Creationists' evolving argument
By Ellen Goodman, 2/6/2003
MICHAEL DINI doesn't exactly fit the profile of an antireligious bigot.
For one thing, the Texas Tech biology professor spent 14 years in a
Roman Catholic order of teaching brothers.
If he's bigoted against anything, it's probably against the current wave
of grade inflation or perhaps "recommendation inflation." In
any case, Dini's Web page lays out strict criteria for any student who
wants his recommendation to graduate school in science.
First of all, he says, you have to earn an A in his class. Second, he
adds, "I should know you fairly well." And third, you need to
"truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer" to the
question: "How do you think the human species originated?"
It was the need to affirm evolution that startled Micah Spradling out of
his seat. The young student wasn't in Dini's class long enough to (1)
get an A or (2) get to know the professor. But Spradling dropped out
anyway. He did some time at Lubbock Christian University, got a medical
school recommendation there, and then returned to Texas Tech with some
lawyers added to his curriculum vitae.
With the aid, comfort, legal advice, and bankroll of the Liberty Legal
Institute of Texas, Spradling is accusing Dini of discriminating against
him on the basis of religion. And John Ashcroft's Department of Justice
has begun an investigation.
This is the sort of frivolous lawsuit you thought conservatives opposed,
but never mind. It's turning the argument over creation and evolution
upside down and inside out.
Remember when the fight against Darwin in the classroom reappeared in
the 1980s? Creationists insisted they weren't trying to get their
religion into the curriculum. Creationism wasn't faith, they said, it
was fact. Now they're arguing that creationism is part of Spradling's
religion. I guess even creationists can evolve.
As for lawyers, watching the Liberty Legal Institute ostensibly fight
prejudice is enough to make anyone dizzy. This is the group that, among
many other things, fought to uphold antisodomy laws that make homosexual
acts illegal in Texas. They also argued that removing a Ten Commandments
monument from the state house grounds would be "censorship" of
religious history.
Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but conservative
lawyers are now agile and nervy enough to hijack liberal arguments for
their own causes. Kelly Shackleford, the chief counsel, actually
compared Dini's attitude toward a creationist with that of a racist.
What if Dini refused to write letters of recommendation to African-
Americans? Shackleford asked. "I can't imagine the university
would say, well, that's a personal decision of one of our professors
and we're not going to interfere. Discrimination on the basis of
race, sex, or religion is prohibited."
Needless - or maybe not needless - to say, Dini's refusal to recommend
a creationist for a graduate degree in medicine or science is not like
refusing to recommend an African-American. It's like refusing to
recognize someone who doesn't believe in gravity for a PhD program in
physics. But creationists who believe that the origin of species is an
open-and-shut book - and the book is the Bible - now accuse
evolutionists of being narrow-minded.
A headline in the local paper described Dini as "Rigid on
evolution." One of Spradling's supporters said that a professor
who dines out on academic freedom ought to grant that freedom to his
students.
Lest you think this is an arcane argument in one Texas university, it's
parallel to what's going on in public high schools. After losing their
bid to rid the classroom of Darwin, creationists went back to court
coyly suggesting equal time for "equal" points of view. Now
they are pressing for laws like those in Mississippi, Alabama, and
Oklahoma that require a printed disclaimer in the textbooks that teach
evolution.
There is nothing that says you can't believe in God and evolution.
Scientists do it all the time. Including, I am told, professor Dini.
Most Americans believe, in a phrase, that "God created
evolution."
But as Dini asks rhetorically on his now infamous Web page, "How
can someone who does not accept the most important theory in biology
expect to properly practice in a field that is so heavily based on
biology?" Is a scientist expected to entertain all points of
view on whether, say, the Earth travels around the sun or risk being
called a bigot?
...cuts...
Any text written by the creationist cult which may be quoted within this
criticial examination of the creationist cult is provided according to
U. S. Code Title 17 "Fair Use" dictates which may be reviewed at
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
"You can lie about ICR all you want." --
Jason Daniel Henderson
"Thank you for your permission however there's never any need
to. Creationist propaganda is already self-debunking." --
Fredric L. Rice
This web site is not affiliated or associated with any creationist cult in any way and neither the web site host, the web site owner, or any of the authors which assisted in debunking creationist nonsense are in any way connected with any creationist cult.
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank