Posted on 11/25/2005 8:34:07 AM PST by Exton1
KU prof's e-mail irks fundamentalists
http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/living/religion/13252419.htm
Associated Press
LAWRENCE - Critics of a new course that equates creationism and intelligent design with mythology say an e-mail sent by the chairman of the University of Kansas religious studies department proves the course is designed to mock fundamentalist Christians.
In a recent message on a Yahoo listserv, Paul Mirecki said of the course "Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationisms and Other Religious Mythologies":
"The fundies want it all taught in a science class, but this will be a nice slap in their big fat face by teaching it as a religious studies class under the category mythology."
He signed the note "Doing my part (to upset) the religious right, Evil Dr. P."
Kansas Provost David Shulenburger said Wednesday that he regretted the words Mirecki used but that he supported the professor and thought the course would be taught in a professional manner.
"My understanding was that was a private e-mail communication that somehow was moved out of those channels and has become a public document," Shulenburger said.
The course was added to next semester's curriculum after the Kansas State Board of Education adopted new school science standards that question evolution.
The course will explore intelligent design, which contends that life is too complex to have evolved without a "designer." It also will cover the origins of creationism, why creationism is an American phenomenon and creationism's role in politics and education.
State Sen. Karin Brownlee, R-Olathe, said she was concerned by Mirecki's comments in the e-mail.
"His intent to make a mockery of Christian beliefs is inappropriate," she said.
Mirecki said the private e-mail was accessed by an outsider.
"They had been reading my e-mails all along," he said. "Where are the ethics in that, I ask."
When asked about conservative anger directed at him and the new course, Mirecki said: "A lot of people are mad about what's going on in Kansas, and I'm one of them."
Mirecki has been taking criticism since the course was announced.
"This man is a hateful man," said state Sen. Kay O'Connor, R-Olathe. "Are we supposed to be using tax dollars to promote hatred?"
But others support Mirecki.
Tim Miller, a fellow professor in the department of religious studies, said intelligent design proponents are showing that they don't like having their beliefs scrutinized.
"They want their religion taught as fact," Miller said. "That's simply something you can't do in a state university."
Hume Feldman, associate professor of physics and astronomy, said he planned to be a guest lecturer in the course. He said the department of religious studies was a good place for intelligent design.
"I think that is exactly the appropriate place to put these kinds of ideas," he said.
John Altevogt, a conservative columnist and activist in Kansas City, said the latest controversy was sparked by the e-mail.
"He says he's trying to offend us," Altevogt said. "The entire tenor of this thing just reeks of religious bigotry."
Brownlee said she was watching to see how the university responded to the e-mail.
"We have to set a standard that it's not culturally acceptable to mock Christianity in America," she said.
University Senate Executive Committee Governance Office - 33 Strong Hall, 4-5169
Faculty
SenEx Chair
Joe Heppert, jheppert@ku.edu , Chemistry, 864-2270 Ruth Ann Atchley, ratchley@ku.edu , Psychology, 864-9816 Richard Hale, rhale@ku.edu ,Aerospace Engineering, 864-2949 Bob Basow, basow@ku.edu , Journalism, 864-7633 Susan Craig, scraig@ku.edu , Art & Architecture, 864-3020 Margaret Severson, mseverson@Ku.edu , Social Welfare, 864-8952
University Council President Jim Carothers, jbc@ku.edu , English 864-3426 (Ex-officio on SenEx)
Paul Mirecki, Chair The Department of Religious Studies, 1300 Oread Avenue, 102 Smith Hall, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Kansas,Lawrence, KS 66045-7615 (785) 864-4663 Voice (785) 864-5205 FAX rstudies@ku.edu
I know precisely what an ad hominem is and I called it accurately.
do you have trouble understanding why a biology professor might find your dismissive opinions of his entire profession irksome enough to respond to in kind?
Well, in kind would mean to demonstrate that mathematics was low-order thinking.
Coming from someone who goes nuts and calls in the mod when I don't ping his majesty!
Youre a funny guy Amish. I'm sure youre a real hit with the hawkeye gals.
That was a colossal failure.
But it somehow might have been more useful than penicillin.
It is extremely bad form to talk about someone on a public thread without pinging them.
Nonsense. If you have been politely asked to terminate a discussion with someone, than, indeed, it is bad manners, though by no means a hanging offense, to "talk behind their back". However, if you choose to engage in a protracted discussion on a public forum with a large number of people, it is absurdly silly to complain because a conversation about you occurs to which you are not explicitly invited. It is no more their job to search the text for your exact login name, than it is for you to search the text for your login name.
It may be the difference between eradicating the disease in 30 years or getting a marginally less painful treatment now. The latter is extremely important. I'd prefer the former, myself. Of course, given that we often get neither...
Where's your formal proof that biology is a "lower order" of thinking than mathematics?
Really? To what argument, precisely, was his Ad hominem response aimed, in place of a responsive argument?
donh, I do know how to use the search function as I used it in Google with "Principia Mathematica -Newton" to find another work with that title.
I see. Formal mathematicians were just on the edge, just almost ready, just panting with desire--to produce penecillin, but, out of professional couresy, waited 30 years or so for Fleming to stumble onto it with stupid old biological thinking. How polite.
donh simply asked me a question about PM. I only wanted to verify that he was referring to Newton's work. It was RWN who decided to make this a gotcha moment.
Well, of course it was. There was flaw in the 9-trillianth and first step of the proof.
Did I hurt your feelings that badly?
Don't be so sensitive Amish. Its unbecoming for a conservative.
BWHAHHAA! Imagine how warped your brain has to be to actually think this way.
I was speaking more generally, not about penicillin in particular.
Ping to #457, so don't get your panties in a bunch Amish.
I just said that there are others that wrote a work with the title of Principia Mathematica. I am well aware of Newton's work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.