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.

[atlaw]

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

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

Ok. I'll bite. Why are trying to do this? Because his particular religious preference is untenable or distasteful? (Assuming, as has often been asserted by the creationists, that evolution is just another religion.) Isn't this religious suppression of the very kind you find repugnant? Aren't you then asking that this professor hue to the religion of the student's choice, or perhaps the religion officially approved by the state?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post!

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

Not at all. The question here, the reason the Department of Justice received a complaint, is whether a publicly funded institution through its agent, Dini, can have a policy which overtly coerces a student to disavow his religious beliefs - or which discriminates among students making the same request for a letter of recommendation - such that targeted students are not treated equally because of their religious beliefs.

The compelling interest argument was raised by the "defense" on this thread. If the school can show that Dini's position on his webpage is correct - that creationist physicians are a public health hazard, then there would exist a compelling interest to override the student(s) first amendment rights in the interest of public health.

[PatrickHenry]

Gone for the evening. ***Smooooch!***

[atlaw]

Aw come on. I've got the poor professor identified as Dimi, Dini, Dinit, and Dimil. Chalk it up to melon fingers.

[Blue Scourge]

Ah, you have to love when everyone digs into their little ideological foxholes and refuses to even listen to the other side....oh well that is just about everyone here, myslef included.

Anyway, my take on it is that I think Dinni is wrong. A person should get a recomendation based on thier merits, reguardless of religion, race, creed, and so on. If the student was a good student and warrented the recomendation than he/she should get it, especially if he/she isn't going into a field that would require over knowledge of evolution.

And calling someone ignorant because he doesn't think the way you do is ignorant. I could say I think that people who don't believe in God are evil, but they're not and I don't think that way.

[atlaw]

Just like A-G. Should be "Why are we trying to do this?"

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOLOL! Typing used to be my best skill, but I cut my very long fingernails off after Thanksgiving. I used to be able to reach all the keys easily with the tip of the nail. Now I tend to "tire" before finishing a word (or omit words altogether) because I have to reach so much further (LOL!)

[Alamo-Girl]

I could say I think that people who don't believe in God are evil, but they're not and I don't think that way.

Thank you, Blue Scourge! You made me smile! I feel the same way.

[general_re]

Hmmph. I'll take that chance - what the heck - and concede defeat if a settlement requires him to take down the offending passage from his website.

[Alamo-Girl]

I should mention that the "defense" on this thread has also recommended academic freedom as a compelling interest argument to bar creationists from becoming physicians, scientists, etc.

I'm not aware of any method that could be used for an objective study to see if creationism has infringed on academic freedom to such an extent that academic freedom should override the first amendment.

I'm not even sure how the term academic freedom could be defined to exclude any ideology much less metaphysics, philosophy, etc.

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOLOL! If you don't feel that you actually lost, I would not want you to buy me dinner - even if I thought I had won.

[Nebullis]

I suspect the bar for compelling reason must be high to override a first amendment right.

I don't know if the bar needs to be raised at all. It's a state institution, with first amendment liberties for its faculty. Dini is acting as a private citizen.

[general_re]

No, no. Put it this way - I've never met Dini, but I am willing to take a chance on the idea that his sense of integrity would not permit him to agree to a settlement that required the removal of that passage. Therefore, if he caves on me, I'll concede that the law as it currently exists allows students to bludgeon professors with their cherished beliefs, and send you your prize with no hard feelings at all.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

It's a state institution, with first amendment liberties for its faculty. Dini is acting as a private citizen.

Texas Tech has endorsed Dini's policy and thus involved itself in the dispute. The policy is posted on a publicly funded university website. Dini is speaking to students at Texas Tech, telling them what his (endorsed) policy is for getting a recommendation for graduate or professional school.

IMHO, it would be a very, very hard sell to convince a judge that Dini was only acting in a personal, non-work related, capacity.

[Alamo-Girl]

It's fine with me as long as you have no hard feelings about it. Hugs!

[longshadow]

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

But it ISN'T a religious preference test, it's a science preference test, as illustrated by the fact that someone who refuses to affirm, for reasons that have nothing to do with religion, his belief that humans are the result of Evolution will be denied a recommendation by the professor just as quickly as someone who fails to affirm for religious reasons.

As a test, lets pretend the student in question isn't a Creationist at all.... let's assume he believes in ...... oh, how about "Intelligent Design." Based on his "non-religious" belief in ID, he refuses to affirm that humans are the result of a natural Evolutionary process, and is denied a letter of recommendation by Dini.

Since virtually every anti-Evo on this site has affirmed that ID "theory" is "not a religion-based theory," it follows that the student was not discriminated upon because of his religious beliefs, but rather for his lack of scientific belief in the Theory of Evolution.

Thus, the professor's criteria are not a "religious preference test," and hence, his refusal to recommend either the Creationist or the ID proponent, is based on a "science preference test", and since "scientific preference" is not a constitutionally protected right, there is no basis in law to claim the professor has violated their "rights."

Of course, if you are willing to stipulate, as I hope you would, that ID "theory" IS a religion-based system, I am willing to substitute an alternate NON-RELIGIOUS student in our hypothetical case who happens to subscribe to some peculiar scientific theory (Lamarkism?) that is at odds with Evolution, and thus he cannot affirm..... the result is exactly the same.

If you are still not convinced, consider a student who refuses to affirm (for reasons that he won't reveal) a belief in the natural Evolutionary origin of humans; he, too, will be denied a recommendation under the professor's policy. Since there is NO religious component to his reason for refusing (as he gave the professor NO reason at all!), ther is no basis on which one can assert that the denial of a recommendation is religiously motivated; hence, the policy is CLEARLY not a "religious preference test."

[general_re]

Good enough. Cheers!

[Blue Scourge]

Hey, I'm here to please... ;)

[Nebullis]

Texas Tech has endorsed Dini's policy and thus involved itself in the dispute.

I don't think that's right. Texas Tech endorsed Dini's right to set his own policy. The university could limit that right but they didn't. In setting his policy, Dini is not acting on behalf of the university. And, since Texas Tech is a state university, his free speech rights are protected.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

I don't think that's right. Texas Tech endorsed Dini's right to set his own policy. The university could limit that right but they didn't.

We are not privy to the actual correspondence and especially the formal reply to the Department of Justice, so we are relying on press reports. But here is what the Associated Press article said:

The Department of Justice asked Texas Tech in Jan. 21 letter to respond to the allegations, university officials said.

Texas Tech spokeswoman Cindy Rugeley said that the university stands by Dini, and that his policies do not conflict with those of Texas Tech.

Back in October, Texas Tech had taken an arms length view:

"A letter of recommendation is a personal matter between a professor and student and is not subject to the university control or regulation," Texas Tech Chancellor David Smith wrote in October in response to an earlier letter of complaint.

And, since Texas Tech is a state university, his free speech rights are protected.

Dini's freedom of speech is not at issue. The legal issues are these:

The question here, the reason the Department of Justice received a complaint, is whether a publicly funded institution through its agent, Dini, can have a policy which overtly coerces a student to disavow his religious beliefs - or which discriminates among students making the same request for a letter of recommendation - such that targeted students are not treated equally because of their religious beliefs.