Professor's Snub of Creationists Prompts U.S. Inquiry

New York Times ^ | 2/02/03 | NICK MADIGAN

[TightSqueeze]

"There's no problem with Dr. Dini saying you have to understand evolution and you have to be able to describe it in detail," said Kelly Shackelford, the group's chief counsel, "but you can't tell students that they have to hold the same personal belief that you do."

My guess is if asked, these special students wouldn't be so sure that the sun, stars and planets didn't revolve around the earth too!

[Iwentsouth]

Now people think they are entitled to recommendation letters.

The dumbing down of America continues.

[Physicist]

"There's no problem with Dr. Dini saying you have to understand evolution and you have to be able to describe it in detail," said Kelly Shackelford, the group's chief counsel, "but you can't tell students that they have to hold the same personal belief that you do."

The professor isn't telling them to change their personal beliefs. They can believe what they want. What's happening here is that the court is being asked to change the professor's personal belief that these students will not make good scientists. Nobody is owed a recommendation. The only obligation the professor is under is to make his true opinion honestly known to the recipient of the letter.

[Catspaw]

Not only does he think he's entitled to a letter of recommendation, but he didn't even take the class from the professor. It's a very weak case.

[Physicist]

I should add that if a physics student asked me for a letter of recommendation, and it was known to me that the student believed the universe to be 6000 years old, I could not in good conscience give that student a good recommendation...unless, of course, the student could convince me of that also. (But in that case, I would urge the student to publish and collect his Nobel Prize.)

For a student to believe that the universe is 6000 years is not simply a matter of personal belief; it requires that he close his mind to extremely well-established facts. This mind-closing is incompatible with a career in science, and I would be compelled to say so.

I'm certain that the professor saw things the same way with respect to evolution.

[Gordian Blade]

Physicist, well said. You beat me to it.

[kittymyrib]

And NO professor is owed a tax-payer financed pay check. He can hold any belief he wants but has NO right to require that the students uphold his religious belief in evolution. Because unless you know of some video tape showing the evolution of species, this theory is a matter of faith. By the way, answer this: how could incomplete male and female reproductive systems produce offspring? Have you ever had friends or relatives trying to conceive, using everything in our modern medical technology, only to have it fail again and again? And we are to believe that male and female reproductive systems, so utterly dissimiliar, could in the process of evolving reproduce off-spring. Now that requires much more faith than I can muster. No wonder evolutionists need "billions and billions of years",in the words of the late Carl Sagan, to make this laughable theory (see Psalm 2:4) fly.

[Catspaw]

Micah Spradling never took a class from this professor. He never asked for a letter of recommendation from this professor. It appears that Mr. Spradling is imposing his religious beliefs on the professor, not the other way around.

Why the Justice Department is involved in this matter is beyond me, and a waste of my tax dollars. Spradling's purpose appears to be frivilous litigation.

[RJCogburn]

require that the students uphold his religious belief in evolution.

You err when you call it a religious belief.

[TightSqueeze]

...but has NO right to require that the students uphold his religious belief in evolution.

Straw-man Alert! Science is not religion, just because all the answers are not known, there is enough theory to think that at some time in the future they can be known. It is not blind faith or simply saying God said it, we believe it, and that settles it. Simply put religion ain't science, and teaching religion as science will only put us behind less religious countries seeking the same answers. Foolishness like this does not go on in other academic countries.

[smith288]

#4 fits science as a religion depending on the zeal one has for it.

---

re·li·gion    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (r-ljn)
n.

1. 1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
   2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

[Salgak]

The professor is owed a tax-payer, and student-financed paycheck FOR TEACHING BIOLOGY COURSES. Not for writing letters of recommendation, a purely optional activity. Have you read the professor's page on his policy ? He requires you to:

a) Get an "A" in at least one of his courses.

b) Be well-enough known to him, by any of a number of criteria.

c) As he teaches a science course, he asks a science question. When a scientist writes a recommendation or other opinion, he puts his credibility as a scientist on the line.

So why SHOULDN'T he evaluate a candidate based on the criteria he sets forward ???

[TightSqueeze]

A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

If this were Jeopardy, I would be inclined to answer... How would one describe Republicanism under the Bush administration?

[Physicist]

Now that requires much more faith than I can muster.

No doubt.

Alternatively, you might try a little knowledge.

[kittymyrib]

We would have no problem had the professor stopped with #1: Make an A in the class. That would be based on merit, not being a buddy with the prof (#2), or agreeing with his religious beliefs regarding evolution (#3). I assume if he's a successful instructor, his students should have learned the theory of evolution and passed the tests with flying colors on this and every other element of the course to get a final A grade. There should be NO qualifications beyond this. He is not hired to attack the personal faith of any student, their parents, and their pastors by requiring them to "truthfully" espouse his belief in evolution.

[Catspaw]

Mr. Spradling said he sat in on two sessions of Dr. Dini's introductory biology class and shortly afterward noticed the guidelines on the professor's Web site (www2.tltc.ttu.edu/dini/Personal/letters.htm).

Spradling didn't take the class, so he couldn't have even reached criteria #1.

I hope Spadling knows that if he loses the lawsuit, he, not the law firm, are responsible for the fees the University and the professor will sure ask the judge to award.

[RJCogburn]

agreeing with his religious beliefs regarding evolution

You seem to insist on referring to evolution as 'religion'. Strange. How come?

[Physicist]

#4 fits science as a religion depending on the zeal one has for it.

It equally well fits a teenager listening to pop songs. But then, wasn't John Lennon savaged by the press for hinting at that?

[smith288]

If this were Jeopardy, I would be inclined to answer... How would one describe Republicanism under the Bush administration?

If this was a discussion about a prof. only giving recommendations to students on Jeopardy I would ask, "Questions that have nothing to do with said topic"