context of the Constitution, legislative actions and judicial precedent, professors here prodded students to also consider how biblical principles and Scripture would apply. In interviews, graduates say they infuse their Christian faith into their work in a variety of ways, perhaps counseling couples to avoid a divorce, or encouraging a businessman to honor a contract. Some are active in causes important to conservative Christians, like opposing abortion."

Bolded portion for emphasis. I think the difference between a BC and a Liberty is that BC professors won't factor in theology in the classroom, whereas at places like Regent, BYU, and Liberty, it's not only in the mission statement, it's actively part of the study of law.

[Tom Joad]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

I assume he was referring to the inherent hypocrisy in the idea of a "religious academic institution."

Ok I was 98% trolling.

[Nate895]

As far as the school (UG, law, or otherwise) goes, we make no bones about the fact we believe Jesus is the Lord over every aspect of our lives, even political and legal affairs. That doesn't mean that we read contracts or statutes differently than anyone else, per se, but it does affect how we would practice law professionally, and might cause us to, in extremely rare cases, act according to our conscious differently than other lawyers. If someone is considering coming here or any school like us, this is something he/she would obviously need to consider very heavily. You will be taught Christian ethics, which is where our Evangelical distinctives come out most clearly. Also keep in mind that it's not like you will be taught torts or contracts much differently than any other school. Constitutional law will also be taught with an originalist understanding, though other points of view are taught (I know a conlaw prof from my church). Also, if you feel bound by conscious due to the agreement you make when you matriculate, you will be unable to drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, or have sex outside of the covenant of marriage. Really, though, I can see absolutely no reason to attend Liberty or Regent if you aren't an Evangelical considering the horrible job prospects.

All good points. But I direct you to that NYT piece about Michele Bachmann's school, which was is Regent in its current incarnation:

"But where secular law professors tend to analyze court decisions in the context of the Constitution, legislative actions and judicial precedent, professors here prodded students to also consider how biblical principles and Scripture would apply. In interviews, graduates say they infuse their Christian faith into their work in a variety of ways, perhaps counseling couples to avoid a divorce, or encouraging a businessman to honor a contract. Some are active in causes important to conservative Christians, like opposing abortion."

Bolded portion for emphasis. I think the difference between a BC and a Liberty is that BC professors won't factor in theology in the classroom, whereas at places like Regent, BYU, and Liberty, it's not only in the mission statement, it's actively part of the study of law.

This is true, and this was what I was driving at with the fact that Christian ethics are taught. Also, I'll point out that there has been a lot of crossover between theology and the law in the past. Many great theologians through history were also lawyers. Many of the same principles apply to arguing the law and arguing theology; Both attempt to apply authoritative documents and plain reason to resolve a dispute. BTW, I'm a religion major who has always had an interest in the legal field.

[Enderdejorand]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

The entire point of this article is to figure out which ones are more religious than others. It's clearly not something that everyone knows, especially when several people have pointed out showing up to BC or Fordham and being completely unaware of their religious natures. The point is that I'm not religious, don't want anyone restricting my ability to smoke cigars or drink alcohol, and don't want to be surrounded by people that will look down on me for that. I went to Catholic school, so I understand what happens in a moderate population of religious people, but again, that's not the point of this article. They're offenders because they're doing what I was asking if they were doing. Nothing more, nothing less.

[vpintz]

The biggest offenders are Baylor, Pepperdine, BYU, Liberty, Ave Maria

Lots of other schools (The Loyola's, U of San Diego, et al) are religious but it does not really transfer into student life at all. The above ones do impose a sort of religious atmosphere from what I understand. I have only had direct experience with Pepperdine and Baylor though.

What is with the language of "offenders"? Is it a crime to be a religious law school? If you go to one of these schools, you knew what you were getting yourself into before you went, or you were an ignoramus who deserves whatever happens to you. As an undergrad student at Liberty, I knew exactly what I was getting into before I came here (though I am an Evangelical, I am a Reformed Evangelical, which is only slightly better than being a liberal around here). I knew I wouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol or smoke my cigars because of Liberty's strange interpretations of the Scriptures and that my strict Calvinism would not be welcomed with open arms, but I am not going to sit around and complain about it because I knew that full well before I came.

If you don't like these school's religious-philosophical worldview, then do not apply or go to these institutions. They aren't "imposing" anything on anyone when it is a well-known and well-advertised fact before anyone attends. It's not like they pretend to be something they're not.

The entire point of this article is to figure out which ones are more religious than others. It's clearly not something that everyone knows, especially when several people have pointed out showing up to BC or Fordham and being completely unaware of their religious natures. The point is that I'm not religious, don't want anyone restricting my ability to smoke cigars or drink alcohol, and don't want to be surrounded by people that will look down on me for that. I went to Catholic school, so I understand what happens in a moderate population of religious people, but again, that's not the point of this article. They're offenders because they're doing what I was asking if they were doing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Just to add another point to your post--I honestly had no idea that Fordham was a religious school. As you said, sometimes it's difficult to tell if a school has a religious affiliation, and even more difficult to tell how much that influence shows up in the classroom and policies of a school.

[TommyK]

The entire point of this article is to figure out which ones are more religious than others. It's clearly not something that everyone knows, especially when several people have pointed out showing up to BC or Fordham and being completely unaware of their religious natures. The point is that I'm not religious, don't want anyone restricting my ability to smoke cigars or drink alcohol, and don't want to be surrounded by people that will look down on me for that. I went to Catholic school, so I understand what happens in a moderate population of religious people, but again, that's not the point of this article. They're offenders because they're doing what I was asking if they were doing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Oh, then you just don't understand what the word "offenders" means. That clears it up.

[TLS_noobie]

Just to keep this tangential conversation alive:

of·fend   [uh-fend] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1. to irritate, annoy, or anger; cause resentful displeasure in: Even the hint of prejudice offends me.
2. to affect (the sense, taste, etc.) disagreeably.

so if:

The entire point of this article is to figure out which ones are more religious than others. It's clearly not something that everyone knows, especially when several people have pointed out showing up to BC or Fordham and being completely unaware of their religious natures. The point is that I'm not religious, don't want anyone restricting my ability to smoke cigars or drink alcohol, and don't want to be surrounded by people that will look down on me for that. I went to Catholic school, so I understand what happens in a moderate population of religious people, but again, that's not the point of this article. They're offenders because they're doing what I was asking if they were doing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Then, yes, whatever school puts a damper on OP's life with their religious affiliation would be an offender in his/her eyes, with OP being the subject of the post and the object would be the school. As far as I can tell, with the aforementioned post at least, OP is not making a claim that the school would be considered an offender from the public's or a societal perspective, just his/her own, which makes it an offender nonetheless.

[TommyK]

you defined offend, not offender.

One that offends, especially one that breaks a public law.

wrongdoer: a person who transgresses moral or civil law

The most common interpretation of offender would be something like one of the above. If the poster said "The most common offenders of my delicate sensibilities and belief that academics should be completely separate of religious infusion are...", nobody would have a problem with it. Nice try defining the base word and doing a scope shift though... You'll have fun in law school, I'm sure.

[TLS_noobie]

you defined offend, not offender.

One that offends, especially one that breaks a public law.

wrongdoer: a person who transgresses moral or civil law

The most common interpretation of offender would be something like one of the above. If the poster said "The most common offenders of my delicate sensibilities and belief that academics should be completely separate of religious infusion are...", nobody would have a problem with it. Nice try defining the base word and doing a scope shift though... You'll have fun in law school, I'm sure.

Haha, thanks

However, one could keep arguing for the case with your given definition. Moral law is subjective, and given the subject is OP anything could be an offender through his own eyes.

Moral Law: The rules of behavior an individual or a group may follow out of personal conscience and that are not necessarily part of legislated law in the United States.

[noleknight16]

What about SMU?

[mattviphky]

What about SMU?

I'm not a student, but the vibe I got from all the literature I read is that you should not be concerned with a zealous climate. For instance, the school's health services dispenses birth control. So I think the school adheres to Methodist principles, which are not as culturally disparate as those of Catholicism or Mormonism.