Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Professor's Snub of Creationists Prompts U.S. Inquiry
New York Times ^ | 2/02/03 | NICK MADIGAN

Posted on 02/03/2003 3:53:13 AM PST by kattracks


LUBBOCK, 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.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 901-920921-940941-960 ... 1,201-1,202 next last
To: dinasour
Okay, should a Professor at a Baptist Theological Seminary be required to give a letter of recommendation to a Wiccan?

Think about this for a minute. Have you ever been to a Baptist seminary? LOL

921 posted on 02/05/2003 6:30:48 PM PST by valleygal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
But I don't think it is appropriate for a state university to stand behind such a policy.

They don't. I believe their position is that they support their faculty's academic freedom. As they should.

922 posted on 02/05/2003 6:35:27 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Preserve the purity of your precious bodily fluids!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 915 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
faculty's academic freedom . . . vs . . . constitutional law // protection // RIGHTS ?
923 posted on 02/05/2003 6:39:10 PM PST by f.Christian (( Orcs of the world : : : Take note and beware. ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 922 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Thank you for your post!

Dini doesn't make reference to Creationist physicians. Nor did he claim that Creationists overprescribe. He merely points out that overprescription is a problem and that rejection of scientific evidence of such is also a problem.

Here is the section from Dini's website which I paraphrased:

it is easy to imagine how physicians who ignore or neglect the Darwinian aspects of medicine or the evolutionary origin of humans can make bad clinical decisions. The current crisis in antibiotic resistance is the result of such decisions.

The "such decisions" in the second sentence refers to the "bad clinical decisions" in the first sentence - which he attributes to "physicians who ignore or neglect the Darwinian aspects of medicine or the evolutionary origin of humans."

Good documentary evidence must exist for the court to rule that creationist physicians are a public health hazard and thus the public good is a compelling interest which must override the first amendment guarantee to freedom of religion.

Do you have anything that would directly support Dini's assertion that (paraphrased) creationist physicians, through over-medication, are responsible for the current bacterial resistance to antibiotics?

Do you have something that shows perhaps a frequency distribution of physician's religious belief v antibiotic v diagnosis, accumulated by patient?

Perhaps you would know if physicians are having to report to anyone their views on human evolution? It seems to me that would be the first step in gathering these statistics.

924 posted on 02/05/2003 6:44:17 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 862 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
But ... You seem to be suggesting that Dini, as a professor at a state funded University, must tow the line and recuse his personal judgment in favor of the prevailing popular sentiment.

Not at all, just don't discriminate based on religious beliefs.

Must he be compelled to recommend for advancement those with whom he disagrees adamently?

Whether he personally agrees with a student should not be an issue. The issue should be is the student is qualified, not if the professor holds a similar religious or political or whatever belief.

925 posted on 02/05/2003 6:47:41 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 918 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Biding my time, wasting space placemarker.
926 posted on 02/05/2003 6:48:10 PM PST by balrog666 (If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 924 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
They don't. I believe their position is that they support their faculty's academic freedom. As they should.

As long as the academic freedom is a legal act.

927 posted on 02/05/2003 6:52:52 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 922 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Nearing end-of session placemarker.
928 posted on 02/05/2003 6:53:22 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 926 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Thank you for your post!

let us agree that if the case never goes to trial, neither of us will be declared the winner.

Agreed!

if the case goes to trial, and Spradling is successful in forcing Dini to substantially change his policy upon the final disposition of the case - i.e., once all appeals are exhausted - I will concede you are the winner. I will, as recognition of your predictive powers, send you a $100 gift certificate for Red Lobster, since they're likely to have a restaurant near wherever you happen to be - if not, I will send you a $100 gift certificate for the restaurant of your choice. And in exchange, if Dini is permitted to retain his policy in a substantially unmodified form, you can congratulate me by doing the same. Deal?

If the DOJ brings the case, Spradling may not even be mentioned. With that understanding, I agree! Red Lobster would be fine!

We didn't chat about what to do if it settles. With Nebullis, the bet is cancelled if settled before trial. Post-judgment settlements weren't addressed.

How about, in our bet, should the case be settled at any point after filed - if Dini is forced to discontinue the policy, you pay me - but if he is allowed to continue, I pay you?

929 posted on 02/05/2003 6:53:42 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 863 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
"Good documentary evidence must exist for the court to rule that creationist physicians are a public health hazard and thus the public good is a compelling interest which must override the first amendment guarantee to freedom of religion."

Maybe I'm missing something here. This issue has been raised on numerous occasions on this thread, but I don't see who is asking any court to issue a ruling on anything like what you are suggesting. This matter really has nothing to do with whether there exists a compelling state interest in suppressing religion or creationism. That's a scarlet herring if there ever was one. The student at issue is perfectly free to practice and hold dear whatever religious belief he wishes. The question is whether he can compel the target professor of his choice to personally endorse his religious preference. Let's not kid ourselves. This is not a matter of suppresion, it is a matter of compulsion.
930 posted on 02/05/2003 6:56:47 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 924 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
Otherwise, we're right smack dab into state thought control.

We are to some degree, but not as much as our neighbor to the north or our friends in Europe. I am not a huge fan of how discrimination laws are used, but they should provide the same protection for everyone.

931 posted on 02/05/2003 6:57:23 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 918 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; general_re
How about, in our bet, should the case be settled at any point after filed - if Dini is forced to discontinue the policy, you pay me - but if he is allowed to continue, I pay you?

Ah, but as part of a settlement he may take down his website. Or he may delete the "offensive" passages and replace them with something more general, like "must have good scientific attitute." And he may still be permitted to adhere to his policy. In that case, how will the bet be decided?

932 posted on 02/05/2003 6:58:14 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 929 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis
Thank you for your post!

You may note that Dini's policy is not just stated for prospective medical students but also for scientists and others. Important to remember is that there are other, perhaps overriding, compelling reasons, such as academic freedom, that are involved.

I suspect the bar for compelling reason must be high to override a first amendment right. Public health, national security, peace, etc. come to mind - academic freedom might not be as compelling.

At any rate, to show a compelling reason the court will surely require hard evidence - objective statistics, studies, etc. Personal testimony can only apply to the facts of one's own first hand experience and thus does not reach broadly.

933 posted on 02/05/2003 6:59:35 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 865 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
The question is whether he can compel the target professor of his choice to personally endorse his religious preference.

No, we are trying to compel the good professor to get his religious preference test out of who he endorses for medical school.

934 posted on 02/05/2003 7:00:33 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 930 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
a matter of compulsion . .. . . .. . one 'science' fits all - -- - - -- - evolution !
935 posted on 02/05/2003 7:00:49 PM PST by f.Christian (( Orcs of the world : : : Take note and beware. ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 930 | View Replies]

To: valleygal
So people who believe in creation and not evolution are ignorant, maybe stupid, in your eyes.?

Yes.

I believe, the commander of the space shuttle, Rick Husband, was a devout Christian...perhaps he even believed in the creation theory. Wait, no, he couldn't have, because then he wouldn't have been a man of science.

I Agree.

936 posted on 02/05/2003 7:01:19 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 920 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
All right, here's my piece of the action. A-Girl, if you win that bet (that is, if Dini has to back down and the student gets satisfaction) I'll give you a big smooch! Whaddaya say? It doesn't get any better than that.

LOLOLOL! You don't have to win a bet to get a smooch from me. Here you go: ****smooch****

And a hug, too!

937 posted on 02/05/2003 7:01:54 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 869 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
faculty's academic freedom (( bias // tyranny )) . . . vs . . . constitutional law (( separation of politics // religion )) // protection // RIGHTS ?
938 posted on 02/05/2003 7:07:25 PM PST by f.Christian (( Orcs of the world : : : Take note and beware. ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 932 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Thank you for your post!

Ah, but as part of a settlement he may take down his website. Or he may delete the "offensive" passages and replace them with something more general, like "must have good scientific attitute." And he may still be permitted to adhere to his policy. In that case, how will the bet be decided?

To my understand - if (by whatever method) he is forced to comply with the law, I win.

939 posted on 02/05/2003 7:08:42 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 932 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Jeepers! To my understand should be To my understanding.
940 posted on 02/05/2003 7:10:14 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 901-920921-940941-960 ... 1,201-1,202 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson