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
... 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.
The thing is, if either Evolution or Mohammedanism were scientifically credible, you wouldn't have to force anyone to believe.
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!
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!!
A perfectly ridiculous untruth. Discussion terminated.
An absolute lie. Guess Newton and Faraday were not scientists?????
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.