University of California system sued over creationism

National Center for Science Education ^ | 08 September 2005 | Staff

[PatrickHenry]

Creationism is prominent in a recent lawsuit that charges the University of California system with violating the constitutional rights of applicants from Christian schools whose high school coursework is deemed inadequate preparation for college. The complaint was filed in federal court in Los Angeles on August 25, 2005, on behalf of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI), the Calvary Chapel Christian School in Murrieta, California, and a handful of students at the school. Representing the plaintiffs are Robert H. Tyler, a lawyer with a new organization called Advocates for Faith and Freedom, and Wendell R. Bird of the Atlanta law firm Bird and Loechl.

Bird is no stranger to litigation over creationism. As a law student in the late 1970s, he published a student note in the Yale Law Journal sketching a strategy for using the free exercise clause of the First Amendment to secure a place for creationism in the public school science classroom. Bird later worked at the Institute for Creation Research, where he updated its model "equal-time" resolution. The ICR's resolution eventually mutated, in Paul Ellwanger's hands, to become model "equal-time" legislation. A bill based on Ellwanger's model was passed in Arkansas in 1981 and then ruled unconstitutional in McLean v. Arkansas.

Although Bird was not able to participate in the McLean trial -- he sought to intervene on behalf of a number of creationist organizations and individuals, but was not allowed to do so -- he was involved in Aguillard v. Treen, which became Edwards v. Aguillard. Named a special assistant attorney general in Louisiana, Bird defended Louisiana's "equal-time" act all the way to the Supreme Court, where in 1987 it was ruled to violate the Establishment Clause. His The Origin of Species Revisited, which compared evolution and "abrupt appearance," was subsequently published (in two volumes).

At issue in the present suit are the guidelines set by the University of California system to ensure that first-year students have been adequately prepared for college in their high schools. The complaint (1.6M PDF) cites a policy of rejecting high school biology courses that use textbooks published by Bob Jones University Press and A Beka Books as "inconsistent with the viewpoints and knowledge generally accepted in the scientific community." Such a policy, the complaint alleges, infringes on the plaintiffs' rights to "freedom of speech, freedom from viewpoint discrimination, freedom of religion and association, freedom from arbitrary discretion, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from hostility toward religion."

Robert Tyler told the Los Angeles Times (August 27, 2005) that "It appears that the UC system is attempting to secularize Christian schools and prevent them from teaching from a [Christian world] view." But creationism is a matter of theology, not of science, Robert John Russell of the Center for Theology and Natural Science told the Oakland Tribune (August 31, 2005). "It's almost ludicrous anyone would even take this seriously," Russell said. "It seems absurd that a student who had poor biology would meet the same standards as a student with 'good' biology. ...This has nothing to do with First Amendment rights."

A spokesperson for the University of California system would not comment on the specific allegations leveled in the complaint, but told the Los Angeles Times that the university was entitled to set course requirements for incoming students, adding, "[t]hese requirements were established after careful study by faculty and staff to ensure that students who come here are fully prepared with broad knowledge and the critical thinking skills necessary to succeed."

In its fall 2005 newsletter, ACSI expresses concern that the University of California system's "secular intolerance might spread to other institutions and to other states. ... If this discrimination is allowed to continue unchallenged, it is only a matter of time before secular institutions in other states will join the bandwagon." Interviewed by Education Week (September 7, 2005), however, a spokesperson for the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers expressed the opposite concern, reportedly worrying "about the potential implications of asking a university to ignore its course requirements -- which had been shaped by experts in various fields -- in favor of a 'free-for-all,' in which any interest group is allowed to shape policy."

[PatrickHenry]

We had a thread on this over two weeks ago, but not much information was then available. It's here:
University of Calif. Sued Over Creationism.
This thread's lead article article has links to more information, including a PDF file with the actual complaint that was filed. It's over 100 pages, including exhibits.

[PatrickHenry]

EvolutionPing

A pro-evolution science list with over 300 names. See the list's explanation at my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail to be added or dropped.

[LiteKeeper]

YEC SPOTREP

[LauraleeBraswell]

THANK GOD, (for you).

[gondramB]

What this really comes down to is do you make exceptions to academic standards because of someone's religion.

I can see making exceptions to school rules for religion - letting a Sikh have a beard in high school or letting Jewish students miss class for religious observances.

But not academic standards.

[snarks_when_bored]

If a student doesn't trust a college's faculty to know what merits study and what doesn't, he oughtn't to seek admission there. No one is forced to attend UCLA.

[Borges]

I think the issue is that UCLA is a state school funded by tax dollars.

[snarks_when_bored]

Doesn't matter. The faculty makes judgments on what counts as scholarship, not politicians or courts. Otherwise, higher education is a sham.

[proxy_user]

Everyone knows that is the case.

The purpose of these suits is to annoy and harass liberals. If they are busy defending, they are stopped from attacking.

[Borges]

Oh I agree. Just clarifying where I thought the plaintiffs are coming from.

[PatrickHenry]

[Blush]

[snarks_when_bored]

Oh I agree. Just clarifying where I thought the plaintiffs are coming from.

Right.

So to speak.

[HEY4QDEMS]

Christian schools whose high school coursework is deemed inadequate preparation for college

That should be easy for them to prove.

Is the dropout rate higher among Christian school attendees?

The failure rate?

My daughter went to Catholic school her whole life and was accepted to every college she applied to. She has a 3.5 average right now which I think is pretty good by anyone's standards.

The U-Cal system better prove it or else they should let Christian educated students enroll.

[shuckmaster]

"[t]hese requirements were established after careful study by faculty and staff to ensure that students who come here are fully prepared with broad knowledge and the critical thinking skills necessary to succeed."

I don't have a problem with that.

[curiosity]

The purpose of these suits is to annoy and harass liberals.

Evolution has nothing to do with liberalism, and creationism has nothing to do with conservatism. This is not a left-right issue.

[PatrickHenry]

My daughter went to Catholic school her whole life ...

She probably received a fine education. The schools involved in this litigation use very different science texts, according to the University.

[curiosity]

My daughter went to Catholic school her whole life and was accepted to every college she applied to. She has a 3.5 average right now which I think is pretty good by anyone's standards.

Catholic schools, for the most part, do an excellent job of teaching evolution and biology in general and do not water it down with nonsense like creationism and "intelligent design."

The same cannot be said for schools of a Protestant fundamentalist bent.

[LauraleeBraswell]

Higher education is a sham already. Although this lawsuit is perhaps the most ridiculouse thing I've ever seen AndI'm Embarrassedforthesepeople- Many of the so-called "intellectual Liberals" who teach "Higher Education" are no better a than neo creationists. They both have no grasp on reality.

[HEY4QDEMS]

The same cannot be said for schools of a Protestant fundamentalist bent.

This may well be true, but for the benefit of the doubt I still think the UCal system should provide historic fact to support their position.

Three of the last five national spelling bee champions were home schooled. Wouldn't it be terrible if the organizers decided that home schoolers do not have an adequate study curriculum and are therefore disqualified from competing.

U-Cal is making a claim that any reasonable observer would expect them to back it up.

[NJ_gent]

"The U-Cal system better prove it or else they should let Christian educated students enroll."

They aren't rejecting students based on the school they went to; they're rejecting them based on the textbooks that were used to teach them. If a high school uses textbooks based on the Raelian movement to teach science to its students, it's highly likely that those students lack the requisite knowledge and understanding required to attend college level science courses. Ergo, those students are unfit to enroll at the university.

The university has the right to set the academic standards used to decide who is accepted to the school. If certain high schools are not preparing their students to meet those standards, then it is the fault of those schools; not the standards themselves. We should not lower standards to be all-inclusive. If you can't compete, you don't go to the show.

Lest we forget: it's a liberal mindset that the rules should be changed to fit the individual's desires.