Judge Awards Embattled Christian, Conservative Prof $50K – and a Promotion

[maxparrish]

Jennifer Kabbany of The College Fix reports.
Judge Awards Embattled Christian, Conservative Prof $50K – and a Promotion

GREENVILLE, N.C. – A U.S. district court judge on Tuesday ruled that the University of North Carolina-Wilmington must promote a conservative, Christian professor who had been denied full professorship because of his beliefs, and ordered administrators to pay the educator $50,000 in back-pay.

The ruling comes on the heels of a March 20 jury verdict which found that employees at the public university retaliated against the professor, Mike Adams, for his conservative, Christian views.

“The court hereby orders the defendants confer upon plaintiff full professorship as of the date of this order, with pay and benefits in the future to relate back to August 2007, when plaintiff’s 2006 promotion application would have gone into effect had it been successful,” states the ruling by Judge Malcolm Howard.

The four-day trial last month centered on Adams, a criminology professor a former atheist who converted to Christianity and became a vocal proponent for his conservative views through books and a syndicated column. Those publicly espoused beliefs prompted peers and administrators at UNC-Wilmington to deny Dr. Adams a full professorship, despite his solid qualifications for the job, the jury found.

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/16991/

Perhaps a lesson for UNC liberal groupthinkers?

 

[laughing dog]

My understanding is that courts are historically reluctant to substitute their judgment for academic judgment in such matters. So, either the facts in this case were egregious or someone overstepped their boundaries.

 

[The Paul]

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/16991/

Perhaps a lesson for UNC liberal groupthinkers?

I guess? They're a figment of your imagination, so you would know.

 

[maxparrish]

More detail on the trial that led up to the verdict:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/16752/

- - - Updated - - -

The trial was granted last year by a federal court that determined there was enough evidence for the case to go forward, ruling the First Amendment protects the views of Adams, a criminology professor whose opinion columns were unpopular and disliked by many of his administrators and peers. The case, originally filed in March 2010, has been fought over in the courts for the past four years, but is expected to be settled soon.

Adams was hired by the university in 1993 as an assistant professor of criminology. He was a self-described atheist at that time.

Several years after his hire, the suit states “he earned strong teaching evaluations, received two faculty awards, published several articles,” and was a very involved humanitarian.

In 2000, however, Adams reconsidered his atheism and became Christian. His conversion led him to publicly speak out on conservative issues, including through a column on Townhall.com.

“After this, he was subjected to intrusive investigations, baseless accusations, and the denial of promotion to full professor even though his scholarly output surpassed that of almost all of his colleagues,” according to the professor’s attorney, who assert the university “denied Adams a promotion because his nationally syndicated opinion columns espoused religious and political views that ran contrary to the opinions held by university officials.”

 

[Bronzeage]

$50K for seven years back pay does not seem like a lot of money.

 

[beero1000]

$50K for seven years back pay does not seem like a lot of money.

He remained employed there and just wasn't given the promotion with the corresponding raise. That's where the back pay comes in.

 

[maxparrish]

Its probably the net difference between the job salary schedules (which likely over lap). It does seem small though...

 

[Bronzeage]

He remained employed there and just wasn't given the promotion with the corresponding raise. That's where the back pay comes in.

Its probably the net difference between the job salary schedules (which likely over lap). It does seem small though...

I'm sure it is, but still seems like a small amount of money for the effort to obtain it. Unless the judgment called for UNC to pay his legal fees, his lawsuit was a fool's mission. He would have been better off to put his attorney's fees into an IRA. The article does not give the professor's age, but assume he is in his 40's. He has approximately 20 years remaining in his teaching career. His victory will yield $142K before he retires.

If his credentials are as great as claimed, he could have joined the faculty of another university, as a full professor with tenure, and been way ahead.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

This is interesting in view of all of the conservative Christian Colleges that require signing a 'statement of faith' as a precondition of academic employment. And can fire any employee or Professor that expresses atheist views, or even publicly questions the absolute accuracy and infallibility of The Bible.

Whatever positions and promotions Mike Adams attained while at UNC were based upon interviews and reviews in which he expressed views that were consistent with the views and goals of the College, and his advancement at UNC was predicated upon his holding of those self-expressed views and principals.

Christian Colleges can fire tenured Professors at will for any latter change of opinion or faith,
But secular Collages must retain Professors that latter adopt wonky conservative fundamentalist views at odds with the Colleges stated and known non-sectarian views and mission?

WTF, are we going to allow our public Colleges to be infiltrated and taken over by the tactics of a Christian Taliban?
Just allow them to employ a brain dead christian judge to make an unjust and inequitable ruling, that undermines the ethical principals and mission of a secular institution?

The money isn't the goal, the next thing this 'Professor' and his judge will go after is 'rights' to preach Young Earth Creationism at UNC.
It is understandable that the Faculty of UNC would not desire such an association despoiling the reputation of their University.

Equal under the Law, award the Professorship under Formal Protest, pay the 50k ....give Mike his formal hearing ...and walking papers, just like any christer 'college' would do under similar circumstances. Some fundy christer diploma mill is where he now belongs.
If that is not acceptable, this ruling must be appealed.

 

[Bronzeage]

This is interesting in view of all of the conservative Christian Colleges that require signing a 'statement of faith' as a precondition of academic employment. And can fire any Professor that expresses atheist views, or even publicly questions the absolute accuracy and infallibility of The Bible.

Whatever positions and promotions Mike Adams attained at UNC were based upon reviews and interviews in which he expressed views that were consistent with the views and goals of the College, and his advancement was predicated upon his holding of those self-expressed views and principals.

Christian Colleges can fire tenured Professors at will for any latter change of opinion or faith,
But secular Collages must retain Professors that adopt wonky conservative fundamentalist views at odds with the Colleges stated non-sectarian and liberal views?

WTF, are we going to allow our public Colleges going to be infiltrated and taken over by the tactics of a Christian Taliban?
Just employ a brain dead christer judge to make an unjust and inequitable ruling, that undermines the ethical principals of a secular institution?
I suppose the next thing this 'Professor' and his judge will go after is the right to preach Young Earth Creationism at UNC.

Equal under the Law, award the Professorship, pay the 50k ....and give Mike his walking papers, just like any christer 'college' would do under similar circumstances. Some brain dead christer diploma mill is where he belongs.

This all probably is all tied up in the "tenure rules" of UNC, which would be the only grounds for his lawsuit. A tenured faculty member cannot be dismissed without a formal hearing. The university would have to show he had failed to meet his obligations as a teacher, or violated university rules. Simply having unpopular opinions or beliefs is not sufficient.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

There is what can be stated as being the legal grounds. ...and an unstated agenda being pursued.

 

[Bronzeage]

There is what can be stated as being the legal grounds. ...and an unstated agenda being pursued.

The reason tenure rules were created in the first place was to protect university faculty from the vagaries of politics.

 

[maxparrish]

This is interesting in view of all of the conservative Christian Colleges that require signing a 'statement of faith' as a precondition of academic employment. And can fire any employee or Professor that expresses atheist views, or even publicly questions the absolute accuracy and infallibility of The Bible.

Whatever positions and promotions Mike Adams attained while at UNC were based upon interviews and reviews in which he expressed views that were consistent with the views and goals of the College, and his advancement at UNC was predicated upon his holding of those self-expressed views and principals.

I'm sorry, I don't have a dictionary for the coy meanings and winks for the blessed. What might those 'views and principles' be?

Christian Colleges can fire tenured Professors at will for any latter change of opinion or faith,
But secular Collages must retain Professors that latter adopt wonky conservative fundamentalist views at odds with the Colleges stated and known non-sectarian views and mission?

His views are no more relevant than if he was Marxist or member of the CPUSA.

WTF, are we going to allow our public Colleges to be infiltrated and taken over by the tactics of a Christian Taliban?
Just allow them to employ a brain dead christian judge to make an unjust and inequitable ruling, that undermines the ethical principals and mission of a secular institution?

The money isn't the goal, the next thing this 'Professor' and his judge will go after is 'rights' to preach Young Earth Creationism at UNC.
It is understandable that the Faculty of UNC would not desire such an association despoiling the reputation of their University.

Equal under the Law, award the Professorship under Formal Protest, pay the 50k ....give Mike his formal hearing ...and walking papers, just like any christer 'college' would do under similar circumstances. Some fundy christer diploma mill is where he now belongs.
If that is not acceptable, this ruling must be appealed.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

I'm sorry, I don't have a dictionary for the coy meanings and winks for the blessed. What might those 'views and principles' be?

I don't see anything particularly coy about what I wrote.

What might those 'views and principals' be? Ought to be obvious.
As an educational employee of a secular educational institution, the acceptance and endorsment of the naturalistic and scientific view of the universe as a natural physical phenomenon, with a scientifically established age of approximately 14 billion years, and an earth of 4.5 billion years, not the product of a ancient Hebrew geocentric and supernatural creation mythology.
Or the fundamental Christian claim that the entire universe and everything in it was created by a Jew that lived 2000 years ago.


The view that present life-forms are the result of billions of years of natural Evolution, not Ken Ham's 'Creation Science' claims of the world magically poofing into existence 6000 years ago, with 'kinds', and Adam and Eve riding around on the dinosaurs.

Mike Adams position and advancement was predicated upon interviews and reviews in which he would have indicated his acceptance of modern scientific theory, method, and standards of evidence.
He has abandoned and betrayed the views and positions that landed him the job and made him credible, and acceptable as a teacher in that venue, for the reciting of a zombie death cults religious mumbo jumbo and superstitions.

The principals of possessing a modicum of academic and intellectual integrity.

I'll ask you straight out. (Don't want to be too coy about it) Let's get acquainted. Are you a fucking theist?

 

[maxparrish]

I don't see anything particularly coy about what I wrote.

What might those 'views and principals' be? Ought to be obvious.

As an educational employee of a secular educational institution, the acceptance and endorsment of the naturalistic and scientific view of the universe as a natural physical phenomenon, with a scientifically established age of approximately 14 billion years, and an earth of 4.5 billion years, not the product of a ancient Hebrew geocentric and supernatural creation mythology.

Or the fundamental Christian claim that the entire universe and everything in it was created by a Jew that lived 2000 years ago.

The view that present life-forms are the result of billions of years of natural Evolution, not Ken Ham's 'Creation Science' claims of the world magically poofing into existence 6000 years ago, with 'kinds', and Adam and Eve riding around on the dinosaurs.

Mike Adams position and advancement was predicated upon interviews and reviews in which he would have indicated his acceptance of modern scientific theory, method, and standards of evidence.

He has abandoned and betrayed the views and positions that landed him the job and made him credible, and acceptable as a teacher in that venue, for the reciting of a zombie death cults religious mumbo jumbo and superstitions.

The principals of possessing a modicum of academic and intellectual integrity.

Your disquisition of nonsense was less than convincing. Adams was hired and given tenure as a professor of criminology, not as a professor of paleontology. I am not aware of anything in a criminology textbook that has glossary and index entries for Adam and Eve, dinosaurs, or creationism. Whatever views he had or now holds on what happened 4,000 or 6 billion years ago has as little relevancy to his profession and as Isaac Newton's belief in the occult had to his physics (or Pauli's odd mysticism to his quantum physics).

His record of teaching and scholarship is what is relevant, not his personal religious views on ancient history (see the first amendment if that eludes you).

I'll ask you straight out. (Don't want to be too coy about it) Let's get acquainted. Are you a fucking theist?

I hate answering questions like that because they are irrelevant to the argument. The argument does not change regardless of my personal beliefs.

That said, I will give the obligatory assurance to those who so obsessed with 'the source' of an opinion: no, I am not a fucking theist. I am a fucking agnostic 'conservative libertarian' whose god is liberty, and whose demigods are JS Mills, John Locke, Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, Albert J Nock, HL Mencken, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, William F. Buckley, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Mark Steyn, Jane Jacobs, most Neo-Con writers, and the writers of South Park.

 

[fromderinside]

no, I am not a fucking theist. I am a fucking agnostic 'conservative libertarian' whose god is liberty, and whose demigods are JS Mills, John Locke, Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, Albert J Nock, HL Mencken, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, William F. Buckley, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Mark Steyn, Jane Jacobs, most Neo-Con writers, and the writers of South Park.

There you go. You insist on liberty and you are a massively social animal whose very status as top world predator depends on keeping a society together. How the hell can one do that and insist on property rights, right to cheat, taking advantage of others, gaming social norms, etc? Fitness for humans is a social thing not a me thing.

For a glimpse at what is really responsible for our remarkable progress in the last several hundred years look to etiquette, removal of knives from social liberty, and other "let's get along" stuff social systems now insist are part of the norm for us. It really has little to do with rationalism. A good read " The Better Angels of our Nature"

I'll take the positive side of the Wiki article any time. Pinker's viewpoint has clear meaning for unabashed libertarianism and is central part of a consistent Ayn Rand-like thinking criticisms.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/16991/

Perhaps a lesson for UNC liberal groupthinkers?

But the collegefix notes that one of the issues they had with him was his lack of single authored publications. The article also notes that he seemed to have some issues with keeping politics separate from work.

 

[maxparrish]

Here are some facts behind the case:

ABOUT THE CASE
Dr. Mike Adams, a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina–Wilmington, frequently received accolades from his colleagues after the university hired him as an assistant professor in 1993 and promoted him to associate professor in 1998. At the time he was an atheist, but his conversion to Christianity in 2000 impacted his views on political and social issues. After this, he was subjected to intrusive investigations, baseless accusations, and the denial of promotion to full professor even though his scholarly output surpassed that of almost all of his colleagues. In a lawsuit filed against the university on Adams’ behalf, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys contended that the university denied Adams a promotion because his nationally syndicated opinion columns espoused religious and political views that ran contrary to the opinions held by university officials

I am reviewing some of the briefs...very interesting.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

Your disquisition of nonsense was less than convincing. Adams was hired and given tenure as a professor of criminology, not as a professor of paleontology. I am not aware of anything in a criminology textbook that has glossary and index entries for Adam and Eve, dinosaurs, or creationism.

Whatever views he had or now holds on what happened 4,000 or 6 billion years ago has as little relevancy to his profession and as Isaac Newton's belief in the occult had to his physics (or Pauli's odd mysticism to his quantum physics).

His record of teaching and scholarship is what is relevant, not his personal religious views on ancient history (see the first amendment if that eludes you).

I beg to disagree. His unwillingness or inability to rationally reject the fundamental religious claims of the Christian religion indicates either a lack of rational academic rigor, a lack of ethical integrity, or a deficiency in his ability to reason logically and rationally.
Whatever the cause or reason for the shutting down of the rational part of his brain, it is relevant to his abilities to impartially distinguish fact from fiction, and truth from fabrication, possession of which is a faculty certainly relevant to teaching in the field of criminology and forensic investigation.

Does Mike Adams the great criminologist know how to forensically investigate and impartially and rationally judge the credibility of the claims and testimonies of the cult that he has joined?
In my view either he does not, or is so brain fucked he is unable, or is so dishonest and unethical that he will not.

Whatever the case, it is a defect in either his intelligence, his character, or in his ethics that renders him unfit and unsuitable as a teacher or representative of UNC. (and incidentally transformed him into a gaseous conservative asshole on legs)
It is understandable why UNC would not desire to advance, or be associated with this embarrassment to scholarship and to academic integrity.

Certainly some conservative Christian college would love to have such a highly regarded and illustrious 'scholar' on their faculty?
....or perhaps not. Nope. No way. Uh uh, that is NOT what is being sought in this conflict. As both parties well know.

I'll ask you straight out. (Don't want to be too coy about it) Let's get acquainted. Are you a fucking theist?

I hate answering questions like that because they are irrelevant to the argument. The argument does not change regardless of my personal beliefs.

That said, I will give the obligatory assurance to those who so obsessed with 'the source' of an opinion: no, I am not a fucking theist. I am a fucking agnostic 'conservative libertarian' whose god is liberty, and whose demigods are JS Mills, John Locke, Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, Albert J Nock, HL Mencken, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, William F. Buckley, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Mark Steyn, Jane Jacobs, most Neo-Con writers, and the writers of South Park.

My sympathy.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Here are some facts behind the case:

I am reviewing some of the briefs...very interesting.

Technically, those aren't all facts. Many are claims.