Posted on 12/13/2010 11:18:17 AM PST by SeekAndFind
An astronomer is suing the University of Kentucky, claiming he was denied a job running its observatory because of his Christian faith.
Martin Gaskell was once considered the leading candidate to be the founding director of the observatory, opened in 2008.
The Courier-Journal reports that a trial has been set for Feb. 8 after a federal judge ruled Gaskell has the right to a jury trial.
Gaskell argues that the school discriminated against him because he had given lectures in the past discussing astronomy and the Bible and his questions about the theory of evolution, even though he accepts it.
The university acknowledges there were questions about his beliefs, but there was valid scientific concern. It also claims there were other factors in denying him the job, including a poor performance review in a previous job.
That's the whole point. Because of their beliefs they are unqualified for the job.
Hmm. God comes to us with human properties yet humans are not allowed to attribute to him human properties.
Psa 53:1 ¶ [[To the chief Musician upon Mahalath, Maschil, [A Psalm] of David.]] The fool hath said in his heart, [There is] no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: [there is] none that doeth good.
Psa 53:2 God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were [any] that did understand, that did seek God.
Either you misunderstood me, or you are dishonestly misquoting what I wrote. Dishonesty and deceit are tools of evil, not of God. I do not need to "find" God; He is not "lost". I am not "lost".
You, however, are lost, and confused; dishonest and deceitful.
You believe in religion, not in God. You put your faith in religion, not in God. For some, religion has been a pathway to God and to the truth. For you and others like you, religion has been an obstacle to the truth; a detour into perpetual ignorance, fear, spiritual regression, corruption, and an unhealthy dependence on false teaching.
Ask God to show you the truth. Ask Him every day; ask sincerely and without fear of what will be revealed. The truth will set you free (I didn't just make this up).
God is real, although none of us can prove it. Religion is manmade; this is an obvious fact.
People wrote the books of the Bible for various reasons, some to control, protect, or manipulate their populations, some to share their wisdom (Solomon), some to document their tribal history, some to perpetuate their own corruption, etc., etc. Jesus chastised the deceit and corruption of his religion, and upon his death, his followers immediately launched another, greater, and more diverse array of deceit and corruption.
I am a Christian because I was born a Christian and choose to remain a Christian. No person, or group of persons, has the "authority" to declare that I am not Christian, or that I am not the "right kind" of Christian. No amount of nonsensical, baseless, pretentious babbling about rituals or blood worship (which is occult behavior in itself), has any effect on my relationship with God.
In the end, however, the real reason why we will not offer him the job is because of his religious beliefs in matters that are unrelated to astronomy or to any of the duties specified for the position... If Martin were not so superbly qualified, so breathtakingly above the other applicants in background and experience, then our decision would be much simpler. We could easily choose another candidate, and could content ourselves with the idea that Martin's religious beliefs played little role in our decision. However, that is not the case. As it is, no objective observer could possibly believe that we have excluded Martin on any basis other than religious.Game set and match.
God can never be proved or disproved by science so science does not attempt to answer that question. It is folly for man to stop his research with "God did it".
Only God would know that. I think you are operating above your pay grade.
While others make the error of believing that if they see what was expected, the theory is supported.
That is known as the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
When the Standard Cosmological Model requires 96% 'dark' matter and energy in order to 'work', objective observers can reasonably assume that the model has been falsified no matter how 'enormous' the quantity of 'supporting' evidence that is claimed to exist.
Dear metmom, doncha know that logic is "optional" with certain people, in certain contexts?
Thank you so very much for your penetrating observations!
I didn't say those people don't exist. I said that science itself is no such cabal, especially when most scientists either are religious or don't care.
My statement was not to show piety. It was to show the arrogance of one that claims he knows the limits of God.
Some people say, “God created the no laws of nature that control everything that happens in nature.” Easy to say, but they haven’t explained a thing.
It is absolute fact, right there in the court record.
it's slanderous to state that they perjured themselves as if it were a fact.
Conviction is such an indicator of truth, isn't it? I bet you think OJ was innocent.
Well, you, no doubt, defaulted to the second part of your premise. Which is completely wrong. I EXACTLY quoted you. You precisely now have defined who you are for all to see. I said nothing about you in my post. Any reference to you seen in my post is therefore established only within your cerebrum. Why? I don't know. But you do.
No one is born a Christian. WE are all born sinners and doomed to hell until we repent and turn to God. It's in the Bible if you care to read it.
No person, or group of persons, has the "authority" to declare that I am not Christian, or that I am not the "right kind" of Christian.
And yet you take it upon yourself to do that very thing in your screed against AndrewC in this very post.
Why do you reserve the right to do yourself what you condemn in others?
Haha! What a rip-roaring statement that is. The rest of the universe fits within the set of non-applicants. What a hoot of an argument! You win the Cliff Clavin award for inane statements.
aR: “What you are seeing is the religious version of the race card. People are being denied things purely on their merits, but because they are religious they think they can claim persecution, and others of their persuasion will automatically believe them and support them. “
********************************************************************************
Actually, what we are seeing here is how wrong you are. In this post 95 on this thread, we have a clearly defined and documented example of exactly what this thread is about. That someone is being denied things based on their religion, not on their merits.
See this comment as an example. It is not imagined persecution. There meadsjn clearly states that he would not hire someone based on their religious preferences or beliefs. The person’s proficiency on the job and qualifications do not even enter the picture.
He has judged him on several levels simply based on religion. Contrary to what you claim, that IS persecution based on religion, not equivalent to the race card.
Could you imagine the fallout if someone made that claim about a minority? Substitute *black* or *Hispanic* for *young earth* and *creationist* and see where it gets you.
There’s no difference there.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2641996/posts?page=95#95
meadsjn: “No. No one gets punished for believing or not believing any certain way.
If “faith” is even part of this person’s situation, he “spoke” or “acted” in some way to make his “faith” a problem to his job. Actions have consequences.
Personally, I wouldn’t hire a “young earth”, “creationist” type idiot for anything requiring thinking above the turnip level.”
“This is intellectually dishonest of them and unworthy of someone who claims to be an objective scientist. They are the tactics of someone with an agenda who’s afraid to look at the truth lest their preferred worldview collapse under too close scrutiny.”
Think of a trial going on in a courtroom. It really doesn’t matter who acts as judge and jury if I can control what is accepted into the trial as evidence and who may give testimony.
In short, if I choose and control the process, I choose and control the outcome.
There you go, making stuff up again.
The vast majority of Christians are not literalists or creationists. Those few who are certainly do not qualify to teach in a field of science requiring reason and judgement, and as I implied, neither would the "climate change" frauds who fabricated years of climate data to create the myth of global warming.
To not hire someone for a science position who cannot differentiate the true from the false, or who deliberately perpetuates the false, is not wrongful discrimination. Perhaps mythology or fantasy fiction would be a more suitable field.
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.