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

Skip to comments.

Texas Tech Professor Won't Recommend Students to Medical School Who Dispute Evolution
Lubbock Avalanche-Journal | 10-19-02 | Theodore R.

Posted on 10/19/2002 8:22:51 AM PDT by Theodore R.

On October 6, the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal carried a story (which I could not access) regarding a Professor Dini, who will recommend to medical school only those pre-med students who express a "faith" in the Darwinian theory of evolution.

Many have since written "Letters to the Editor" to dispute this professor.

Here is the letter of October 19:

Many read the plight of Tech student Micah Spradling disenfranchised by Professor Dini for refusing to "truthfully and forthrightly believe in" the theory of evolution. Why not require students to merely understand and intelligently discuss this theory?

Must students "take the mark" by pledging to "believe in" a mere theory as indelible fact? Isn't this less a question of academic freedom and more a question of civil rights?

Not to cast the first stone at Dini, but I must ask how many other students are in danger of being disenfranchised based on their religious convictions? The comments of Doctors Edwards, Seay and Vanderpool criticizing Dini were correct.

It appears the discipline of creation science is expanding as the pillars of evolution crumble. And try as they might, professors like Dini will be unable to shore them up. Dini's implication that a physician who fails to believe in his pet theory would also fail to remain a physician for long does not impress me.

After 20 years in medicine, I believe the theory of evolution holds as much water as a colander. Is clinging to this theory a psychological defense mechanism enabling the professor to ignore the concept that he will one day stand face to face with the Creator?

The theory in question has no relevance to clinical medicine. I would not hesitate to recommend a good medical student who failed to share my beliefs on the theory of evolution. Can Dini step up to the plate and do likewise?

TERRY GAGE, M.D./Lubbock Clinical Associate Professor TTU School of Medicine Via e-mail


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: evolution; medical; texastech
See, liberalism is alive even in Lubbock, but there the conservatives do sometimes fight back.
1 posted on 10/19/2002 8:22:51 AM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
As usual, the "tolerant" left will tolerate anything; as long as it agrees with them.
2 posted on 10/19/2002 8:38:02 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
... Is clinging to this theory a psychological defense mechanism enabling the professor to ignore the concept that he will one day stand face to face with the Creator? ...
And she'll be peeved, I'm telling you. Cross. Upset. Angsty. Her brow all furrowed. Oh, and I've heard she prefers the term "Creatrix"--Creator is too gender neutral, ergo too politically correct and she hates that.
3 posted on 10/19/2002 8:45:24 AM PDT by Asclepius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Just like all those mullahs and ayatollahs we hear: "convert or die."

The thing is, if either Evolution or Mohammedanism were scientifically credible, you wouldn't have to force anyone to believe.

4 posted on 10/19/2002 8:47:30 AM PDT by T'wit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
As a first year biochemistry graduate student at Case Western Reserve University in 1963-64, I (along with all the other basic medical sciences graduate students) took the first year of Medical School training alongside the medical students. It's been a while, but I have an excellent memory and I don't remember "evolution" taught or discussed in the med school curiculum. For Medicine/Medical Students/Doctors, "Man is the Measure". They may practice surgery on animals, and test drugs on animals, but the proof is in the final application to people. I have trouble imagining what difference a belief in evolution would make to the practice of medicine, so long as the doctor "believes" in the result of clinical trials and the surgeons and other physicians who train him/her.
5 posted on 10/19/2002 8:48:54 AM PDT by FairWitness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Not liberalism. Reality.

Just like not allowing someone to continue their astronomy PhD because they believe the Sun revolves around the Flat Earth.
6 posted on 10/19/2002 9:07:53 AM PDT by The Shootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Shootist
Trying to orbit science around darwin...

is like trying to put the sun in orbit around the moon---

HACKWARDS!

Darwin is an assteroid----klunker....

no fuel---lotta assh/slag!

Halebopps---cargo cults...govt work/well-fare!

Posted... here---12 days ago!

7 posted on 10/19/2002 9:14:39 AM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Sadly, good science is the disputing of everything, including the accepted theories.
8 posted on 10/19/2002 9:21:01 AM PDT by VoidAngel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T'wit
By definition, no one is a scientist if he does not believe in the scientific method. And no one who believes in the scientific method believes in creationism. It is reasonable to believe that doctors should be scientists. Therefore, ....

I also find it interesting that you equate evolution with "Mohammedanism," when it is the Christian cosmology that is nearly identical with Isalm's, both claiming that God created the earth in six days.

And if you want to compare the number of people killed for their beliefs on religion, believers in creationism have killed a few more than the believers in Evolution. (ironic understatement)
9 posted on 10/19/2002 9:22:23 AM PDT by timsmit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: timsmit
By definition, no one is a scientist if he does not believe in the scientific method. And no one who believes in the scientific method believes in creationism.

Wrong!! My husband is a PhD biochemist and has taught in graduate school and has also worked in many top science industries. His colleagues say that he is an excellent scientist. He believes in the scientific method and also believes that evolution is a theory that has not been proved and believes in Creationism. If you can believe in the Resurrection, then it is not a leap to believe that God can do anything!!

10 posted on 10/19/2002 9:42:44 AM PDT by AUsome Joy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Shootist; All
Wrong link... right---one!
11 posted on 10/19/2002 10:31:27 AM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: timsmit
> And no one who believes in the scientific method believes in creationism.

A perfectly ridiculous untruth. Discussion terminated.

12 posted on 10/19/2002 1:24:09 PM PDT by T'wit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: timsmit
By definition, no one is a scientist if he does not believe in the scientific method. And no one who believes in the scientific method believes in creationism.

An absolute lie. Guess Newton and Faraday were not scientists?????

13 posted on 10/19/2002 9:33:08 PM PDT by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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