Term paper about "God" earns student failing grade

[Crash Davis]

My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them.
-- Abraham Lincoln, to Judge J. S. Wakefield, after Willie Lincoln's death (Willie died in 1862)

"In religion, Mr. Lincoln was about of the same opinion as Bob Ingersoll, and there is no account of his ever having changed. He went to church a few times with his family while he was President, but so far as I have been able to find out, he remained an unbeliever. Mr. Lincoln in his younger days wrote a book, in which he endeavored to prove the fallacy of the plan of salvation and the divinity of Christ."
-- Judge James M. Nelson, who had an intimate acquaintance with Lincoln in Washington, in the Louisville Times, in 1887, quoted from Franklin Steiner, The Religious Beleifs of Our Presidents, p. 137

[Crash Davis]

The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
-- George Washington, letter to the congregation of Touro Synagogue, Newport, Rhode Island, August, 1790, in Anson Phelps Stokes, Church and State in the United States, Vol 1. p. 862

Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.
-- George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792

We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition ... In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man's religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States.
-- George Washington, letter to the members of the New Church in Baltimore, January 27, 1793

If they are good workmen, they may be of Asia, Africa, or Europe. They may be Mohometans, Jews or Christians of any Sect, or they may be Atheists.
-- George Washington, letter to Tench Tilghman asking him to secure a carpenter and a bricklayer for his Mount Vernon estate, March 24, 1784

I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable Asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong.
-- George Washington, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, a Mennonite minister, May 28, 1788

[Crash Davis]

The Church was resolved to have a New Testament, and as, after the lapse of more than three hundred years, no handwriting could be proved or disproved, the Church, which like former impostors had then gotten possession of the State, had everything its own way. It invented creeds, such as that called the Apostle's Creed, the Nicean Creed, the Athanasian Creed, and out of the loads of rubbish that were presented it voted four to be Gospels, and others to be Epistles, as we now find them arranged.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

Reason and Ignorance, the opposites of each other, influence the great bulk of mankind. If either of these can be rendered sufficiently extensive in a country, the machinery of government goes easily on. Reason obeys itself; and Ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
-- Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man: Being An Answer To Mr. Burke's Attack On The French Revolution, Part the First, Conclusion

When an objection cannot be made formidable, there is some policy in trying to make it frightful; and to substitute the yell and the war-whoop, in the place of reason, argument and good order.
-- Thomas Paine

When I contemplate the natural dignity of man; when I feel (for Nature has not been kind enough to me to blunt my feelings) for the honor and happiness of its character, I become irritated at the attempt to govern mankind by force and fraud, as if they were all knaves and fools, and can scarcely avoid disgust at those who are thus imposed upon.
-- Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man

To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.
-- Thomas Paine, The Crisis

The countries the most famous and the most respected of antiquity are those which distinguished themselves by promoting and patronizing science, and on the contrary those which neglected or discouraged it are universally denominated rude and barbarous. The patronage which Britain has shown to Arts, Science and Literature has given her a better established and lasting rank in the world than she ever acquired by her arms. And Russia is a modern instance of the effect which the encouragement of those things produces both as to the internal improvement of a country and the character it raises abroad. The reign of Louis the fourteenth is more distinguished by being the Era of Science and Literature in France than by any other circumstance of those days.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

Persecution is not an original feature in any religion; but it is always the strongly marked feature of all religions established by law. Take away the law-establishment, and every religion re-assumes its original benignity.
-- Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man, 1791
‘As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of all government to protect all conscientious professors thereof, and I know of no other business which government hath to do therewith.
-- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
-- Thomas Paine, (1737-1809), The Age of Reason

It is from the Bible that man has learned cruelty, rapine and murder; for the belief of a cruel God makes a cruel man.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

There is scarcely any part of science, or anything in nature, which those imposters and blasphemers of science, called priests, as well Christians as Jews, have not, at some time or other, perverted, or sought to pervert to the purpose of superstition and falsehood.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on nothing; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing and admits of no conclusion.
-- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (1793-5)
Everything wonderful in appearance has been ascribed to angels, to devils, or to saints. Everything ancient has some legendary tale annexed to it. The common operations of nature have not escaped their practice of corrupting everything.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine
No falsehood is so fatal as that which is made an article of faith.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine
The Bible: a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalise mankind.
-- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (1793-5),

The Christian system of religion is an outrage on common sense.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine
The Bible is a book that has been read more, and examined less, than any book that ever existed.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine
Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon that the Word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.
-- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (1794)

The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion.
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine
Yet this is trash that the Church imposes upon the world as the Word of God; this is the collection of lies and contradictions called the Holy Bible! this is the rubbish called Revealed Religion!
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine

[savafan]

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

Were you raised to mention God every time you write about religion?

Well, I was raised in a strong Christian household with both of my biological parents married to each other, and that Christianity was the only truth. I didn't write about religion much in elementary school though.

When it came to my later years of education, I had chosen my own path, and when I did write about religion (which Christianity is not to me), I did mention God.

[registerthis]

Well, we know Crash Davis would get an 'A'.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by RedFanAlways1966

Absolutely. I think anyone who has had the college experience in the last 25 years suspected this from the get-go. But most are blinded by the "did not follow instructions" argument. No more said... it ends at the did not follow instructions. Something smells rotten in Denmark. Oops, I am not following instructions... this argument ends b/c some have said it should end at the follow instructions thing.

1. Assignment was given.
2. All students were required to present topic proposal for approval.
3. Subject topic was presented for approval per class requirement.
4. Student was given conditional approval for paper topic.
5. Student chose to pursue proposed topic for paper.
6. Student willingly ignored conditions of approval.
7. Student turned in rough draft that was not acceptable.
8. Professor explained parameters again and listed potential result of non-compliance regarding approved assignment parameters.
9.. Student chose to accept result of non-compliance by submitting work that was already determined to be unacceptable.

That's where it should have ended. The instructor's motivation is immaterial. The student's motivation is immaterial.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

1. Assignment was given.
2. All students were required to present topic proposal for approval.
3. Subject topic was presented for approval per class requirement.
4. Student was given conditional approval for paper topic.
5. Student chose to pursue proposed topic for paper.
6. Student willingly ignored conditions of approval.
7. Student turned in rough draft that was not acceptable.
8. Professor explained parameters again and listed potential result of non-compliance regarding approved assignment parameters.
9.. Student chose to accept result of non-compliance by submitting work that was already determined to be unacceptable.

That's where it should have ended. The instructor's motivation is immaterial. The student's motivation is immaterial.

It all changes when God is involved, evidently.

[Jaycint]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

1. Assignment was given.
2. All students were required to present topic proposal for approval.
3. Subject topic was presented for approval per class requirement.
4. Student was given conditional approval for paper topic.
5. Student chose to pursue proposed topic for paper.
6. Student willingly ignored conditions of approval.
7. Student turned in rough draft that was not acceptable.
8. Professor explained parameters again and listed potential result of non-compliance regarding approved assignment parameters.
9.. Student chose to accept result of non-compliance by submitting work that was already determined to be unacceptable.

That's where it should have ended. The instructor's motivation is immaterial. The student's motivation is immaterial.

Here is what probably should have happened and all of this would have been easily averted. Between Steps 5 and 6 of Steel's step by step plan should have come step 5.5 and 5.75 as listed below.

5.5 Student lets teacher know full well that she thinks he is abusing his position in order to further his own aetheistic beliefs. Student tells teacher that she sees through his attempt to censor something that he personally doesn't believe in.

5.75 Student then writes the paper the way the teacher requested it to be done.

That way both parties get what they want, he stifles her ability to write a paper using the word "God" which apparently would so offend his aetheistic sensibilities and she calls him on it and basically says "I'll write it your way but don't think you just got over on me."

[Reds/Flyers Fan]

I think Crash Davis wins the longest post in RZ history -- hands down. Reading that took longer than most Eric Milton starts this summer.

[Blimpie]

Originally Posted by Reds/Flyers Fan

I think Crash Davis wins the longest post in RZ history -- hands down. Reading that took longer than most Eric Milton starts this summer.

That was a post? I'd call it more like a "manifesto"

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by Jaycint

Here is what probably should have happened and all of this would have been easily averted. Between Steps 5 and 6 of Steel's step by step plan should have come step 5.5 and 5.75 as listed below.

5.5 Student lets teacher know full well that she thinks he is abusing his position in order to further his own aetheistic beliefs. Student tells teacher that she sees through his attempt to censor something that he personally doesn't believe in.

5.75 Student then writes the paper the way the teacher requested it to be done.

That way both parties get what they want, he stifles her ability to write a paper using the word "God" which apparently would so offend his aetheistic sensibilities and she calls him on it and basically says "I'll write it your way but don't think you just got over on me."

That sounds like a good solution to me.

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by RedsBaron

I would want to actually read the paper before making any judgment about its quality or the grade it deserved.
I do find the statements supposedly made by the professor to be of interest though. He apparently objected to the paper, at least in part, because the mention of God offended him. So what? A professor, even more than a student, should be able to tolerate reading ideas that "offend" him. It also appears that the professor may have had his own agenda, if he really said that "Religion has no place in government" was a better topic.

You're smearing that red herring pretty hard on that tree, there. The teacher's ideology doesn't matter. At all.

And your analogy earlier about the kindergartener not relinquishing her rights when she steps into the classroom?

I've never seen a slower "bait-and-switch" in my life. You telegraphed that baby from here to there. This isn't about "rights." At all; in the least. This is about "did you do your homework correctly or not." That's all. All that other crap about ideology and the persecuted Christians and state-funded colleges and first amendment rights; all of it has no bearing on this issue; all of it is a red herring, ungermane to the issue at hand. See, she HAD the right to use "God," no one detained her from doing so and she went ahead and did it; but the teacher is under no obligation to give her a grade that she was happy with, as long as the teacher gives her the criteria beforehand.

But something tells me I'm just wasting my time explaining this.

[RedsBaron]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

But something tells me I'm just wasting my time explaining this.

You got that right. Anytime someone wants to simply condescend and also misrepresent what I've said is really wasting his time "explaining" it to poor little stupid me-it's a wonder I ever made it out of elementary school.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by Jaycint

Here is what probably should have happened and all of this would have been easily averted. Between Steps 5 and 6 of Steel's step by step plan should have come step 5.5 and 5.75 as listed below.

5.5 Student lets teacher know full well that she thinks he is abusing his position in order to further his own aetheistic beliefs. Student tells teacher that she sees through his attempt to censor something that he personally doesn't believe in.

5.75 Student then writes the paper the way the teacher requested it to be done.

That way both parties get what they want, he stifles her ability to write a paper using the word "God" which apparently would so offend his aetheistic sensibilities and she calls him on it and basically says "I'll write it your way but don't think you just got over on me."

Problem is that her point wasn't to simply let the professor know she didn't agree with his judgment. That disagreement was made perfectly clear when she submitted her rough draft.

Her point was open defiance and it was a backstabbing attempt because she had to initially lie to the professor to get past the point of initial concept approval (i.e. he would have never allowed her to use that topic if she had told him she wouldn't follow the parameters). It's not her open defiance that burns me about this one. It was her dishonesty and failure to graciously accept the consequences of her behavior. He trusted her enough to allow her to use a topic he could just as well have quashed, and she abused that trust. When that happens, someone does get hurt, but it's not the abuser.

The professor's motivations are immaterial. We can only guess that he was her target and, as he's reported to be of an athiest mindset, he's a convenient one I guess. But we don't know. Maybe it was the kid from India sitting next to her. Might it have been the Iranian student two rows in front of her. Could have been the native Chinese girl up one row and to her left.

We don't know who. But we know that she maliciously targetted someone.

And that's all I really need to know about this one. Malicious intent. Dishonest actions. Blaming others for her own behavior. And she's using her Faith as a sheild. Wow. Just wow.

[RedsBaron]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

The professor's motivations are immaterial. We can only guess that he was her target and, as he's reported to be of an athiest mindset, he's a convenient one I guess. But we don't know. Maybe it was the kid from India sitting next to her. Might it have been the Iranian student two rows in front of her. Could have been the native Chinese girl up one row and to her left.

We don't know who. But we know that she maliciously targetted someone.

And that's all I really need to know about this one. Malicious intent. Dishonest actions. Blaming others for her own behavior. And she's using her Faith as a sheild. Wow. Just wow.

How do you "know" she "targeted" anyone?
Maybe she did. Maybe she wrote a terrible paper (I've already noted that I would want to read the paper before forming any kind of opinion as to what kind of grade she deserved). But how do we "know' what her motives are?