PDA

View Full Version : The Law Could Let Students Sue for Untolerated Beliefs



Monica
03-25-2005, 04:04 PM
http://www.alligator.org/pt2/050323freedom.php

Capitol bill aims to control ‘leftist’ profs
THE LAW COULD LET STUDENTS SUE FOR UNTOLERATED BELIEFS.

By JAMES VANLANDINGHAM
Alligator Staff Writer


TALLAHASSEE — Republicans on the House Choice and Innovation Committee voted along party lines Tuesday to pass a bill that aims to stamp out “leftist totalitarianism” by “dictator professors” in the classrooms of Florida’s universities.

The Academic Freedom Bill of Rights, sponsored by Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, passed 8-to-2 despite strenuous objections from the only two Democrats on the committee.

The bill has two more committees to pass before it can be considered by the full House.

While promoting the bill Tuesday, Baxley said a university education should be more than “one biased view by the professor, who as a dictator controls the classroom,” as part of “a misuse of their platform to indoctrinate the next generation with their own views.”

The bill sets a statewide standard that students cannot be punished for professing beliefs with which their professors disagree. Professors would also be advised to teach alternative “serious academic theories” that may disagree with their personal views.

According to a legislative staff analysis of the bill, the law would give students who think their beliefs are not being respected legal standing to sue professors and universities.

Students who believe their professor is singling them out for “public ridicule” – for instance, when professors use the Socratic method to force students to explain their theories in class – would also be given the right to sue.

“Some professors say, ‘Evolution is a fact. I don’t want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don’t like it, there’s the door,’” Baxley said, citing one example when he thought a student should sue.

Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, warned of lawsuits from students enrolled in Holocaust history courses who believe the Holocaust never happened.

Similar suits could be filed by students who don’t believe astronauts landed on the moon, who believe teaching birth control is a sin or even by Shands medical students who refuse to perform blood transfusions and believe prayer is the only way to heal the body, Gelber added.

“This is a horrible step,” he said. “Universities will have to hire lawyers so our curricula can be decided by judges in courtrooms. Professors might have to pay court costs — even if they win — from their own pockets. This is not an innocent piece of legislation.”

The staff analysis also warned the bill may shift responsibility for determining whether a student’s freedom has been infringed from the faculty to the courts.

But Baxley brushed off Gelber’s concerns. “Freedom is a dangerous thing, and you might be exposed to things you don’t want to hear,” he said. “Being a businessman, I found out you can be sued for anything. Besides, if students are being persecuted and ridiculed for their beliefs, I think they should be given standing to sue.”

During the committee hearing, Baxley cast opposition to his bill as “leftists” struggling against “mainstream society.”

“The critics ridicule me for daring to stand up for students and faculty,” he said, adding that he was called a McCarthyist.

Baxley later said he had a list of students who were discriminated against by professors, but refused to reveal names because he felt they would be persecuted.

Rep. Eleanor Sobel, D-Hollywood, argued universities and the state Board of Governors already have policies in place to protect academic freedom. Moreover, a state law outlining how professors are supposed to teach would encroach on the board’s authority to manage state schools.

“The big hand of state government is going into the universities telling them how to teach,” she said. “This bill is the antithesis of academic freedom.”

But Baxley compared the state’s universities to children, saying the legislature should not give them money without providing “guidance” to their behavior.

“Professors are accountable for what they say or do,” he said. “They’re accountable to the rest of us in society … All of a sudden the faculty think they can do what they want and shut us out. Why is it so unheard of to say the professor shouldn’t be a dictator and control that room as their totalitarian niche?”

In an interview before the meeting, Baxley said “arrogant, elitist academics are swarming” to oppose the bill, and media reports misrepresented his intentions.

“I expect to be out there on my own pretty far,” he said. “I don’t expect to be part of a team.”

Well, that sounds interesting. My life would have been easier if there had been some kind of punishment (maybe not sueing but SOMETHING) for the teachers who forced their beliefs on me in Jr High, heh, that was aweful. And it wasn't even religous either (mainly Blacks are superior to whites (yes she SAID that before) when I was the only white girl in the class. But that's beside the point...

Thoughts?

ShadowTiger
03-25-2005, 04:12 PM
Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, warned of lawsuits from students enrolled in Holocaust history courses who believe the Holocaust never happened. There are parts of certain philosophy courses (My PHIL 101 Course, for example. Best class I've ever taken, hands down.) that tend to disprove such theories fairly easily, having to do with odd circumstances for each piece of evidence, but when pooled together, they're undeniable that it happened.

I wonder if such circumstances would involve having a unique one-sided perspective concerning poetry involved. I have a philosophy of religion class, in why my professor is not only an atheist, but an odd sort of theist which believes god is BAD. It's a very strange class.

But otherwise, I've never really encountered a situation in which the teacher attempts to press his/her own viewpoints onto the students. It's just difficult to see, IMHO. Not that it can't happen.

Trevelyan_06
03-25-2005, 04:17 PM
That's great if you want a society where all education is only one pre-tested, mother approved, court upheld mindset. Part of the educational process is learning that there are other viewpoints beside your own out there, and that yours may be wrong. A good student will learn to seperate the good stuff from the bad stuff, learn to decide which professor is a valueable source of information and knowledge and which is just so much hot air.

Beldaran
03-25-2005, 04:47 PM
If you don't think there is academic bias in america, you need to see THIS (http://www.brainterminal.com/video/brainwashing-101.html)

Rainman
03-25-2005, 06:22 PM
I don't care about trying to teach more conservative views, however, getting professor's to teach against their scientific view's by forcing them to teach intelligent design is retarded.

EDIT: btw, why sue? If they don't belief in the teachings then they should just grin and bear it. If I had a nickel for everytime I had to put on a false religious front just so I didn't make someone made... well, I'd have a significant quantity of money.

carrot red
03-25-2005, 08:43 PM
... you can be sued for anything.
It's true that you can be sued for anything in America, but I think it would be a sad day when lawyers get access to schools to fatten their pockets.

It's not something I really agree with, maybe because I never faced an problems whatsoever. I don't think teachers/professors should have to measure every word they say because they fear a law suit.

Cloral
03-25-2005, 09:18 PM
This is entirely unnecessary. Don't like the way a professor is treating you? Go file a complaint with the professor's department. Or, use the course eval at the end of the class to express your concerns. These things are looked at and do influence things like promotions and pay increases. So you already have all the tools you need without the fatcat lawyers stepping in making a huge mess of things. You may feel alone in the classroom but there is always someone higher up in the administration that can help out. And if not, then you're at the wrong school (I mention this because there are some schools like UC Berkley where conservative thought is not tolerated, and some schools like Bob Jones where progressive thought is not tolerated. So sometimes you're simply in the wrong place).

And if you're in high school or lower and this happens? Tell your parents. Chances are they share your views - and they can certainly do something about it.

AlexMax
03-25-2005, 10:38 PM
So wait, real scientists and professors are rejecting these so called Christian "scientists" and fundamentalists, so now they're trying to get their "theories" in by force?"

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with these people. Science is not democratic, something either has evidence to support it and is accepted in the scientific community or it's not. I don't see why these people say "Well, teach both and let the people make up their own minds". IT'S NOT SCIENCE! IT IS A FUCKING FAIRY TALE.


If you don't think there is academic bias in america, you need to see THIS (http://www.brainterminal.com/video/brainwashing-101.html)

With the nutcases we have on my campus, I highly doubt that these people are doing anything more than blowing up a few scattered cases of administration idiocy. "Prosecuted just for posting a flyer for a speech"? Something tells me that we aren't getting the full story here.

bigjoe
03-25-2005, 10:54 PM
And it wasn't even religous either (mainly Blacks are superior to whites (yes she SAID that before) when I was the only white girl in the class. But that's beside the point...
Understand where you're coming from, but this law will more than likely be used in a 'reverse racist' manner... i.e. black people can openly claim their superiority , but if a white person makes a peep, they'll be in trouble.

Dart Zaidyer
03-26-2005, 01:09 AM
I've never liked my teachers treading all over my beliefs as if they knew they were infallible beyond doubt, but I don't know about legislation to enforce "tolerance". This could be used as more of a weapon than a patch.

Axel
03-26-2005, 11:08 AM
This is ridiculous. What kind of ignoramous only wants access to what they're already comfortable with? How can you grow if you're only exposed to one side of every issue: yours? Who cares if the proffessor teaches something you don't like? You're there to learn, not have your pre-concieved notions reinforced.

slothman
03-26-2005, 11:49 AM
...
Well, that sounds interesting. My life would have been easier if there had been some kind of punishment (maybe not sueing but SOMETHING) for the teachers who forced their beliefs on me in Jr High, heh, that was aweful. And it wasn't even religous either (mainly Blacks are superior to whites (yes she SAID that before) when I was the only white girl in the class....
She actually said that! You might be able to get her on disciplinary action regardless of the law.
I almost agree with the law. I do think classes, both college and lower, should have more viewpoints.
I don't think people should be able to sue because of that.
Plus I think that the socratic method is good. Of course I could be wrong. But if it is bad then does mean that students never have to explain themselves? That would defeat the whole point of college. To learn why and not what. A doctor that can't figure out why someone has a disease might not be able to fix it.

Cloral
03-26-2005, 04:06 PM
Here's another point: if this law passed, religious studies classes would most likely have to stop, as atheists would sue for their beliefs not being tolerated. Heck, they'd probably enroll in such classes just for the opportunity to sue.

And again, if you feel like you're not being tolerated in a class, the first thing you should do is speak with the teacher outside of class. I think a lot of the time it is simply a misunderstanding, and if you let the teacher know how you feel they'll be more considerate in the future. Of course this won't always work, and then it's time to go after the diciplinary action. Also you should ask yourself if there is really a problem or if you're just being closed-minded.
I'm not saying that was the case with you Monica, your teacher was simply a racist. Also I doubt that teacher would have listened to you if you had talked to her outside of class. That is a situation where you go to the principal and tell him/her that you feel uncomfortable in that class.

PS: Note that racism against whites isn't 'reverse racism', it just racism. Because if you call it reverse racism, then you are necessarily dividing whites and others and saying there is something different between them. Racism will not end until we stop labeling groups like this.

AlexMax
03-26-2005, 04:37 PM
She actually said that! You might be able to get her on disciplinary action regardless of the law.
I almost agree with the law. I do think classes, both college and lower, should have more viewpoints.
I don't think people should be able to sue because of that.
Plus I think that the socratic method is good. Of course I could be wrong. But if it is bad then does mean that students never have to explain themselves? That would defeat the whole point of college. To learn why and not what. A doctor that can't figure out why someone has a disease might not be able to fix it.

If the 'other viewpoints' consist of fabrication and conjecture, no I do not think they belong in a classroom. Sometimes, a 'vewpoint' is not scientific in the least and has no fucking business in a science classroom. How many times do I have to repeat this SCIENCE IS NOT A FUCKING DEMOCRACY. You don't 'vote' on what is right, you either agree with what the evidence agrees with or you just come out and say that "No, I'd rather think that everything was created in seven days and there is nothing you can do to change that". Fine. But don't force scientists to preach your views just because you beleive in some fantasy.

And to make things perfectly clear creatiionism has almost no evidence supporting it And even if by chance you found some shred of slight inconsistancy, the fact is that evolution has mountains and mountains and mountains of evidence to support it, and chances are the inconsistancy is caused by some other factor that we still need to discover. For example, Newton's laws of Physics. When Einstein developed general relativity, it painted a more accurate picture of the world around us, but yet we continue to use Newtonian physics because A. It still accounts for 99% of the situations we deal with and B. It's a lot easier to use. It's not like Evolution being tossed out completely in favor of creationism, we KNOW FOR A FACT that evolution happenss. (And whoever created the distinction between 'micro' and 'macro' evolution needs to be shot, there is no such thing). And so far, there is not a single shread of evidence that proves Evolution wrong. Well, actually, there are some "inconsistancies" that creationists love to bring up time and time again, but they have all been debunked, it's just that creationists conveniently forget to mention that fact.

This is just a weapon to force professors to censor themselves for fear of legal threats from fundamentalists with too much money to spend on lawyers. Christians, no matter what you personally beleive about my above statements, this is where the money from your collection plates is going towards. I hope you're pleased with the results.

Beldaran
03-26-2005, 05:08 PM
I tend to agree with you Alex, but no one's going to take you seriously when you have such an insulting tone. I can't imagine a christian reading your post and saying to themselves, "Gee, he's right. I'm a moronic twit with no fucking brain."

I find a great condradiction in scientists' belief that if a thing turns out to be more complex and thought provoking than we thought, then it's evidence that no thought or design went into it. Logic would suggest otherwise. Still, this is no excuse for religionists to force their "god caused it to be this way" prefaces into science classrooms, and it's certainly no reason to allow fundamentalists to teach the 3rd world science of 7 day creationism.

AlexMax
03-26-2005, 07:34 PM
I tend to agree with you Alex, but no one's going to take you seriously when you have such an insulting tone. I can't imagine a christian reading your post and saying to themselves, "Gee, he's right. I'm a moronic twit with no fucking brain."

Once fundies stop insulting our intelligence with "Creationism is a science", then perhaps we can have some reasonable discorse. My words are one of someone who is pissed the hell off why people can't seem to see the obvious instead of relying on some biased "focus on the family" institution to do their homework for them. And hopefully my tone is sharp enough for people to actually pay attention this time.

Rainman
03-26-2005, 08:09 PM
http://www.skepticreport.com/creationism/thingscreationistshate.htm

This is as good a place as any to post this.

Cloral
03-26-2005, 09:17 PM
From that website:

Despite some legal attempts in some state legislatures to return it to the divine purity of 3, pi has hardened its heart and refused to conform to the biblically prescribed norm.
Actually, I did some research, and this is not true. Indiana had a bill on the table which defined Pi to about 6 different values including 3.2 and 4. After a mathematics professor spoke up at the bill's hearing, it was decided it was not a matter for the state to legislate on. But no state had a bill that would set Pi to 3.

Point being, don't take everything you read as truth. Question always. Keep an open mind and the truth just might reveal itself.

AlexMax
03-26-2005, 10:30 PM
http://www.skepticreport.com/creationism/thingscreationistshate.htm

This is as good a place as any to post this.

Bad idea to put all of your eggs in one basket like this....


From that website:

Actually, I did some research, and this is not true. Indiana had a bill on the table which defined Pi to about 6 different values including 3.2 and 4. After a mathematics professor spoke up at the bill's hearing, it was decided it was not a matter for the state to legislate on. But no state had a bill that would set Pi to 3.

Point being, don't take everything you read as truth. Question always. Keep an open mind and the truth just might reveal itself.

...because mistakes and exaggerations can be made. Trust me, I've known way too many evangelists who will use minor inconsistances as an excuse for completely missing the piont. Someone makes one minor slip up, and suddenly the entire article's accuracy is called into question. Whish is why it is best not rely on such things.

(Also, I am not implying that Cloral is a crazy fundie :) I was about to reply to Rainman's post and saw Cloral provided a perfect example of what I was about to say)