In 2006, Dr. Frank Kauffman, assistant professor of social work at Missouri State University, assigned his students to write a letter to the Missouri Legislature expressing the view that gay couples should have the right to adopt children. The assignment conflicted with the views of Emily Brooker, a student whose Christian religious values disagreed not only with the idea of gay adoption, but with homosexuality in general.
Brooker, who was working on her undergraduate degree in social work, protested Kauffman's class assignment by taking legal action. Represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal group, Brooker won the decision. MSU expressed their apologies and awarded Brooker $9,000 to pay for legal fees and another $12,000 to cover the expenses that would accrue during the first two years of her Master's work. On top of that, Brooker was given $3,000 per year to help pay for living expenses.
The legal system sided with Brooker, MSU admitted to the wrongdoing and offered their sincere apologies, and Brooker was compensated through monetary awards and admittance into a Master's program. Problem solved, right? Well, not quite.
In response to Brooker's conflict with MSU, State Representative Jane Cunningham (89) sponsored House Bill 213, which seeks to establish the Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act. The controversial bill recently passed in the Missouri House by a wide margin of 97/50. HB 213 is now becoming a fuming topic of debate because many believe that the bill clearly represents the latest effort by creationists (a.k.a. intelligent design advocates) to admit Biblical teachings into public school curriculums.
|
Teaching by women could be dismissed |
Keith Hardeman, president of the Missouri conference of the American Association of University Professors, stated in the Springfield News-Leader, "That the involved MSU faculty acted improperly is a given. But a state law to intervene in such cases is an overreaction and redundant." (http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070406/OPINIONS02/704060365/1006/OPINIONS)
Hardeman continued by saying that, in the MSU case, as with most other cases of faculty impropriety, "the system worked....In fact, there is no credible evidence to even remotely suggest these policies aren't working across the board."
Regarding Rep. Cunningham and her proposed bill, "She's already attempted to influence science curriculum with her failed bill to impose intelligent design," Hardeman said.
"If taken to its logical conclusion, when a history professor discusses Hitler's 'Final Solution,' HB 213 would require equal time for the absurd idea that the Holocaust never occurred. While it may sound silly, that could be reality if we substitute political guidelines for proven research-based academic standards," Hardeman said.
Hardeman's Holocaust example is only one of many possible abuses of HB 213. Not only could a student use HB 213 to deny the conclusions drawn in history and nearly every field of science, but a literal interpretation of I Timothy 2:12, which states, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence," could legally dismiss the teachings of all female professors.
These types of legislative acts are nothing new in the U.S., the only developed nation in which nearly half of the population denies Darwin's theory of evolution, despite universal consensus among biologists.
The last major bout between creationists and evolutionary theorists took place in federal court in Dover, Pennsylvania in 2005. In the Dover trial, the science-minded plaintiff argued that "the only real effect of the ID (intelligent design) Policy is the advancement of religion."
The federal judge who presided over the Dover trial, John E. Jones III, agreed with the former statement and went on to say that evolution "is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator." Judge Jones finalized his decision by decrying: "The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial." (http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf)
A remaining question regarding HB 213 which has rarely been considered in public forums is: Are the Christians who support HB 213 ready to accept the inerrancy of all other religious philosophies, and are they willing to have those views portrayed as absolute truths to their children? It would seem that HB 213 would not only allow the Christian view of creation to be taught in public schools, but it would also allow Muslim, New Age, and all other personal or cultural philosophies to be accepted as fully legitimate and completely accurate.
Beth Low, the representative for the Penn Valley area, voted against the bill in the House. It is not known how Jolie Justus, the senator for this area, will vote, though given her record she seems likely to vote against the bill.
For our editorial on this subject, click here.
Copyright 2007 Metropolitan Community College