Volunteer work is not a job that losing merits a congressional investigation.
But are you suggesting — as a conservative — that a charitable organization cannot manage its volunteers and restrict what they say in public about the work of the organization? Could a church not remove an unpaid deacon for writing books promoting atheism? Could a corporation not withhold promotions to an employee who writes books denouncing the products of the corporation?
Are you suggesting that an employer such as Baylor cannot determine which of its faculty it wishes to include as classroom teachers and which it wishes to exclude?
Are you suggesting that a tenure committee cannot project a prospective teacher’s value to the university based on whether he accepts the consensus definition of the work to be done?
The comments being made in regard to the “expelled” sound like new-age postmodernist gook to me. They suggest that people cannot chose their associates and that employers cannot require employees to promote the fundamental work of the institution.
Once again, I have to ask for an example of a person who is unemployed or who has fired from a paying position for supporting ID.
I think it would be useful to look at the careers of people who have signed the Discovery Institute statement on evolution.
Take it up with Congress. They have oversight of Government agencies.
As a conservative do you agree with the conservative platform?
Your conservative red herring is going to be ignored.
The OSC report has found that unfair treatment was given to Sternberg although they had no jusridiction to punish or force the SI to provide information for them in regards to a specific portion of the law. All of your red herring arguments are foolish. A charitable organization does not purport to have "academic freedom" neither are they government organizations. A corporation is not a government organization, and in most cases cannot discriminate based upon political or religious leanings. A church is obviously none of the above and of course can decide who does what with respect to religion since that is directly a right established explicitly by the first amendment. If you were a conservative you would know that.
Baylor can decide who teaches what and where within the scope of their institution. However, it is bogus to claim any sort of benefit due to "academic" freedom if their actions belie that claim.
Are you suggesting that a tenure committee cannot project a prospective teacher’s value to the university based on whether he accepts the consensus definition of the work to be done?
I am not suggesting anything. I am telling you that people are being discriminated against for their mention of ID.
Once again, I have to ask for an example of a person who is unemployed or who has fired from a paying position for supporting ID.
I've answered that and I do not pursue red herring. People have been pressured etc. due to their mention of ID. That is beyond a doubt. The comments and emails of those that pressured etc. are the evidence.
Keep thinking. If you really want to know. Do the work and don't try to pass it on to me. It was your idea not mine. I made no assertion about the list that obsesses you.