As you can see from the right column of the blog, I am currently reading a review copy of Dr. John West’s new book “Stockholm Syndrom Christianity”, which is coming out early next month. The book provides a lot of interesting details on what causes Christian institutions to abandon historical Christian convictions. And I found an interesting article by Dr. West to give you a preview.

This article from Evolution News has the title “Do Scientists Have Freedom to Question Darwinism?” and it’s adapted from one of the chapters of the amazing book “The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith: Exploring the Ultimate Questions About Life and the Cosmos.”

Here’s an excerpt from the article:

The list of scientists, teachers, students, and others who have faced retaliation or discrimination for their public skepticism of Darwinism is long and growing.

[…]At San Francisco State University, tenured biology professor Dean Kenyon was removed from teaching introductory biology classes. Once an influential proponent of Darwinian evolution, Kenyon had come to doubt key parts of Darwin’s theory and expressed those doubts to students in class, including his belief that some biological features exhibited evidence of intelligent design.

[…]Scientists outside of biology who express skepticism about Darwinism can also face discrimination and bullying. At Baylor University, mathematician William Dembski was fired as director of an academic center he had founded to explore the idea of intelligent design as an alternative to unguided Darwinian evolution. Eventually his faculty contract was not renewed as well, and he lost his job. Dembski, who holds doctorates from the University of Chicago and the University of Illinois at Chicago, had exemplary academic credentials and publications, but his research center had been strenuously opposed by Baylor’s biology faculty.

This one is about a professor who identified as an evolutionist, but simply argued for giving every scientific theory a critical evaluation:

Sometimes scientists can find themselves blacklisted if they merely express openness or sympathy to a critical examination of Darwinism. Astronomer Martin Gaskell was a top applicant to become the head of an observatory at the University of Kentucky. In the words of one university faculty member there, “his qualifications…stand far above those of any other applicant.” But Gaskell was ultimately rejected for the job after the biology faculty waged an internal war against his hiring. Why did they want to prevent him from getting the job? First, Gaskell was perceived by other faculty to be “potentially evangelical.” Worse, although he identified himself as a supporter of evolution, in online notes for a science and faith talk, Gaskell respectfully discussed the views of intelligent design proponents and acknowledged that modern evolutionary theory had unresolved problems — just like any scientific theory.

When it comes to intelligent design, the approach of critics is similar to the Inquisition. Don’t just expel the heretic, but make sure that everyone else has been warned not to criticize the church:

Eric Hedin was an assistant professor of physics at Ball State University. Like Gaskell, he had a long list of peer-reviewed science publications. For many years, he taught an interdisciplinary honors class at Ball State called “The Boundaries of Science,”which explored the limits of science.

Now they are going to talk about Jerry Coyne. You might remember that I recently blogged about his view that atheists cannot ground morality rationally in their atheistic worldview. So of course, here he is, behaving immorally and trampling the human rights of anyone who disagrees with him:

During one small part of the course, Hedin discussed the debate over intelligent design in physics and cosmology — not biology. Hedin’s course received positive student reviews. However, atheist evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne at the University of Chicago and the Freedom from Religion Foundation filed complaints. Ball State then violated its own procedures and appointed an ad hoc committee stacked with avowed critics of intelligent design, including two who spoke at a previous Darwin Day conference organized by the Ball State Freethought Alliance, a group whose “original goal,” according to its president, was “belittling religion.” Hedin’s class was eventually cancelled by Ball State. In addition, the university president issued a campus speech code not only banning professors from covering intelligent design in science classes but also from expressing support for the concept in social science and humanities classes.

Isn’t it interesting to see that the best argument for Darwinism is “if you don’t make a faith commitment to Darwinism, I will destroy your career”.

And the second best argument is like it, “if you claim to be a Christian and deny Darwinism, then I will let you lead the NIH, or publish books with a prestigious academic press. And you can be a professor at Wheaton College, Calvin College, Westmont College or Baylor University.”

Sometimes, I think it’s better to just get your STEM degrees, and then just go directly into the private sector. Then you can be paid well, do productive work that customers are willing to pay for, without having to compromise your faith to impress the secular leftist elites, and without having to beg for grant money from the secular leftists in government.

Consider the case of “Secular Student Alliance v. U.S. Department of Education”, in which an atheist group called Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed suit to challenge a Trump-era rule that guaranteed first amendment protections to religious student groups on college campuses. Why would atheists want to use government to coerce religious people against their will?

Are there such things as human rights in atheism? Of course not. The universe is an accident. Human beings are just accidental arrangements of atoms that evolved by chance. Their behaviors are determined by chemicals in their brains. And there is no reward or punishment waiting for us when we die. So, of course atheists look at American documents like the Constitution as a pack of nonsense. And of course they have no rational foundation for basic human rights, such as freedom of speech.

Well, lucky for these religious student groups, Alliance Defending Freedom – a Christian legal firm – decided to step in and oppose the fascist atheists. And they won! The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Trump-era regulation defending freedom of speech is valid.

Here is what the ADF said about their win:

Universities are meant to be a marketplace of ideas where students can learn to respect diverse opinions and beliefs and not have to fear punishment or harassment because of their own values. The Department of Education under President Trump rightfully updated its regulations to ensure that institutions of higher education have policies that align with the First Amendment. Christian student group Ratio Christi has at least twice gone to court over discriminatory policies targeted at their beliefs, and the Department of Education updated its regulations to prevent these types of violations. We’re pleased the court upheld First Amendment freedoms for college students everywhere.

I learned about this story from the Sound Faith Consulting blog, and the leader of Sound Faith actually did an interview about these issues with the head of Ratio Christi, Corey Miller:

I still have a passion for what goes on at university campuses, and listening to that video reminded me of how much Christianity is attacked on campuses. It’s definitely something to pray about, and something to think about for people who enroll in universities hoping to get an education.

You know what I always say: whether trades or degrees, make sure that you are learning something that lets you solve problems for customers in the private sector. Don’t go for a non-STEM degree that just leaves you with student loans and no job and no money. If you are going to go non-STEM, at least be aware of the risks. The rewards can be great (you could work for the ADF as a lawyer) but the risks are much higher. So count the cost.