A federal judge upheld the University of California's decision to deny students credit for some courses offered by Christian high schools, rejecting claims of discrimination and infringement of free expression.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Chris Carlson)In this file photo, students leave the campus at Calvary Chapel Christian School Tuesday, Jan. 3, 2005, in Murrieta, Calif. The University of California has refused to approve courses at Calvary, which in turn has filed a lawsuit against the university system.
U.S. District Judge S. James Otero of Los Angeles ruled against arguments from Calvary Chapel Christian School of Murrieta and Calvary Baptist School in La Verne and said UC's review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the courses, which include English, history, government and religion.
The university's decision was constitutional, the judge said in a final ruling issued Friday, noting that the UC did not reject the specific courses because of "animus," or anti-religious bias. The ruling follows Otero's decision in March that upheld the university's system of approving high school classes.
Calvary Chapel and the Association of Christian Schools International filed a lawsuit in 2005 when UC did not give credit for some courses when considering students' eligibility for university admission. The Christian school argued that UC unconstitutionally treated Calvary students unequally compared to other students and denied to honor courses that had a "Christian viewpoint" or "any instance of God's guidance of history, or any alternative ... to evolution."
The lawsuit contends that the UC school system has refused to approve over 150 courses that were intended to be taught by Christian, Catholic, and Jewish high schools merely because they were to be taught from a religious viewpoint. Calvary Chapel and ACSI argue that the UC is attempting to force Christian schools to water down their teaching.
"It appears the UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools," attorney Jennifer Monk of Advocates for Faith and Freedom said Tuesday, in a released statement.
The federal judge, however, ruled that UC rejected the courses not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they were too narrow to fulfill UC's entrance requirements.
UC has approved many courses containing religious material and viewpoints but it denies credit to courses that rely largely or entirely on material stressing supernatural over historic or scientific explanations, the judge said, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. Such books would be acceptable as supplementary reading, but not as the main textbook, UC says.
One of the courses the university rejected was a history course called Christianity's Influence on America. The primary text in that course "instructs that the Bible is the unerring source for analysis of historical events" and evaluates historical figures based on their religious motivations, one UC professor on the review committee said. Another text, "Biology for Christian Schools," declares that "if [scientific] conclusions contradict the Word of God, the conclusions are wrong," Otero said.
"No one is questioning the right of Calvary Chapel to teach what they want to teach. But what the case says is that when you do that, there may be consequences," David Masci, a senior research fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, said Tuesday, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Charles Robinson, the university's vice president for legal affairs, argued that the ruling "confirms that UC may apply the same admissions standards to all students and to all high schools without regard to their religious affiliations."
The case has drawn wide attention as the role of religion in public education was in dispute.
Charles Haynes, senior scholar on religious liberty issues at the First Amendment Center in Arlington, Va., had said before Friday's ruling that the case could have "serious implications" for religious schools across the country if the university wins.
Attorney Robert Tyler, who represents Calvary and a group of 4,000 Christian schools nationwide, said "this case is about the future of private religious education and the right to be able to have your kids learn from a religious perspective."
The decision has already been appealed, said Tyler, whose four children attend Calvary Christian.
The appeal will argue that the district judge applied the wrong legal principles as articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court and disregarded evidence showing the UC’s practice of rejecting courses merely because the officials disagree with the religious perspective from which a course may be taught.
RSS
This is just the beginning for Christians. This doesn't even cover the fact that the universities and public colleges are being infiltrated with Muslim teachers. Once many university and college instructors are predominately Muslim they will teach hatred against Christianity.
Islam has called for a new approach to transform the world into Islam by reducing the violence and becoming peaceful and infiltrating the high levels of education, corporations, businesses, and government.
A spokesperson for CAIR has stated that, â
I've looked throuth the postings all the ways back. The link you put up must have fallen off. Please repost it.
Thanks!
"Why do you try to make humanism out to be a bad thing, its based around personal liberty and freedom"
The basis of Christianity is to die to self and live for Christ. As you can see Christianity and humanism are quite opposed to each other. Humanism finds liberty and freedom in self...Christianity finds none in self but true liberty and freedom in Christ.
Why do you try to make humanism out to be a bad thing, its based around personal liberty and freedom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
"Christian schools are standing up and saying no to humanism."
No, they are trying to enforce their own standards for entrance requirements for the UC. These kids could always go to some school like Liberty U or Pat Roberts U. They are trying to force UC, which is secular, (note the difference from private religous based schools) into caving into accepting non accredited courses, how hard is this to comprehend?
This would be like getting a 1100 on your SAT and crying that UC Berkeley, or Standford rejected you and then going on a hissy fit trying to sue them.
"I think that if the HS course is accredited"
Go back and read the article I cited earlier, the judge defined WHY those classes they took are not accredited and can't be substitued for college level coursework.
Here's the key issue...UC is long known for their attempts to force humanisim as the only true belief and all others are secondary to humanism. These Christian schools are standing up and saying no to humanism. How dare they! The STATE run school says you must accept humanism as your primary religion...yes it was ruled as a religion by the US Supreme Court in the 80s.
I think that if the HS course is accredited then they need to file a 504 complaint against UC. Let the Office of Civil Rights at the US Department of Education determine if it was a violation of their FEDERAL civil rights which could bring unfortunate sanctions against UC. This is the checks and balances available between the state level and federal level. If they want federal funds and federal accreditation they have to play ball.
Rollin
Hi. Is the Bible a historical document? or is it fiction? this is a false choice. Of course Bibles are historical documents (I use the plural since historiclly there are many distinct books that are often interchangably reffered to as the bible for example King James is one vulgate another) each of these is a historical document. Does being historical make something true or false? No. What it seems your really asking is whether the bible as we know it today is a historically accurate account of the past times which are the subject of its contents. This question isn't really sensible either since their are many translations which are not fully consistent in there statements or contents. Also of course the Bible is not one book but rather many different books bound together. Some of the books of the bible do not even assert themselves to be historical in the nature of their content (psalms for example). On the other hand there are many aspects of Biblical "history" which are independently corroborated by other sources including archaeological evidence. So I would say the only sensible answer to that question is that some of the Bible is valid history, some is literature, some is spiritual teachings, Some is reverent poetry, etc.
HL Mencken said that every complex problem has a simple solution and invariably it is wrong.
Just FYI, the Bible college my dad worked for also had questions about giving credit for some course work in some cases. It isn't always about religion. We'll just have to wait to get more facts.
"In other words, the high schools are not stressing actual fact based science, and instead invoking supernaturalism to explain things. And you are wondering why they are rejected still?"
Well, here's the catch. My dad is a retired college dean and SACS representative (who does accreditation). What has happened here is a choice made by UC. Either the course is accredited for college bound credit or it's not. If UC says THEY will not accept the course they have that option. However, as long as the course contains all the information required for accreditation it can also include all the 'God did it' it wants to.
The question still remains...is the coursework the HS is using accredited or not. If it isn't then UC has the option and may be in the right. If it is accredited by the west coasts equiv. of SACS then it's going to be quite a fight!
Thanks believer, I appreciate your reply to my question.
Best Wishes
Steve
steveh20, sorry I missed your post, but yes I do agree with you that if we don't like something we need to be involved in changing it if at all possible and I am actively involved in doing just that through various ways. But I do see a definite trend in our country against the Biblical Worldview and towards those who adhere to that view and the recent court decisions in California are a good example.
crc said: "Our founding fathers would 'roll in their graves'. This country is so anti-God, anti-Bible it's unbelievable. I think I'm living in some foreign country run by dictators or something."
First, the phrase "foreign country" has no meaning unless a particular frame of reference (read: a 'home' country) has been identified. For the sake of rebutting, I'll assume your 'home' country is the U.S.
Second, if your founding fathers are "roll[ing] in their graves", then perhaps you aren't in the U.S. after all... Recall, our founding fathers specifically opposed a particular religious sponsorship, they did not allow women to vote, they viewed most blacks as slaves, concubines, or both, and some (e.g. George Washington) grew large quantities of marijuana.
*My* founding fathers, in the U.S., would be pleased by this ruling.
--
Stan
jsmith175 said: "Perhaps UC should be forced to test these students on the knowledge of the courses instead of whether it was taught with a certain worldview or not."
While this is absolutely true, it is not the question at hand. In fact, UC schools follow the "a-g system" to determine eligibility in the absence of accepted courses. Every single student whose high school courses have been rejected based on this controversy can, and probably will, pass this "a-g system" to gain acceptance.
The question is instead whether the UC system has the right to require certain key academic benchmarks to be met, which this court ruling has correctly determined that yes, they do.
The bottom line is this: If you want your kids to attend a UC school, teach to the standard. If you refuse to teach to that standard, send them to ORU.
--
Stan
a few sections of the bible appear to be historical. i.e. that they contain a description of an event or place that can be confirmed by other sources. other sections appear to be written by authors who were describing an event that happened outside of their personal experience. usually long before. some of these reports can be verified or denied by original sources.
many sections are a collection of tales and folk memories. these cannot be checked. they may represent personal experiences or they may be entirely fictional. think of james frey's a million little pieces as bad example of personal experience as truth.
lastly and most importantly the bible as we know it, is a committee report organized by the state to approve the official religion and insure compliance to prevent disruption and rebellion against the state. and its translastion, publication and distribution has been carefully controlled and monitored for several centuries.
given this history of the book and the ommi-present hand of the state in its history, i find it very suggestive that there are those that believe it to be the true word of a god and not the work of men. the bible you have in your hands is a product of government, not god.
I tend to approach it as faction.
Hey Chicago-
How do you know that the Bible is "NOT" an historical document? Are you saying that Bible is fictional?