Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 01-23-2002, 01:39 PM

This is a continuation of <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=51&t=000047&p=3" target="_blank">this thread</a> in BC&A, where the question of tax subsidies for religious education came up, specifically tax subsidies for the study of theology.

It is also prompted by this on the Newswire: <a href="http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=15650" target="_blank">Religious schools' use of tax-free bonds spurs church-state debate</a>.

Annunaki had posted, in response to Polycarp:

Quote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------
There are virtually no topics free from debate at institutes of higher learning. Physics, philosophy, literature, business management, etc are all seen from different perspectives by experts in the field. You’re putting theology in a separate category by saying that the government should only subsidize the (a)theological view with which you agree. This hardly seems to be the actions of someone prone to encouraging the free exercise of thought and expression.
--------------------------------------------------

You`re right. I do put theology in a seperate category from physics, philosophy, literature, business management, etc. In other words I have removed theology from legitmate fields of study that have shown to be benificial to society.
I do not find the guessing,hoping and out right lying of religion to be in any way benificial.

Freedom of thought and expression is fine and dandy,but thoughts and expressions such as those of religious believers that tend to hault the progress of mankind rather than assist it,should not be funded in any way with secular tax dollars.
There are more than enough private schools, revival tents,churches and bible study groups for this type of "education' if you choose to take that path.

If the far out biblical tales were to be discussed and viewed the same way as Greek mythology is in these institutions I`d have no problem with it,but that does not seem to be the case.
It`s not what category I have put theology into but rather what category theology refuses to put the bible into that is the problem IMO.

The definition of theology from Websters...
"The science of God or of religion; the science which treats of the existence, character, and attributes of God, his laws and government, the doctrines we are to believe, and the duties we are to practice; divinity; (as more commonly understood) ``the knowledge derivable from the Scriptures, the systematic exhibition of revealed truth, the science of Christian faith and life.''

the doctrines we are to believe, and the duties we are to practice

Until the answer to the above query is NONE, I will continue to insist that the use of tax dollars be haulted.

I posted:

Quote:

When Universities started getting lots of government grants in the 60's (or did it start in the 50's?), they had to redefine themselves as predominantly secular institutions, which most of them were happy to do, even if they had been founded as religious schools.

Most of these grants were for science, medicine, etc. There might have been some indirect subsidy of the theology department as well as the Classics department, but no direct subsidy for theology.

The Pope's recent move to force Catholic-related Universities to only hire theologians with the Vatican's seal of approval has caused some of the Catholic institutions to worry about their government grants.

Students, on the other hand, would be eligible for whatever student aid is generally available, since it would not do to discriminate against students preparing for a religious career, vs. a legal career.

Someone who has been around a University more recently than I should have better information. If my tax dollars financed Metacrock's theology studies, I might have to - - well, at least write my Senator about the waste of government funds.

Polycarp posted:

Quote:

OK. So are you saying Duke, Princeton, and Harvard should be forced to close their divinity schools in order to receive money? How ‘bout philosophy classes in secular institutions? No teacher should be allowed to mention the possibility of god’s existence, or else it might be promoting “theology”. We’d have to cut funding for those schools, too. I don’t see where you could draw the line. What about “religious believers” who are professors? Are you going to ban them from teaching at secular universities? If you say no government money for these institutions, then it would seem you’d be against financial aid for students attending these schools. Toto summarized the situation well. Please clarify how you will determine which schools should still get aid, or how you would distinguish which schools I could attend and still receive financial aid.

You’re apparently unaware that the biblical tales are viewed and discussed in the same way as Greek mythology by some professors in some of these institutions. Again, it seems like you’re as close-minded as the fundamentalists you oppose. You’ll only allow the government to support your view. This is quite telling. Do you see this? In the majority of these schools, you’re not told what doctrines to believe or duties to practice. The different views are presented and you choose what you want to do and believe. Of course, there are exceptions to this.

Professors of all subjects tell their students what to believe and do. You’re not making a point by claiming theology is alone in this regard because it’s simply false. What medical instructor doesn’t tell a student what to do in diagnosing an illness? What business professor doesn’t try to instill a set of beliefs in her student on how to run a successful company? What basketball coach doesn’t tell his players how to run their team’s offense? I hope you can begin to see the double standard you’re using.

I wonder what your response would be if a bunch of Christians demanded all atheistic teachings be removed from public colleges. We’d be hearing about Hitler, Constantine, the Crusades, and every other debacle of the last 2000 years.

RyanS2:

Quote:

I don't see a problem with theology in general, (the study of God). It might appear on some levels to be tautology here, (we cannot prove Gods existence, therefore how do we study that which we cannot prove), but then again, we have lots of meta-physics we can't "absolutely" prove either, they merely are a set of symbols and equations which the theory proves, but if you ask for a more concrete definition than that, (dark energy/dark mass?) you will just get what borders on metaphysical speculation. Likewise with theology, most of it is just questions which they can only answer when they put "God" into the equation. (What caused the Sun to be here? Why does the Earth rotate precisely where it needs to be? If Hydrogen atoms were 5% denser... ad infinitum).
Can theology be taught as a science? Depends. Winston's College Dictionary: "Science: A body of knowledge, general truths of particular facts, obtained and shown to be correct by accurate observation and thinking; knowledge condensced, arranged and systemized, with references to general truths and laws".

Whether the BELIEF in a God is harmful or not is debateable. The belief in CERTAIN DOCTRINES of a GOD thing is, with few exceptions, been a bad thing, but that does not mean the total belief in a God is bad. This is letting the pendalum swing too far in the other direction.

Polycarp then posted:

Quote:

Toto described it fairly. Let’s make it simple and focus on government financial aid for students. Here’s a story to illustrate…

I’m going to graduate from high school in the spring, and I've already been accepted at two colleges: Notre Dame (private, religious school) and the University of Wisconsin (public, secular school). I’m still undecided on a major, but am considering religion, philosophy, or biology. All three majors are available at both schools, so there are six possibilities (2 schools X 3 majors). I can major in Christian studies at both schools, and since I’m a Christian this is a distinct possibility. Should my choice of schools and/or majors be a factor in whether I get financial aid?

I’d love to hear from a bunch of people on this.

Here's my take on Polycarp's last post:

UCLA, a public institution, has a department of Islamic Studies. Assume for the sake of this example (I think this is true but don't have time to research it) that most of the students in that department are not Muslims, study about Islam and its history, and some end up working for the CIA. No problem here.

UCLA also has a department of Jewish Studies. The emphasis there is Jewish history and culture, and the appeal is to secular Jews interested in their community. Still no problem.

I don't think there is a department of Christain studies, but you could probably fashion the equivalent with a major in Philosophy with emphasis on Religious Philosophy, and a minor in history. You would be studying under professors with a variety of points of view, and meeting secular standards. I don't see a problem here.

However, suppose you went to a hypothetical Catholic University. And suppose that CU follows the Vatican's latest dictat and fires all of its theology professors who do not promise to teach only the Vatican approved party line on theology. At that point I don't think that you should get financial aid to attend this University. You have crossed the line between education and religious indoctrination.

Polycarp · 01-23-2002, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
UCLA, a public institution, has a department of Islamic Studies. Assume for the sake of this example (I think this is true but don't have time to research it) that most of the students in that department are not Muslims, study about Islam and its history, and some end up working for the CIA. No problem here.
UCLA also has a department of Jewish Studies. The emphasis there is Jewish history and culture, and the appeal is to secular Jews interested in their community. Still no problem.
I don't think there is a department of Christain studies, but you could probably fashion the equivalent with a major in Philosophy with emphasis on Religious Philosophy, and a minor in history. You would be studying under professors with a variety of points of view, and meeting secular standards. I don't see a problem here.

For those who weren�t in the initial discussion at the BC&A board, I�d like to clarify that the Newswire article on tax-free bonds was never mentioned or discussed previously in that conversation. Therefore, I�ll withhold comment on that particular issue.

Toto � I�m not sure why you replaced my hypothetical scenario in which I used real possibilities with a different scenario that proposes only hypothetical, and not real life, situations.

Anyone can view information on religious studies at the University of Wisconsin at these links:

<a href="http://polyglot.lss.wisc.edu/rsp/relstud.htm" target="_blank">University of Wisconsin Religious Studies Program</a>

<a href="http://polyglot.lss.wisc.edu/rsp/majorrequirements.htm" target="_blank">Major Requirements for Religious Studies at University of Wisconsin</a>

Your argument here doesn�t make sense to me. What difference should it make as to whether the people studying a religion are already adherents? It�s irrelevant. Likewise, a school has no control over what a student does with their education after graduation. Whether the graduate goes on to work for the CIA, join a mosque or synagogue, or become a Mary Kay sales rep is again irrelevant to the discussion.

Quote:

However, suppose you went to a hypothetical Catholic University. And suppose that CU follows the Vatican's latest dictat and fires all of its theology professors who do not promise to teach only the Vatican approved party line on theology. At that point I don't think that you should get financial aid to attend this University. You have crossed the line between education and religious indoctrination.

We�ve suddenly entered �hypothetical land�. Why? I gave an actual, real-world example. But, for the sake of argument, I�ll try to address your contention. If, by coincidence, every theology professor already taught Vatican-approved theology without any mandate being placed on them, then you would also seem to require a prohibition of financial aid. If not, please clarify the distinction.

In such a case, we would need to survey the theology instructors to see if their belief system was in line with the Vatican. How far are you going to take this survey? Will you cover all of the hundreds of doctrines?

On a different angle� What if I want to attend this �hypothetical Catholic University� and study biology? Should I also be prohibited from getting financial aid because of the school�s policy on its theology department? I�m not seeing the distinction in your criteria.

[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Polycarp ]

[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Polycarp ]</p>

Toto · 01-23-2002, 03:51 PM

Polycarp - I thought your example was hypothetical.

When I look at the UW Relgious Studies page, I see a department devoted to the study of comparative religion, in what appears to be primarily an athropological or sociological point of view. This is standard fare for a secular institution, and a far cry from "Christian Studies".

I brought up my hypothetical Catholic University because I think it defines the dividing line between what is acceptable subsidy of education and unacceptable subsidy of religion. The Vatican has in fact recently tried to clamp down on theology professors who do not toe the line.

There's no need to survey the professors to see if they spontaneously happen to support the Vatican's positions. You only get that kind of conformity when you have some institutional force behind it. And when you have professors fired for what is essentially heresy, you have an institution that does not comply with the Civil Rights Acts and is not eligible for federal subsidies, just as Bob Jones University is not eligible.

And I would not want to subsidize the study of biology in such a school. Who knows what they would teach?

Polycarp · 01-24-2002, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
Polycarp - I thought your example was hypothetical.
When I look at the UW Relgious Studies page, I see a department devoted to the study of comparative religion, in what appears to be primarily an athropological or sociological point of view. This is standard fare for a secular institution, and a far cry from "Christian Studies".

Just to clarify… My situation is hypothetical only in the sense that I am not graduating from high school this spring, nor am I planning to attend either of the schools mentioned. I was simply pointing out that my scenario was using real programs at real schools, so I didn’t see a need to propose hypothetical schools and programs.

Quote:

I brought up my hypothetical Catholic University because I think it defines the dividing line between what is acceptable subsidy of education and unacceptable subsidy of religion. The Vatican has in fact recently tried to clamp down on theology professors who do not toe the line.
There's no need to survey the professors to see if they spontaneously happen to support the Vatican's positions. You only get that kind of conformity when you have some institutional force behind it. And when you have professors fired for what is essentially heresy, you have an institution that does not comply with the Civil Rights Acts and is not eligible for federal subsidies, just as Bob Jones University is not eligible.
And I would not want to subsidize the study of biology in such a school. Who knows what they would teach?

I think you’re confusing a few issues here. First of all, religious educational institutions are exempt from the Civil Rights Act in the sense that they can discriminate on the basis of religion. You’re simply wrong if you disagree. I’m surprised you didn’t know this. Your attempt to poison the well with a reference to Bob Jones University is inappropriate and irrelevant. Here’s the relevant section from the actual Civil Rights Act:

“EXEMPTION
SEC. 2000e-1. [Section 702]

(a) This subchapter shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities.”

You can read all of it here: <a href="http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/vii.html" target="_blank">http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/vii.html</a>

Therefore, your entire legal argument crumbles in regards to private, religious institutions. This only means that in my hypothetical scenario the University of Wisconsin must hire without regard to religious beliefs, but Notre Dame can require religious adherence because it’s a religious educational institution. The same would apply to your "hypothetical Catholic university", which might as well be Notre Dame.

Your comment about not wanting to subsidize the study of biology at such a school reveals your level of bias. For example, you’re saying that if a school such as Notre Dame were to require its theology instructors to adhere to certain doctrines it would somehow undermine or devalue the work of every other department at the school. You have absolutely no evidence for this, and your argument is a complete non-sequitir based only on your personal preferences. Many of the greatest schools of past centuries were religious ones requiring some sort of doctrinal adherence of theology instructors. Therefore, your argument is completely invalidated.

Are you saying we should re-write the Civil Rights Act and require religious institutions to hire anyone without regard to the applicant’s religion? That would be great… We could require the SecWeb to hire Muslims, Jews, and Christians to run this place, too.

Toto · 01-24-2002, 09:02 AM

Polycarp- briefly for now - when an institution accepts government grants, it agrees not to discriminate on the basis of religion. (That's what the Faith Based funding dispute is all about.) So when Notre Dame accepts government grants, it relinquishes its rights as a private religious institution to enforce religious orthodoxy among its professors.

It has every right to discriminate on the basis of religion, but then it doesn't get taxpayer support.

And I maintain that Bob Jones University is an appropriate analogy, and that a University that would enforce theological orthodoxy might try to do the same with biology, to the detriment of the science.

scombrid · 01-24-2002, 12:27 PM

Toto said:

Quote:

There's no need to survey the professors to see if they spontaneously happen to support the Vatican's positions. You only get that kind of conformity when you have some institutional force behind it. And when you have professors fired for what is essentially heresy, you have an institution that does not comply with the Civil Rights Acts and is not eligible for federal subsidies, just as Bob Jones University is not eligible.

Polycarp responds:

Quote:

(a) This subchapter shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities.”
You can read all of it here: <a href="http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/vii.html" target="_blank">http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/vii.html</a>
Therefore, your entire legal argument crumbles in regards to private, religious institutions. This only means that in my hypothetical scenario the University of Wisconsin must hire without regard to religious beliefs, but Notre Dame can require religious adherence because it’s a religious educational institution. The same would apply to your "hypothetical Catholic university", which might as well be Notre Dame

As Toto pointed out, if any entity fails to comply with the Civil Rights Act they are ineligible for government subsidy. By falling under that exception to the Civil Rights Act that Polycarp listed, BoJo U. is not complying with the Civil Rights Act and is not eligible for government money. The Catholic High School I attended made me go to mass every week, take a theology class daily, and hired only Catholic teachers. How could they do that legally? See the subchapter of CRA that Polycarp listed and rest assured that they didn’t receive any money from the city, state, or feds.

Polycarp · 01-24-2002, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
<strong>Polycarp- briefly for now - when an institution accepts government grants, it agrees not to discriminate on the basis of religion. (That's what the Faith Based funding dispute is all about.) So when Notre Dame accepts government grants, it relinquishes its rights as a private religious institution to enforce religious orthodoxy among its professors.

It has every right to discriminate on the basis of religion, but then it doesn't get taxpayer support.

And I maintain that Bob Jones University is an appropriate analogy, and that a University that would enforce theological orthodoxy might try to do the same with biology, to the detriment of the science.</strong>

Toto & Scombrid –

Apparently neither of you read my analogy very carefully. It spoke of a student receiving financial aid. Students receive the same government financial aid whether they go to a private school (Notre Dame) or a public school (U of Wisconsin). This is the issue. Trust me, I know plenty of people who have obtained government aid to attend private schools. Are either of you willing to address this?

Toto · 01-24-2002, 04:46 PM

But that private school has to abide by the non-discrimination provisions of the Federal Civil Rights Act or other federal laws (it's been a while since I looked at it.) Students at Bob Jones U cannot get federal aid because Bob Jones U made a decision not to sign the agreements to be non-discriminatory. I have to assume that Notre Dame and a lot of other colleges and universities that started out as religious institutions made a different decision, and agreed to be non-discriminatory.

I did a quick web search and there are non-discrimination policies all over the place from religious schools, which I assume are meant to fulfil this federal requirement. In addition, Executive Order 11246 covers employment by federal contractors (which includes Universities that get federal grants.)

Polycarp · 01-25-2002, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
But that private school has to abide by the non-discrimination provisions of the Federal Civil Rights Act or other federal laws (it's been a while since I looked at it.) Students at Bob Jones U cannot get federal aid because Bob Jones U made a decision not to sign the agreements to be non-discriminatory. I have to assume that Notre Dame and a lot of other colleges and universities that started out as religious institutions made a different decision, and agreed to be non-discriminatory.

Toto,

I'm not going to waste any more time trying to convince you of something I know to be true. I know many people who teach at private, religious colleges. I also know many people who are students at private, religious colleges. These institutions can discriminate on the basis of religion. This is exactly what the Civil Rights Act says. Religious organizations can not be forced to hire people with different religious views. Call or write to one of these schools in your area. Biola University is a private religious school near you. Call 'em up and they'll explain it to you themselves. Here's what their page says on faculty hiring:

"Faculty Vacancies

Biola is an evangelical Christian university in which faculty endorse a university statement of Christian faith and community values, and are committed to the integration of faith and learning. Applicants must also have the ability to contribute to multi-cultural understandings. Ethnic and gender diversity desired. Biola is located 22 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. Please contact the department listing the position for further information."

<a href="http://www.biola.edu/admin/hrs/faculty_vacancies.cfm" target="_blank">http://www.biola.edu/admin/hrs/faculty_vacancies.cfm</a>

Toto · 01-25-2002, 08:31 AM

If my tax dollars are supporting this, I don't think they should be. I won't have time to look into this for a while, though. Perhaps someone else has some information.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-23-2002, 03:51 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Polycarp - I thought your example was hypothetical. When I look at the UW Relgious Studies page, I see a department devoted to the study of comparative religion, in what appears to be primarily an athropological or sociological point of view. This is standard fare for a secular institution, and a far cry from "Christian Studies". I brought up my hypothetical Catholic University because I think it defines the dividing line between what is acceptable subsidy of education and unacceptable subsidy of religion. The Vatican has in fact recently tried to clamp down on theology professors who do not toe the line. There's no need to survey the professors to see if they spontaneously happen to support the Vatican's positions. You only get that kind of conformity when you have some institutional force behind it. And when you have professors fired for what is essentially heresy, you have an institution that does not comply with the Civil Rights Acts and is not eligible for federal subsidies, just as Bob Jones University is not eligible. And I would not want to subsidize the study of biology in such a school. Who knows what they would teach?

01-24-2002, 09:02 AM	#5
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Polycarp- briefly for now - when an institution accepts government grants, it agrees not to discriminate on the basis of religion. (That's what the Faith Based funding dispute is all about.) So when Notre Dame accepts government grants, it relinquishes its rights as a private religious institution to enforce religious orthodoxy among its professors. It has every right to discriminate on the basis of religion, but then it doesn't get taxpayer support. And I maintain that Bob Jones University is an appropriate analogy, and that a University that would enforce theological orthodoxy might try to do the same with biology, to the detriment of the science.

01-24-2002, 04:46 PM	#8
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	But that private school has to abide by the non-discrimination provisions of the Federal Civil Rights Act or other federal laws (it's been a while since I looked at it.) Students at Bob Jones U cannot get federal aid because Bob Jones U made a decision not to sign the agreements to be non-discriminatory. I have to assume that Notre Dame and a lot of other colleges and universities that started out as religious institutions made a different decision, and agreed to be non-discriminatory. I did a quick web search and there are non-discrimination policies all over the place from religious schools, which I assume are meant to fulfil this federal requirement. In addition, Executive Order 11246 covers employment by federal contractors (which includes Universities that get federal grants.)

01-25-2002, 08:31 AM	#10
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	If my tax dollars are supporting this, I don't think they should be. I won't have time to look into this for a while, though. Perhaps someone else has some information.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.