Show me where it was required to do what you assert.
As far as I know, the IFL wasn't part of it. The president wanted to create a vehicle specifically for Dembski's work
Wrong.
The Academic Intelligent Design Controversy: William Dembski and Baylor University
The concept for creating such a center was sparked after Dr. Michael Beatty, director of the Institute of Faith and Learning and philosophy professor, and Dr. Donald Schmeltekopf, provost and vice-president of academic affairs, read the articles of director William Dembski.
They approached Dembski with the idea of creating a research center that would be a component of the Institute of Faith and Learning.
I'm sure that your assertion about the desires of a university president are true, but considerations of the purpose of the university and the desires of the regents as expressed by the president, I believe, surmount any desires of the faculty. From the same reference.
The criticism culminated in September in the senate's harshly worded no-confidence vote. Regents responded at the time by voting 31-4 to reaffirm Sloan, but the turmoil didn't go away. In February, committees appointed to look into the alleged problems issued reports acknowledging the strife and calling on Sloan to heal the division. Last month, Sloan wrote regents, complaining that his critics were orchestrating a letter-writing campaign against him to wear the regents down.
Finally, horror of horrors, a Baptist University tried to add this to the school policy.
Senators said a breaking point was a proposed addition to school policy that faculty found a threat to academic freedom. The new policy would discourage research and teaching about "practices inconsistent with Baptist faith or practice."
Again, this was all fomented due to the establishment of a department outside "of the walls" that surround the science departments.
Not required, but it pisses of everybody when you do it behind their backs.
You want intimidation? Okay, how about this from the Baylor newspaper back in 1999:
That debate intensified Tuesday, when an outgoing Baylor professor said President Robert Sloan is intimidating faculty into not commenting on the controversy.What? I thought it was only IDers who got intimidated by the establishment, their jobs threatened. Now we have IDers in powerful positions threatening scientists!"Faculty are not speaking out because Sloan can make their lives miserable," Dr. Lewis Barker, psychology and neuroscience professor, said. "They don't speak out for fear of their salaries and of being singled out by administration.
"I know you can't get many faculty responses, but the ones you have represent the majority of the faculty. The others are just too scared to speak out and want to hold on to their jobs."
I also liked later in the article, over the likes of the Discovery Institute linking to their center's web site:
"We have no control over who decides to link to our site. We do not endorse a connection to those sites at all. They didn't ask our permission. It would be better if they removed it,..."But Dembski had until then been pulling a $40,000 a year salary from the Discovery Institute!