Well, the Discovery Institute won’t go gentle into that good night. After their loss in the Eric Hedin affair, in which Ball State University (BSU) President Jo Ann Gora proclaimed that courses like Hedin’s could not teach intelligent design creationism (ID) as science, Hedin’s course in Physics and Astronomy was canned. That course proselytized Christianity and ID, and the Freedom from Religion Foundation pointed out its unconstitutionality to BSU. After that, there was an investigation by several faculty members, culminating with Gora’s wonderfully definitive policy statement.

The Discovery Institute (DI), home of ID, didn’t take this lying down. After naming me Censor of the Year for my small role in this issue, they have now influenced four Indiana State legislators to write to BSU asking for data on what happened when Hedin’s course was canned. And they’re crying “censorship” of intelligent design. My informants tell me that this inquiry is probably the first step in Indiana trying to pass a law that would allow ID to be taught at state universities (of which BSU is one). Alternatively, it may be the way the DI is doing preliminary spadework (“discovery”) before filing a lawsuit. Either way, this is not going to work. As the DI press release notes below, BSU is refusing to answer the legislators’ inquiries.

Here’s the first report of the hydra growing another head from the Muncie Star-Press:

MUNCIE — The Discovery Institute says four state legislators led by Senate Education Committee Chair Dennis Kruse, R–Auburn, have sent a letter to Ball State University’s president and board of trustees expressing concerns about the university’s treatment of BSU physicist Eric Hedin and its “imposition of a speech code censoring faculty speech on intelligent design.” Hedin previously taught an honors course on the “Boundaries of Science” that briefly discussed the idea that nature displays evidence of intelligent design, but the course was removed following an investigation that the institute says operated outside of normal procedures. In their letter, legislators expressed concerns “about whether improper procedures were followed while investigating professor Eric Hedin’s course, and whether an ad hoc committee appointed to investigate him was filled with persons with conflicts of interest…We are also concerned about the cancellation of Hedin’s class and the policy you announced last summer restricting faculty speech on intelligent design. We are disturbed by reports that while you restrict faculty speech on intelligent design, BSU authorized a seminar that teaches ‘Science Must Destroy Religion.’ The legislators promised to send additional questions to BSU in coming weeks. Discovery Institute is asking BSU to investigate its honors seminar “Dangerous Ideas.” The sole textbook used in the course is an anthology edited by a prominent atheist in which the authors assert that “Science Must Destroy Religion,” that “There is no God; no Intelligent Designer; no higher purpose to our lives,” and even that scientists should function as our society’s “high priests.” The book contains an afterword by atheist evangelist Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion.

And here’s the Discovery Institute’s News Release:

Legislators Demand Answers about Intelligent Design Ban at Ball State University News Release

March 11, 2014

Robert Crowther

Discovery Institute

(206) 292-0401 x107

mailto:rob@discovery.org Indianapolis—Four state legislators led by Senate Education Committee Chair Dennis Kruse (R–Auburn) have sent a letter to Ball State University’s (BSU) President and Board of Trustees expressing serious concerns about the university’s treatment of BSU physicist Eric Hedin and its imposition of a speech code censoring faculty speech on intelligent design. Prof. Hedin previously taught an honors course on the “Boundaries of Science” which briefly discussed the idea that nature displays evidence of intelligent design, but the course was removed from BSU’s course schedule for Spring Semester 2014 following a controversial investigation that operated outside of normal procedures.

In their letter, legislators expressed concerns “about whether improper procedures were followed while investigating Prof. Eric Hedin’s course, and whether an ad hoc committee appointed to investigate him was filled with persons with conflicts of interest…We are also concerned about the cancellation of Hedin’s class and the policy you announced last summer restricting faculty speech on intelligent design. We are disturbed by reports that while you restrict faculty speech on intelligent design, BSU authorized a seminar that teaches ‘Science Must Destroy Religion.’ Your policy banning professors from expressing their views on intelligent design raises many troubling questions. One of the most important is: Does the policy forbid science professors from explaining either their support or rejection of intelligent design in answer to student questions about intelligent design in class?” The legislators promised to send additional questions to BSU in coming weeks. The legislators’ letter comes after nearly 10,000 people signed a petition urging BSU to allow academic freedom for Prof. Hedin. “Thus far BSU has refused to answer many questions about its mistreatment of Prof. Hedin,” said Discovery Institute attorney Joshua Youngkin. “BSU even recently filed a complaint with the Public Access Counselor to delay disclosing emails requested under the Indiana Access to Public Records Act. It’s time for BSU to stop stonewalling.” “Senator Kruse and his fellow legislators are to be applauded for investigating BSU’s actions violating academic freedom and open discussion,” added Donald McLaughlin, Discovery Institute’s Indiana representative and an alumnus of Ball State.

Now, you may ask,”What is this seminar that teaches that Science must destroy religion’?” In fact, it turns out to be an honors seminar that uses as its basis a book edited by John Brockman (my agent), What is Your Dangerous Idea? . I’ve read that book—in fact, I contributed one of the essays—and it’s a mixture of diverse ideas, most of which have no bearing on religion. Brockman’s introduction (he is an atheist) says nothing about religion, and Steve Pinker’s foreword merely discusses and summarizes the book’s contents. Reader Roan below has also linked to Dawkins’s published afterword, and that, too, lacks any explicit atheism. But you can peruse the book’s contents at Amazon. And yes, there are anti-religious pieces like Sam’s and these:

But there are also pro-religious pieces and pro-woo pieces like these:

In other words, the book itself doesn’t seem to be promoting, overall, an atheist or a religious agenda, but is a balanced discussion of issues that intellectuals consider “dangerous.” To me, that seems an appropriate mix for an Honors Seminar. As I’ve always said, I wouldn’t have minded if Hedin had taught his course with two strictures: 1). It be taught not as a science course but as a philosophy or humanities course, and 2.) It be balanced, promoting no religious viewpoint in particular. If it discussed intelligent design creationism, it would also have to discuss criticisms of that notion. If it promoted God as having a hand in science, it would have to include contrary views by scientists like Victor Stenger and Richard Dawkins. Remember that President Gora’s objection was to teaching ID as science, not to having any discussion of religion or unbelief anywhere in her university.

The DI is going to lose on this one, and if the legislators try to pass some “equal time” law for ID in Indiana Universities, they’ll just look ridiculous. The Discovery Institute is simply unable to accept that they can’t push creationism in a public university, and are trying to make trouble.

I’ve gotten a copy of the letter to BSU from the four Indiana legislators engaged in their ludicrous crusade, and I’ll put it up tomorrow. I know that one of them is a Republican, but I’m predicting that the other three are, too (it’s not evident from the letter). In the meantime, no worries. The DI is livid that its Wedge Strategy didn’t work, and is trying to push the camel’s nose back into the tent.