Uncommon Descent

There’s been this big hub-bub among creationist conspiracists that “academic freedom” is being quashed by all those EVILutionists. That was the main theme of the movie Expelled and it even resulted in an anti-science bill being signed into law by Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal (most states rejected such nonsense, fortunately). For those who are unfamiliar, “academic freedom”, in its creationist sense, is just code/whine word for “no one will listen to our bad ideas”.

So it comes as an entertaining irony that the people whining and moaning about not having a voice in acadamia, have been called out for quieting dissent against their poorly thought out positions when the academics come onto their turf. This is actually something commonly practiced by the likes of Michael Heath, local Christian zealot and bigot. He actually just doesn’t approve dissenting comments, no matter how cleanly written, but it’s roughly the same principle: creationists want us to hear their voices, but cover their ears when truth is spoken to them.

Is anyone surprised?

5 Responses

  1. There are some bloggers that can handle reasonable dissent and some that can’t on both sides of this question (or any question, for that matter).

    And of course their are some posters who merely post hate filled rants (on both sides of an issue) whom should be blocked.

    I have no idea what this reality has to do with the primary argument, which is that in a free society, in publicly supported venues, the greatest access by the most diverse voices should be the goal.

  2. The view of what “academic freedom” means to these creationists is specifically relevant because they think it means all points should be allowed for consideration – at the very least, evolution and creationism should be discussed as both being viable. The blogger in my post did this and was censored.

    Of course, the actual idea of academic freedom has nothing to do with this because these crackpot creationists have no idea what that means.

  3. The view of what “academic freedom” means to these creationists is specifically relevant because they think it means all points should be allowed for consideration – at the very least, evolution and creationism should be discussed as both being viable. The blogger in my post did this and was censored.

    Of course, the actual idea of academic freedom has nothing to do with this because these crackpot creationists have no idea what that means.

    I don’t think an atheist would recognize academic freedom if it smacked them in the face.

    My first year at the university in Iowa (when I was still an evolutionist and agnostic) we had an atheist Professor of Engineering – Dr. John Patterson – reccomend at a department meeting that any student who openly admitted they believed God had anything to do with the creation of the world shouldn’t be allowed to receive a science degree of any kind.

    This being in a time before universities were fully immersed in materialist ideology, the proposal met with quite a bit of uproar – even from those who weren’t particularly religious.

    It’s too bad this sort of fascism has won the day in the minds of so many atheists, though not unexpected.

  4. The real red flag in all of this is the refusal of evolutionists….motivated, I believe, by FEAR, to openly engage in debate within schools. The big argument when establishing the “right” to teach evolution in the first place, was academic freedom. Once that ideology gained power, however, it is gripping it more tightly than any religious zealot and mercilessly crusades against any opposition politically rather than scientifically.

    ANY blog or organization that is defending Darwin’s theory of evolution against intelligent design ALWAYS trips themselves up by first and foremost trying to color any person who is presenting Intelligent Design as a religious covert operator. That is ridiculous and shows the bigotry and hatred and FEAR that motivates and overrides any objectivity (a NECESSITY in real science) IF “science” can defeat intelligent design, than why not leave it to science rather than resort to character assassination and bigotry? What it says to me is that evolutionists have colored intelligent design theorists in their own image.

  5. The creationist definition of “academic freedom” has little connection with the actual definition.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: