Wednesday August 13, 2008
Judge Rules California University Has Right to Reject Christian Courses for Admission Requirements
By Kathleen Gilbert
LOS ANGELES, CA, August 13, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A federal judge ruled Friday that the University of California is permitted to reject certain Christian curricula as inadequate for meeting admission requirements.
The University of California (UC) system has decided that high school students who use certain Christian textbooks will not be considered to have taken the requisite courses necessary for admission to the University.
However, the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI), as well as Calvary Chapel Christian School and five Calvary students, argued that the University's decision was not based on a rational assessment of the texts' educational value, and reveals a bias against Christian beliefs. This, they alleged, violates their Constitutional rights, including freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
The dispute concerned certain textbooks - including physics, American literature, and biology texts from such publishers as Bob Jones University (BJU) Press and A Beka books - which utilize a Christian perspective. While the UC argued that these texts were deemed inadequate purely on an objective assessment of their educational content, ACSI contends that the inclusion of Christian material in no way compromised the curriculum.
According to court documents, in order to prove that their rights were violated, ACSI and Calvary School "would have to show that Defendants rejected the challenged courses to punish religious viewpoints rather than out of rational concern about the academic merit of those religious viewpoints."
Many of the plaintiff's motions were dismissed for procedural reasons. The remaining complaints attempted to convince the Court that UC's admission policy was unduly subjective.
Wyatt R. Hume, UC provost and executive vice president for academic and health affairs, however, claimed that the textbooks were evaluated from an objective academic perspective: "The question the university addresses in reviewing courses is not whether they have religious content, but whether they provide adequate instruction in the subject matter.
"We also evaluate whether or not they promote the analytical and critical thinking skills necessary to succeed at the University. Our decisions are made based on the academic merits of the course."
However, an ACSI document reported that, by the University's own admission, the decision to reject the textbooks was based, not upon the quality of objective material, but upon the perception that they "prioritize religion over science." According to the report, UC officials had also said in the case of the BJU physics book, there was no objection to the factual information presented. Instead it was indicated that "if the Scripture verses that begin each chapter were removed the textbook would likely be approved."
Yet the court ultimately rejected the claim that the UC system showed ill will toward the Christian faith, and stated that the University had legitimate reasons to reject the texts, including the omission of important subject material and inadequate emphasis on developing critical thinking skills. According to the decision summary, the Court "agreed with the analyses of experts who found [the textbooks] academically inadequate."
To Ian Slatter, representing the Home School Legal Defense Association, the UC system's victory came as little surprise. He declined to comment as to whether the new court ruling could pose a significant threat to the homeschooling agenda.
Jennifer Monk, the plaintiff's lawyer, condemned the decision as a threat to the religious freedom of Christian education. "It appears that UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools," she said. "Science courses from a religious perspective are not approved . . . if it comes from certain publishers or from a religious perspective, UC simply denies them."
This ruling does not mean that students who have taken courses using the unapproved texts cannot still be accepted to UC. Most students qualify for admission to UC by taking an approved set of college preparatory classes; students whose courses lack UC approval can still remain eligible by scoring well in those subjects on the Scholastic Assessment Test.
Judge Otero's ruling has been appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and if upheld, could reach the Supreme Court, considering its potential ramifications for future cases concerning freedom of religion in schools.
Latest Headlines
- "Manhattan Declaration" Embodies U.S. Christian Pushback against Abortion, Same-Sex "Marriage"

- Hoffman Loses Final Tally of NY-23 Race; Alleges ACORN Tampering and Fraud

- Abortion Activist Judge Hamilton Confirmed with Help of Ten Republican Senators

- CDC Reverses Gardasil Vaccine Requirement for Immigrants

- Germany Faces Economic Downturn with Plummeting Birth Rate and Aging Population

- CCHD in Archdiocese of Chicago Says it is Working to Fix Problems

- Rejection of Washington DC Marriage Referendum Challenged With Legal Suit

- Obama-Supporting Homosexual Activist to Out Sexually Involved Priests Unless they Support Gay 'Marriage

- Austrian Catholic Bishops Issue Bland Response to Govt's Homosexual Partnership Bill

- Interim Report on Catholic Sex-Abuse Says "Homosexual Identity" Not a Predictor of Sex Abuse

- LSN NewsBytes - US Health Care Reform

- LSN NewsBytes - Climate Change/Global Warming

- Pro-Abortion Lawmakers Shower Praise on Senate Bill's Phony Abortion Compromise

- 59 Bishops Contributed Financially to Maine Bishop's Effort to Oppose Maine Same-Sex "Marriage" Law

Most Read this Week
- Largest U.S. Homosexual Publisher Shuts Down, Closing Major Gay Newspapers
- Italian Mayors Order Crufixes Put in Classrooms in Revolt against European Court Ruling
- EWTN's Arroyo Hosts Reform CCHD Reps Who Reveal Shocking Evidence Against USCCB Anti-Poverty Arm
- Nat'l Organization for Marriage Responds to Miss California "Sex Tape" Scandal
- Obama Evades Questioning on Stupak Amendment in FOX Interview
- French Judge Finds Hospital Guilty of "Unreasonable Obstinacy" in Saving Newborn's Life
- EU Leaders to Choose President today in Secret "Soviet Style" Meetings
- Hoffman "Unconcedes" Battle for NY-23: Recount Provides Hope for "Miracle" Victory
- CCHD Responds to Reform Movement
- White House Advisor Indicates Obama Will Work to Abolish Pro-Life Health Amendment
MORE NEWS:
LifeSiteNews.com Home Page
Last 10 Days
Archives
Special Reports
Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.








Back to Top