# Would this kind of religious persecution be allowed in college? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 14, 2014, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724 "2014-03-14T21:23:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2014, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/201 "2014-03-21T19:40:22Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > That is giving waaaaaay too much power to the claimant to get out of doing anything they don’t like. Not at all. Recognizing that any claimed religious objection is a valid one and worthy of being treated as such, does not mean that raising a religious objection allows a student to automatically pass an assignment, or a class. It means a good-faith effort to accomodate the objection. We had a [recent thread that raised these issues that we both posted in](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=712633&highlight=policy), in that case, the university’s policy was as follows: > [@](#): > > To grant a religious accommodation, the university must decide the beliefs are sincere, and that it will not interfere with other students’ experience or harm the course’s academic integrity. That is a fine policy. Applying it to the case at hand in this thread, we can surely agree that the student’s beliefs are sincere. I’d say it’s almost self-evident that the student not writing those exact words would not interfere with the other students’ experience, or harm the course’s academic integrity. Would you agree? If not, why? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > I believe that in this case, there needs to be some sort of commonly understood validity of the claim in order for someone to use it as an excuse. Therefore, in the context of a classroom, I would empower professors to use their discretion to decide which religious claims offer a valid excuse to get out of classwork. If there are objections, the student can take it up the chain of command. > > Note that I am not saying that professors get to decide which religions are real or false. I am addressing the religiously neutral criteria of which types of objection merits consideration. Refusing to write something on a piece of paper, in my view, is not valid, whether the content of the statement is religious or not, I assert that it is more about the method than the content. Establishing the criteria for which religious objections are valid and which are not cannot be religiously neutral. How could it possibly be? If a student’s religious belief is that any denial of their God in any form is unacceptable, then a policy that an objection to writing “God is dead” is not a valid objection isn’t religiously neutral, is it? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Obviously, you could say that in this case, both the real world and the movie world versions, the student did take it up the chain of command (dunno for sure about the movie, but it probably would be a second resort) and the bosses disagreed. That’s ok, the procedure to object is there. But I think that the logic of the professors in both cases are unassailable and it is a valid lesson. A different dean of the school might see it differently, that’s the point. Are you referring to the FAU stomp-on-Jesus incident as the real-world case? The facts of that [are in dispute](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/01/stomp-on-jesus-professor_n_2990116.html), but they strongly suggest that the student who refused to step on the peice of paper wasn’t punished for refusing (for example, the professor’s lesson plan indicated that discussion was to follow the activity, with no pass/fail or grading involved as to whether a student stepped on the paper; the plan anticipated that some would decline to do so.) I don’t object at all to the FAU assignment. The bright-line distinction between it and the movie scenario is that in the former, no one was punished for declining to state a particular view. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > The goal is not to let any spurious claim be given serious consideration. Sometimes the professor should be able to say “you fail” and that’s it It’s simply baffling to me that you don’t understand that allowing the professor to dismiss a religious objection as “spurious” is allowing the professor to decide which religious views are true, or should be taken seriously, and which are not. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > I think this situation is analogous to a medical school where the student was a Christian science whackjob and refused to do some required work and claimed religious exemption, I would fail him too. Refer to the model policy I suggest above. In that case, certainly, the student can’t pass the class, because their religious objection to practicing medicine obviously harms the academic integrity of a class on medicine. It’s simply not possible to learn medicine without performing medical work, and no reasonable accomodation is possible. None of this is applicable to the scenario in the OP. If the value to be had from the exercise is a discussion of the power of symbols, as **Left Hand of Dorkness** noted above, and as the FAU professor anticipated, having one or more students refuse _serves_ the exercise, it doesn’t undermine it. Even if it didn’t, if a reasonable alternative assignment can be found, it should be assigned. Proving god exists is not a reasonable alternative to writing three words, any more than inventing cold fusion is a reasonable alternative to shaking hands. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > The professor put himself in the line of fire and caused part of the problem, that I don’t disagree with. But I don’t agree the style of his teaching is the wrong way, merely a more inconvenient way. > > The student himself holds some responsibility. He could have just wrote it. No skin off his nose And the little Jehovah’s Witness kids could have just [said the pledge of allegience.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minersville_School_District_v._Gobitis) No skin off their nose. But, luckily, in this country, we enjoy freedom of religion, so they didn’t have to violate their beliefs for no reason. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > In a philosophy class? I don’t, especially a short, written assignment. Well, that’s such a fundamental difference of understanding that I doubt we’ll ever see eye-to-eye on this. Religious objections are always valid, and should always be accomodated when it’s reasonable to do so, regardless of what class it is. Certainly, sometime reasonable accomodation is impossible, like your med student example, or a student who insists that only males be allowed to speak in class, or that he be allowed to sacrifice a goat before every exam. The scenario in the OP isn’t one of those times. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > I would be interested in knowing what your response would be to a hypothetical situation, so that I can better understand where you’re coming from. > > Suppose a philosophy professor, on the first day of class, asked all the students to separate by religions. For ease, let’s just say you have atheists and agnostics on one side, and Christians of various denominations on the other. And the assignment was that for whatever side they are on, they have to write an essay against their beliefs. Atheists have to write a convincing essay that a god exists, and Christians have to write that god doesn’t exist. One Christian student objects. Would you consider that a valid objection? Should the professor not assign him something he disagrees with? > > You may reply that all students are given the same assignment, so lets take it further. Suppose all the students except that one objects, and he is offered to either take a fail or a different assignment: he, unlike his fellow Christians, gets to write an essay on why god exists. Do you think he’s being punished then? What if instead of an essay, he has to do a whole semester long project culminating in a presentation on why god exists? Again, the objection is always valid. The questions are whether it can reasonably be accommodated, and whether the assignment was itself disciminatory. In this case, the question would be: would a student writing an essay on why God exists, as opposed to one on why one doesn’t exist, harm the academic integrity of the course? I can see how it could, if the point is to defend other viewpoints. Is there another reasonable alternative available? Yes: write an essay defending some other belief the student doesn’t hold, of which there are plenty to choose from. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Aren’t you putting yourself as the arbiter of scholarly decisions? Why is that ok but giving the professor the leeway to trust that his decisions are meaningful for the class he’s teaching not ok? Let’s say you don’t know much about quantum physics, would you object if a hypothetical QP professor gives an assignment you can’t see the value of and some student objects because it violates some religious belief? If the professor is willing to formally state that he’s grading his college level students on their physical ability to write three words that he gives them to write, then he’s a joke of a teacher. If the actual value comes from the discussion around the activity, (because surely you’re not willing to state that an assignment to write three words given by the professor, followed by nothing else, was of any academic value to a college class) then it’d have to be shown that the religious objection harmed the class, and couldn’t reasonably be accomodated (which would still leave the issue of the punitive assignment, of course). As to the hypothetical QP professor: I’m not objecting because the assignment triggered a religious objection, but rather in how that objection was handled (though, that the nature of the “assignment” looks like a litmus test is troubling, of course). > [@YogSosoth](#): > > I can, but I’ll be prepared for you to say that those are stupid reasons. > > By refusing to write those words, the student damages the ability of all professors and schools to create coursework based on academic practices the student is most likely unfamiliar with. It gives students too much power over how they are taught, limiting and altering knowledge to the student’s point of view, rather than enriching them with things they may not have conceived of. It damages teaching. It damages schools. It damages knowledge. I feel the same way to this student as the glurge of Fox News, telling people what they want to hear, rather than the truth. We see firsthand everyday how that is bad for society. It can also give too much power to rich special interests, who not only can field people with one point of view, but can actively object to reality much more easily by raising a stink. > > Philosophy, specifically, is about knowledge, damage to one is damage to the other. By refusing to do something he doesn’t feel comfortable with, he damages himself by refusing to expose himself to contrary opinions, and damages the above: all knowledge. Yes, I am being quite hyperbolic, but don’t laugh and claim that its not going to happen, nor that its a drop in the bucket. Crap like Fox News exists, these people exist, and they have power, and with a handful of electoral victories, they can shape the minds of millions of students for a generation. It is wrong for the student to, in the context of a philosophy class, object to writing a few words down. Keeping things grounded in the specifics of this classroom: How does the student objecting to writing those words alter what the professor can teach the student? Whatever lesson on symbols or what-have-you that you had in mind can still easily be conveyed; arguably all the stronger for the demonstration of the power of symbols. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > What is your ultimate goal? I think that if you are not espousing this belief, then your method will certainly take us to a world where any student can claim any religious objection and it must be accepted. I don’t see you limiting your reasoning to specifics or making up caveats, so what limits would you place on student religious objections? Can a medical student pass if he refuses to disturb the humours of the body? Could biology students object to evolution and still pass? What about geology? If you are a YEC, can you still get a degree if you think the earth is 6000 years old? I want to know what, if any, exceptions you would make and then I want to know how that is different from this professor telling his students he must write an objectionable statement on a piece of paper My goal is religious freedom; it’s a human right, and as an atheist, it’s in my best interest. I spoke to this above, but a quick recap: You’re making no distinction between accepting that an objection is valid, and how (or whether) it can be accomodated. All objections that can be reasonably accomodated should be. Anything less is giving the professor the power to decree which religious views are legitimate. So, to your examples, the method is clear: can the objection be reasonably accomodated? In those cases, if the objection was to _being taught_, then no. If it’s a matter of a student perfectly grasping biology or geology, and able to pass every test, their religious beliefs shouldn’t factor in at all. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > I’m not disagreeing about what he thinks. I’m disagreeing with your statement that “that is his right”. I don’t believe that student should, or does, have that right Understood, but that’s a scary world to live in, especially for atheists. I’m very glad the Supreme Court disagrees with you. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Just because religious kids can be singled out doesn’t mean they are, and doesn’t mean they aren’t self-segregating. I think your question is irrelevant because we haven’t established that he wanted to do anything of the sort. It matters, because if you permit a practice that’s indistinguishable from religious discrimination, you are de facto permitting religious discrimination. You can’t count the conscience of the professors, you need rules in place to prevent all types of discrimination. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Again, I believe there’s a clear difference between forcing you to eat or drink something than writing on a piece of paper A Jehovah’s Witness might disagree: eating the pork is trivial, writing the statement is terribly wrong. Why do you, or the professor, get to tell him his religion has it wrong? Who gets to make these criteria? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2014, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/202 "2014-03-21T20:02:38Z")
Good lord, that got long quickly. As an alternative to further line-by-line, here’s a summation: Where we differ in the question of the professor’s role: you charge him with deciding if a religious objection is valid or not, based on some criteria of some kind. I charge him, working with the administration, with accommodating all religious objections that are reasonably possible to accommodate. Given this, your scenarios of students deciding what they will be taught, of Christian Scientists learning nothing aobut medicine but graduating as doctors, of slackers automatically passing every class by claiming religious objections…none of them will come to pass. ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2014, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/203 "2014-03-21T23:10:29Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > […] > > And the little Jehovah’s Witness kids could have just [said the pledge of allegience.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minersville_School_District_v._Gobitis) No skin off their nose. But, luckily, in this country, we enjoy freedom of religion, so they didn’t have to violate their beliefs for no reason. > […] > A Jehovah’s Witness might disagree: eating the pork is trivial, writing the statement is terribly wrong. > > Why do you, or the professor, get to tell him his religion has it wrong? Who gets to make these criteria? In the _West Virigina_ case, which overruled the Supreme Court’s own _Gobitis_ case (flag salute), the published opinion included this statement, which I’m not quoting exactly: “If there be any fixed star in our universe, it is that no official can decide what is orthodox in any [religion or other institution]; if there are any exceptions, they do not now occur to us.” Indeed it is not the professor’s, the Supreme Court’s, or any of the Teeming Millions’ privilege to pass judgment on such-and-such person’s religion and say, This is right or wrong; everyone may claim their religion is correct–believing otherwise would be hypocritical. As far as just “wiriting something down” is concerned, I am put in mind of a satirical statement from _Stan Freberg Presents the U. S. A.:_ “I know how this happens. You go to a harmless party, sign a harmles paper, and forget all about it. Ten years later, you get hauled up before a committee.” You just try getting me to write something that contradicts what I believe. Just try it, buddy. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2014, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/204 "2014-03-21T23:14:04Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Good lord, that got long quickly. As an alternative to further line-by-line, here’s a summation: > > Where we differ in the question of the professor’s role: you charge him with deciding if a religious objection is valid or not, based on some criteria of some kind. I charge him, working with the administration, with accommodating all religious objections that are reasonably possible to accommodate. Given this, your scenarios of students deciding what they will be taught, of Christian Scientists learning nothing aobut medicine but graduating as doctors, of slackers automatically passing every class by claiming religious objections…none of them will come to pass. Yeah, that was a bit long \<\_\< I think your view would be challenged much more so if the story gets bigger press, or if the situation was more well known. And I see it has happening already with the likes of Fox and its viewers self-segregating inside of an echo chamber. I think that in order to lessen that, we need to force expose people to other viewpoints, and forcing students to write something they might not necessarily believe is a good way of doing that. Yes, I leave the professor in charge because I believe they are more academically free than a dean or administration that I see as more cowed by outside pressures. There are enough professors and schools that I don’t find the student’s rights to be at all violated. We probably won’t ever agree on that. Good day to you! ---
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/205 "2014-03-22T00:27:37Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Your baseless and unsubstantiated ad hominems are a lot less civil than the naughty words I’ve used, so hop down off that high horse of yours. If you want to take issue with the quality of my arguments, fucking do so. Just saying they’re low quality isn’t actually that interesting: SHOW me why they’re low quality. > > Or, you know, keep tsking at me as if that’s the civil thing to do, your call. I did. That’s when you got really nasty. Go back. read for comprehensive, and leave me alone. Nothing is less civil than your behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/206 "2014-03-22T00:48:58Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > [It breaks down like so:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_the_United_States) > > A - 90% - 100% > B - 80% - 89% > C - 70% - 79% > D - 60% - 69% > F - 59% and below > > There’s also [this one:](http://faculty.washington.edu/scstroup/Gradescale.html) > > A - 91 - 100% > B - 81 - 90% > C - 71 - 80% > D - 61 - 70% > F - 60% and below > > …and other variations, but they all put 80% as either a low B or a high C. This is actually offering less information that you might think. Percentages don’t translate well from one national system to another. For example, you might have countries in which 50-70 percent is sufficient to get you the highest ranking in the nation and if anyone claimed to have 90-100 percent, it would be laughed off as a joke. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/207 "2014-03-22T12:58:32Z")
> [@j666](#): > > I did. That’s when you got really nasty. > > Go back. read for comprehensive, and leave me alone. > > Nothing is less civil than your behavior. The irony of your telling me to read for comprehension is, I trust, lost on you. Bring substantiation of your objections, or pie, when you come back. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/208 "2014-03-22T13:07:25Z")
In fact, **j666** , I’ll make you a deal. Find one post of yours–ONE POST–in which you’ve responded with substance to something I’ve said, and give us the post number. Three digits, and I’ll publicly eat crow and retract all the bad things I’ve said about your ability to string two words together into an argument. Pinky-swear. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/209 "2014-03-22T13:12:37Z")
To help, though, I’ll eliminate some possibilities. Obviously you’re not gonna look at your weird question in 155. Your stupid attempt at psychoanalysis in 158 also won’t work. And we both know that the repetition of the dumb psychoanalysis in 172 is a no-go. 180 just doubles down on your pitiful ad hominems and then has the gall of accusing me of being rude, after you’ve spent three posts insulting me. 182 comes closest to substance with the ingenious idea that “People disagree with you,” but c’mon, I kinda knew that already. So whatcha go? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/210 "2014-03-22T19:22:34Z")
> [@dougie\_monty](#): > > Indeed it is not the professor’s, the Supreme Court’s, or any of the Teeming Millions’ privilege to pass judgment on such-and-such person’s religion and say, This is right or wrong; everyone may claim their religion is correct–believing otherwise would be hypocritical. Fuck that; I’ll pass judgement on anything I damn well please, including religion. ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2014, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/211 "2014-03-22T23:54:57Z")
Yes, in your own little ivory tower. And you’ll draw everybody’s well-deserved contempt for it. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/212 "2014-03-23T01:29:42Z")
> [@dougie\_monty](#): > > Yes, in your own little ivory tower. And you’ll draw everybody’s well-deserved contempt for it. So you’re saying he’d be hypocritical to judge someone else’s religion, no matter what it is, and you’re judging him for that? Is this the rhetorical equivalent of a Moebius strip? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/213 "2014-03-23T04:28:04Z")
Yeah! You can sneer at my ivory tower from your _own_ ivory tower, so there! ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/214 "2014-03-23T05:02:45Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Yeah! You can sneer at my ivory tower from your _own_ ivory tower, so there! That’s sweet. You think what you want in your ivory tower, and make your little Möbius strips. :rolleyes: FWIW, in the song “Games People Play” the line that is sung “In their ivory towers,” I thought was “With their rivalries and powers,” which seemed to me to make more sense. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/215 "2014-03-23T05:04:48Z")
Regardless, we all make judgments on whatever the environment presents to us - it makes as much sense to criticize this ability (indeed, survival mechanism) as to criticize the capacity for sight or hearing. ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/216 "2014-03-23T05:20:42Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Regardless, we all make judgments on whatever the environment presents to us - it makes as much sense to criticize this ability (indeed, survival mechanism) as to criticize the capacity for sight or hearing. Sure. Well, when in comes to religious or political affiliation, one should always believe his/her own to be the right one–it would be hypocritical to believe otherwise. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/217 "2014-03-23T05:36:44Z")
I don’t have a religion and I feel just fine judging religions (and all human practices, really) if they are irrational, harmful or just plain stupid. ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/218 "2014-03-23T06:21:10Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I don’t have a religion and I feel just fine judging religions (and all human practices, really) if they are irrational, harmful or just plain stupid. If. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/219 "2014-03-23T07:59:57Z")
Well, cite me a religion that’s none of the above, and I’ll gladly use other criteria. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2014, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724/220 "2014-03-23T12:26:46Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Heck, starting out with “God is dead” is silly. Just teach a class on Nietzsche and Ayn Rand and 75% of the students will end up atheist, anyway. Just point out the quote from Psalms 81 or 82 (depending on which version of the Bible one uses), and use the quote; “I said you are gods and sons of God”. also how Jesus backs this up in John 10. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-this-kind-of-religious-persecution-be-allowed-in-college/683724.md?page=12)