Spokane7
59°Quick links: 2012 graduating seniors • Summer camp guide • Jobs: The Road Ahead • Prep sports • News quiz
The goal of creating a tolerant environment is a noble one. The problem is, the neutral position 
we are aiming for does not exist. Cleansing academia of any reference to God does not create an unbiased, intellectual environment. On the contrary, it makes a very strong statement about the existence and importance of God. Claiming we can study a given field without any sort of reference to God assumes even if God exists, he isn’t necessary to explain the world. That is not a neutral position. We think removing questions of God from the classroom will put everyone on equal footing, but what it does in reality is to assume an atheistic view of the world. Atheism means “without god.” Therefore, if we remove God from the discussion, we are engaging in an atheistic education, not a neutral one/Benjamin Ledford, Argonaut. More here.
Question: Ledford maintains that colleges and universities foster an environment in the name of tolerance that supports atheism. Do you agree or disagree?
D.F. Oliveria is a columnist and blogger for The Spokesman-Review. Huckleberries Online was judged the best 2008 Idaho newspaper blog by the Idaho Press Club. And the best 2007 news blog in the Pacific Northwest by the Society for Professional Journalist. Print Huckleberries is a past winner of the Herb Caen Memorial Column contest by the National Association of Newspaper Columnists. The Readership Institute of Northwestern University cited this blog as a good example of online community journalism.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
Find DFO on Facebook
DFO on Twitter
toadman on March 13 at 9:35 a.m.
Ledford’s simplistic analysis is quaint, and wrong. I have yet to be in a class in all my college career where the belief in God, or the concept of “god” wasn’t discussed (where the subject matter warranted such a discussion…it rarely came up in math courses).
Ledford’s argument is anti-intellectualism, at it’s best.
toadman on March 13 at 9:37 a.m.
…and I see you added a nice little picture of Darwin, who was NOT an atheist, by the way.
poolman on March 13 at 9:55 a.m.
I don’t think there is any value in mixing religion or “God” in with the sciences (math, physics, chemistry,…). If you want to discuss the role religion played on historical events, literature, art etc. that’s great. I would love to go back to a university and take a theology class – I’m totally fascinated by the different belief systems and how they originated. I’m not sure what this guys point is. Is he a bible thumper and not getting enough Jesus in his scholastic diet - Dude - go to church…
Arch_Druid on March 13 at 9:57 a.m.
Toadman, I would argue, which version of God that explains the world? I’d have to say that “BL” doesn’t much harken to history where some of this nation’s greatest conflicts were based on a concept of God. Whether it was Mormon v the mainstream. Roman Catholic v Protestant. References to God in one’s studies was to tell the unwanted just how unwelcome they happened to be. By insisting on religious tolerance, it assures that all are welcome to study in school. And that what they believe or choose not to is not up to the educational system to decide. I highly doubt that people became atheist because of such tolerance. But I can see where more people are turning away from religion undoubtedly because of its extreme political activism.
cantyoureadthesigns on March 13 at 10:00 a.m.
This is absurd.
What is the function of talking about God in Accounting classes? Finance? Animal Husbandry? Ornamental Horticulture? Math/Calculus? Statistics? Physics? Chemistry? Anatomy? Agronomy? Fluid Dynamics?
Agricultural Business Management? (Praying for rain in a drought year?)
Sure, there are areas where concept and dimensions of God and religion might, in fact does come into discussion, especially in Literature, Cultural, Psychology, History, Philosophy, and probably many others.
Ledford is ignorant and wrong.
toadman on March 13 at 10:07 a.m.
Ledford’s commentary is actually a thinly veiled statement…that statement is, “I don’t want to have to deal with the idea that there are people who have different believe systems from my own and would therefore live in a world that is intolerant of people who do not share my faith.”
Learning in an environment of religious neutrality is difficult for people who don’t like to think hard, question their beliefs and/or their god. If you fear for your faith, then stay away from strangers, and go to a college sponsored by your faith. But I believe people lose out on so much by challenging their beliefs, or trying to understand people of different faiths. It’s too bad Ledford doesn’t have the mental fortitude, or a strong enough religious faith to do just this.
IMO, he’s an intellectual weakling.
Now, to be sure, someone is going to say “But Toadman, aren’t you being intolerant of Ledford’s intolerance?” This is a dumb and endlessly circular statement that has no place in an adult conversation, so just don’t go there. Really.
Arch_Druid on March 13 at 10:28 a.m.
I think that you put it together quite well, Toadman. Now shall I make the argument that this is what I regard as not conservative about Christianity today? The biblical Christ did not curtail which neighbors you could safely love. In fact in the book of Luke, he even said that perfect love was to love even one’s enemies. A conservative Christian would not fear people of another belief because he would indeed be secure in his own. And a conservative Christian wouldn’t be aiming battering rams at secular institutions such as public education to insist that only his or her philosophy get taught. To impose it on people not necessarily of that sectarian faith just because “I want to be sure that MY kids receive this instruction.” What’s wrong with being the parent who teaches his or her kids the value of that faith? What’s wrong with taking them to the church of one’s choice and having them instructed in the values of one’s faith? I believe that’s what churches are for. I believe that’s why holy books are out on the market to begin with so that people can make use of their own time and incentives to learn all they need to about their particular faith.
It’s called laziness and a need for gvt intervention to protect most exclusively specified faiths. And the biblical apostle Paul had something to say about that, and it wasn’t positive.
Aliasjax on March 13 at 10:31 a.m.
I for one am with Ledford on this one. I think all Pastafarians should unite behind him and demand a mandatory class, “Flying Spaghetti Monster 101” be offered at all schools so all of us Pastafarians can get educated from a perspective that honors the real creator of all things.
Sisyphus on March 13 at 10:36 a.m.
“Dude - go to church…”—last I checked there were several all around campus.
scootermom on March 13 at 10:50 a.m.
I seem to recall a lot of discussion about religion when I was in college. It’s important to understand what others believe, and how it fits into the bigger picture.
Comparative religion is an important area of study for those in the social sciences. Not so sure how it would relate to engineering or science …
“Removing God from the classroom” is wingnut lanuage that’s code for returning evangelical Christian theology as a mandatory subject of study and omitting any and all philosophies that conflict with the Bible.
Rosalind on March 13 at 11:00 a.m.
Ledford’s logic: if one does not discuss God, one is being atheist. If one discusses God, one is providing a religiously neutral environment.
HILARIOUS.
I hope Ledford is discussing Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and all the other faiths of the world during these classes as well. Otherwise he’s just being a huge hypocrite.
If he were a student in my class constantly bringing up all the religions of the world, I might have to tell him to shut his mouth so I could get some teaching done.
toadman on March 13 at 11:02 a.m.
scootermom.. it’s definitely coded information, it has to be, it doesn’t make sense if it’s not because mostly, his commentary is complete gibberish to rational people.
cantyoureadthesigns on March 13 at 11:16 a.m.
“toadman on March 13 at 11:02 a.m.
scootermom.. it’s definitely coded information, it has to be, it doesn’t make sense if it’s not because mostly, his commentary is complete gibberish to rational people.”
Having now read the rest of his editorials in the Argonaut, yep, complete gibberish, well except for one good column about Iraq not needing democracy as the US defines it.
Sad, really, that the Argonaut doesn’t have a conservative columnist (or perhaps they do, not sure) who actually has a grip on reality and logic.
“Dude, go to church”
Mr. Ledford need not even leave campus to engage in spiritual discussion and worship in an academic setting. As but one example, Campus Crusade for Christ, has a large oncampus program with five full time staff.
http://www.uiweb.uidaho.edu/student_orgs/crusade/staff.html
saraeanderson on March 13 at 12:34 p.m.
I thought this argument was routed before Ben was born.
Liz on March 13 at 2:50 p.m.
I have to say, I have returned to the classroom a couple of times in my adulthood. As an evangelical Christian, what I have found is this: if you are respectful that others do have a right to believe something else, then you are for the most part also respected even with politically incorrect views. The ones who come out spoiling for a fight and imply an insult along with a carefully (or more likely NOT so carefully) thought out argument wind up slinking out with their tails between their legs feeling like they were “persecuted”. I have never, ever been wishy washy about what I believe in class and I have never been put down for it, even by very liberal professors. I even got an A on a paper once that pretty much contradicted everything that the professor claimed to believe. Because I try to go about it in a respectful way. Jesus was truthful. But he was always respectful about it and didn’t stoop to calling people names or telling them that they were stupid for believing what they did.
toadman on March 13 at 3:04 p.m.
Liz, that’s exactly as it should be, I think. Mutual respect for the beliefs of others leads, in my opinion, to a healthier understanding of one another, and a more civil society.
fortboise on March 13 at 9:59 p.m.
As a former Argonaut columnist, I have some affection for the misguided and charming rhetoric of the not-yet-fully-formed.
But I would have to say that Mr. Ledford isn’t paying sufficient attention in class. It’s been a long, long time, but I remember religion coming up in plenty of my courses. Philosophy, Art History, Anthropology, American Literature, without going back to check my transcript. Not so much in Calculus, Geology, Biology, Botany, engineering stuff… but hallelujah, it doesn’t matter if you’re an atheist or a sectarian, this “God” thing suffuses every blessed subject under the sun.