Jerry Falwell Jr.’s Liberty University just gutted its entire Philosophy Dept., including all professors, according to one who says he was notified not by phone but by a letter in the mail. The school offers a Bachelor’s degree in Philosophy, no word on how that will affect current students or if they have even been notified.
“Liberty University has chosen to completely dissolve the philosophy department. As of June 30 I am unemployed,” Professor Mark Foreman writes on his Facebook page, noting there is no retirement program.
In a comment Professor Foreman says, “our entire department has been laid off,” and adds, “we had no notice that this was coming. We all got letters telling us we were nonrenewed the last couple of days. There is no retirement program,” he notes. “And I don’t know what my plans are yet. Still reeling from the news.”
Messiah College Professor John Fea, who first reported the news, writes, “This speaks volumes about Liberty University’s commitment to Christian thinking and the liberal arts. But it doesn’t surprise me.”
“Last year,” he adds, “Insider Higher Ed reported that Liberty has been losing students. It made multiple faculty cuts in June, including the termination of eleven divinity school faculty.”
On the school’s website Liberty University lauds it philosophy degree which it says “will prepare you to assess theories and worldviews by analyzing and evaluating claims and arguments from a biblical perspective.”
“Prepare for your career as you study multiple-perspective thinking led by professors who share your passion for philosophy and who are grounded in their Christian faith. Learn how to express your position and argue for the truth of Christian Theism.”
It’s not known how the school will now offer that critical piece of a Christian education.
“Honestly, what’s the point of a university where philosophy isn’t even on the menu?” Mehta asks. “I know it’s Liberty, but even Christian schools usually pride themselves on making sure students are well-versed in the humanities. Not here. Not anymore.”
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
Freedom of Speech?: Supreme Court Rules Anti-LGBTQ Group Should Have Been Allowed to Fly Christian Flag at City Hall
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed down a stunning unanimous decision, finding that Boston violated the First Amendment free speech rights of an anti-LGBTQ group that had requested the city fly a Christian flag at city hall. That group, Camp Constitution, says part of its mission is to “expose some of the abuses and perversions that have brought our nation and economy so far down.”
Like the Supreme Court’s very narrow decision in the Masterpiece Cake Shop case, the ruling, which is very specific, runs the risk of being used by the right to initiate more religion-based attacks against minority Americans.
The decision, written by retiring justice Stephen Breyer, disturbingly also cites Boston allowing the LGBTQ Pride flag to fly in front of its city hall as an example of how the city granted many other groups’ requests but engaged in discrimination against the Christian group.
“Between 2005 and 2017,” the decision reads, “Boston approved the raising of about 50 unique flags for 284 such ceremonies. Most of these flags were other countries’, but some were associated with groups or causes, such as the Pride Flag, a banner honoring emergency medical service workers, and others.”
The ruling favored Camp Constitution not on the grounds of religious liberty (although other justices wrote concurring opinions that pointed to religion) but on free speech grounds. In short, the ruling states that because the city regularly allowed many other groups to fly various flags, denying one group that “right” violated its freedom of speech.
“Boston’s flag-raising program was aimed at promoting diversity and tolerance among the city’s different communities,” Reuters reports. “In turning down Camp Constitution, Boston had said that raising the cross flag could appear to violate another part of the First Amendment that bars governmental endorsement of a particular religion.”
Reuters adds that the current Supreme Court, with a 6-3 right-wing majority, “has taken an expansive view of religious rights and has been increasingly receptive to arguments that governments are acting with hostility toward religion.”
Justice Gorsuch wrote a concurring opinion, which Justice Thomas joined. Justice Alito and Justice Kavanaugh also wrote separate concurring opinions, both of which essentially telegraph how they want to reshape the country’s understanding of the First Amendment to favor religion.
Kavanaugh wrote that “a government violates the Constitution when (as here) it excludes religious persons, organizations, or speech because of religion from public programs, benefits, facilities, and the like.”
Conservative Justice Alito, citing various other cases, wrote that “excluding religious messages from public forums that are open to other viewpoints is a ‘denial of the right of free speech’ indicating ‘hostility to religion’ that would ‘undermine the very neutrality the Establishment Clause requires.'”
The ruling overturns lower court rulings against Camp Constitution.
The case, Shurtleff v. Boston, was brought by Camp Constitution’s Hal Shurtleff. The attorneys who filed it were from the anti-LGBTQ hate group Liberty Counsel.
Here’s one of Shurtleff’s recent tweets:
Is the ‘Gay Manifesto” Now U.S. Public Policy? https://t.co/KfkHYSIGqr
— Hal Shurtleff (@Freedominboston) April 1, 2022
It links to a post that wrongly takes a well-known satirical opinion piece from the 1980’s and claims it as an actual “manifesto” of the LGBTQ community.
Former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade, a well-known law professor and MSNBC/NBC News legal analyst says the Supreme Court is “further blurring the line between church and state.”
MSNBC’s Pete Williams:
‘Don’t Go Condemning’: Pope Blasts US Bishops Over Attacks Against Biden
Pope Francis is offered up strong criticism against America’s conservative bishops for their attacks against President Joe Biden, a devout Catholic, over his stance on abortion. The Roman Catholic Church opposes abortion, among many other acts, but U.S. bishops have singled out Biden’s pro-choice policy and are moving to refuse him the holy sacraments, such as communion, as punishment for it.
“What must the pastor do?” Francis, The New York Times reports, said when a reporter asked him about President Biden and abortion. “Be a pastor, don’t go condemning. Be a pastor, because he is a pastor also for the excommunicated.”
While President Biden, only the nation’s second Catholic to be elected president, personally opposes abortion, he strongly supports a woman’s right to choose and does not believe it is the government’s right to interfere in that personal and constitutionally-protected decision.
“I have never refused the eucharist to anyone,” Pope Francis also told reporters.
The Times adds, “Bishops should be pastors, he said, not politicians.”
Back in June the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) overwhelmingly voted to move toward chastising President Biden for his abortion stance, despite the Vatican issuing a clear warning they were not to do so.
“Some leading bishops, whose priorities clearly aligned with former President Donald J. Trump, now want to reassert the centrality of opposition to abortion in the Catholic faith and lay down a hard line — especially with a liberal Catholic in the Oval Office,” The New York Times reported in mid-June.
“If we look at the history of the church, we will see that every time the bishops have not managed a problem as pastors, they have taken a political stance on a political problem,” the Pope told reporters on Wednesday while on a plane returning to Rome.
The Pope also told reporters, “communion is not a prize for the perfect,” and “the eucharist is not the reward of saints but the bread of sinners.”
Vatican: It’s ‘Morally Acceptable’ to Receive COVID-19 Vaccine Derived from Aborted Fetuses
The Vatican released a statement Monday that said it’s “morally acceptable” to receive a vaccination for COVID-19, even if the vaccine’s research or production involved using cell lines derived from aborted fetuses. They cited the “grave danger” of the pandemic as their reasoning behind the controversial move.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office charged with promoting and defending church morals and traditions, released a heavily cited document that stated, in part: “when ethically irreproachable COVID-19 vaccines are not available … it is morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.”
Anyone objecting to the vaccine due to its nature and their religion may do so, but the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith noted these entities must “do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent.”
The Vatican News reported that Pope Francis approved the text on Thursday.
“In such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive,” the report said.
“In view of the gravity of the current pandemic and the lack of availability of alternative vaccines, the reasons to accept the new COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna are sufficiently serious to justify their use,” the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said in their own statement last week.
The U.S. conference said that receiving one of the vaccines “ought to be understood as an act of charity toward the other members of our community” and “considered an act of love of our neighbor and part of our moral responsibility for the common good.”
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
‘We Are the Christian Taliban’: White Nationalist Declares Far Right’s Goal Is Turning US Into ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’
- News23 hours ago
‘He’s a Trump Acolyte’: Reporter Shreds Secret Service Agent’s Credibility in Face of Denials About SUV Incident
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
Teachers Told to Remove Rainbows, Photos of Same-Sex Spouses as DeSantis’ ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Law Goes Into Effect
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
‘Ghoulish’ Greg Abbott Slammed as a ‘Monster’ for ‘Inhumane’ Response to Deaths of 50 People Locked in Tractor-Trailer
- News3 days ago
‘Seditious Conspiracy’: Experts Say Hutchinson Testimony Is ‘Smoking Gun’ and ‘Strongest Legal Evidence Against Trump’
- BREAKING NEWS21 hours ago
‘I Cannot Think of Many Things More Frightening’: Justice Kagan Rebukes SCOTUS Conservatives Over EPA Ruling
- News2 days ago
‘Every Sign’ Trump Wanted to See Members of Congress and His VP ‘Shot or Killed’: Historian
- News3 days ago
Newsmax Hosts Laughs at Rudy Giuliani’s Assault Claims: ‘I’ve Got to Be Honest – It Doesn’t Look That Bad’