[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [HAPS-L] Missouri Bill passes house



It appears Ms. Brooker’s issues with the college went beyond the failure of Missouri State University and one of its faculty members to adequately attend to her religious views but rather extended into active discrimination and intimidation.  If you can get past the inflammatory language in the following excerpt, many of the facts presented are supported by the links to USA Today and MSU.  Are you suggesting Trevor, that such behaviour would be appropriate under the guise of academic freedom?

The following is an excerpt from (http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/2007/apr07/psrapr07.html) followed by links to a USA Today article and a news release from MSU.

Emily Brooker was a student at Missouri State University (MSU) working to win her Bachelor of Social Work when MSU stifled and silenced her speech because it fell outside the liberal orthodoxy of the MSU School of Social Work. She found that the college engaged in indoctrination, not education. When Emily took a brave stance in defending her views on particular issues, MSU retaliated against her by trumping up grievance charges and forcing her to advocate positions contrary to her religious beliefs. In legal jargon, she was deprived of due process and equal protection.

Emily had to conform to MSU's orthodoxy in order to get her degree, which she received on May 19, 2006. However, that wasn't the end of it. Emily sued MSU officials: the university president, the directors of the School of Social Work, and the professors — and she won a smashing victory.

Emily enrolled in MSU in September 2002 to obtain a Bachelor of Social Work degree. In the spring of 2005, she registered for SWK 209 on Social Welfare Policy taught by Professor Frank G. Kauffman, a course that is required in order to graduate with a Bachelor of Social Work. Professor Kauffman identified himself in class as a "liberal" and social work as a "liberal" profession, and he used the class to routinely engage in leftist diatribes against President Bush and the Federal Government. Emily and other students vocally questioned his statements.

As a result, Emily received a "C" grade in this course. When she approached Kauffman about her grade, he claimed it was because she was tardy and had exhibited unprofessional behavior in class. Emily appealed her "C" grade based on her superb academic performance. Kauffman replied with a harsh email denying her appeal. Emily then appealed to the Social Work Department chairperson, who granted her appeal and raised her grade to a "B."

In the fall of 2005, Emily enrolled in SWK 409 on Social Welfare Policy, another course required for graduation, also taught by Kauffman. In this course, students were supposed to work in small groups on an advocacy project of their own choosing. Emily joined a group to do a project on homelessness.

A few weeks into the course, Kauffman brought to class a guest from PROMO, an organization of advocates of homosexual behavior, and Kauffman suggested that the groups change their focus and work on advocating homosexual foster homes and adoptions. In the next class, Kauffman stated that the class had to attend a town hall meeting on homosexual adoption, and then write a letter to Missouri legislators advocating homosexual adoption, and that the letter must be on MSU letterhead and signed by each student. Emily participated in everything else he requested, but did not want to sign a letter promoting homosexual foster homes and adoption.

Emily was notified by phone that she had violated the School of Social Work's Standards of Essential Functioning. She was accused of a Level 3 Grievance. The Grievance hearing, which lasted two and a half hours, violated a dozen elements of due process as well as subjecting her to personally invasive questions criticizing her Christian beliefs. The faculty demanded that Emily write a paper declaring that she would "lessen the gap" between her personal beliefs and professional obligations as to the ethics code.

Emily sued with the help of Alliance Defense Fund and local lawyer Dee Wampler, and she won when MSU signed an out-of-court agreement. Her academic record was cleared, MSU will pay her tuition for two years of graduate school, her attorneys were paid, and Professor Kauffman was put on non-classroom duties for the rest of the semester.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-11-02-gay-adoption_x.htm

 

 

http://www.news.missouristate.edu/releases/27833.htm

 

 

 

Dr. John W. Anderson

Instructor, Life Sciences and Chemistry

Chemical Hygiene Officer

Mid-State Technical College

Wisconsin Rapids, WI

715-422-5428


From: HAPS-L-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:HAPS-L-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Evans
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:43 AM
To: HAPS-L@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [HAPS-L] Missouri Bill passes house

 

The Missouri House of Representatives has passed the Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act (H.B. 213). It seems that last year at one of MO’s institutions of higher learning Ms. Brooker had a divergence in religious views with her social work professor especially in regards to an assignment. She was unhappy that her views were not attended to and this is the fruit of that event.

 

The bill has 13 provisions in it but the one that is most likely to impinge on human anatomy and physiology instruction prohibits discrimination against discrimination founded on personal views including:  “…intellectual diversity concerns in the institution’s guidelines on teaching and program development and such concerns shall include but not be limited to the protection of religious freedom including the viewpoint that the Bible is inerrant….”

 

The Missouri Senate Education Committee recommended passage to the whole senate and the bill is awaiting placement on that body’s calendar.

 

The Theory of Evolution is the first thing that everyone thinks about here but there are other areas that give pause to a professor or teacher:

1.       Psychopharaceutical use and the Church of Scientology;

2.       The use of human blood and certain religious groups;

3.       Geologists and physicists very frequently provide information at odds with the literal Bible;

4.       Psychology professors should realize that their very practice is at odds with the views of many Moslems;

5.       And the old issue was that the Roman Catholic Church at one time found that there was an issue with the use of human cadavers—will this be “resurrected?”

 

David Evans

 

HAPS-PRO