i can see this turning ugly

[Immanuel]

No. They do need to be able to write something that is sufficiently stronger than "This is what I think".

There is a reason academic writing is considered rigorous. Any jackass can spout off their opinion. It takes a degree of education to formulate a well thought out and supported paper.

Yet, it appears that the issue here is exactly "what she thinks" and the fact that it does not coincide with what her professors think.

Not how she writes it, but the fact that she thinks it or they would not be forcing her into a "re-education camp".

Immie

Again, we don't know what the issue here is in totality.

No, we don't, but anytime someone starts talking about "re-education camps" the hair on the back of my neck stands straight up.

I do not doubt the word of Ms. Keeton that this school has told her that she must conform or get out and I do not care if it is based on religion or simply her belief that homosexuality is not genetic. Since it seems apparent that they told her attend this "diversity training" and disavow your beliefs or else, I find it offensive, period.

Immie

 

[ConHog]

I notice no one had the guts to tell me how they would feel if they were in college majoring in history and a professor failed them because they refused to believe the story of Noah's Ark was real.

 

[AllieBaba]

So everything a plaintiff claims is automatically true?

I don't think so.

I'll bet you spend a significant amount of time bitching about trial lawyers too, huh?

I didn't say it was automatically true. That's the claim, though. No mention of an op ed.

Except by you. Apparently it's a dream that's near and dear to you.

Okay, so it might not be about religion because her suit claims it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Physicians are not scientists? They don't do clinical and actual research?

Okay, whatever.

Your opinion on what is and what is not a scientist isn't terribly relevant anyways. The scientific community will march on without you and physicians will continue to contribute to it.

No, psychologists are not scientists. Why do you keep attacking things I do not say?

Also, anyone who ignores data just because it does not fit his theory is not a scientist, he is a hack.

I'd place psychologists in the field of social sciences and psychiatrists in the field of hard scientists. So if you claim that psychiatrists are not scientists, it's ludricrous.

Or maybe your comments were psychologist specific, but then you still have to contend with the American Psyciatric Association that holds the same belief or the American Academy of Pediatrics:
Official Statement Concerning Homosexuality from the American Academy of Pediatrics | CLGS

First, I specifically claimed that psychologists are not scientists, I have not mentioned psychologists because I understand the difference bewteen them. Until this point you have been giving the same weight to both of them, simply because you agree with their opinion.

Second, an opinion is still an opinion, even if it is held by Albert Einstein. I do not want opinions, I want evidence. Show me some evidence that homosexuality is a state of being, and not a choice one makes. You are the one that is insisting that the consensus is scientific, if it is it should be based on science. If, on the other hand, it is just an opinion, it is no more valid than mine.

 

[ConHog]

No, psychologists are not scientists. Why do you keep attacking things I do not say?

Also, anyone who ignores data just because it does not fit his theory is not a scientist, he is a hack.

I'd place psychologists in the field of social sciences and psychiatrists in the field of hard scientists. So if you claim that psychiatrists are not scientists, it's ludricrous.

Or maybe your comments were psychologist specific, but then you still have to contend with the American Psyciatric Association that holds the same belief or the American Academy of Pediatrics:
Official Statement Concerning Homosexuality from the American Academy of Pediatrics | CLGS

First, I specifically claimed that psychologists are not scientists, I have not mentioned psychologists because I understand the difference bewteen them. Until this point you have been giving the same weight to both of them, simply because you agree with their opinion.

Second, an opinion is still an opinion, even if it is held by Albert Einstein. I do not want opinions, I want evidence. Show me some evidence that homosexuality is a state of being, and not a choice one makes. You are the one that is insisting that the consensus is scientific, if it is it should be based on science. If, on the other hand, it is just an opinion, it is no more valid than mine.

I disagree with on this point to the Nth degree. There is a huge difference between an opinion and a learned opinion. For instance, your opinion in the law thread we are involved in simply is not as valid as the legal opinion of my wife. That's a fact.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I disagree with on this point to the Nth degree. There is a huge difference between an opinion and a learned opinion. For instance, your opinion in the law thread we are involved in simply is not as valid as the legal opinion of my wife. That's a fact.

If it is a learned opinion it is based on facts and evidence. If it is just based on personal belief, or going along with others, then it is not a learned opinion, whoever has it. The "scientific consensus" that homosexuality is a state of being is not based on facts and evidence, it it was someone could point to those facts and evidence, all they can do is point to the opinion.

See the difference?

 

[Madeline]

I don't think law and medicine are completely comparable, Quantum Windbag. A lay person can certainly master a particular law or case.....what law school and practicing law gives a person is a broad knowledge of the American legal system, so that if it aids in comprehension, the law or case can be placed in context. But none of this is something any reasonably intelligent person couldn't acquire with time. I'm sure there are terrific "jailhouse lawyers" for this very reason -- they had the time and motivation to learn.

Medicine seems different to me. I don't know what would substitute adequately for the anatomy classes, the training, the floor work with patients. And mebbe this is just my bias, but I don't think "any reasonably intelligent person" could master the body of knowledge required of a MD no matter how much time was given. They doubtless could become versed about a particular drug, or whatnot. But the whole human body? That I think likely exceeds most folks' capacities.

 

[Coyote]

PS, I'm working on my Human SErvices Management degree...my best friend has a degree in psychology.

I have yet to see any fucking agreement where we are required to state we'll believe a certain way, and put aside our Christian beliefs.

And someone needs to smack whomever thinks Christians should be excluded from schools and degree programs based upon their religion need to admit they're fucking Nazi sympathizers, bigots, and deserve to have the shit knocked out of them. Regularly.

Calm down.

It has nothing to do with "believing" a certain way and everything to do with being able to fulfill the degree requirements and conduct their profession in a manner in accordance with their professions accepted standards.

Kindly point out where anyone things Christians should be excluded from schools and degree programs based on their religion? Get real!

 

[ConHog]

I disagree with on this point to the Nth degree. There is a huge difference between an opinion and a learned opinion. For instance, your opinion in the law thread we are involved in simply is not as valid as the legal opinion of my wife. That's a fact.

If it is a learned opinion it is based on facts and evidence. If it is just based on personal belief, or going along with others, then it is not a learned opinion, whoever has it. The "scientific consensus" that homosexuality is a state of being is not based on facts and evidence, it it was someone could point to those facts and evidence, all they can do is point to the opinion.

See the difference?

Hey, I happen to agree that they don't have it right, but someone in any particular field is going to have a more knowledgable opinion than someone who isn't.

I mean look at some of the people on this board who spout opinions which are clearly invalid. They have no basis in fact , and are nothing except for a person having diarrhea of the keyboard and being unable to admit that they in fact do NOT know what they are talking about. For instance, how can you have a a valid opinion of whether sanctuary cities are legal when you can't even understand the basic premise of Article Six of the US COTUS? Or in the case of this thread, how can one have a valid opinion when one doesn't understand that religious discrimination is the issue here, or maybe understands it, but won't admit it?

I guess what I'm saying is that not all opinions are created equal.

 

[ConHog]

PS, I'm working on my Human SErvices Management degree...my best friend has a degree in psychology.

I have yet to see any fucking agreement where we are required to state we'll believe a certain way, and put aside our Christian beliefs.

And someone needs to smack whomever thinks Christians should be excluded from schools and degree programs based upon their religion need to admit they're fucking Nazi sympathizers, bigots, and deserve to have the shit knocked out of them. Regularly.

Calm down.

It has nothing to do with "believing" a certain way and everything to do with being able to fulfill the degree requirements and conduct their profession in a manner in accordance with their professions accepted standards.

Kindly point out where anyone things Christians should be excluded from schools and degree programs based on their religion? Get real!

You get real. The student in this case made the statement that that is exactly what she was told by a school official. I have yet to see that statement refuted.

 

[ConHog]

a little further research led me to THIS article where claims are made that her grades were not the issue at all. And in fact school officials seem to admit this as they talk about how she will have to go through their little reeducation plan

'Lose Christianity or face expulsion'

 

[AllieBaba]

PS, I'm working on my Human SErvices Management degree...my best friend has a degree in psychology.

I have yet to see any fucking agreement where we are required to state we'll believe a certain way, and put aside our Christian beliefs.

And someone needs to smack whomever thinks Christians should be excluded from schools and degree programs based upon their religion need to admit they're fucking Nazi sympathizers, bigots, and deserve to have the shit knocked out of them. Regularly.

Calm down.

It has nothing to do with "believing" a certain way and everything to do with being able to fulfill the degree requirements and conduct their profession in a manner in accordance with their professions accepted standards.

Kindly point out where anyone things Christians should be excluded from schools and degree programs based on their religion? Get real!

Read the fucking thread, that's what it's about. And it is said, in this very thread, that Christians shouldn't enter into human service programs because their religion makes them unsuited.

And a neg rep for telling me to calm down. Kiss my ass.

 

[Oscar Wao]

World Net Daily?

I guess I can post links to GLAAD, PFLAG, and the like to back up the validity of homosexuality?

I guess I can post links to NORML as an argument to legalize weeed?

 

[calvin]

thanx for sharing

 

[AllieBaba]

World Net Daily?

I guess I can post links to GLAAD, PFLAG, and the like to back up the validity of homosexuality?

I guess I can post links to NORML as an argument to legalize weeed?

No thanks, that's already been done.

World Net Daily is actually a pretty good little rag, as far as I can tell. They focus on Christian issues and write from a position of faith, but other than that I think the journalism is ok.

 

[Oscar Wao]

IOW, it's an agenda-based site, just like PFLAG, NORMAL, NOW, etc. are.

 

[Madeline]

I have to admit, the lady got herself one helluva lawyer. I wonder how long he stared at the facts of her case before he (or she) stumbled onto the idea of framing this as a religious freedom issue.

And one other thing...not for nothing, but I got a few grades I felt were undeservedly low in college. It never, ever crossed my mind to sue over them. I don't happen to think this is a delightful new development in American education.

 

[AllieBaba]

Ah, yet another theory.

First there's the theory that she submitted an oped as an academic paper.

Then there's the lie that Christians can't work in human services.

Now the theory that she was getting bad grades so made up an excuse.

The attorney has already seen the evidence. That's why they're suing.

 

[Immanuel]

World Net Daily?

I guess I can post links to GLAAD, PFLAG, and the like to back up the validity of homosexuality?

I guess I can post links to NORML as an argument to legalize weeed?

I'd love to see GLAAD's or PFLAG's point of view on this case. Have you looked those up yet and might you have a link?

I realize you are probably offline at the moment. I'll see what I can find on it.

Immie

 

[Annie]

Its not about her religion, its about the refusal to accept the facts.

She needs to know just like you can not get a degree in Anthropology if you insist the world was made in 7 days , you can not have a couseling degree if you are going to insist being gay is a crime. Its against the sceince of the field.

Do you ever stop lying?

Immie

how is he lying? the school doesn't deny Christians they just don't graduate people who don't fit in with their ethics system. I would hope that all professions/schools like this would have an ethics system that they are required to follow and don't just accredit anyone who comes through

And 'what if' the faculty were to change to a majority that agreed with the Christian girl? Then those who thought differently would be denied degrees?

Universities are supposed to encourage diversity of thought, not little soldiers hiding under the banner of 'ethics by majority.' Science? Not yet proven there's a gay gene or some chemical deal going on. Personally I think science hasn't discovered it yet. My opinion or the majority opinion though doesn't make it 'science.'

Even the school seems to recognize the science argument weak at best, thus they throw in wanting her writing skills to strengthen. Yet the school allowed her in based upon their criteria for grad students. So, their criteria are flawed? No GRE? Didn't vet her undergrad work? Unlikely.