Professor Refuses Letters of Recommendation to Creationist Students

AP Breaking News ^

[OperationFreedom]

Your Amish truckdriver comparison is a faulty one. This casts doubt on your deductive reasoning skills. Which in turn raises questions about your credibility on this whole issue.

[Right Wing Professor]

Don't look now, but you just admitted evolution is not observation.

And it really floats your boat, I'll also admit shrill is not a color, red is not a philosophical theory, and Amstel light is not a beer. No offense, but who but an idiot would confuse an explanantion with an observation?

[BearCub]

You are correct. However, if letters of recommendation are being prepared for other, non-Christian students, then he has shown a pattern of discrimination.

Really no different from white students receiving letters of recommendation only, but black students who make the request are refused based on their race.

The issue of recommendation letters being a private one, I fully support his right to discriminate against anyone for any reason - including religion or even race.

[Dataman]

I normally laugh when I hear Christian Conservatives likened to Islamic mullahs. A story like this makes gives me pause, though.

A stereotype like that is unworthy of a thinking being.

Perhaps we should look at it from a different perspective: The professor failed to use the mountain of evidence in his favor in a way that persuaded his students. IOW, the professor failed and is now punishing the students.

Now where have I seen that kind of hypocrisy before? Oh yeah-- The Dems, unable to control their spending, blame the taxpayer for being too greedy.

[Right Wing Professor]

Yawn! Another creationist ad hominem. That took all of, what, five minutes?

[BearCub]

The professor is wrong.

No he's not. How on Earth can you possibly expect to force someone to recommend someone? It is a private matter & he can refuse for any - or no - reason whatsoever.

[Dataman]

No offense, but who but an idiot would confuse an explanantion with an observation?

No offense, but why did you choose that screen name?

[arm958]

Biology without evolution is birdwatching. It's the collection of observations with no possibility of gaining fundamental understanding.

On the contrary, the theory of evolution is irrelevant to serious scientific study. Variations within species do NOT prove this nutty theory. The theory of evolution is dependent on the belief that entirely new species are created by natural selectivity over time. That just can't happen, scientifically. Hence, the laughably expansive leap of faith as so-called scientists put their eggs in the evolution basket.

[rwfromkansas]

If a student makes an issue of it by himself in class, that would be grounds for no letter, but NOT if the teacher started talking about evolution in class. It should be expected that discussion will take place in such an event; college is intended for growth in thinking and without such a discussion, that can't take place.

[the_devils_advocate_666]

"Finding that no religion is based on facts and cannot therefore be true, I began to reflect what must be the condition of [hu]mankind trained from infancy to believe in error." -- Robert Owen

[Heartlander]

“As an example, read the following caution that comes from a recent syllabus for a science education class at a major U.S. university”:

Cautions about sources and topics
Never cite a religious science source such as ICR, Answers in Genesis, or anything else like that. It is easy to recognize these groups. They are virulently anti-evolution. This caution also extends to the new ID (Intelligent Design) movement - another anti-evolutionary charade. These people are 95% wrong. As for the other 5%, no answer is known so they make up things that are not supported by experimentation. More than 100 years of rigorous investigations in fields from biology to geology have proven evolution as a fact. The debate is about mechanisms and it is a vigorous one. This debate is the theory part of evolution. You will be penalized for citing anti-evolutionary material. It is not science. If the thesis of your paper is anti-evolutionary (akin to arguing against the germ theory of disease or against the atomic theory of matter) you will receive a failing grade. Scientific journals do not publish papers with creationist and ID themes. I will certainly not accept them.

Source

”Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world; it is God's gift to humanity. “

“We Americans have faith in ourselves, but not in ourselves alone. We do not claim to know all the ways of Providence, yet we can trust in them, placing our confidence in the loving God behind all of life and all of history.

May he guide us now, and may God continue to bless the United States of America.
-President Bush's State of the Union address to the nation on January 28, 2003

[OperationFreedom]

Yeah... why the personal attack? I will not get in a pising match with you about your religious beliefs on the begginings of life. I hold to one religion and you hold to another.

For the record. I have studied this issue for years trying to discredit creationism as a way to reject the rest of the Bible. Could not do it.

[Right Wing Professor]

The explanation is in my profile.

[arm958]

It's the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution for a reason. I'm amazed at how man so-called scientists can be so blind.

[Right Wing Professor]

ous scientific study. Variations within species do NOT prove this nutty theory. The theory of evolution is dependent on the belief that entirely new species are created by natural selectivity over time.

The species is an artificial category created by humans. Putting any significance on it as a limit on evolution betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of descriptive biology.

Q. for creationists: are Bullock's Orioles and Baltimore Orioles the same species?

[longshadow]

When I was teaching college (1970s), this was rather common. At least once a month. The biology courses had more of it.

In a non-biological course? Now that's very interesting. Whatever could possess someone to interject Creationist beliefs in a non-bio class?

[IowaHawk]

If these students want to maintain that the Earth was created 6000 years ago, or or that dinosaurs are a parlour trick staged by Globalist Humanist conspirators, or that pi=3, nobody's stopping them. The issue is whether they can legally force a professor to write them a letter of recommendation.

Don't like it? Transfer to Bob Jones U.

[usastandsunited]

The species is an artificial category created by humans. Putting any significance on it as a limit on evolution betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of descriptive biology.

Tell me Professor, is "Time" something created by humans also ?

[arm958]

The species is an artificial category created by humans. Putting any significance on it as a limit on evolution betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of descriptive biology.

If it's just an artificial category, then members of different species should be able to successfully mate and reproduce, thus creating a new species. Oh, wait, that can't happen, scientifically.

[Right Wing Professor]

A sound policy. Thanks for posting it.