Posted on 11/19/2005 11:37:00 PM PST by nickcarraway
Cody Young is an evangelical Christian who attends a religious high school in Southern California. With stellar grades, competitive test scores and an impressive list of extracurricular activities, Mr. Young has mapped a future that includes studying engineering at the University of California and a career in the aerospace industry, his lawyers have said.
But Mr. Young, his teachers and his family fear his beliefs may hurt his chance to attend the university. They say the public university system, which has 10 campuses, discriminates against students from evangelical Christian schools, especially faith-based ones like Calvary Chapel Christian School in Murrieta, where Mr. Young is a senior.
Mr. Young, five other Calvary students, the school and the Association of Christian Schools International, which represents 4,000 religious schools, sued the University of California in the summer, accusing it of "viewpoint discrimination" and unfair admission standards that violate the free speech and religious rights of evangelical Christians.
The suit, scheduled for a hearing on Dec. 12 in Federal District Court in Los Angeles, says many of Calvary's best students are at a disadvantage when they apply to the university because admissions officials have refused to certify several of the school's courses on literature, history, social studies and science that use curriculums and textbooks with a Christian viewpoint.
The lawyer for the school, Robert Tyler, said reviewing and approving the course content was an intrusion into private education that amounted to government censorship. "They are trying to secularize private Christian schools," Mr. Tyler said. "They have taken God out of public schools. Now they want to do it at Christian schools."
A lawyer for the university, Christopher M. Patti, called the suit baseless. Acknowledging the university does not accept some courses,
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
"They had ADDED material of interest to them as a Christian school. They have not SUBTRACTED anything"
I don't see anything in the the article that indicates the course met all the requirements for accreditation and merely added extra things. I've been through the accreditation process as the curriculum coordinator of a science department. The regional accredidaton association didn't have any problem with our religious curriculum (I also taught a Judeo-Christian religion class) - they were only interested in the academics, the overall environment in the school and the quality and educational background of the teachers.
"I think some may think science is liberalism."
They may but that is really unfortunate for the conservative movement.
The conservative movement can do just fine without creationists so don't worry about it.
"Assuming you mean public schools, why would a private school lower itself to the lowest possible common denominator?
Public schools are enthralled by the likes of the NEA, ACLU and other liberal organization who have openly declared war on Christianity. There's nothing different about Christianity in this country in perhaps over 200 years of it's existence, except perhaps a better understanding of what it takes to be a Christian by today's standards."
1. The common denominator in question is accreditation and both public and private schools have to meet the same standard, at least in principle.
2. Actually there is an unfortunate trend lately to try to distance Christianity from observable science.
That course teaches straight American History and examines the influence on it of Christianity as an ADDITIONAL level of interest.
Try doing the same thing to "African American Influence on American History."
Why is Christianity allowed to be discriminated against....and Christianity's influence is tremendous?
I'd like to dump all of these hyphenated American history courses, Christian-American, African-American, etc., etc.. Let's teach American history, period, and leave specialization for advanced undergraduates.
Now that was a nice hit.
It's just the truth. :-)
Totally agee.
The way it was so nicely phrased was what struck me....
Kinda like telling someone they are a worthless cow chip...and they walk away feeling good about it.
LOL!!
Note to Kansas = crippled curricula will come back to bite your alumni.
"Reasonable people, when they see statements that identify academia as an evil that needs to be cured with the spilling of blood"
The problem is, of course, that you are still lying about what was said.
At least your consistent across the board. However, one can have a full overview of American History by following the Christian inroads.
This charge emerges from secular America’s docile homage to the doctrines of Darwin. Wise and educated people today realize that the borderline between cutting-edge science and religious belief is fuzzy. One need only examine the work of cosmologist Stephen Hawking, British scientific philosopher Antony Flew, or Israeli physicist Gerald Schroeder to hear the language of theology. Only propagandists and ideologues think that Darwin ended the discussion.
The truth is that two incompatible beliefs can account for mankind’s presence on the planet. The first is that God created us in His image and placed us here. The second is that through a lengthy process of unaided materialistic evolution, primitive protoplasm became Bach, Beethoven, and the Beatles.
Many scientists, including the 40% who are religious according to a University of Georgia study cited by the New York Times in February of this year, accept the first view. Many scientists accept the second view and some scientists await further evidence. The issue is hardly cut and dried because a great deal of modern science flows as much from scientific philosophy as it does from laboratory experiment. This is particularly true of non-replicable science such as that dealing with cosmology and origin of the universe questions.
This leaves only one question: Are secular liberals or Christian conservatives more dogmatic and closed-minded? To any fair-minded person, the answer is startlingly simple. It would be tough to find a single Christian high school, college, or university in the nation that does not treat Darwinian evolution seriously. However, it would be even tougher to find a single public high school or secular university that grants a respectful hearing to intelligent design, let alone a religious view of creation.
It is also only on secular campuses that truth is frequently suppressed in the interests of political correctness.
If science means being open to all ideas, judging those ideas on the basis of evidence rather than belief, and withholding judgment in the absence of evidence, there can be no doubt at all. Christian conservatives are far less anti-Scientific than others.
Rabbi Daniel Lapin
It is also only on secular campuses that truth is frequently suppressed in the interests of political correctness.
If science means being open to all ideas, judging those ideas on the basis of evidence rather than belief, and withholding judgment in the absence of evidence, there can be no doubt at all. Christian conservatives are far less anti-Scientific than others.
=====================================================================
Great comment, Rabbi.
Lost in the "discussion" between the dogmatic atheists and devoted Christians (and Theists) is what the issue in the law suit actually is. It's not good enough for RWP and his fellow atheists (or secular humanists, etc., whatever label is preferred) that every child in American be taught Darwinian evolution. It must be taught as established scientific fact. Even that is not sufficient. The students must agree and believe in the theory. In the case of the UC, not even that suffices. Private, Christian schools such as the one my daughter attends, Calvary Chapel Christian High School, Vista, CA, must NOT teach anything that contradicts their dogma. The UC system has publicly expressed it's opinion that it has the lawful, constitutional right to be the final arbiter on curriculum any place a student in America studies, if they intend to apply to a UC school. This will logically apply to home schooled students as well, and will range far beyond the issue of evolution. If a Bob Jones, Beka, or even a Pastor's notes are found there, the UC Administrators intend that my child and others who attend such schools will never see the inside of an advanced University. And it's not just biology. Every left-wing principle now in play will be taught to every child in America, or those children will never attend a major University. It's not a reactionary conjecture on my part; it's a logically deduction based on the UC's stated position.
The issue is not whether Darwinian Evolution is "true", or scientifically accurate. University professors such as "Right Wing Professor" and the UC Administrators want to make sure that NO SCHOOL IN AMERICA dares teach anything that contradicts their dogma.
My daughter is well versed in the sciences, she tutors Math and English, and she also knows what she believes, and why she believes it. She can articulate her objections to Darwinian evolution because she has studied it. She has a good, classical "liberal" education, because she attended the private schools (seven different schools in 12 years) that she has. But that is not good enough for the UC or RWP. Her SAT scores and stelar accomplisments mean nothing.
RWP and his Darwin worshipping buddies are having a good old chuckle at the Neanderthal-Christians like myself, who dare to disbelieve their holy teachings. They could care less that my well-qualified daughter faces clear discrimination - real, personal, lifetime-lasting damage, because of, and only because of her religious faith. She's and other kids like her must be considered acceptable "collateral damage" to RWP and his ilk. I can just imagine their thoughts: "Too bad she had stupid parents who sent her to a Christian school to learn "voodoo" science. Oh well, screw her; at least our University classrooms will be pure and undefiled by those mystics. Maybe we should pin a star on them so we'll all be able to recognize those idiots in case they try to sneak in."
RWP is so far "right wing" that his position on religious people is hard to distinguish from that of Hitler's. He certainly has never absorbed the U.S. Constitution, or the First Amendment. (Hint: It was written to protect my daughter from creeps like the secular left, not to empower them in persecuting Christians.")
SFS
Oh good, more libel from a Christian. By their fruits ye shall know them.
I fully support your right to teach your unfortunate kids whatever loony origin story you wish. However, I have not only the right, but the duty, to evaluate academic credentials when they pertain to my subject area. A course which teaches scientifically false material - for example, that the earth is of the order of thousands of yours old - is not a valid science course.
My daughter is well versed in the sciences, she tutors Math and English, and she also knows what she believes, and why she believes it. She can articulate her objections to Darwinian evolution because she has studied it. She has a good, classical "liberal" education, because she attended the private schools (seven different schools in 12 years) that she has. But that is not good enough for the UC or RWP. Her SAT scores and stelar accomplisments mean nothing.
Seven schools in twelve years. Why did you do that?
SAT scores are only part of university admissions credentials.
RWP is so far "right wing" that his position on religious people is hard to distinguish from that of Hitler's. He certainly has never absorbed the U.S. Constitution, or the First Amendment. (Hint: It was written to protect my daughter from creeps like the secular left, not to empower them in persecuting Christians.")
(1) Godwin's law invoked
(2) Please identify two or three figures in the secular left in 1789, and some documentation of the claim that the First Amendment was formulated to protect us from them.
Well, I have to agree, there's going to be exceptions. I should state in this in general terms.
And you are correct. Morality begins at home. Parents who send their children to such school simply want a continuation of what they are trying to teach their children. It's the reenforcement of those values they won't be able to get in a public school.
Yet there may be a few exceptions, and happily so at that.
Looks like that storm blew way South of us here in SoFlo. I hadn't checked since yesterday. I'm feeling pretty religious myself this morning.
Why dumb them down, too?
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.