Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Prof to student: Keep the faith, lose the grade
worldnetdaily.com — A community college in New York has been presented with a demand letter from the American Center for Law and Justice to halt a professor's classroom practices that allegedly have damaged at least one student – so far. At issue is a professor's demand that students "change their own personal viewpoints,
rjwusa- 97 diggs
- digg it
- rjwusa, on 04/12/2008, -8/+42Funny, no one is asking the professor to change HIS viewpoints.
- JimmySpaza, on 04/12/2008, -6/+22It is frequently the professors, blinded by their own intellectual arrogance, who need to reevaluate and change their beliefs.
- socialismEVIL, on 04/12/2008, -6/+17Hypocrisy is a one way street in liberalism land
- gmarie624, on 04/12/2008, -5/+18Exactly. Who's 'closed-minded', 'uncritical', and 'blinded by belief' ???
- Taquoshi, on 04/13/2008, -4/+11If the student must change his or her beliefs, then it is not a class, it is an indoctrination.
- herecomes, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4Ahh, a philosophy class. Logic and critical thinking. I can only imagine just how frustrated this professor must be, receiving an endless stream of papers that consist of nothing more than collections of logical fallacies. And giving a poor grade on these papers would, of course, constitute a first amendment violation.
In my first year Philosophy class, we used many religious arguments to illustrate logical fallacies. E.g. "God is omnipotent; God is omniscient; God is benevolent; Evil exists."- animalwheeler, on 04/14/2008, -4/+4But she showed excellent critical thinking before, and it's the professors beliefs that SHE is wrong alone for having a religious belief, even after she had shown good grades before hand. If it is philosophy, the prof should also be open the the fact that God can exist as well; not the total shutout as he exhibits.
- drachemorder, on 04/14/2008, -4/+5Kind of self-defeating, isn't it, to try to use logic to argue against God? Who do you think invented logic in the first place? Made it so that the world works according to rational laws, and then made creatures capable of understanding those laws? When you argue against God you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all.
- MisterFreeze, on 04/14/2008, -1/+3You need to take a first-year Philosophy course, mate. Your statement above is an example of circular reasoning.
- InRussetShadows, on 04/12/2008, -5/+36Looks like the classroom, like the sidewalk, is no longer a place where you can exercise your first amendment rights.
- herecomes, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6Well I'm sure you can't exercise them in a first year Philosophy class if you wish to make a passing grade.
- RagingCacti, on 04/12/2008, -17/+7There has to be a lot more to this story. The article lacks information about what assignment(s) it was that dropped her grade. Maybe she had to write a paper to argue against the existence of a God, but simply refused to instead of fulfilling the assignment and coming to a stronger faith within herself.
- kelly, on 04/12/2008, -3/+22Ya, because there is no such thing as professors who discriminate based on their student's religious principals... right?
- eir574, on 04/12/2008, -9/+5No, because we have no information as of yet on the college's point of view.
- danielttt, on 04/12/2008, -2/+15""No, because we have no information as of yet on the college's point of view. "" I think that rather than worry about a point of view, we should be concerned with the facts. An investigation should already have been launched. If the findings support the assertions of this stellar student, this professor should be fired immediately. Based on what's published to date, it would appear the school's point of view is to hide these facts.
- jp111, on 04/12/2008, -3/+6College's point of view. They should not have a point of view....that's just another word for discrimination or narrow mindedness.
- eir574, on 04/12/2008, -4/+5"If the findings support the assertions of this stellar student, this professor should be fired immediately."
My point is that we don't have those findings. We have the student's point of view. We don't have the professor's response. Are you saying that you want to fire him without giving him a chance to defend himself? Ridiculous. - lydecker, on 04/13/2008, -3/+5He's saying we need to find the facts. In order to find those, we need to listen to both statements and fint what is true.
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -2/+5If this girl were at fault, I doubt seriously she would have filed a complaint or that the well-respected ACLJ would have taken her case.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -4/+3You doubt that someone who is at fault would make an accusation? No, that never happens.
- Nannybell, on 04/12/2008, -5/+1...
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -3/+9E, the ACLJ most likely would not go public with this until they had investigated it. They are a well-known organization. They've argued before the Supreme Court. Their website says this about the case: "Gina’s online class discussions with her professor and fellow students demonstrate her knowledge of the material and ability to provide a reasoned defense of her positions. She has participated in every discussion, read all assigned materials, and completed every assignment. Gina has studied and discussed various philosophical arguments on whether God exists and whether He possesses certain characteristics such as being all-knowing or all-present. However, Gina will not state that she personally believes that the idea of God is problematic or that she needs to reconsider her sincerely held religious beliefs. On the course’s online message board, the professor has called Gina “closed-minded,” “uncritical,” “hurtful,” and “blinded by belief” simply because she will not adopt his way of thinking." http://www.aclj.org/TrialNotebook/Read.aspx?id=605
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -3/+4No matter how respectable the ACLJ is, the professor is entitled to defend himself. We still only have the student's side of the story. We haven't seen the assignment. We don't convict people or find against them in a court of law without hearing their side of the story, and we should recognize here that there's another side of the story. It might very well be the case that the professor is way out of line. The quotes from the message board are disturbing, but so far it's only hearsay. I haven't seen the message board, and I haven't seen the full context of the quotes. It's not as if anyone ever misinterprets what people say on digg as personal attacks when they weren't meant that way, right?
I just don't understand why people here are so quick to condemn the professor and to dismiss the possibility that he might have something reasonable to say for himself. It's wrong. - lydecker, on 04/13/2008, -4/+4People were also very quick to condemn the school and the latino boys and girls for attacking that one girl, without hearing the school side or the 21 accused kids' side of the story.
http://digg.com/world_news/TEEN_VIOLENTLY_ATTACKED ...
Basically, people online go on the information they have. And sadly, they'll use it to justify whatever cause they want... as in "This is evidence of anti-white hatred!" ...when the whole thing turns out to be a lie, they shrug it off, but won't change the premise - ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -0/+8WAIT A MINUTE!!! OK! This is an age where, because of the Privacy Act, a student's grades cannot even be posted with his or her social security number. Yet it is OK for a professor to call a student names on some kind of academic forum. Something is wrong here. And, as you know, I am not exactly a knee jerk conservative.
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -2/+6Thank you, TW, that you see something wrong with a supposedly *mature* professor going on a public forum and calling one of his students names. Now, if the rest of the liberals here would just sit with that awhile.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -3/+4No matter how respectable the ACLJ is, the professor is entitled to defend himself. We still only have the student's side of the story. We haven't seen the assignment. We don't convict people or find against them in a court of law without hearing their side of the story, and we should recognize here that there's another side of the story. It might very well be the case that the professor is way out of line. The quotes from the message board are disturbing, but so far it's only hearsay. I haven't seen the message board, and I haven't seen the full context of the quotes. It's not as if anyone ever misinterprets what people say on digg as personal attacks when they weren't meant that way, right?
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -3/+4E: It's not just that I am going along with what WND had to say on the matter. I also read what the ACLJ had to say about it. Did you visit the link I gave you? I frequently use WND as a source for learning about the existence of an issue, but then I frequently check the issue out elsewhere. Unless the ACLJ is misreporting the story (and I simply do not believe that), this girl has maintained a 3.9 GPA and has had no other problems. Nor did she have a problem in this class until she revealed her Christian beliefs.
I have told you before that there is persecution of conservative Christians going on in America, generally by far-left liberals like this professor. It exists and is increasing. You aren't on the receiving end, and frankly you are not pro-Christian, so perhaps you just don't know about it since it doesn't affect your life.
I would like to ask you a direct question: What is your own attitude toward conservative Christianity? What is your gut-level response to conservative Christians?
L: Jesus stated very clearly that His followers would be persecuted by the unbelieving world. He said that the unbelieving world would hate us because it hates Him. Is the unbelieving world hard on you because of your faith, or do you find yourself getting along fairly well with it? If unbelievers don't have a problem with your faith, could it be because you too much resemble them? This new *Jesus* that liberals are presenting is all love all the time, and never just and never condemning. The world has no problem with that distorted view of Jesus because they never have to be told that anything they are doing is wrong or that they need a Savior or that there is a hell where they will spend eternity.- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4I did read the link. It's still only the student's side of the story. No matter how many sources tell that story, we still don't have the professor's defense. Let's say you're right that Christians are being persecuted. That still has no bearing on whether the professor deserves to defend himself before being judged guilty in our minds. It may make you think that it's more likely that the story is true, but we should still give the professor a chance to defend himself. I'm not accusing the ACLJ of misrepresenting the story, but it does sound like they haven't heard back from the school yet.
You asked about my attitude towards conservative Christianity and what my gut level response is to conservative Christians. A few of my friends are conservative Christians. One teaches at a private Christian high school. Another works for homeland security and wants to get involved in local politics. Others are scientists. I don't have a problem with anyone else's values, so long as their actions don't infringe on another person's rights. I do have a problem with people who think that anyone who doesn't share their values is in some way deficient, and I have a problem with people who jump to conclusions about others based on stereotypes without knowing anything about them. There are people from all walks of life who do that, not just Christians. People jump to conclusions based on hearing one side of the story. It's easy to vilify people after being told that they've done something wrong. Society does it all the time. It's harder to say that no matter how much we trust the source and no matter how terrible the accusation is, we should reserve judgement until we hear the accused defend himself. As lydecker pointed out, didn't this just happen the other day on digg with the story about the girl who said she was attacked? Didn't it happen a couple of years ago at Duke? It's far too easy in this society to discredit someone. I wouldn't want to be judged based solely on the words of someone who felt I'd done something wrong to him or her, and I try not to do it to anyone else, either. I'm sure I fail at that from time to time. However, I'm shocked that people here feel that I'm saying something wrong when I make that point.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4I did read the link. It's still only the student's side of the story. No matter how many sources tell that story, we still don't have the professor's defense. Let's say you're right that Christians are being persecuted. That still has no bearing on whether the professor deserves to defend himself before being judged guilty in our minds. It may make you think that it's more likely that the story is true, but we should still give the professor a chance to defend himself. I'm not accusing the ACLJ of misrepresenting the story, but it does sound like they haven't heard back from the school yet.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -2/+4It's amazing that Raging Cacti's comment was dug down. He or she is simply asking to see all the facts. What is it about this that is troublesome? Remember, WND was the "news source" that aired all the nonsense about Barack Obama having oral sex in the back of a limo with some nut case whom they (WND) treated as legitimate. There is nothing wrong with questioning sources, unless you already have determined what you are willing to believe.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4ThoughtfulWI,
Thank you for saying that. I've been saying the same thing and have been getting dug down for it. It's very possible that this professor was out of line and should be fired. However, how many times do we need to learn the lesson that we shouldn't convict someone in our minds when we have only one side of the story? One aspect of our society that scares me is that a person's career or life can be ruined by being falsely accused. I'm not even saying that I think the student is making a false accusation. I'm just saying that we shouldn't judge the accusation to be true or false yet. It's not as if human beings understand one another perfectly in all situations. Maybe she believes she's telling her story objectively, but she's misinterpreted the professor's intentions. Maybe the words and phrases taken from the class message board are out of context. I'm not sure what context could make them sound better, but I'd still like to see it.
P.S. Thanks to the other people who are considering that there may be more to this story. - these3remain, on 04/13/2008, -2/+5There remains to be heard the professor's side of this story. But it is unconscionable that he requires his students to sign a statement renouncing their beliefs at the beginning of the course. It would be like requiring atheists to sign a statement professing belief in God as part of a course. I've been waiting to hear some response from this prof - he's been amazingly silent. I would also point out that the ACLJ is not only extremely reputable, they also represent the cases they take on pro-bono. It would not make much sense for them to simply take the word of a student without doing some fact-checking first before undertaking her case for free.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -2/+3As I mentioned in another comment, we haven't seen that statement yet. We've only heard what one person has had to say abut it. We don't know that it says something as direct as "Sign here to indicate that you renounce your belief in god."
It's not clear from this article or from the ACLJ website how much time has passed since the ACLJ sent the school their letter. The school is almost certainly formulating a response, and could be requiring the professor to refrain from commenting publicly for the time being. I don't like the idea of taking his silence as any kind of indication that he's guilty. - eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+2An addendum: The WND article is dated April 11. The web page on which the ACLJ describes the case is dated April 10. Too little time has passed to use the professor's silence as evidence for his guilt.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -2/+3As I mentioned in another comment, we haven't seen that statement yet. We've only heard what one person has had to say abut it. We don't know that it says something as direct as "Sign here to indicate that you renounce your belief in god."
- danielttt, on 04/12/2008, -2/+15""No, because we have no information as of yet on the college's point of view. "" I think that rather than worry about a point of view, we should be concerned with the facts. An investigation should already have been launched. If the findings support the assertions of this stellar student, this professor should be fired immediately. Based on what's published to date, it would appear the school's point of view is to hide these facts.
- eir574, on 04/12/2008, -9/+5No, because we have no information as of yet on the college's point of view.
- MarilynBr, on 04/12/2008, -3/+17To require her to write such a paper would be inappropriate. I would refuse to do it also.
- ROaks, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4Marilyn, that is my point of view. Making an assignment of this nature is asinine.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -2/+1Inappropriate, asinine, pointless, illegal, etc. are all very different issues and it's important to differentiate when talking about issues such as these.
- ROaks, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4Marilyn, that is my point of view. Making an assignment of this nature is asinine.
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -4/+13That is a possibility I hadn't considered. To be successful in debate you must understand their point of view. It is common in debate that you are required to argue from the opposing party's point of view in order to be able to successfully challenge that point of view. However, if that were the case the lawyers probably would have refused the case. Most lawyers won't take a case they don't feel they have a good chance of winning. Also, this is a philosophy class, not a debate class. She should be able to express her own philosophical points of view. Refusing to denounce her own belief system does not make her a better philosopher, it only makes her a better follower.
- postingbh, on 04/12/2008, -11/+5"Refusing to denounce her own belief system does not make her a better philosopher, it only makes her a better follower."
- The professor didn't ask her to "denounce her own belief system," but rather "state that [she is] unsure of whether [her] own personal beliefs are correct." There is a big difference.- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -2/+14To state that she is unsure of whether her own personal beliefs are correct would be to denounce her own belief system. To change from I know to maybe. Also, it would be a lie.
- postingbh, on 04/12/2008, -9/+4I disagree on the basis that equating the two creates a situation where anything can be trivially be dismissed as going against someone's personal beliefs. To reject the mere possibility that you are wrong is to say that no matter how strong the other argument, no matter how much evidence supports another idea, no matter how weak your own argument, you cannot be convinced. It essentially undermines the entire process of learning, be it formal education or not. It's not just an issue of one philosophy class, but rather our entire approach to learning. To learn, you need to accept the possibility that your current understanding is flawed.
- e2thexyz, on 04/12/2008, -4/+6You seem to be putting demands and restrictions on only one side. So regarding the view of origins taught in public schools:
There is no evidence for evolution. Not only is there no evidence FOR it, it is overwhelmingly evident to any thinking person that intelligence was necessary for life on earth just because of the mind-boggling complexity of it all.
Now will you call on public school teachers, and "scientists" who blindly follow Darwinism, to admit their argument is weak, and accept the possibility that their "current understanding is flawed?" - eir574, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7e2thexyz,
I have never heard a teacher or scientist claim that the theory of evolution is completely correct and that it will never be modified. That evolution occurs on some level by some mechanism is fact, and most creationists recognize that (it's what they call microevolution). The mechanism by which evolution occurs is theory, and no reasonable person is claiming that it is a complete, unchanging, infallible theory. That's how science works -- nothing's ever proven beyond all doubt. We deal in uncertainties and probabilities. - Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -4/+5P, no, a student doesn't need to accept anything whatsoever. We live in a free society. That professor has no right to mess wtih the minds of his students. There is something chilling in that suggestion. She doesn't have to admit anything. He is there to teach her philosophy, period. But it appears he goes way beyond that in his methods and is possibly unstable himself. I find the whole thing beyond chilling.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+6I find it chilling that we apparently don't need to hear from the accused before convicting him in our minds. This isn't exactly the first time this has happened. Whenever there's an emotionally charged issue, we tend to vilify the alleged offender without considering his or her side of the story. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that this phenomenon is limited to any one religion or region of the political spectrum. Most people do it, and we should encourage ourselves to rise above it. There are a few posts here that suggest that there may be more to this story than meets the eye, but most people are calling for the professor's head.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -0/+6It is especially important to hear both viewpoints when the story comes from WND. But I will not rule out the possibility that this Prof. is an arrogant twit. And I am still amazed he is allowed to attack a student on an internet forum, or am I misunderstanding something?
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+7ThoughtfulWI,
If he attacked a student on an internet forum, I hope that he broke university regulations in doing so and will be disciplined or fired. But, I'll withhold judgement until I see the full context of those quotes, not just individual words taken out of context. Apparently, not everyone agrees with me, as I'm being dugg down in every post where I state that we shouldn't convict this professor in our minds until we hear his side of the story. Mob mentality scares me. - Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -4/+4Oh, E, there is no mob mentality going on. You are seeing a reaction to yet another liberal professor making life hard for a Christian student. It goes on all the time. Do some research and find out about it.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+6Nanny: How hard is it to understand that there's another side of this story? It may very well be that the professor is totally in the wrong here. I don't discount that, and I think there are definitely professors and teachers out their who let their authority go to their heads. Again, I still think he deserves a chance to defend himself, as did the people who were accused of attacking that student in a much commented on story the other day on digg. People jump on the bandwagon and vilify other people too easily these days. That's what I mean by mob mentality.
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -4/+3The mob mentality you speak of works both ways. I am concerned you possibly don't see that. However, yes, there may be another side. Maybe he has been falsely accused. Maybe the girl misunderstood him. Maybe she behaved horribly. Maybe the entire story has been misrepresented. BUT, I have a great deal of confidence in the judgment of the ACLJ. This story is posted on their website. I don't believe they would have run with it without doing a lot of investigation first. So, let's wait and see. Additional details probably will be forthcoming.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -1/+5I specifically said in at least one other post that people from all walks of life are too quick to judge others. I don't think it's just a Christian problem.
The ACLJ web page says that they've contacted the school, but does not say that they've gotten a response. The last sentence says that they'll provide more details as the situation develops. It sounds to me that this is in a fairly early stage. The student has told her story, the ACLJ has perhaps perused the message board she mentioned, and it's not at all clear that anything else has happened. Meanwhile, the ACLJ puts words in the professor's mouth:
"Rather, the professor believes that it is his job to get students to change their own personal viewpoints or state that they are unsure of whether their own personal beliefs are correct."
Of course, the people at the ACLJ are not journalists. Once they take a case, their job is to represent their client vigorously. That sentence I quoted smacks of one sidedness. It's fine for the ACLJ to say that, but I look at it and think that they probably can't read the professor's mind. - Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -1/+2Perhaps the professor has stated that attitude orally and/or in writing. Let's wait and see what happens. If this is one-sided, that will come out.
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -2/+14To state that she is unsure of whether her own personal beliefs are correct would be to denounce her own belief system. To change from I know to maybe. Also, it would be a lie.
- postingbh, on 04/12/2008, -11/+5"Refusing to denounce her own belief system does not make her a better philosopher, it only makes her a better follower."
- danielttt, on 04/12/2008, -3/+13Your attitude is to blame the student. Read the story. She has a 3.9 GPA with 2 years into this school. She's obviously not a slacker. With or without the first amendment, for a professor to ask a student to postulate an antithetical paper to her religiously held faith structure is unprofessional. It's incredibly insensitive and mean.. It demonstrates his cowardly (where is his name) own unyielding belief system and indicates he is not mature enough to hold his position. It appears you also hold the professor's views and are totally sympathetic to this treatment.
- eir574, on 04/12/2008, -3/+7Yes. Let's gang up on him before he's told his side of the story. Let's not ask to see the written assignment and the student's paper. Let's not ask him to recount his version of the events so that we can decide if he's credible. While we're at it, why do we let criminals who are so obviously guilty put on a defense in court? Shouldn't they just remain silent while the prosecutors present their case?
- DOGODSWILL, on 04/12/2008, -4/+0You must be another ANTI-CHRIST ATHEIST---------Believe it are not , our CHRISTIAN PRAYERS go up for you. It's people like you that protect these SICK PROF.'S.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -1/+2You also forgot to call him a [m00k]. Please correct and resubmit comment.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2Again I ask, what is a [m00k] ?
- lydecker, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2Urban Dictionary it.
"Inscrutibly incapable person.
Someone who seems unable to understand/do the simplest of things."
- lydecker, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2Urban Dictionary it.
- kelly, on 04/12/2008, -3/+22Ya, because there is no such thing as professors who discriminate based on their student's religious principals... right?
- kelly, on 04/12/2008, -5/+25"a student who has been punished with lower grades and has been labeled "closed-minded" by a professor"
Ya, because this professor seems so open to other ideas.- judyco, on 04/12/2008, -5/+7This whole college scene scares me, I don't see who any parent would want to spend money to send their children out to be brainwashed. My granddaughter's first year at college, she was just 17, was a disaster. She choose not to go back. The first night there, a professor slept with her roommate; then she had classes on the "myths of marijuana" and it went down hill from there. Her roommate was bi-sexual and if she didn't get in her room at night early, she was likely to find someone else sleeping in her bed. My granddaughter thought at first it was just a big party all the time.
- herecomes, on 04/14/2008, -2/+4Wow, an institution that teaches you to question assumptions, think for yourself, and use empirical methods to discover truths is "brainwashing". Sounds like someone has been brainwashed.
And all that disgusting fornication going on, that does sound terrifying... I don't want to appear hysterical, but it really sounds like the end of times are upon us.
- herecomes, on 04/14/2008, -2/+4Wow, an institution that teaches you to question assumptions, think for yourself, and use empirical methods to discover truths is "brainwashing". Sounds like someone has been brainwashed.
- judyco, on 04/12/2008, -5/+7This whole college scene scares me, I don't see who any parent would want to spend money to send their children out to be brainwashed. My granddaughter's first year at college, she was just 17, was a disaster. She choose not to go back. The first night there, a professor slept with her roommate; then she had classes on the "myths of marijuana" and it went down hill from there. Her roommate was bi-sexual and if she didn't get in her room at night early, she was likely to find someone else sleeping in her bed. My granddaughter thought at first it was just a big party all the time.
- hugothecommie, on 04/12/2008, -11/+4Oh now come on, everyone knows that it is only conservatives that try to push there beliefs down every one Else's throats.
- skydebbie, on 04/12/2008, -5/+13Liberals are shoving a whole boat load of garbage down the throats of everyone. Humanistic beliefs, environmentalism, global warming and gay life style manure are just the ones off the top of my mind. Christians persuade with love, Liberals force theirs with violence or 'the laws' that they sneak into being behind so many smoke screens of "tolerance'. Socialism hasn't worked out too well truly anywhere, but that hasn't stopped Socialists from slowly implementing their practices and beliefs into the fabric of the world and more impoertantly the USA.
- JimmySpaza, on 04/12/2008, -2/+11You forgot the /sarcasm tag, right? Right?
- jp111, on 04/12/2008, -2/+8Right, like abortion in all its sick forms, state monitored speech, overburdensome taxation, anti Christian and Jewish philosophy, forced gay teachings and acceptance, pro ILLEGAL immigration being good, steal from the have for the have nots, redistribution of others property, pro other religion (Moozlim) anti US Constitution, global warming garbage (control). Yep, they even pushed the light bulb restriction in favor of mercury mandates. Yep the conservatives really force that down our throats, don't they.
- DOGODSWILL, on 04/12/2008, -5/+1YOU must be either a LIBERAL , MUSLIM, ATHEIST, or a FAGOT , (or worse yet , all four combined). I say this because none of you can back a single issue you comment on , with SCRIPTURE of the HOLY BIBLE . As a lawyer once said , HE could argue a case with 10 wise men -------but you can't argue with even one FOOL.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -0/+4DOGOD! Step AWAY from the crack pipe!
- lydecker, on 04/13/2008, -0/+4I didn't think you could be an atheist and a muslim.... hm, maybe somehow.
- DOGODSWILL, on 04/13/2008, -4/+1Speak and show your BIBICAL IGNORANTS again. This is why you can't discuse any topic with someone that is ignorant of the facts being disccused .Your kind are always wanting to argue with the TRUTH , with out the TRUTH to support your arguement. (example) Neither, a MUSLIMS or ATHEIST believe in JESUS CHRIST , and it takes a true BORNED AGAIN CHRISTIAN to under stand this . --------------like wise your kind can't understand the difference in CHRISTIANITY and religion .
- alkajazz, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4"Neither, a MUSLIMS or ATHEIST believe in JESUS CHRIST" Both of us believe he at least existed. Now the miracles on the other hand. That's another story.
- herecomes, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3The funny thing about fundamentalists is that they're so insane you can never tell if people like DOGODSWILL is one of them or making fun of them.
- animalwheeler, on 04/14/2008, -1/+3I assumed it was in sarcasm, since it started with "Oh come on now..."
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -2/+22I worry a great deal about what will be available for higher education when my own children graduate from High School. Your personal beliefs should not effect your ability to study for a career. I'm willing to bet this girl is not studying to become a professional philosopher. For such a ridiculous class stand in the way of graduating is a travesty. The school should be educating, not brainwashing.
- drachemorder, on 04/13/2008, -1/+8I think a lot depends on your field of study. I never had any significant trouble with anti-Christian viewpoints, but I studied computer engineering. I did not have to take many classes that even presented the opportunity for anti-Christian viewpoints. A lot depends, too, on where you go to college --- I went to Mississippi State, which is in one of the most conservative areas in the nation, and thus there was a lot of support for Christians.
- flip2trip, on 04/12/2008, -2/+22The cancer of liberalism has been in the classroom at college campuses for a long time and will continue to spread because those in academia live in a closed society. The continual inbreeding of ideas has produced mutated thinking and removed reasoned thought processes. Common sense and mutual respect are only afforded to those who are like-minded and any reference to God merely points to your stupidity and lack of understanding.
- LifeguardMom, on 04/12/2008, -2/+23My daughter took an Interdisciplinary Studies class at our local college. The mid-term exam was all about the professor's personal viewpoints, not on anything educational. She had to choose between getting a good grade and standing up for her morals and ideals. She stood up for her beliefs and got a C on the mid-term. She did get a B in the class overall, but she wrote a letter of complaint to the department because she felt it was wrong to grade someone on the professor's opinions. Needless to say she never heard from the school on this.
Our local college is one of the best in California. However, it is hostile to Christians and conservatives, as most colleges are. My kids hate the fact that the majority of their professors think they are stupid because they are Christians. Unfortunately, I have to tell them that this is the way of the world. They hate Jesus, so therefore they will hate you as well.
So much for freedom of speech and freedom to worship.- alkajazz, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1"Our local college is one of the best in California. However, it is hostile to Christians and conservatives, as most colleges are. My kids hate the fact that the majority of their professors think they are stupid because they are Christians. Unfortunately, I have to tell them that this is the way of the world. They hate Jesus, so therefore they will hate you as well." Maybe because faith is the rejection of evidence? I really don't see how you're surprised by that. "When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data." - Henry Morris
- VinBea, on 04/12/2008, -1/+15the PRO-fes-SOR obviously hates Jesus resident in this student - which isn't a hate-crime, because hate-crimes have nothing to do with what's correct; rather what's political - which only has relevance within a society who's political ruling elites ( the GW Bushes, Hillary Clintons, John McCains, B. ""Heissan"" OBamas of the nation) are collectively foisting upon the masses (that's you and me folks) a secular-humanistic-democracy, steeped in relativism, in which the mob-rule creates the chaos these self same ruling elites must have so as to then get the same mob-rule to sign off on, or example: Bill Clinton, among others, suggesting that many more police officers are needed to help police the society ruled by the mob -- the whole 'bucket' being dropped into the deep of communism as Marx claimed a Democracy is in relationship to the progression into communism.
We're suppose to be a Constitutional Republic; so which serves the purpose more toward big centralized government: pushing global democracy as being all about peace and security - or a Constitutional Republic in which the mob via moral absolutes, with a conscious are required to police themselves so the government doesn't have to? - skydebbie, on 04/12/2008, -1/+12This so reminds me of the movie, The Gathering, where one of the segments is the professor persecuting Christian beliefs in her class, wanting 'academic' freedom, and being shown to be the good states-person by turning in any rogue leftover Christians after the Rapture, to be tortured, to persuade them to forget Jesus, or executed.
- jp111, on 04/12/2008, -3/+1So, you're saying Beam me up Scotty is the only truth!
- kemojr, on 04/12/2008, -1/+19I experienced some of this guff in the 1960's. Some of these professors think that freedom of expression is reserved only for their exalted posteriors. Good for this young woman and the people that are defending her.
- downs1, on 04/12/2008, -1/+17The professor is the one who is close-minded to truth. He (or she) thinks he is above it all, and that his belief is the one his students should/must espouse. Not only that, but he is being paid, at least in part, by the tuition that his students pay. To turn around and say that any student who doesn't essentially deny the existence of God will not graduate is the height of arrogance and is essentially extortion. This fool needs to be removed from teaching because he can utterly destroy lives. But, you know that won't happen because he is probably tenured. That means he can say anything, do anything, profess anything and he is "safe" in academia. In his mind, he is climbing the ladder of academic success; however, one day he will find that he leaned his ladder against the wrong wall!
- JimmySpaza, on 04/12/2008, -2/+16One thing is for sure...almost every liberal professor hates...HATES to be questioned and critiqued. There is an intellectual arrogance among them, especially the atheistic and agnostic ones, which is astounding and shocking to those who first experience it.
I've met only one leftist professor who encouraged independent thought regardless of political and theological views. Just one. I actually enjoyed his class more so than any other.
The rest of the liberals...pfftt...debate them at will. You will find it easy to make them look like hypocrites and fools 75% of the time. The rest of the time you will have a good healthy debate on your hands.- BlackBob, on 04/12/2008, -8/+3You sound pretty hostile towards professors. Couldn't cut it in college, could you?
- herkimer65, on 04/12/2008, -1/+14She should have told her professor she was a muslim. That seems to be the only religion that is allowed to be taught in schools these days.
- Kent4jmj, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2Common ground??? Wow that's like the third time in six months. :o)
- JWNimrod, on 04/12/2008, -1/+7I hope they sue this communist right out of existence.
- Kent4jmj, on 04/12/2008, -2/+18TOWARD TOTALITARIANISM
In a talk given by Fr. Joseph Esper, he outlines the stages of persecution:
Experts agree that five stages of a coming persecution can be identified:
(1) The targeted group is stigmatized; its reputation is attacked, possibly by mocking it and rejecting its values.
(2) Then the group is marginalized, or pushed out of the mainstream of society, with deliberate efforts to limit and undo its influence.
(3) The third stage is to vilify the group, viciously attacking it and blaming it for many of society’s problems.
(4) Next, the group is criminalized, with increasing restrictions placed on its activities and eventually even its existence.
(5) The final stage is one of outright persecution.
Many commentators believe the United States is now in stage three, and moving into stage four. —www.stedwardonthelake.com- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -1/+12Wow. I never read that before. Thanks for the post. That is exactly what is going on.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -4/+3What is the group you reference? Surely it's not Christians seeing as every presidential candidate is Christian, about 99% of our politicians are Christian, and the large majority of citizens are Christian. So what group are you referring to?
- RustyG, on 04/12/2008, -2/+8The leftists (call them Marxist, Socialist, Communists, Fasciasts, Nazi, Liberals,et al have long dominated the educational field and are all anti-God. Their ascendence in this field is no accident as they hire and promote only those of their own persuasion. American parents: wake up! You are paying out your hard-earned money to these so-call educators to turn your sons and daughters into anti-religious, anti-capitalist, politically correct, left-wing haters of their own birthright.
- nippinawassee, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5this sure got way off track... question 1: where is the ACLU if this prof. is teaching religion (or there is NO religion)? religion is religion and if this was a class wherein a student complained about religion being used for a grade, the ACLU would be on it like a hawk on a chicken. is it because the prof. is a member of the ACLU? Said it before and will again: parents need to instill their beliefs, religion, morals, etc., into their children before they come into the talons of the public school system.
the one thing that is also very helpful is teaching your children that some teachers are there because they can't get a job - they are going to state things that go against what WE have taught you - rather than rebutt them in front of the class, which if not applauded, does cause concern for the prof./teacher because the fear of the entire class realizing he/she is a total jerk, they use the grades to threaten the child who speaks out. Now, this is what you teach them - they must become a member of the ONIS or the NIU clubs - "Oh, NOW I see!" or the "Now I understand!" clubs. Stating these two simple phrases, accompanied by a smile of understanding, will get your higher grade - and trust me, the dumbass teacher(s) will never catch on - they will be so thrilled to see that they have ENLIGHTENED one more student and the student's comment will be an applaud to his/her ego... simple. If they were as SMART as they think they are, they would never ever get into a contest of wills where an individual's choice of religion is concerned BUT! that's the point - they aren't! They are so focused on forcing their will and belief on the students, particularly the bright ones who speak up when they disagree that they don't realize they are setting themselves up bigtime. Get the grades you want by being smarter - don't enter into any discussion/argument with anyone who at that time has control over your future... Be smarter than the prof which isn't difficult (with this kind of individual in this article) - spread your beliefs among people who do not have your future in their hands... and again, where is the ACLU? Religion is being discussed in a public college? Oh I forget again - it's OK for their people to argue against God and religion, right?- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2Now I Understand (out loud)...that you're a bigoted, left-wing, totalitarian jerk with a closed mind that cannot even handle the thought that someone might not agree with you (silently). That's how it's done, right? I see your point. When it comes to class discussion I find it very difficult not to participate honestly and share my beliefs. When honest discussion takes place I've found that sometimes by the end of the discussion I've changed my viewpoint. When those discussion of been based on my personal religious beliefs they have caused me to question my beliefs, which has caused me to then research the points that have been brought up. I end up with a deeper understanding of my own belief system and stronger faith. I think religion should be discussed openly in colleges and universities...I am not afraid of having my beliefs challenged or of sharing my beliefs with others. We shouldn't be graded on whether, at the end of the discussion, we share the professors beliefs. It is this kind of professor which makes your plan necessary for so many young people seeking to move on to a professional career.
- nippinawassee, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3Welll, goooood for you!
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2Now I Understand (out loud)...that you're a bigoted, left-wing, totalitarian jerk with a closed mind that cannot even handle the thought that someone might not agree with you (silently). That's how it's done, right? I see your point. When it comes to class discussion I find it very difficult not to participate honestly and share my beliefs. When honest discussion takes place I've found that sometimes by the end of the discussion I've changed my viewpoint. When those discussion of been based on my personal religious beliefs they have caused me to question my beliefs, which has caused me to then research the points that have been brought up. I end up with a deeper understanding of my own belief system and stronger faith. I think religion should be discussed openly in colleges and universities...I am not afraid of having my beliefs challenged or of sharing my beliefs with others. We shouldn't be graded on whether, at the end of the discussion, we share the professors beliefs. It is this kind of professor which makes your plan necessary for so many young people seeking to move on to a professional career.
- Harvester1, on 04/12/2008, -2/+12This is not just a freedom of speech issue, it's a freedom of thought issue. I know Jesus is Lord in the same way I know I must breathe in and out in order to get the oxygen my body needs to survive. What words come out of our mouths will be reflected in our hearts and minds, which is why the enemy has chosen our high school and college campuses in which to wreak havoc. We need to pray a hedge of protection and discernment around this girl and others who share her faith, and we need to quit shelling out money to institutions determined to condemn our young people to separation from God.
- these3remain, on 04/12/2008, -2/+10My understanding of this issue is that all the students in this class were told they must sign a statement at the beginning of the class renouncing their beliefs or at least questioning their beliefs. How can a professor demand something like this if the student does NOT question their beliefs but is firm in knowing what they believe and why. Just another attempt to strip away the rights of Christians within the public indoctrination system. If you want to sign the petition that the ACLJ is sponsoring, you may find it here: https://www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?SC=3341 ...
- socialismEVIL, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9Open mindedness is NOT the same as accepting as true everything that comes into it. That's gullibility.
- socialismEVIL, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Could it be this man?
Zachary Starr
http://ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=81 ...
He needs MUCH more feedback!!! Come on, socialismEVIL nation- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3If that's him, the feedback he has received from his students on that site is pretty bad.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3Yes it is, but that could be for more than one reason. I checked out his course outline, and he is very strict and "old school" in his approach. This does not always go over well with today's students. I have taught college courses in which students felt singularly abused, because I would not allow them to chew gum in class, and I too held to an absence and tardiness policy. It would be useful to hear the other side of this story.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -2/+4I once looked up some of my professors either on that site or on a similar one. Almost inevitably, it was the people who were upset who took the time to post comments. Like your students, they felt they were wronged by things like strict grading policies, long reading assignments that had to be completed in a short period of time, too much homework, etc. They were the majority of students who posted ratings on that site, but were the minority of students in the class.
I particularly like this comment on the professor's page: "He despreatly needs to retire. His take home tests are damn near impossible." Oh, too bad. I had more than a few of those in college, too. Getting anywhere on them was a victory. - these3remain, on 04/13/2008, -1/+2There are always 2 sides to every story; agreed. There does seem to be some consistent feedback regarding this teacher's verbal abuse toward those who believe in God, though - and that is what this lawsuit is about. This prof demands that students sign this statement before he will give a final grade for the course. It's just not right no matter what you believe.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -3/+2I still haven't seen that actual statement. I'd like to see it before accepting that someone else's interpretation is fact. It may very well be that the professor is directing verbal abuse at people who believe in god, though it could also be that he's saying something that's been interpreted as abuse, but isn't necessarily intended that way or interpreted that way by everyone.
Also, we still don't know that socialismEVIL found the right professor. I know you said in another comment that it has to be him because he teaches philosophy (along with about a dozen others at the school -- I checked) and because other students have said that they've had problems in his class when god comes up. It's still not necessarily him, though.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -3/+2I still haven't seen that actual statement. I'd like to see it before accepting that someone else's interpretation is fact. It may very well be that the professor is directing verbal abuse at people who believe in god, though it could also be that he's saying something that's been interpreted as abuse, but isn't necessarily intended that way or interpreted that way by everyone.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -2/+4I once looked up some of my professors either on that site or on a similar one. Almost inevitably, it was the people who were upset who took the time to post comments. Like your students, they felt they were wronged by things like strict grading policies, long reading assignments that had to be completed in a short period of time, too much homework, etc. They were the majority of students who posted ratings on that site, but were the minority of students in the class.
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3Yes it is, but that could be for more than one reason. I checked out his course outline, and he is very strict and "old school" in his approach. This does not always go over well with today's students. I have taught college courses in which students felt singularly abused, because I would not allow them to chew gum in class, and I too held to an absence and tardiness policy. It would be useful to hear the other side of this story.
- these3remain, on 04/13/2008, -1/+4Must be him - it's a philosophy prof and his feedback reflects a "lack of love" for those who believe in God. Need to pray for this man.
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3If that's him, the feedback he has received from his students on that site is pretty bad.
- jp111, on 04/12/2008, -3/+7These are the people that know evolution is an absolute fact.....they just cannot prove it. Ironic.
- chickenbig, on 04/12/2008, -2/+8The only thing these idiot professors understand are lawsuits. She should get a good lawyer and hit him as hard as she can in the pocketbook. I can guarantee he will think twice about pulling such a stupid stunt in the future.
- freeman997, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5While I don't have much use for muslims, where are they when we need them? A couple of you immams, go take this class. I want to watch what happens when the broad-minded 'professor' starts attacking their beliefs and demanding they change.
- SamMcPhy, on 04/12/2008, -3/+7The ACLJ should demand DAMAGES for this student (or help this student with a civil damages suit). It's time illegal anti-christian behavior costs the perpetrator/s just the same way the ACLU extracts damages when homosexual or minority rights are violated.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2To get damages you need to show that you suffered an actual loss. There is absolutely no basis for awarding damages here.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -0/+4There might be a basis for damages if the student can't graduate because she fails the course.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3Gina would at least need to fail the course before damages were considered. At this point however, there is no basis for damages.
The troubling part is that people are jumping to so many conclusions about the professor's intent and what the consequences (like damages) should be before even hearing the evidence. The ACLJ has been pretty vague in their accusations. First, the ACLJ claims that passing is "contingent upon a student’s willingness to express agreement with philosophical viewpoints that conflict with her religious beliefs," which I read as being fairly black and white given their use of "contingent." But then the ACLJ says Gina has received a variety of grades and feedback in the course, which do not indicate any such contingencies. The ACLJ even makes extraordinary claims about the professor's intent, saying such thing as, "the professor labeled her 'closed-minded,' 'uncritical,' 'hurtful,' and 'blinded by belief' simply because she did not adopt his way of thinking."
While the ACLJ is quick to make such claims and even organize a national protest, the ACLJ hasn't provided any evidence to support their claims. In short, I think everyone is jumping the gun a little bit and is far too quick to call themselves a martyr.
http://www.google.com/search?q="suffolk+county"+site:aclj.org- eir574, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2I agree with everything you said in this post, and I meant my previous statement to be conditional on whether she actually fails the course (or receives an undeserved grade low enough to damage her GPA, which could in turn hurt her in a job search). It's possible to set up a grading policy in the class where Gina could have done well throughout the course, and could still fail for failing to complete all requirements, assuming that agreeing with this statement we haven't yet seen is truly a course requirement.
I've been saying all over this page that too many people are jumping to conclusions without waiting for the professor to defend himself. We haven't seen or heard the statement the students were supposed to agree to. We've seen some disturbing quotes from the class message board, but they're a few words here and there taken out of context. I've been dug down all over the place for saying it. It's really quite disturbing to me. One person even agreed that we should hear the other side of the story, but said that the professor's silence so far may say something as well. The ACLJ web page is dated April 10, and it's only April 13. They threatened legal action, then the professor may not be able to say anything publicly until the school comes up with a formal response. The ACLJ's own deadline of April 14 hasn't even passed, not that they've given the school much time to respond (assuming the letter was sent around the time the ACLJ posted information on their web site).
- eir574, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2I agree with everything you said in this post, and I meant my previous statement to be conditional on whether she actually fails the course (or receives an undeserved grade low enough to damage her GPA, which could in turn hurt her in a job search). It's possible to set up a grading policy in the class where Gina could have done well throughout the course, and could still fail for failing to complete all requirements, assuming that agreeing with this statement we haven't yet seen is truly a course requirement.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3Gina would at least need to fail the course before damages were considered. At this point however, there is no basis for damages.
- eir574, on 04/13/2008, -0/+4There might be a basis for damages if the student can't graduate because she fails the course.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2To get damages you need to show that you suffered an actual loss. There is absolutely no basis for awarding damages here.
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -2/+8I think a college philosophy class is an excellent place to discuss religion; but shouldn't the professor be encouraging students to discuss different philosophies, not just his own? This class could have been a great opportunity for people of different belief systems to share their beliefs, and the supporting data for those beliefs. There is a strong likelihood that people would have come away from that class having altered their own beliefs, or at the very least they would likely have been more tolerant of those they disagree with. Instead the teacher turned it into an anti-Christian hate class. Having the students sign a document stating that their closely-held beliefs may be wrong, even though the signing of that document is a lie (since they don't really believing they're wrong), will result in the students being more close-minded and hostile to anything that may call their personal beliefs into question. He slammed the door on any possibility of open communication. Clearly this is not a philosophy class, but an I'm right and you're wrong class.
- Taquoshi, on 04/13/2008, -2/+3Kirralin23 - I agree with you that it is indoctrination rather than education.
- rkeyo, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6MORE neofascist Lords of Tolerance, spreading their foul corruption. How long, folks???
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2As long as you are Sheep.
- sexydarin, on 04/12/2008, -4/+5it's time to get rid of these colleges and universtities. Start making leftism illegal using the law system. Just like these loser leftists are trying to make conservatives and christians illegal.
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3Yup. That's the ticket. Become a Fascist to get rid of a Fascist.
Surely you jest.- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -2/+2You would think so, but these loons would ***** all over the Constitution if WND told them it was the Christian thing to do.
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3Yup. That's the ticket. Become a Fascist to get rid of a Fascist.
- Wesen, on 04/12/2008, -2/+3So what's new? I recall from my College days the cultivation of a deft ability to promote the Professor's interests and biases in order to get good grades. It's called the game of school. However, it is not uncommon for young folks to be punished for their views. I did a 9 month practicum for Social Work and was consistently promised an A for the work. Because I answered the kids questions honestly about Christianity I was given the minimum requirement to pass, a B. No warnings, no meetings just a declaration of impropriety. Oh well, I passed and moved on.
- ROaks, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3Wesen, with all due respect, that routine sounds a little namby pamby to me. Of course you were there and know better than I but it sounds as though you went along to get along. I think that is the conservatives and especially the conservative, blood bought, born again Christians problem. We have for far too long with their program. Going along to get along. It is time to be BOLD, BRAVE and stand up and take our education system and our country back.
- nippinawassee, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3It may sound namby-pamby but nowadays until the flip (right is wrong, wrong is right) changes, it'sfar better for a student to get their degree. this is a long range plan - get the degree, obtain a teaching position at a University and then encourage the open discussions without penalty... that is until someof the liberaloffspring whine to the Dean that the prof is not playing fair... The students should be strong enough by the time they are in college to do just what Wesen said - no one but the individual can abandon their religion...
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3That sounds way too much like the concept of over and over again voting for the lesser of two evils for president. When do we stop and say, *this far and no further*?
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2ROaks, I'm with you on that. Where do we sign up and when do we get started?
- nippinawassee, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3It may sound namby-pamby but nowadays until the flip (right is wrong, wrong is right) changes, it'sfar better for a student to get their degree. this is a long range plan - get the degree, obtain a teaching position at a University and then encourage the open discussions without penalty... that is until someof the liberaloffspring whine to the Dean that the prof is not playing fair... The students should be strong enough by the time they are in college to do just what Wesen said - no one but the individual can abandon their religion...
- Taquoshi, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2Wesen, we had a series of mandatory classes in our college too. It was well know that in Senior year, you had to take Man & Philosophy and would be required to write your worldview at the end of the class. Woe to those who were practicing Jews or Christians and acknowledged it. Instant D or F. I was the first of our group to register for that class in the spring, but when I got back to school in the fall, it turned out the class was no longer mandatory. The college had been sued by a student who had a 4.0 until she hit that course and got a D. You should have SEEN the line of students coming out of the registrar's office, out into the hallway, going down the stairs, and into the lower hallway when word got around you could drop the class!!!!
Oddly enough, though, I did have a sociology professor who supposedly NEVER gave women an A. He and I managed to hit it off and had some interesting conversations. We were at polar opposite ends of the political and social spectrums, but somehow or other seemed to understand where each other was coming from. No one was more surprised than I was when I got my semester grades and found out that I had gotten an "A".
- ROaks, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3Wesen, with all due respect, that routine sounds a little namby pamby to me. Of course you were there and know better than I but it sounds as though you went along to get along. I think that is the conservatives and especially the conservative, blood bought, born again Christians problem. We have for far too long with their program. Going along to get along. It is time to be BOLD, BRAVE and stand up and take our education system and our country back.
- mchan103, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7The Professor needs to be fired, and the school needs to change grades and policies.
- jlcboi23, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Home school is the best answer for a Christian nowadays.
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -0/+6Home school college?
- ThoughtfulWi, on 04/13/2008, -1/+1LOL!
- kirralin23, on 04/12/2008, -0/+6Home school college?
- Nannybell, on 04/13/2008, -1/+7It would appear this professor is into messing with the minds of his students rather than just teaching a course in philosophy. I find it disturbing.
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -2/+1Why? Is it possible that he wanted to see just how committed Christians, Muslims, and other religions are to their faith? Wolves eat Sheep
.
I know what I would do. I wouldn't sign the agreement going into the class and I would see the school board ASAP. Wolves eat Sheep
And I would never give up my convictions for any reason and I would fight them to the end. In other words, be Wolf or be a Sheep.
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -2/+1Why? Is it possible that he wanted to see just how committed Christians, Muslims, and other religions are to their faith? Wolves eat Sheep
- principaldad, on 04/13/2008, -2/+3And just what does "open-minded" mean? It, or its counterpart closed-minded, are stupid phrases used when a person lacks an actual argument.
- shanson13, on 04/13/2008, -2/+3Don't be too open minded or you let all the garbage in! The problem of course stems from our society turning from God to humanism...We were told about this time 2000 years ago...
2 Timothy 4:2-4 (New Living Translation)
2 Preach the word of God. Be prepared, whether the time is favorable or not. Patiently correct, rebuke, and encourage your people with good teaching.
3 For a time is coming when people will no longer listen to sound and wholesome teaching. They will follow their own desires and will look for teachers who will tell them whatever their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will reject the truth and chase after myths.
I pray for this young lady and I hope she will be strengthened and comforted by the Holy Spirit. - quantumfoam, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3Parents need to do the necessary research to make sure their children are attending an institution of learning and not of indoctrination.
- Ruler4you, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3The problem isn't so much that teachers are trying to change peoples beliefs but that they are trying to change them to beliefs of depravity and amoralism in many cases simply because they believe in something that teachers don't have the make up to believe in. They are promoting a godless society and and one where relative morality are prevalent.
This is U.N. doctrine. It is being placed in all classrooms and in all textbooks. Read Agenda 21 on the U.N. website. - nippinawassee, on 04/13/2008, -1/+2hannybell: " That sounds way too much like the concept of over and over again voting for the lesser of two evils for president. When do we stop and say, *this far and no further*?"
Absolutely right but the normal citizens cannot WAIT for a politician that is strong enough to stand up and say: ENOUGH! - until we get that individual in office, or at least on the horizon, the parents must reinforce their children before they enter any public institution. If you dwell on either concept, you'll lose - they have to work together by keeping up the education at home AND by working to find someone strong enough to represent the normals in this country... - MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -2/+2Every single person who does not stand up to these Fascist jerks for fear of getting a lessor grade deserves to be castigated as a fool and a coward, BECAUSE THEY ARE. The lesson to be learned here is not the topic of the class, but is it so offensive to make you ANGRY! And if you are angry, what are you going to do about it? NOBODY AT ANY JOB INTERVIEW EVER ASKED ME WHAT GRADE I RECEIVED IN PHILOSOPHY. GET IT?
Lookie here people, instead of being quiet about your beliefs, SPEAK UP. There are many like you, LEAD THE WAY! It never fails to amaze me on how cowardly people can act toward these washed up societal perverts called 'professors'. They put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us. I marvel at how these students point the finger at these self-appointed Demi-Gods for their so called outrageous behavior while never considering that due to their avoidance of conflict (cowardly behavior) they never look at their own lack of guts to confront these human trash cans. Laughable! The problem exists in your own intimidation by these Prof's, and they are having a good time doing it. Quit worrying about your grades and bust their chops when they are wrong.
Sheesh!- Wesen, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1This is easy to say when you have had experience. I think most students who look back on their College days when they were 18 to 21 would not have handled things much differently. Did you tell your CO to go to hell when he told you to charge an enemy's position or re-take a hill for the 10th time? We all learn from our experiences. How do you stack up now compared to your Professors would be the proof of your choices.
- HoneyCom, on 04/13/2008, -2/+1Would the professor dare tell a Muslim student he was close-minded because he refuses to believe Allah may not exist? I doubt it.
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -0/+4Yes, they would, and they have. BTW- you imply Muslims are all fanatics when you state your premise as such. Muslims hold no monopoly on fanatic behavior. Shall we talk about the Spanish Inquisition and Jim Jones of Guyana? How about those Southern Baptist folks who mess around with rattlesnakes? Or the Puritans and their witch burning? Or the Global Warming lemmings in their Church of Gaia?
- MarineVeteran1, on 04/13/2008, -2/+0Wolves eat Sheep
Are you a Sheep, or a Wolf?
Most of you are Sheep. And so it goes.- Wesen, on 04/13/2008, -0/+0you forgot the meaningful class, sheepdogs. sheep have a hard time distinguishing between wolves and sheepdogs but the difference lies in nature and intent. if you leave cattle in a field unattended they will be fine but sheep will wander. thus, the sheepdog possesses drives and intelligence for different situations.
- postingbh, on 04/13/2008, -1/+1So has anyone considered the possibility that devout Muslims, Jews, and other religious students took this class and were faced with the same requirements?
- rjwusa, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2I would expect a devout muslim or observant Jew to file a complaint against the prof as well. Just because someone has tenure and is on a faculty does not make him any more brilliant or wise than his most simpleminded student. Ward Churchill demonstrated that.
- postingbh, on 04/14/2008, -2/+2Well, let's say this class has 20 students. Are we willing to say that 19/20 students is not religious? Gina is the only religious student that is currently taking the course? I would also suspect the professor hasn't drastically changed teaching styles over the course of his/her teaching career, which means we could be talking about hundreds or thousands of students - and Gina is the only devoutly religious student? That seems to be a stretch and makes me really question what's going on here.
Gina is a straight-A student. If there's anything we know about straight-A students, it's that they hate getting lower grades. I've run across several straight-A students who happily cheated on tests, blackmailed professors, and threatened lawsuits just to get an A. I don't like jumping to conclusions, but since everyone is quick to attack this professor, I'm willing to say that Gina might just be a snotty holier-than-thou little princess who couldn't handle getting a B, so she decided to call up the ACLJ.
- postingbh, on 04/14/2008, -2/+2Well, let's say this class has 20 students. Are we willing to say that 19/20 students is not religious? Gina is the only religious student that is currently taking the course? I would also suspect the professor hasn't drastically changed teaching styles over the course of his/her teaching career, which means we could be talking about hundreds or thousands of students - and Gina is the only devoutly religious student? That seems to be a stretch and makes me really question what's going on here.
- rjwusa, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2I would expect a devout muslim or observant Jew to file a complaint against the prof as well. Just because someone has tenure and is on a faculty does not make him any more brilliant or wise than his most simpleminded student. Ward Churchill demonstrated that.
- monstaar, on 04/26/2008, -0/+0Ah, more far left detriment.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by