Professor Fails Student for Refusing to Conform to His Anti-Christian Bias

[Hyena Dandy]

I think that there's definitely problems with the assumptions in the questions, and I personally would have likely dropped the class (The same as I did in an astronomy class where the teacher kept diverting from Astronomy to Talking About Why Religious People Are Dumb (because they hate astronomy.))

Now, it is possible that what the teacher is doing is asking students to look at things from another perspective. But that doesn't seem like what this is to me. The questions seem more like they are stating a thesis, and asking the students to expand on it. College is a place to expand student's knowledge. Challenging preconceptions is important. That is not the way to do it, and is from a historical perspective irresponsible. Questions like

"How does the renaissance allow for humanism to become the faith of the day" is asking me to write an essay explaining that thesis. And I imagine most renaissance historians would argue that that thesis is pretty questionable in and of itself. Similarly, "Write about Martin Luther as a Humanist, don't talk about his theology" is different from "What Humanist ideals are found in Martin Luther's writing? Not theological ideals" The former question can only be answered if I think that his theology and humanism can be seen separately.

Now, I'm all for challenging ideas, but there has to be an option to be challenged and disagree. I'd happily read an article about how Luther's humanism and theology are separate things that can be understood separately. And I would be willing to be convinced. However, I would draw the line at being told I need to come to a specific answer and write about that. I would also be happy to answer "Why is it that (X) person thinks (Y)?" It's important to learn to get into other people's heads.

For example, if I were to read a question that says "Why is it that someone would believe that Hypatia was killed for her scientific beliefs against Religion?" Or "What evidence is there that Hypatia's scientific studies were why she was killed?" I would be very happy to write that. In fact, that's a type of essay I think more people SHOULD be asked to write. However, if I were given a question that says "In what way did Hypatia's scientific studies lead to her death?" I would be quite put out, and potentially drop the course, if I wasn't allowed to present an argument that that's not the case.

Edit: This isn't to say that what he's done should be illegal. But rather that I think he's an ass who's not doing a very good job as a teacher.

[Gravekeeper]

A) It's Breitbart.

B) I'm pretty sure this is the idea behind an awful movie with Kevin Sorbo.

C) If someone asks you a question about the history of your religion and you immediately dovetail into using the term "Marxist" you should not be in a college humanities course.

D) It's Breitbart.

I can't find any real news source bothering with this story. Everything is right wing / fundie nutjob sites screeching about Christian persecution. Also, Fox ( Naturally ).

Her beliefs were obviously deeply ingrained in her, so much so that any doubts would likely have sent her whole world toppling over.

If an essay question can destroy your entire world you have much much bigger problems. She's 16, not a 4 year old learning Santa isn't real.

[Hyena Dandy]

I can't find any real news source bothering with this story

Well, yeah. Because "College professor kind of a dick" is not really news worth reporting. Most people have had bad professors in their time without, qutie literally, making a legal case out of it. It takes quite a bit of an ego to say that you're legally entitled to pass a class because it had a bad professor. I had a bad astronomy teacher. I didn't sue the school over it. >_>

Edit:

"So do you think religion was created as a means of control?"

That's exactly what I'm talking about, in the difference between a good question and a bad one. "Do you think religion was created as a means of control?" and trying to prove your answer wrong, is very different from "Tell me how religion was created as a means of control." Or "What evidence is there that religion was created as a means of control?"

Edited Edit: Also, the story behind the Kevin Sorbo movie is someone getting pissed because they don't let a teacher finish their sentence. >_> What caused the whole uproar is actually a pretty common philosophy exercise. You're asked to write 'God is Dead' on a piece of paper, sign it, and hand it in... With the intention of leading into a discussion about symbols, languages, etc. As a Christian would not believe that God does not exist, or that writing "God does not exist" would cause Him to cease to exist, and signing one's name does not mean that you believe it. I can write "My favorite team is the Pittsburgh Steelers" and sign it, and it wouldn't make it true. It's a good exercise to get people thinking. But idiots somehow flipped it upside down, and claimed that it was the opposite of its real intention, and, in fact, if that was the real intention, then the exercise itself would be rendered moot, since a teacher who doesn't want religious students in his class could not effectively talk about meanings nad symbols if they assume no-one feels uncomfortable doing that.

[Panacea]

"How does the renaissance allow for humanism to become the faith of the day" is asking me to write an essay explaining that thesis. And I imagine most renaissance historians would argue that that thesis is pretty questionable in and of itself. Similarly, "Write about Martin Luther as a Humanist, don't talk about his theology" is different from "What Humanist ideals are found in Martin Luther's writing? Not theological ideals" The former question can only be answered if I think that his theology and humanism can be seen separately.
<snip>

Edit: This isn't to say that what he's done should be illegal. But rather that I think he's an ass who's not doing a very good job as a teacher.

Well, I said in my first post on this topic that I thought the assignment was advanced for undergraduate level work. I also think it's much for an introductory to Humanities course, which this is.

That is not something to be litigated, because professors have academic freedom. It's an issue to be dealt with in the course evaluation. If the work is too much for you, you drop. You don't insist on banging your head into a wall and failing the course, and then complain that you failed.

C) If someone asks you a question about the history of your religion and you immediately dovetail into using the term "Marxist" you should not be in a college humanities course.

Well, that's par for the course for Christian fundies. When you can't make a good argument scream "Communist!" as if it's the bogeyman.

I can't find any real news source bothering with this story. Everything is right wing / fundie nutjob sites screeching about Christian persecution. Also, Fox ( Naturally ).

I can't either. It's because this story is not news. I did find a blog that pretty much agreed with what I've had to say, and you've said to some extent.

If an essay question can destroy your entire world you have much much bigger problems. She's 16, not a 4 year old learning Santa isn't real.

So this.