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

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

[kattracks]

UBBOCK, Tex., Feb. 2 — A biology professor who insists that his students accept the tenets of human evolution has found himself the subject of Justice Department scrutiny.

Prompted by a complaint from the Liberty Legal Institute, a group of Christian lawyers, the department is investigating whether Michael L. Dini, an associate professor of biology at Texas Tech University here, discriminated against students on the basis of religion when he posted a demand on his Web site that students wanting a letter of recommendation for postgraduate studies "truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer" to the question of how the human species originated.

"The central, unifying principle of biology is the theory of evolution," Dr. Dini wrote. "How can someone who does not accept the most important theory in biology expect to properly practice in a field that is so heavily based on biology?"

That was enough for the lawyers' group, based in Plano, a Dallas suburb, to file a complaint on behalf of a 22-year-old Texas Tech student, Micah Spradling.

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).

Mr. Spradling said that given the professor's position, there was "no way" he would have enrolled in Dr. Dini's class or asked him for a recommendation to medical school.

"That would be denying my faith as a Christian," said Mr. Spradling, a junior raised in Lubbock who plans to study prosthetics and orthotics at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. "They've taken prayer out of schools and the Ten Commandments out of courtrooms, so I thought I had an opportunity to make a difference."

In an interview in his office, Dr. Dini pointed to a computer screen full of e-mail messages and said he felt besieged.

"The policy is not meant in any way to be discriminatory toward anyone's beliefs, but instead to ensure that people who I recommend to a medical school or a professional school or a graduate school in the biomedical sciences are scientists," he said. "I think science and religion address very different types of questions, and they shouldn't overlap."

Dr. Dini, who said he had no intention of changing his policy, declined to address the question of his own faith. But university officials and several students who support him say he is a religious man.

"He's a devout Catholic," said Greg Rogers, 36, a pre-med student from Lubbock. "He's mentioned it in discussion groups."

Mr. Rogers, who returned to college for a second degree and who said his beliefs aligned with Dr. Dini's, added: "I believe in God and evolution. I believe that evolution was the tool that brought us about. To deny the theory of evolution is, to me, like denying the law of gravity. In science, a theory is about as close to a fact as you can get."

Another student, Brent Lawlis, 21, from Midland, Tex., said he hoped to become an orthopedic surgeon and had had no trouble obtaining a letter of recommendation from Dr. Dini. "I'm a Christian, but there's too much biological evidence to throw out evolution," he said.

But other students waiting to enter classes Friday morning said they felt that Dr. Dini had stepped over the line. "Just because someone believes in creationism doesn't mean he shouldn't give them a recommendation," said Lindsay Otoski, 20, a sophomore from Albuquerque who is studying nursing. "It's not fair."

On Jan. 21, Jeremiah Glassman, chief of the Department of Justice's civil rights division, told the university's general counsel, Dale Pat Campbell, that his office was looking into the complaint, and asked for copies of the university's policies on letters of recommendation.

David R. Smith, the Texas Tech chancellor, said on Friday afternoon that the university, a state institution with almost 30,000 students and an operating budget of $845 million, had no such policy and preferred to leave such matters to professors.

In a letter released by his office, Dr. Smith noted that there were 38 other faculty members who could have issued Mr. Spradling a letter of recommendation, had he taken their classes. "I suspect there are a number of them who can and do provide letters of recommendation to students regardless of their ability to articulate a scientific answer to the origin of the human species," Dr. Smith wrote.

Members of the Liberty Legal Institute, who specialize in litigating what they call religious freedom cases, said their complaint was a matter of principle.

"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."

Mr. Shackelford said that he would await the outcome of the Justice Department investigation but that the next step would probably be to file a suit against the university.

[HumanaeVitae]

I'm not advocating either throwing this guy in jail, or even making him write the letter.

My posts merely pointed out the complete hypocrisy of the academic establishment on the question of evolution. This doctrine is taken as a matter of faith, not fact. If it were taken as a matter of fact, Darwinists would have no problem with a bunch of 'dopey' creationists challenging it. For some reason, however, they don't seem willing to have an open debate on the issue...

[Catspaw]

Would a Wiccan be accepted to a Baptist Theological Seminary in the first place?

Here's one scenario: he was Baptist when she was accepted at the university or seminary, but somewhere along the line, he converted to Wiccan. Stranger things have happened.

[HumanaeVitae]

See #241.

Why should the state subsidize a doctrine that the academic establishment will not allow to be challenged? If a scientist comes out as a skeptic of evolution--even if he's not a Christian creationist--early in his career, I'm betting that's the end of his career right there...

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

Indeed, I've been so busy answering replies I haven't had a chance to research case law for the statute I mentioned. So I don't know what the legal interpretation of the word force is, i.e. whether physical or mental. When in doubt about the meaning of a word, the Supremes refer to the committee reports and testimony.

There is another statute in the same area which provides for conspiracy to deny civil rights. That one does not mention "force." Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 13, Section 241

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or ...

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;...

[Doctor Stochastic]

The complaint filed was for discrimination based religion.

Thus confirming that the student's views were not based on scientific objections to evolution but on religious views.

[Catspaw]

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person

And exactly how was he "injure[d], oppress[ed], threaten[ed] or intimidate[d]?"

[f.Christian]

Science and evolution (( religion )) are not the same thing ==== OPPOSITES !

[Right Wing Professor]

Although courts have applied strict scrutiny in certain racial discrimination cases, they don't apply it to sex-based or religious discrimination cases, prefering a rational basis test.

These are in either case civil procedures. It's the proposal the DOJ should prosecute criminally that worries me. In general, a university will cover a faculty member who gets sued while doing his job, but they can't keep you out of jail.

Of course, this won't happen; the statute she's citing requires use of force or threat of force. It's the apparent equanimity with which she discusses criminal prosecution that's truly shocking.

[HumanaeVitae]

As opposed to your proposal that the professor be forced to speak against his will?

Of course he shouldn't be forced to speak against his will. But the student shouldn't be forced to essentially issue a Confession of Faith regarding evolution. This professor, and all professors at public institutions should be required to accept something like this as a response if they are going to have an Evolutionary Inquisition requirement for recommendations:

"I accept that the doctrine of evolution is a prevalent and widely held doctrine in the scientific community. While neither affirming nor denying the validity of this doctrine, I pledge to study it and obtain thorough knowledge of it as related to my graduate studies."

Etc.

[general_re]

Why should the state subsidize a doctrine that the academic establishment will not allow to be challenged?

And what, specifically, indicates that he is not allowed to challenge the theory of evolution?

[Under the Radar]

Yes, you are right, and I appreciate the correction. And I am as appalled as you at the wanton disregard for civil liberties by a self-described "strict Constitutionalist."

[Right Wing Professor]

Thank you for your post!

Look, AG, here's the deal. If Dini is vulnerable to criminal prosecution, as you have been advocating, then so am I. And since you apparently think I should be thrown in jail, the 'thanks for your post' strikes me as just a teeny-weeny bit insincere. Why don't you save it for those you don't want to sic criminal prosecutors on?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post and for sharing your personal experience! I'm very glad for your son, that he was able to advance without the letters of recommendation.

And I would very much like for all issues to be resolved by discussion amongst the parties rather than going to court. In fact, if I were the professor, I would remind this student that fundamentalists Christians are not to bring a lawsuit:

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.

Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather [suffer yourselves to] be defrauded?

Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that [your] brethren. - I Corinthians 6:1-8

Of course, not being a believer himself, he wouldn't realize that to a Christian the Word always trumps the Constitution.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

me: The complaint filed was for discrimination based religion.

you: Thus confirming that the student's views were not based on scientific objections to evolution but on religious views.

Huh? The complaint has nothing to do with science, it has everything to do with freedom of religion.

[cookcounty]

If the professor was consistent, he would be upfront about it and have it printed in the college catalog, so that skeptics in evolution (whom he excludes, not just 6000-year-old Creationists) would not sign up for the class, pay the fee and THEN find out about the prof's unusual policies.

[general_re]

Of course he shouldn't be forced to speak against his will.

Of course that's what you're proposing. Your proposed disclaimer is a simple fig leaf - Dini has determined that, in his opinion, an affirmative acceptance of the theory of evolution is a necessary part of the study of biology and medicine. And yet you propose to force him to issue letters of recommendation to all who decline to meet his requirements by claiming the mantle of this mushy caveat.

He requires an answer of "yes", yet you wish to force him to accept "I don't know". But a letter of recommendation is not something that one is entitled to as a matter of course - Dini is, and should be, free to issue or not issue letters for any reason he sees fit, or for no reason at all.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

And exactly how was he "injure[d], oppress[ed], threaten[ed] or intimidate[d]?"

To paraphrase, by being told that the only way he could be "good enough" to get this professor's recommendation so he could enter medical school is if he were to disavow his religious beliefs.

[js1138]

I don't think Christians should roll over and die in the face of injustice. I just think it's unwise to sue someone over their presonal judgement, bigoted or otherwise. It is this person's personal opinion that is being requested. The student's grades are the objective(!?) measure.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Should a student who refused to accept (on religious grounds) the existance of imaginary numbers be denied a letter of recommendation to a graduate mathematics department?

[Catspaw]

Huh? The complaint has nothing to do with science, it has everything to do with freedom of religion.

He's free to practice his religion. Your advocacy of a criminal prosecution of a professor for some perceived discrimination of a student who did not take his class, but merely sat in on two of the professor's classes and allegedly looking at the professor's website is truly mind-boggling, a wildly liberal interpretation of the statutes. Is this the weapon you want to place in the hands of Democrat administrations to come?