Sorry, I needed to go on a little rant for a while.

I was just reading through my "GPTI Handbook" and came across the following passage:


Religious Sensitivity

Religious topics may affect some students far more intensely than instructors imagine. Obviously religion will arise in many valid discussions, but the instructor has an obligation to avoid scrupulously any hint of religious bias or any suggestion of denigrating any religious belief, religious practice, or public policies based upon such beliefs and practices.

It is, unfortunately, all too easy for the instructor to cloak in sarcasm a position which the instructor finds silly or harmful but which the student may link to a deeply held religious belief. It is up to the instructor to recognize when such issues arise and to read his or her behavior accordingly.

The instructor should take pains to steer students away from writing about religion or social and political policies arising from religious belief, and the instructor should take further pains to encourage students to avoid using religious belief, liturgy, or the Bible as evidence to support a thesis or claim.

Specifically, the instructor should resist having students write about abortion, prayer in the schools, evolution versus creationism, and the validity of Holy Scripture.


Some of this is a little troubling to me, primarily the last two paragraphs. Of course, religion is a tricky topic in a diverse composition classroom. Of course, religion is a dangerous subject. As ol' Hauerwas (I think) says, "Any religion worth dying for can become a religion worth killing for." In a classroom context, it's sure to spark heated debate. Sure. But it seems a lot more dangerous to me to sweep it under the rug because it might cause impassioned feelings. A teacher can encourage mature thought on religious matters without either evangelizing or denigrating a religious view. In fact, that religious belief can be so dangerous is precisely the reason it should be discussed and debated in classrooms and in student writing. The impoverishment of religious thought in our American churches is largely a product our liberalistic (not "liberal") schools denying the students the opportunity to think about the matter. Students leave school with no ability to critically think and question the impoverished religious discourse surrounding them, and of course, that makes them vulnerable to the shallow pseudo-Christian/political ideologues running things at the moment. Certainly, our churches have to take a lot (in fact most) of blame for this too. We don't teach people how to think theologically, and we've basically given into liberalism. We've let Caesar run us for a long time now. But I think my school should also see that their decision to ignore religion in the classroom and in their students' lives isn't going to help things improve. Furthermore, it's difficult for me to see why writing theologically about a subject isn't valid. Certainly, a scientific argument against evolution that uses the Bible isn't valid and a legal argument using the Bible isn't either. A theological argument on these subjects, on the other hand, should be a perfectly valid context within which the students could draw on their faith. For instance, when I hear the question of abortion, I totally reject the use of legal language. I won't go into my thoughts here except to say that for me the subject is not at all an issue of rights. I wouldn't think any argument within a Christian theological context valid that appeals to human rights or that tries to determine when life begins. I can, however, recognize a good legal argument, written within an American legal context, and can assess how well the argument is made within that context. I could give a well made legal argument an A. I personally would not be influenced by it because I reject the narrative forming such an American legal argument, but I could assess the writing that occurs within that context fairly. It seems to me that our system should be the same. Just because certain individuals within our academic program reject and are not comfortable with any religious narrative doesn't mean that they should deny their students the opportunity to write within those contexts. I don't want to make this argument on the basis of rights either, though I think that argument could easily be made. It just seems that the department is showing their students an enormous lack of respect and is doing a great disservice to them (though, of course, this is nothing new).

ACU keeps looking better and better every day.