What did these people expect from the judge? Let's try religion in maths, shall we: "Professor, I cannot solve this equations because the answer may be 666, which is against my religious beliefs"

(Yes, I know, Calvin tried it)

However, given the lack of self-scrutiny these people have, will they appeal?

That the big red button rests in the hands of a bunch of people with such a medieval mindset. (lets just ignore the way that their leaders are elected)

Anyone who believes in any deity is suspect, but to enforce your irrational views on an education system, just perpetuates this childlike view of the world and creates yet enough generation who fail to take responsibility for their own actions.

Wankers tbh

someone over there sees some sense!

Truly it is said that the Brits and the Yanks are one nation seperated by a common language.

Looking through the 'fun' edition of the Wackypedia produces this definition of 'animus', a word which Jung invented:

"...It is the personification of the masculine qualities in a woman's psyche. These qualities may include rationality, authority, objectivity, initiative, courage, conviction, action, aggression, and brutality..."

Do you think the 'learned' judge means 'animosity'? Of course, I could just go and alter the wacky definition....

..everytime i read crap like this, how the hell this shit can happen in one of the most wealthy countries of the world. We humans are truely one fucked up bunch.

After i grab my coat, i shall go start working on launching my own suicide cult. It's the white, robelike one. Thanks.

Do I correctly interpret Ms. Monk's comment to mean that my coursework in Afghanistan on applied chemistry at the Taliban High School should also be recognised?

Mine's the one with the copy of 'Practical applications of unstable compounds' by Prof. bin Laden in the pocket

... it makes me want to shout "hallelujah!" ;-)

Maybe the yanks are finally starting the long march away from godbotherdom

Amen to that!

Mine's the one with the spear hole in the side

Oh come ON people, don't you know that you have to accept any faith-based silliness that comes masquerading as "teaching" these days? So please judges, please accept these teachings that religions motivations matter more than personal will and inventiveness, please accept the teaching of religious dogma pretending to be factual and historical, and please pretend that these 5 students got some edukatun while at their Christian-themed worship sessions, er, high school.

And then while you are at it, please accept MY children's high-school classwork in black-magic, spells and potions, Druid culture and history, and the physics of levitation as real qualifying coursework for transfer credits. They are just as well based in historical facts as any Christian-themed teachings, and have actually been around longer...

Was going to use the "IT?" symbol, but frankly this kind of stuff impacts the US's ability to produce thinking, educated students that will populate our industry, so I guess it is very important in the long run...

The fact is simply that people can still learn whatever they want, however a state institution does not have to recognise courses that don't meet minimum standards. This is by the way not restricted to "Christian versions" of courses, since substandard courses from regular colleges also get ignored.

Now, let's see if Oxford and Cambridge will have the guts to reject some of the stuff taught in some "acedemies" sponsored by the Taleban elder friends of Antonio Bliar.

After all it is not just the US where fanatic drivel is being used to brainwash kids. Thanks to Antonio Bliar we now got that too. Granted, it is not in such a blatant form, it is much more subtle, but we got it none the less.

I am amazed, a victory for common sense! I merely await the flames of religious wrath that are sure to imminently appear. I will therefore pre-emptively submit a riposte.

A US judge says a University can ignore a course that isn't academically rigorous and balanced. As far as I can tell he is not saying it can be rejected because it is religious. I think this is a good thing, the University should be allowed to decide what courses they consider are sufficiently balanced and rigorous to count towards their entry requirements.

Cheers... mine is the fireproof one...

"It appears the UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools,"

Not at all, if you wish to lie to your children you're welcome to, Just don't expect a university to take into account a student's excellent knowledge of Humpty Dumpty's moving personal story when applying for a veterinary course on poultry.

"It appears the UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools."

Yes Jennifer Monk, you are part right - but it does only APPEAR that way. To the rest of us educated mortals this is a very sensible decision and is to be applauded. These fervent christian egos would try to block the use of the scientific method at all costs if they could, but then without shame try to accuse UC of secularisation when they make a decision to quite rightly denouce christian dogma as "truth".

When the revolution comes there won't be a wall long enough for these hypocrite idiots.

Clearly, not having even the most basic academic understanding necessary to complete the course, these students were intent on disrupting the teaching with constant interuptions and contradictory statements so this is a victory for common sense. It's just surprising that it has come from the US.

You do wonder whether we would have had the same outcome in the UK?

I did find the title of the book amusing. "A US History...". If, as the article suggests, it is based solely on the Bible, I don't recall the US getting much of a mention!

It's a reminder of how politicised the US court system is. After all, if the course is properly accredited, to ignore it merely because it's taught from a religious point of view is merely discrimination. The purpose of the judgement is to make it impossible to run (e.g.) Roman Catholic universities by derecognising their courses. That doesn't sound to me like something that a judge should be deciding; or, indeed, a politician.

Somehow I don't think that Moslem courses would get that treatment. So all we're dealing with is more politically correct hate against those they dislike. We really need a campaign to root out political correctness, it seems to me - the source of nearly all the bile, discrimination and interference with our rights in our days.

haha

bwahahaha

ahaha

BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA

"What do you mean all my course work isn't worth the paper it's printed on"

Reg Vardy, take note

This ruling clearly contradicts the evidence of the Bible, and is therefore unenforceable.

I was most pleased to read this. It's good to see even in the teeth of sweeping fundamentalism the courts can at least act rationally.

-- Jon

<- Flames for the fires we shall all surely burn in!

... and this would be different from a secular US university in what way?

My middle year at a UK uni I went on an exchange to the US. I cleaned out their 300/400 level CompSci classes but the exams were multiple-choice. The correct answer was always the one lifted verbatim from the textbook written by the incumbent professor - all other answers which said the same thing were "wrong". At best it was knowledge accumulation - critical thinking didn't come into it.

Don't even get me started on how Americans deal with history!

Paris, because one US history major (university senior year) thought Paris was the capital of Europe

Aaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

-breathe-

hahahahahahahahahahaha

It would seem to be from their title that 'faith' comes before 'freedom' in their philosophy.

Tells you all you need to know.

Good decision by the Judge, IMHO.

We of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster abhor the intolerance of all who seek to prevent anybody from holding religious views, however ridiculous.

We are one in brother- and sister-hood with those cruelly persecuted by the university in this way.

News like this makes me smile.

The thought that people believe the Bible is 100% true makes me laugh aloud.

from me writing a thesis stating star wars is real...

seriously - when is the bible belt going to realise everyone else thinks they are nuts? surely higher education and fairy tales dont go hand in hand. higher education is about learning yourself not being told to believe all this make believe rubbish

No kidding. Only idiots claim the bible is absolutely infallible. This is why christian creeds since the very first have called the Bible "inspired by god" - and made sure to point out that it was written by imperfect men. The perfectly inspired word of god is infallible, but we aren't.

No comment on the court case though. I don't have enough information to judge and when it comes to christians (or any religious people) in court, there's always more detail tot he arguments than the media lets on.

Also, where's the Paris and IT angles? I see neither!

Faith and Freedom; An oxymoron surely?

in California, of all places.

Bunch of religious nutcases are being told they're idiots. Which they clearly are. Religion and Education should never mix, in fact, the sooner we abolish that bloody awful culturally perpetuated mental illness that is religion the better.

Face it. It's bollocks, complete and utter bollocks.

"Hello Mr Skyfairy! Save me from my so-called sins, defined by 2000 year old text written by a bunch of misogynists who clearly needed to take some drugs and get laid, because you know, like, something... ummm yes all the problems that faced them and their ideas on sexuality and critical thinking are SOOO FUCKING RELEVANT to the world today..."

I think not. Religion == Bullshit. It's a fact, get over it. You may stop your internal dialogue. Grow the fuck up and put your pathetic psychological crutch down.

To quote the wisdom of the internet:

"Christianity:

The belief that some cosmic Jewish Zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force for your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

Makes perfect sense."

The same basically applies to all religions, so let's have a little rationality here and stop polluting childrens minds with this steaming pile of guilt ridden social control-oriented horse shit.

Thank you, now here's Tom with the weather.

"failed to adequately teach critical thinking and modern historical analytic methods."

Critical thinking is what is currently missing in a vast majority of the population.

I believe homoeopathy works.

I believe mobile phone masts will make my children thick.

I believe wi-fi will give me cancer.

I believe MS Vista will make my computer faster.

I believe the earth is 6,000 years old.

No no no. Please think. Please teach your children to think. Don't just gobble down this mumbo jumbo and spurt it out. Gits.

Anyway, Jennifer Monk, good name/job link.

Good to see the sneaky machinations of the anti-Darwinistas defeated again. I just hope the same backbone continues to be shown by our judicary here in the UK. Religion has no place in schools, other than as a historic look into social control and exploitation, maybe psychiatric studies into non-logical group thought thinking, and legal studies of such conmen as Jimmy Swaggert. Sorry if that offends the religeous out there, but you can take your social crutch and shove it somewhere it's not going to distract my children from real education.

More evidence methinks that publicly funded faith schools do more for kids than forcing religiously conservative parents to resort to private schools whose curriculum can't be standardized.

"It appears the UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools," said their attorney, Jennifer Monk of Advocates for Faith and Freedom.

And that's a bad thing?

Coincidence?

"Wankers tbh"

That's a very aggresive stance to take against people, who aren't harming anyone as far as I can tell, simply because they have different beliefs than you.

Still better than the NBC reporter who yesterday described Phelps as the most 'winningest' Olympian ever.

If these 'students' already believe that the contents of the Bible are "absolute and infallible", then their 'studies' are clearly complete, and they can have no use for any further 'education' of any sort. Clearly a university place would be wasted on them.

"Anyone who believes in any deity is suspect, but to enforce your irrational views on an education system, just perpetuates this childlike view of the world and creates yet enough generation who fail to take responsibility for their own actions."

How strongly do you believe that?

Belief with no room for compromise _ON EITHER SIDE_ of the argument is irrational.

Actually "animus" is exactly what he means - it describes a feeling of animosity...

Mine is the one with the dictionary in the pocket!

The way I see it, the Universities have the right to refuse entry to candidates that they deem to have insufficient or irrelevant qualifications, in the same way that the parents of these children have the right to send them to whichever school they feel fits with their particular (albeit backward) world view.

Anyway, what are they complaining about? If this Bob Jones University that wrote the text book is so great, why don't they send their kids there? Oh wait, you mean employers would laugh them out of the interview room? Oh dear, better get on the phone to your lawyer again...

So the judge is saying it's OK to reject credits (meaning qualifications?? that language thing again) provided you can prove the course didn't appeal to the male side of your nature.

You're screwed if you're on a cookery course then.

Of course the law is equal to all.. so it's OK for christian universities to ignore secular qualifications too, and black universities to ignore white qualifications, etc. etc.... what a mess the US has become..

It truly highlights the shocking situation that both of our mature democracy's find themselves in, when we have to celebrate a decision that to any sane person seems obvious.

I despair that people even still read "Jesus's Bumper Book of Blags" but it to try and be passed of in a court of law, as anything other than a work of fiction with vague historical references really troubles me.

The sooner we can get Steve Jobs elevated to deity status and we can put the whole organised religion thing to bed.

From www.merriamwebster.com (An American dictionary)

Main Entry: an·i·mus Listen to the pronunciation of animus

Pronunciation: \ˈa-nə-məs\

Function: noun

Etymology: Latin, spirit, mind, courage, anger

Date: 1816

1 : basic attitude or governing spirit : disposition, intention

2 : a usually prejudiced and often spiteful or malevolent ill will

3 : an inner masculine part of the female personality in the analytic psychology of C. G. Jung — compare anima

An encyclopaedia will only cover def. 3 because the others are purely linguistic and are dictionary entries.

Jung didn't "invent" the word, as you can see it was around in 1816. 59 years before his birth and roughly 100 years before his use in this context.

I don't know if you're taking a swipe at the judge, Americans or wikipedia. However you miss on all three.

I think the learned judge meant 'animus' as that is what he said.

I think the judge was right

"an Animus is an undead monster created through the use of both arcane and divine magic. They are unique to the Great Kingdom and its successor states. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animus+(Dungeons+%26+Dragons)

And the judge was right, the university was not acting like an undead monster.

- Joel

He'll soon veto or undo it somehow, retarded bible-muppet that he is.

Go look in the Concise Oxford Dictionary: animus: animosity in speech or action (second meaning)

</pedantry>

Dunno about Bob Jones University, but there's apparently some secondary school out there who failed to adequately teach about not splitting infinitives!

There's a 'fun" edition? Where do I find this and exactly how does it differ from the better-known "turgid inaccurate crap" edition?

Excuse me while I have a chuckle about the use of wikipedia as a reliable source.

Jung did not invent the word, unless of course he was around when the original Latin word was dreamed up, in Latin it means an intense dislike or hatred.

Good on the judge though, it should be up to the university about what they accept and don't.

How dare this university ignore course credits from the BJU. I bet they recognise and give credit to the diligent study of other mythologies, such as Greek, Hindu, Norse, Chinese, etc.

Why pick on the Christians?

Bottom line if people believe in God then by definition they also believe in the devil. I for one choose to ignore our new World underlords :).

Must admit, its refreshing too see some sanity prevailing. Indeed in say 2000 years time if somebody dug up a old copy of a Dallas script would we be worshiping JR.

Oh question for the religious types:

If only God can create souls and he created Adam and Eve; Then why do we have more than two people on the planet and are they indeed worthy of worshiping god by there own standards?

Another question is:

How many religious people take there sick child to a doctor first instead of a priest, is that not showing disrespect towards God's plans?

Oh and remember people if you hear the voice of God your religious, but to hear a voice by any other name your a nutter; Hardly fair in a democratic World now is it.

JOKE ALERT - or is it!

It appears that Jennifer Monk has less intelligence than Paris Hilton's dog, and possibly less intelligence than Paris herself, difficult thought that may be to believe.

The UC system isn't 'secularizing private religious schools' (known around here as 'cracker academies', because that's where white racist bigots stick their children so that said children won't have to be near black children; Bob Jones University itself is pretty much the ultimate cracker academy). The UC system is merely saying that if you want to get into one of its universities, you have to know actual real science, history, etc., not Bible-based bullshit.

This strikes me (and, more importantly, the judge in the case) as being the point. It is perfectly legal to fill your private, religious, schooled students' heads with nonsense... just don't expect anyone else to pay any attention to that nonsense.

And, in any case, it is perfectly possible to go to a private, religious, school and still have a _real_ education. I know because that is what I did; I went to schools run by the Roman Catholic Church from elementary to high school, and to a university closely associated with the RCC (and, unfortunately, 'Merkin feetball, which is the thing worshiped by most 'Merkins on weekends from August to February, and the Bible-bashers can go and pout.) Fr. McClusky, SJ, ran physics class in high school with an iron fist and did not mention the Bible even once... after opening prayers, that is. Newton and Curie and Thompson and Dirac and Einstein got mentions. Biology class was wall-to-wall Darwin and Mendel and Crick and Watson. Tales of large barges filled with animals (and animal poop, as anyone who's ever been _near_ a stable can easily work out...) need not apply.

But then one of the other things that cracker academies are there for is to avoid contact with non-Christians, and to those nutbags Catholics ain't Christian. There's a cracker academy about three miles down the road from me and even the grounds-keeping staff there are white. Pretty much everywhere else in Palm Beach County (except other cracker academies) the grounds-keepers are mostly Hispanic and Haitian... which means not only are they not white, but they're mostly Catholic, too. Vade retro, Satanas!

Paris, 'cause, well, I respect her opinions more than I respect those of those jackasses.

If you're going to complain about how they are picking on Christians, it would be a good idea to use facts rather than "I bet" as reason for your offense.

it is impossible to pick upon a christian given a true christian would turn the other cheek. As such those that get upset about this are not true christians. A true christian would see this as ignorance in others and show pity knowing that God will judge them all in the end. To complain and moan about it, is paramount to impersenating God and the christian values, which would technicaly make you a non Christian and indeed somebody who says there a follower of God yet does not follow the words of God is worse than somebody who is ignorant of the words and indeed God.

Remember to complain in a negative way is worshipping the devil which if you believe in God you also believe in. Frankly I blame the sun and cave-man science for alot of this whole god thang. Oh and do I believe in the devil - nope, only in stupid and non-stupid people, choice is always yours to make.

...at least they tried to do one decent thing, and that was to stomp out religion.

I've always loved Bob Jones, though; the guy's name sounds like it should have the words "Texaco Station" after it instead of "University".

Better than that, did God really dictate it in English? Or are they using the original Hebrew text?

Maybe the translator was told what to say by God.

>>"It's a reminder of how politicised the US court system is. After all, if the course is properly accredited, to ignore it merely because it's taught from a religious point of view is merely discrimination. The purpose of the judgement is to make it impossible to run (e.g.) Roman Catholic universities by derecognising their courses."

What the judgement is saying is that it's legitimate for an educational (as opposed to an indoctrinational) institution to set what it considers worthwhile academic entry standards even if some of the people whose toes that treads on want to whine "religious discrimination".

It's not about derecognising Universities or their courses, just dubious history courses taught in *high schools*, as was obvious from the very first sentence of the article.

Not BJU credits, credits from high school courses using a "textbook" produced by BJU.

And mythology study is fine, but the history course given as an example (in which the BJU book was used) supposedly ignored historical figures as people and only analysed them as believers, which leads to "Hitler was bad because he was an atheist"-level cognitive failure.

Let them go to a Christian University where their high-school courses will be recognized. Then it will be up to future employers to decide if they want to employ someone with a degree founded on critical thinking or wishful thinking. Those with degrees awarded by a religious uni will soon learn they are unfit to be unemployed in the real world, they'll suffer economically, and learn to send their kids (if they can afford it) to a non-religious uni.

Mines the cliche that's so way past it's sell-by date, it's come back into fashion.

Fucking hell fundamentalist nutters take on the University of California and the case was accepted by the court! No matter what the outcome the case itself is fucking worrying. Of course it never had a chance in California but in the Bible Belt it could be a very different matter. And these extemists are increasing in number - they have the highest birthrate among whites in America. We'd better all start buffing up on scripture...

The American constitution guarantees freedom of speech and religion, the corollary to that is that American's are free to believe and speak any old tosh, and many of them do.

Can't have one without the other unfortunately.

However, that doesn't mean that people who don't share your beliefs are somehow bound to accept them.

A university which wants to have students who are able to think for themselves!!

I have no objection to people beleiving in a religion, I was religious myself untill around 16. But at university, accepting any view as incontrovertably accurate should never be allowed. This does not disqualify religious candidates, I have know several people with good scientific abilities who maintain their strong religious beliefs. But if you havent been taught the required material for the prerequisites of a university course, you don't get in.

I can just imagine their interviews:

Interviewer) What can you tell me of the rulers of Egypt?

Candidate) The rulers of Egypt were blashphemous heathens. The Pharoah enslaved the Israelites for a lot of years, until God punished him.

Interviewer) And what of the Romans?

Candidate) They killed our Lord and saviour, nailing him to a cross

Interviewer) Actually, it is a known historical fact that crux immissa, or cross, was unlikely to be used at the time of Jesus' execution. Historical records state that the crux simplex was used.

Candidate) BLASPHEMER!!!!

Just the sort of thing that would get you into a university...

Ferry boat seems to imply that Homeopathy is faith based and may not work. This seems to stem from a lack of knowledge and lack of critical thought. A thorough check of ALL the data would reveal that in general there is sufficient evidence of the success of Homeopathy but at best some very sketchy theories on how it actually works.

An understanding of how something works is useful but you don't need to understand how and why gravity works to appreciate that stepping of a high building is a bad idea.

Why pick on the Christians? Ha I will tell you why, when was the last time Hindu, Norse, Greek or Chinese beliefs were taught as scientific and historical fact in US schools?

I dont think any university in the US would award credits for a class that taught the stories of the Monkey King or of Oden as historical fact. Folklore, maybe, but not irrefutable historical fact.

Evangelical Christians need to understand a few things

1. They pretty much made up a lot of the stuff they believe and it has no bearing on older Christian teachings

2. Much of what they do and say is not Christian (forgiveness is a word they dont use, the teachings of Jesus are ignored)

3. The world of God doesn't revolve around the US

4. The faith healing is Blasphemy, especially when asking for large sums of money

5. Most of the worlds history happened before the US was even founded

6. There are many more religions in the world

Religeous education is child abuse forced upon the children by their parents.

Nobody believes Norse Mythology or claims it as the ineerant basis of history.

Im sure the university recognise courses in Christian Theology, just not it biblical science or other unfounded crap.

I think you're being ironic here, but in case anyone misunderstands: the scholars of ancient cultures and their associated works of "fiction" are not the same as the students of BJU who appear to have been taught that an answer or opinion on anything can be derived from the bible. Religion can be a part of education, but not a substitute for it.

Anyway; a victory for the "real" America where the rule of law is paramount and (mostly) free from religious interference (as the founders intended).

Paris, because she may well have been to BJU...

I've long wondered how we could base virtually a whole civilisation on a book that can't be backed up with any concrete evidence to back up the story.

I'd also like to bet a different verdict would be reached in say Utah?

Black helicopters for when the Spanish Inquisition arrive!

There is something wrong when a court declaring that a university can indeed maintain their academic standards is news. This is so frivilous, the judges shouldn't have let it get to court in the first place. The idea that religions correctly described the natural laws was squashed in the Age of Enlightenment and that finished centuries ago. How these schools even exist boggles the mind.

Surely the truly faithful would PRAY for the university to change their minds, rather than running straight to the lawyers (who are generally assumed to bat for the other side anyway).

If the heather university's walls don't come tumbling down, maybe the almighty doesn't actually agree with them, or even - heavens [not] above - doesn't exist?

Mind you, I think he's a bit busy at the moment, bringing petrol prices down: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/05/30/ST2008053003189.html

Erm.. read the article. The problem wasn't the Christianity, it was the fact the course "failed to adequately teach critical thinking and modern historical analytic methods."

The rest of the world plays football & America plays soccer.

The rest of the world plays rugby & America plays American Football.

The rest of the world plays cricket & America plays baseball.

Americans do this because it makes them feel like they invented something rather than tinkered with (subverted) it. & then they can be the best at it.

So it is with Christianity in America. This cult of fundamentalism is irrelevant to global Christianity.

You may know the old saying, "The Gospel Truth". Ever wondered why not "The Bible Truth"? Because throughout history, until now in American cults, Christians have never been expected to have a literal interpretation of the whole Bible.

These nutters need bringing down.

Paris makes more sense..

@NB

There's nothing 'symbolic' about the eating of the cosmic zombie Jew's flesh. (just wanted to clear that up)

"I bet they recognise and give credit to the diligent study of other mythologies, such as Greek, Hindu, Norse, Chinese, etc."

How much do you want to bet? Have you researched this? Or is it just a hunch?

Also: hurrah for common sense! As a child I didn't know what to believe, but the older I get the more I'm convinced that religion is hogwash and I don't know how any sane adult could fall for it.

"...failed to adequately teach critical thinking and modern historical analytic methods."

Unfortunately, that describes most Public High School history curricula as well. Typically in America, history is taught simply as a bunch of facts with little to string them together. Analyzing historical data isn't taught until college - if even then.

I have mixed feelings about the ruling. I personally feel a college should be able to dismiss out of hand anything it feels like. That license comes with a caveat though - I don't support public funding in education to begin with. All universities should be private - the UC shouldn't exist in the first place :)

For all who were left behind in the eastern islands of the Atlantic and who still support monarchy, this decision came from the Ninth CIrcus (Circuit), whose decisions are the most frequently overturned of all federal court districts in US.

those are High school credits from a curriculum designed by a University. They are NOT University credits as some commenters seem to believe.

"That's a very aggresive stance to take against people, who aren't harming anyone as far as I can tell, simply because they have different beliefs than you."

Actually, by demanding access to courses that their *ahem* "education" makes them thoroughly unsuited for, they are wasting time, money and potentially damaging the education prospects of other students. And that's before we get on to the basic corrosiveness of fundamentalist dogma no matter which version of sky fairy worship they follow. So yes, they are harming people and "wankers" covers it quite nicely.

"Belief with no room for compromise _ON EITHER SIDE_ of the argument is irrational."

While your statement is true about arguments of a rational nature, belief in any religion without compromise is, by it's very nature, an irrational argument and therefore cannot be argued.

Not believing is not a belief, rather a rationalization that the belief is false.

Coat please... The one with "Truth" on the front and "Science" on the back.

...let us not forget the people who will actually be affected by this: the students. These guys have based years of work on Christian propoganda text books because that's what they were told to do, by their school and usually by their family. This is not their fault, but they're the ones that are paying for it.

I realise that in the long run this kind of action could (but let's face it, won't) drive Bible-bash based schools towards a broader and more objective curriculum, but that doesn't help these poor kids, who after all have been learning *something* over the past few years, however speculative / scientifically questionable / outright false it may be. It could, at the very least, form a grounding for asking questions, even if many of us feel that they'll be the wrong ones.

If UC has any sense it will at least look at putting an access course together for these students to try and rescue them from the path of the zealot they will otherwise undoubtably follow.

finally logic prevails. I looked at a private Christian school for my son. They used the "Bob Jones" texts. Scariest moment was when the teacher said "we teach evolution the same way we teach other myths...something you'll go to hell for believing in".

Needless to say, my son doesn't attend that school.

"That's a very aggresive stance to take against people, who aren't harming anyone as far as I can tell, simply because they have different beliefs than you."

If only that were true. They are harming mant many children that are being indoctrinated into belief rather then critical thinking. How much more harmful do you want?

Even if the kids aren't being forced to accept the bible as the one true source of knowledge, not questioning the need to kill all the terrorists is pretty harmful too.

Shaking ones long held beliefs is a good way to annoy someone too, so when they do come accross others who do not believe or take seriously their indoctrinated faith they are more likely to react violently.

We don't speak Latin; splitting infinitives is acceptable in English. Pedantry is only valid when it's right.

"I bet they recognise and give credit to the diligent study of other mythologies"

I would hope that depends on what is meant by 'study'. Unfortunately for BJU, memorising the bible and church dogma/doctrine and using out-of-context, 2000-year-old theological arguments is not 'study'.

Most modern further education requires students to show understanding, the ability to draw logical conclusions from evidence and the creativity to extend knowledge toward useful theories.

The judge's comment is very easy to understand (even for a BJU grad) "adequately teach critical thinking and modern historical analytic methods". You could study anything, including the bible, and meet the judges requirements - BJU obviously does not. Perhaps they suggest one simply reads and believes rather than 'studies' at all?

Does this mean the credits I've gained through my research in to the influences of The Great Flying Spaghetti Monster on 17th century colonial expansionism are now worthless :(

I'm not sure whether I should be happy or sad about this judgement.

I'm happy because the right decision was made.

I'm sad that this case even got to court in the first place.

In a healthy and open society this would have been laughed out of court, but in the 'states they are too afraid that they might offend the idiots...

Mine's the one with 'unbeliever' written on the back.

Yes it may seem aggressive, but they ARE hurting me and mine.

Any powerful group with the ability to influence the thinking of governments and the media are a threat to true freedom of belief, expression and movement.

Ignore the nutters talked about in the article; they are just the idiotic fringe surrounding religion. The scary ones are the ones who sit in the background, making policy, controlling and influencing people and keeping the general populous as uneducated/empowered as possible to maintain their stranglehold

This may sound paranoid, but you can lay most evil in this world at the feet of the various religious groups. The fact that the world is still in an affective feudal state is just one way that the various control mechanisms (hell/secular hatred/ownership of women etc) have failed the human race.

I apologize for the use of the word empowered - it is a silly word

Don't just claim that the theories you like are true.

Macro evolution is yet to be proven, as are all creation theories.

Without time travel we can never prove what happened, we can only theorise.

It's the one the Roman soldiers are gambling for

Aren't we putting too much *faith* in this decision?

Bearing in mind that this was the rather more liberal California we are talking about - what would the ruling be in, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Kansas....etc...

Ahhl be gettin mah coat now y'all

If Jupiter's Witnesses ring my doorbell and try to sell me a leaflet, they will get the same treatment as the other JW's. If some people try to push Yggdrasil Design into the school curriculum, they will have to explain clearly what their theory is and abandon it when it is shown to be contrary to the results of experiments.

I am not picking on Christians any more than I would on any group that tries to convince me that their invisible friend is real.

"God is as real as I am." he assured me, and my faith was restored, for I knew Santa would never lie.

... and the mundane universe extends a few tens of thousands of miles in every direction, where it is enclosed by the Sphere of Fixed Stars. God's truth, signed the Pope.

History:

The kings of England ruled by divine right, until Oliver Cromwell came along. God was with him to a greater extent than He was with Charles I, so Cromwell was able to defeat and execute Charles on a balance of God's will... ...When Oliver Cromwell died, his son took over, but he was a totally lame little prat and God wasn't with him at *all*. Thusly did the Commonweal come to its end.

What actually happened:

Charles I was no fun at all, and Oliver Cromwell promised to make the New Model Army dress in pirate costumes and install a small sacramental beer fountain in Parliament Square after the Civil War ended. However, he and his cohorts broke both promises and eventually the Flying Spaghetti Monster ran out of patience with them.

---

As a point of interest, the restriction on teaching religion at US public (state) schools was nothing to do with humanism or liberalism or protecting the little dears from the nasty Old Testament. Compulsory education in the US came in, uncoincidentally, at the time that the growing industrial base was flexing its muscles and working out how it was going to control the working population and market its products to them. Religion had a strong hold over the people, but was considered too unreliable and uncontrollable to be useful to business (consider what the drinks industry thought about the Prohibition movement), so business wanted to curtail its influence.

---

Fair's fair, Christian institutions are quite capable of teaching most educational subjects very well. In those cases where they don't, their students will have to go on the discard pile, along with the guys with the mail-order diplomas and the scientologist with the certificate in thetan-thumping.

"That's a very aggresive stance to take against people, who aren't harming anyone as far as I can tell, simply because they have different beliefs than you."

Ok, I agree that Gordon Prya had an aggressive stance, but I'm going to take issue with your view that they aren't harming anyone. They are most definitely harming their children. In forcing children to be indoctrinated in a religious viewpoint before they are old enough to take that decision themselves, and then denying those children a mainstream eduction because it doesn't follow their indoctrination principles, then surely they are affecting their children. I'm not going to go as far as Richard Dawkins and call it Child Abuse, but it is certainly unfair.

... they're not just separated by half the width of the country, they're on opposite sides of the world!

RAmen!

Brilliant news ! Maybe now all will still be well even if US schools insist on teaching creationism to their students .. they just won't get into university ! Perhaps this will eventually lead to the evolution of an American sub-species that finally realises that to do anything useful in the world requires you to actually THINK, as opposed to just perpetuating mythical rubbish like the bible ....

<flames because I have it on infalliblle authority that there's a lot of them in my future....>

It's pretty clear you don't know what you are talking about. Just because a course is accredited shouldn't mean that a particular higher education institution should accept it as credit towards entry. Oxford and Cambridge for example do not accept all A-level qualifications as being equal. Some they have determined to be insufficiently academically rigourous and do not accept as an entrance requirement. This is no different. They have deemed that this particular qualification by virtue of teaching dogma rather than critical thinking either does not fit with their methods of teaching, or lacks the rigour necessary for their courses. In either case, they are perfectly reasonable to reject the qualification, and the judge is perfectly reasonable to agree to this. If the judge had overturned things, then I think it would be clear that he would be rejecting free thinking in favour of religious dogma, and the political movement that is the Christian right in the US would have won. At that point, the judiciary would most definitely have been politicised.

My colleague wants to visit japan, when shown a map he couldn't tell me where it is, neither korea, new zealand or Georgia (big in the news) so people are dumb all over the world for differing reasons, not just Americans. Problem is Americans went to court over it after being told they were dumb.

If someone wants to believe a book written in chinese whispers by someone of a different faith that courses allegedly 6000 years of history and ignores things like fossils and science and questions like Adam and Eve had two male children, where do the other people come from... (Don't mention outside the garden as that means those that sin are part of us all - furthering why we shouldn't read the bible in the first place) :)

Let them believe what they want, just ban them telling others and let them live in one place so they can be tagged and monitored easily.

@Richard.

Everyone accepts now that the greek and norse myths are myths. Unfortunately you can't tell christians that it is myth, never mind the other religions, so you need to be a little more creative in how you get the message across.

"Macro evolution is yet to be proven, as are all creation theories."

False, speciation has in fact been observed in extant species. Macro evolution has been proven beyond doubt.

Alien, because fundaMENTALists are as wilfully ignorant of reality as the conspiracy theorists.

The university dare because as a university the onus on them is to teach and support fact and not perpetuate nor encourage fairy tale belief systems.

I do agree with you that one religion should not be singled out. This judges ruling and the university of California admission policy should apply the same lack of acceptance to ALL faith based teachings where the fantasy contained within "the book" contradicts established fact and do so without bias.

Perhaps the judge singled out Christians because that was what the case concerned. Should a similar case arise where the teachings of Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Scientology at al are called into question, I hope the university and the judge show the same level of integrity and common sense.

Is there no way you would compromise in your argument? ;P

How typical of a god botherer to distort the ruling to their own ends. I am not religious but I'm happy to tolerate religious people who don't come out with statements that boil down to 'my god says back is white, and in defiance of all the facts, I agree with them'.

The point here is that the material used to teach did not present a balanced point of view, and I think the judge made that clear. You can teach all you like from a religious point of view but it still has to be balanced and take the facts as they stand into account. The course material quoted clearly failed to do this, as all reasonable people would agree.

As others have said, believe what you want but don't expect it to count when you apply for higher education.

There are plenty of C of E and RC schools in the UK that churn out perfectly acceptable science and history courses and there is no reason why this should not continue. Please don't confuse discrimination against a religion with discrimination against deeply flawed (educational) teaching methods.

I see where Gordon is coming from, and I agree. What, exactly, do you think is 'irrational' about not wishing to compromise with a worldview which is inherently not evidence-based? Is it so unreasonable of me to be bothered about the fact that, in the 21st century, many of the UK's decision makers pay at least lip service to the arbitrary rules set out in a collection of ancient books?

<pedant>

Whether a split infinitive is valid or not is still a matter for debate. Although I accept that most grammar guides now permit split infinitives. My position on this can be summed up as follows:

1) In spoken English, it is hard to argue against a split infinitive, especially if it enhances meaning. In many ways one can see it as a similar grammatical construct to a tmesis for example.

2) In written English, where a split infinitive can be easily avoided, it can be sensible to avoid it. However, I will never ambiguate meaning in order to avoid a split infinitive.

</pedant>

Really, you guys are nothing more than religious fanatics. You rejoice in the news, you mock, you gloat. You exclaim Darwin, the scientific method, etc.

I don't think I read one post where anyone even bothered to look into the book being used before dismissing it. Sounds to me like most of you worship the scientific method in name, but are just like most christians in being unchristlike, you are very unscientific in your methods. Simply acting out on your personal bias'.

*shrugs*

That's humanity for you...

"Belief with no room for compromise _ON EITHER SIDE_ of the argument is irrational."

I'll believe that 2+2=4, speed of light is constant, gravity exists & that there is no past or present evidence of any god, from any belief system.

Fath is the oppposite of fact. It is that the belief that there is something beyond fact. The judge allowed the universities' throwing out of the course that tried to dictate that fath _was_ fact.

As for all of the US bashers : us yanks ain't all under-edjukated. we knows how to cook us up some sweet tastin' possum.

The longer I live in the US, the more grateful I am for the sanity of (most of) its judges.

By the way, another Code Word to watch out for from the Religious Right is "activist judges". That's the smear they pull out whenever a judge upholds the Constitution over patently unconstitutional laws passed by pandering or pusillanimous politicians. The attack usually is along the lines of "unelected judges overturning the will of the people"...

"I'm not going to go as far as Richard Dawkins and call it Child Abuse"

I will, religious indoctrination IS child abuse, and I believe this to be fact.

I know this from experience, it took me a long time to shake off the guilt trip and fear that a religious and superstitious Catholic mother programmed into me. Between her and Sunday school my mind was well and truly fucked up. I am fortunate that I have never been afraid to question, can think in a logical manner and have a somewhat rebellious nature. Otherwise I would still be suffering from the mental illness that an irrational belief system instills in a fresh impressionable mind.

...my carpet.

A god squadder knocked on the door with horrendous dissentry. Luckily i was able to remove his head from, and ram his crucifix up his arse and plug the flow before it stunk the place up. "holy shit" he said

I think Ferry Boat is not saying Homoeopathy is faith based but rather that believing it works is equivalent to thinking the world is only 6000 years old. There is a difference between believing in something and saying something is the result of belief.

In any case homoeopathy is a complete load of crap. As far as I know there is no scientific evidence that it is any better than a placebo at curing anything. Plus try taking a look at some of the mixtures that are sold, there are those where the so called active ingredient has been watered down so much there are only a few molecules per bottle. Please tell me how a single molecule of active ingredient can cure a problem?

Even though there is a complete lack of evidence of its effectiveness these alternative health professionals, aka conmen, still manage to sell homoeopathic remedies in enormous quantities to the unsuspecting public.

http://www.sickipedia.org/search.php?q=jesus

I must add my favourite quote from the TV series Firefly:

River: "So we'll integrate non-progressional evolution theory with God's creation of Eden. Eleven inherent metaphoric parallels already there. Eleven. Important number. Prime number. One goes into the house of eleven eleven times, but always comes out one. Noah's ark is a problem..."

Book: "Really?"

River: "We'll have to call it early quantum state phenomenon. It's the only way to explain how to fit 5000 species of mammal on the same boat."

Anyone who ants to do further research on the matter, start here:

http://www.bju.edu/about/creed/

that's all I can say. How stupid US has become.

Some idiots poison youth with bullshit, yet, they sue the uni which doesn't agree with them?

The sooner we get rid of those idiots, the better this world will become.

Ban all religions.

"To prepare students to excel intellectually and vocationally by offering diverse academic programs rooted in biblical truth and centered on a liberal arts core"

Huh ? Some definition of "liberal" which has previously escaped me....

Paris, 'cos she's graduated from BJ University will full honours

I see you too appear to have fallen for the propaganda peddled by the producers of "Star Trek" when the BBC refused to show their series with such an obvious grammatical error in the opening title voiceover.

You'll be telling me next that a preposition is a good thing to end a sentence with!

Well what is macro evolution? Where does proven evolution change into unproven macro evolution and why is the line there?

And the 9th Circuit is the most overturned because...?

They have the most cases.

As a %, the 9th Circuit is better than the average.

This is honestly kind of unfair to the students. Usually, kids who are going to religious schools don't have a choice in the matter - even most religious kids I know would go to a public school, given the choice. It's usually their parent's choice to send them to a private religious school, and it's the school's choice, not the students', of what cirriculum to use, and so in the end, the people who are missing out are the ones who had the least amount of control over the whole thing. And, let's not mention how well public schools teach things like critical thinking.... perhaps the schools in question here should just have remedial courses for anyone who's school's courses failed to meet their standards, or for anyone else who can't cut it in their 'normal' college classes.

While the greater majority of the Reg Reading population is spouting there pitchforks against the Bible... remember this.

So I guess its ok for me to go to an Islamic School and be taught that its a good thing to blow up the "infidels" and then get accepted into a Californian university. And say the Koran is perfect and infallible... including the Hadeef.

Better yet... what about the KKK.... oh hell.. why stop there...any thing religious that involves some sort of prejudice or something dangerous like witchcraft or the occult.

My point if you don't have enough brain cells to comprehend this.... while they reject the Bible... they will NOT reject the above mentioned items. Oh but don't let in the people who believe in the bible! They are dangerous! So dangerous it would disrupt our poor little liberal world!!! Egads! Oh but let in everyone else thats against the Bible.. no problem at all! Even if your going to kill us or something stupid! We don't care!

And if you people can't figure that out.... you shouldn't be in the IT Business let alone making judgments on something so simple that your low IQ brains can't figure out.

That.. is called Discernment.

PS: And this Bible believing "idiot"... is going to enjoy his day.

Any form of religion should be confined to church and ban from any educational insitution. Religion as caused ONLY pain and suffering since the down of man and is a source of constant violence and as NEVER helped any human in in good way.

Religion is the whorst mistake humanity ever make.

Actually, the (few) instances in which Homoeopathy appears to be effective are easily explained by the well known 'Placebo Effect'.*

In fairness, the actual mechanisms of the placebo effect are, AFAIK still the subject of investigation and are not fully understood, but that doesn't mean that we should ascribe some mystical significance to one particular instance of this broadly observed phenomenon.

As the great PTerry says "Some people will get better from anything."

*As at least four peer reviewed studies have stated :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/aug/26/health.medicineandhealth3

Maybe it's just me, but it seems like almost any religion EXCEPT Christianity is being promoted by the UK Government - if anybody says anything that some go-sah Intellectual in their ivory tower thinks *might* offend a Sikh, Muslim, Buddah or anyone else *except* a Christian, said "anybody" can expect a visit from one of NuLabour's Thought Police within a short timeframe.

Me, I'm off to see if I can summon Cthulhu and his minions, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, to have a word on my behalf with our (in)glorious Government and his Politcally-Correct religious zealots.

(Note to the Thought Police; my codename is HASTUR - got that? Not sure? Say it twice more to be certain ;-)

.

.

Mine's the one with the Elder sign on the breast pocket and "Cthulhu - Why Vote For The Lesser Evil" on the back.

>>"Well what is macro evolution? Where does proven evolution change into unproven macro evolution and why is the line there?"

In the arguments of creationists/IDers, proven 'microevolution' turns into unproven (and therefore suggestibly impossible) 'macroevolution' at the point where they can start pretending it didn't happen with something approaching a straight face, reckoning that Satan and/or a prankster Jehovah created all the fossils, clear similarities in DNA between related species, etc just to confuse people.

Basically, if they didn't see it happen, then they can pretend it never happened, and that they are still specially created by a deity. The desire to believe *that* seems to be what much creationism comes down to, even among those who'd loudly claim to be ever so 'umble.

The prominent leaders of the fundies — the Oral Robertses, the Bob Joneses, the Jerry Falwells, the Jim Bakkers, the Billy Grahams, the Pat Robertsons, and their ilk — are clever men who figured out that there's lots of money to be made from suckers, so they have exploited long-preëxistent religious stupidity in the US to line their pockets.

Money and power, that's what it's all about.

It's necessary to forestall their followers from learning to think critically because subjected to careful examination, fundie theology turns out to be a wet paper bag. It won't hold up to the slightest scrutiny. As a result, fundie educational institutions are primarily focussed on stamping out independent thought while pumping the minds of their gullible students full of nonsensical propaganda.

How does this differ from, say, the RC church? My Catholic friends tell me that contrary to the impression il Papa would like to give, the RC church is far from being a monolith. Within it are many different schools of thought and belief circumscribed by a surprisingly limited number of fundamental dogmas. The Jesuit order is an example of this, being the brains trust of the church (though Jesuit academic work is generally somewhat second rate).

Note too this difference between the fundies and the RC hierarchy: the wealth accumulated by fundie leaders passes down in their family, whereas in the RC church (and, for that matter, most non-fundie sects) whatever wealth has been accumulated is clearly institutional, not personal.

The fundies have figured out that though they have managed to acquire an undue political influence (really intended to further their accumulation of personal wealth and power), it's helpful to pretend to be victims of oppression. With few exceptions, most readers of El Reg probably agree that, if anything, the fundies are far more often oppressors who make every effort to impose their own narrow ideologies on society as a whole.

Hence, in the case at hand, it's important to play the role of poor downtrodden Christians subjected to official discrimination.

Money and power, that's what it's all about. Keep that slogan in mind.

I have long suspected that the leaders of the fundies and their chief henchmen (including politicians such as Bush Jr. who exploit the gullible) are complete hypocrites: they don't believe a word of fundie teaching, but are smart enough not to be caught laughing about it on the way to the bank with another bag full of money.

Book Description - From Crayons to Condoms: The Ugly Truth About America's Public Schools.

What's really going at your local public school? In From Crayons to Condoms: The Ugly Truth About America's Public Schools, Steven Baldwin and Karen Holgate let parents, concerned teachers and students speak for themselves about the dismal state of government education in America today.

The conclusion? Today's schools are laboratories for disaster, where failed methodologies and policies continually find new life thanks to bureaucracies more interested in maintaining power than in educating.

Lavishly armed with your tax dollars, government at every level encourages mass social experimentation on our kids - success optional. In From Crayons to Condoms you'll discover...

* The lesbian gym teacher who hands out a paper called "101 Ways To Do It Without Going All The Way" in every class.

* The "Inventive Spelling" curriculum which demands of parents that they "avoid giving in to our natural desire to correct the mistakes" because it's "harmful to the children"

* The "innovative name-calling" program for kindergarteners and first graders that teaches new words and concepts like "dyke" and "faggot."

* The required courses in "death education" that actually encourage teen depression and suicide.

* The math classes in which students write down how they "feel" about math problems...as opposed to learning fractions, algebra and multiplication tables.

Today's public schools are not just rife with bizarre, inaccurate textbooks and failed teaching practices - they encourage classroom activities that produce dangerous, even deadly, results.

"The rest of the world plays cricket & America plays baseball."

This is Ross McToss, I'm afraid - it's only a few British ex-colonies that play cricket, and quite a few countries (although hardly the rest of the world) that plays baseball: Japan, Cuba, Korea, Dominican Republic...

"But at university, accepting any view as incontrovertably accurate should never be allowed."

Does this include the current favorite religion of AGW????

In all fairness, this equates to the state telling private christian schools what they can and can't teach. They may not be doing it explicitly, but by refusing to accept a history class with a religious slant, they're effectively dictating curriculum, and meddling in the affairs of the religious organization. By this same reasoning, most biology classes should be ignored by the University because they (the classes) consider the THEORY of evolution to be infallible fact, when in truth, it's unproven - but is still taken as fact which "fail[s] to adequately teach critical thinking and modern [scientific] analytic methods."

I should have expected this, however, because apparently, separation of church and state only applies when the government wants to HELP a religious organization, not when they want to kick one in the groin.

What concerns me is that the state university bases their objection on the notion that this history class is slanted in its world view. The problem with this ruling is that it sets a dangerous precedent wherein publicly funded state universities have the power to decide that any or all religious group or groups' students cannot pursue higher education unless they go to a religious school, which would further entrench the slanted world view the university is concerned about. Does it make any sense to say that a university will only teach those who already know? Certainly not! As an institution of "higher" learning, perhaps the impetus should on the university to take these students in, and EDUCATE them in a balanced world view, rather that telling them to bugger off to a christian university, only to further slant them so they can experience their rude awakening in the much less tolerant "real world". Denying admission because of a biased history class will only serve to further bias those students toward their skewed view of the world, when what they need is to have their world view balanced out by an institution willing to teach them.

Having studied both theology and economics, I can say they are both fairy tales.

Then history, how about economics next?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population

It's author might have something to say on the issue.

Well Faith based is exactly that... It's all a bit sad.

You have to be kidding me. You know that homeopathy is based on dilutions to infinity and how rediculous the premise is and you are actually defending it?

It's a joke.

Any credible studies give it the same effect as a placebo.

You forget something. It is US. It is a place where there are companies that hold mandatory prayers at the beginning of meetings and this for some f*** reason is not considered discrimination.

AC: Your statement shows your utter dearth of knowledge and understanding of history. You have simply regurgitated a myth which is popular, displaying precisely the lack of critical thinking and research which this item was allegedly reporting.

As for the supposed incompatibility between Christianity and real personal freedom... just see how free the people living under anti-theist communist rule have been and are now.

One of the states (Iowa or Kansas, I can't be arsed to remember which) has decided not to teach that pernicious claptrap, evolution.

More nutters preparing for the "end times" with their finger on the launch button.

"This is Ross McToss, I'm afraid - it's only a few British ex-colonies that play cricket, and quite a few countries (although hardly the rest of the world) that plays baseball: Japan, Cuba, Korea, Dominican Republic..."

Actually you are also wrong. Only a few ex-colonies play test match cricket, but there are lots of countries which play cricket. 154 countries play cricket to one extent or another, over half of these are members of the ICC (in some capacity), and about 3/4 have formal national league structures. The Netherlands (and also the USA) have pretty active cricket leagues.

As I understand it, about 160 countries in the world play baseball to some extent, with a huge amount of overlap. Finally, there are more people in the world who actively play cricket than baseball (mainly because of the effect of the sub-continent of India).

Now, what does this have to do with a rant on God?

"I don't think I read one post where anyone even bothered to look into the book being used before dismissing it. Sounds to me like most of you worship the scientific method in name, but are just like most christians in being unchristlike, you are very unscientific in your methods."

Did you see alafair's post before you pronounced judgement?

And not all of us have the time to research every news story that lands in front of us. So we accept that when the college says the course isn't rigourous enough for their requirements, they're telling the truth.

Plus, who worships the scientific method? It's just a way of doing things. It's worked better than anything else, that's all.

just a bit of a thought here...

since these applicants have firm belif in infalable bible and it had taught them everything why do they even apply?

these spots can and should go to people who actually can use them instead of people who know everything already.

as for the judge good for him! but i feel very sorry for him at same time since now christians everywhere will be chasing him with pitchforks and torches wherever he goes.( if they catch him alive i am sure there will be a stake with his name on it somewhere)

also let us celebrate this small victory of common sense in war against religious nuts!

paris because even she can see that religion is wrong!

Sorry mate, homeopathy has been shown to have no greater rate of success than the placebo effect - i.e. it's a load of old tosh I'm afraid.

My head just exploded.

"claims from a group of Christian high schools and Christian high school students that the 10-campus University had suppressed free speech and discriminated against religious views in rejecting such course credits."

So I suppose it's not suppressing free speech and discriminatory to "[fail] to adequately teach critical thinking and modern historical analytic methods".

Nor I suppose is it suppressing free speech or discriminatory to "[instruct] that the Bible is the unerring source for analysis of historical events, [to attribute] historical events to divine providence rather than analyzing human action, [to evaluate] historical figures and their contributions based on their religious motivations or lack thereof and" -- most damningly -- to "[contain] inadequate treatment of several major ethnic groups, women, and non-Christian religious groups."

"As for the supposed incompatibility between Christianity and real personal freedom... just see how free the people living under anti-theist communist rule have been and are now."

yes, because communism is the only alternative to a christian theocracy right?

Honestly, it boggles the mind...

@Michael

"What concerns me is that the state university bases their objection on the notion that this history class is slanted in its world view."

Then be concerned no more, because they based it on the fact that the course did not adequately prepare the students to take their degree course.

It's that simple. It's not worldview or bias, it's that the educational material in these schools, teaching belief in the inerrancy of the bible and of fundamentalist religions, is directly opposed to the critical thinking required in a real academic history department.

Simply put, what they've learned is useless.

And to those who pity the children - if enough universities follow this example then maybe the parents will get the message and stop sending their children to these third rate indoctrination camps.

Name like that sounds like a Catholic heretic, HE'S A WITCH! A WITCH! BURN HIM

For this great ruling.

No other comments necessary!

Although, to be fair, there *is* an effective placebo effect.

So it's not that homeopathy doesn't work, it's just that forgetting about it and getting on with things works just as well. As does wearing a wet chamois on your head and chanting ancient welsh poems.

"just see how free the people living under anti-theist communist rule have been and are now."

Generally a fair bit better than those under religious laws.

You see, not believing in the Sky Fairy means several things. Some of them not so good, but out of the good ones, most are able to make a more free society:

a) critical thinking. you don't just believe, you want proof

b) God doesn't tell you what is moral, you do, so it's a lot easier to see other people as just "other people" rather than "not people" as so many religions seem to manage

c) if there is no afterlife, this is all you've got. so don't waste it

d) if there's no afterlife, this is all anyone else has got, so don't waste it for them

e) without religion there's less that binds people as a unit (which CAN be bad) and this means there's less divisiveness. At least, all the divisions are not stored up to make boundaries between populous religions and are divides the same total variation amongst the same population but with more (and smaller) gradients between

Religion does have its place in today's world as part of the _spiritual_ side of humanity. Meditating upon the tenents of your chosen religion, finding wisdom while coping with day-to-day life, finding the strength of will to get you through adversity, and gaining inner peace in today's modern society are all well and good, and perfectly suited for religion.

But, if you need to learn about the workings of everyday life. the "why"s and "how"s, the real, deep-down system of this thing called Life, then you need to learn about Sciences, History, and analytical thinking. Believe me, reality is complex enough without introducing Supernatural red herrings into the mix.

If more prople understood this, we'd ALL be better off.