UC system sued

[JMHACLJ at aol.com]

In a message dated 8/28/2005 12:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
mgraber at gvpt.umd.edu writes:

Whether  states can decide that intelligent design is science raises one set 
of issue,  but given that virtual unanimity among the science profession, 
surely the  state can
decide that it is not.



Ahhh, so you would support the UC system judgment because it relates to  ID.  
But the article does not demonstrate the focused judgment on a ground  so 
completely one-sided as you say the field of science is on this  question.  
Courses in history, civic, literature all appear to have the  threat of denial of 
accreditation hanging over them.  
 
Here's a quote from the Press-Telegram article:
 
According to the complaint, the university system has sent a "form  letter' 
to Christian high schools informing them that two popular Christian  biology 
textbooks are not acceptable, and that the course outlines are "not  consistent 
with the viewpoints and knowledge generally accepted in the  scientific 
community.'  
The letter states that, "As such, students who take these course may not  be 
prepared for success if/when they enter science courses/programs at UC,'  
according to the court papers.  
The UC system also found that a Calvary Chapel Christian School history  
course titled "Christianity's Influence on American History' did not meet the  
requirements, the suit states.  
An English course titled "Christianity and Morality in American  Literature' 
was also rejected, as was a government course titled "Special  Providence: 
American Government,' according to the court papers.  
The Murrieta school and the Association of Christian Schools  International, 
"while not objecting to instruction in these courses and already  offering 
them, object to government officials and bodies dictating and censoring  the 
viewpoints that may and may not be taught in those courses, and regulating  
viewpoints and the content of private schools,' the suit states.  
The plaintiffs further argue that the requirements are unfair in light of  
the "often superior academic performance by the students that are supposedly  
harmed by instruction that adds religious viewpoints.' 
A form letter, the archetypical evidence of a studious public servant  
producing a considered and thoughtful evaluation on a case by case basis.  
 
What you did as director of graduate studies has  little bearing with what a 
public university should do in evaluating candidates  to undergraduate schools 
in its system.  But, in the case of such  responsibilities, did you find 
yourself firing off warning letters to various  Christian schools and colleges 
that unless the curricula they employed suited  your thinking, the students 
matriculated in them could never have a shot at  competing for educational slots in 
your program?
 
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050828/213aa9d6/attachment.html