America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

FoxNews.com - The South Carolina legislature has rankled liberal groups after requiring that a pair of public schools use state funds to teach the U.S. Constitution and other founding documents -- on the heels of a budget fight over gay-themed books in the curriculum.

State House lawmakers previously had cut funds from two public universities in retaliation for required-reading material containing homosexual themes. A revised budget passed by both the House and the Senate earlier this month, though, restored the money -- but dictated that exact amount be spent "for instruction in the provisions and principles of the United States Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers, including the study of and devotion to American institutions and ideals."

The bill restored at least $52,000 for the College of Charleston, and at least $17,000 for USC-Upstate, which were the original amounts cut back in March. The legislation also says that any school that conducts a mandatory reading program must provide an alternative in case the chosen book conflicts with any students’ moral or religious beliefs.

Gov. Nikki Haley went along with the Constitution requirement on Thursday, saying she did not agree with it but kept it in because lawmakers spent so much time on the bill. She said her office "didn't want to interject ourselves into that."

"I don't believe legislators should micromanage our boards," she said, according to The Associated Press. "They elect board members, so if they want to beat up on them, go for it... but to go in there and micromanage books being read, I think that's out of our purview."

The supposed compromise didn't satisfy the schools' defenders.

The National Coalition Against Censorship, ACLU of South Carolina and other groups said in a statement earlier this week that the new bill is a “symbolic penalty” that is just as troubling as the House’s original proposal.

“It represents unwarranted political interference with academic freedom and undermines the integrity of the higher education system in South Carolina,” the groups said.

The College of Charleston did not respond to a request for comment from FoxNews.com, but the school’s president said when the cuts were first proposed that the school has the right to introduce controversial ideas to students.

The fight arose after the schools required some students to read novels with gay themes.

The College of Charleston’s program selects one book a year for the entire campus to read, which this year was Alison Bechdel's “Fun Home,” a memoir about the author growing up as a lesbian in rural Pennsylvania. USC-Upstate’s program has first-year writing students all read the same book, which this year was “Out Loud: The Best of Rainbow Radio,” a compilation of stories shared on South Carolina’s first radio station for gays and lesbians.

Republican state Rep. Garry Smith, who introduced the cuts in the House, told FoxNews.com in March he received complaints from constituents who have children at both schools. He said when they or their students objected to the books' content, they were told they could not read an alternative book.

“I appreciate the issue of freedom and academic freedom and very much support that, but in this case it was very irresponsibly exercised,” he said.

Democratic Rep. James Smith introduced amendments to reverse the cuts in the House, but both failed. Smith told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that he still considers the amended budget a victory for academic freedom.

“It took a lot more effort than it should have, but we feel vindicated,” he said.

Smith said he believes the amendment requiring Constitution lessons was added so Republican lawmakers can claim victory in the fight.

“The reality is some of my colleagues need a lesson on the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights,” he said.

I prefer the teaching of our Constitution etc. over the teachings of Gay Lifestyle. I DO NOT see how these F'n
Universities get by making this **** required reading......one disturbing world we live in......

People don't want to read about gays, fine, give them an alternative book. Don't however think teaching the Constitution is going to make things any better. This country has been fighting over what it says, or means, or what the writers really meant, etc. since it became the law of the land and will continue to fight over it as long as the country is around. As far as teaching the Declaration of Independence, it will end with the same problem. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." If people are honest, they will have to admit that never in the history of this country have we lived by this statement. First time a person points this out somewhere other than in an online forum, some group is going to get upset and we will be right back where we started. Until we learn that we simply can't get along unless we compromise and that we need to quit trying to force our beliefs on others, we to quit trying to be someone's moral compass, etc., nothing is ever going to get better.

See TMCTLT, you just proved my point. The first thing I said was let them read another book but you chose to ignore it. My comment about not forcing our beliefs on others would also cover that. In regards to what you call "libs try to make it sound like the wording of Our Founding Fathers is/has been somehow misinterpreted", I was actually referring to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who has stated numerous times that he believes that the Constitution should be read as is and not interpreted in regards to modern day issues. In regards to groups which are or not been discriminated against you forgot women, Muslims, and a number of others.

The point you proved is that people just can't let others have their own belief systems. You don't have to agree with them, or roll for them as you put it but at the same time you do not have to be crude or offensive about it. My simple statement that we all need to learn to get along you labeled as bull****. You could have simply stated you disagree but you didn't. That just goes to show people don't want to get along.

Niki was actually right. Micromanaging the university by the politicians is stupid and nothing more than posturing regardless of the subject.

This is a dumb move.

Rainbow Flag NOW!

We'll call it Old Glorious.

So for liberal academia how is the material controversial or provocative? And how do you require reading for EVERY student? Why would this be needed for an engineering student?

Modern academia is only comfortable being controversial to those who don't share their views and it's hypocritical to open learning and TRUE liberalism.

But for the issue at hand I have no problem myself reading material I disagree with for a course I want to pass. Hearing and listening and critical thinking is important, and of you're afraid of challenging your convictions their not very strong. However in the world today of PC don't offend anyone it's patently obvious who it's ok to offend.

Education has reached a sorry state. I have no problem with controversial reading requirements. But, before one delves off in that direction the basics should be mastered.

You have phd's who have no concept of reality driving policy decisions.

+1

Not lately. The current conservative/republicans are not for smaller government they are more selective of when to claim that.

Ditto, to Gene363 He nailed it!!

Wouldn't it be a more accurate statement to say until one group stood up for themselves and demanded the rights that everyone else has? Just to fill in a little information so that we don't get hung up on my use of the word "rights", the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision in the case of loving versus the case of Loving vs. The State of Virginia stated that "marriage is one of the most basic rights of free men".

Like it or not, whether it goes along with your own personal beliefs or not, the Constitution is the law of the land and it guarantees all Americas the same rights.

5th Amendment states no person shall be " deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law".

14th Amendment, Section 1 states "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Sammy a social agenda should not be forced on anyone. A Christian may not want to read about homosexuality and should not be forced to.

I agree with you gryphonms (#25) but that goes both ways. Only problem is that people on here only want to talk about when the libs push their agenda on "decent people" but ignore it when others try to push their agendas on gays, Muslims, women, or anyone else who doesn't agree with them.

Students are forced to go to this university?

What would you have them do TW, transfer due to the curriculum change?

Okay, TMCTLT, very simple. Women do not receive equal pay for equal work. Conservatives are going crazy regulating a woman's right to birth control, abortion, options for healthcare. Muslims are prosecuted for nothing more that wanting to build a place to worship and anti- Muslim laws are trying to be pushed through legislatures because of the great Sharia Law scare. In regards to gays, they can be fired, kicked out of their homes, refused service at any establishment in most states simply because they are gay. They are repeatedly told that being gay is a choice by people who have no idea in this world if this is true or not. As a matter of fact every reason people use to discriminate against gays is based on a personal belief or opinion. Then we can move on to the individuals on disability because everyone knows they are all liars who want to sponge off the government. Individuals working minimum wage jobs because they chose not to get an education. There is never a case where something happened that prevented them from going to college.

My fingers are tired so I will be stooping now.

There was a recent case where religious oponents of homosexual marriage were forced to bake a cake.

Same difference, isn't it?

YES IT IS, and give it time....they WILL also force preachers/ priests to perform marriage unions regardless of how they feel. This IS the part MOST have a problem with....No Free Choice left

If you think one's business operations have the same rights as ones religious practices, you aren't too well versed on the constitution. Perhaps you should have gone to this college.

Obviously if it were so easy to understand, the argument wouldn't have made it to court, now would it brightboy?

Here's 11 people fired in 2013 for being gay (or that's what they're claiming)
http://www.advocate.com/year-review/2013/12/18/meet-people-fired-being-lgbt-2013

Here's gay men refused service in a restaurant
http://topekasnews.com/kansas-restaurant-kicks-gay-man-tells-gay-eating/

An austin bar trying to "straighten" its image
http://www.advocate.com/business/2013/07/23/austin-new-bar-owners-refuse-gay-customers

This sh3t isn't hard to find klinger. And these are just the stories that get reported.

This **** isn't hard to understand either....if a person OWNS and RUNS his business these are choices he/ she should be able to make. Kind of like listening to a radio station that offends you....Change the F'n station....Not the rest of the world. There always has been those businesses who are and have always been okay with the Gay lifestyle and serve these folks well, problem is this movement will not be satisfied until they have FORCED everyone else to See The World THEIR WAY...it's NOT about CHOICE at all

I didn't open the links. But these appear to be cases of bigotry, in one form or another.

People can be bigots. But Sammy isn't crying foul over that. His post seemed to imply that WE (the people of America) allow these things to happen. And on that front I have to disagree.

That's correct and yes it's " equal opportunity offender " rules.....as with the Smoking Ban everywhere, if left alone the problem would have solved itself. If a business owner chooses to allow smoking great, those who don't like it find another bar/ restaurant to go to where smoking is prohibited. Much the same if a particular business decides they will not serve the gay community, find another that will...if there's none out there then Start one. If a given community does or doesn't approve of how a business conducts itself.....I expect it will show up in his / her bottom line and they
( the business owner ) will have to decide if " lost revenue " is worth it!! Let the People speak with their pocketbooks not through constant legislation