Our plane to Calcutta has been delayed by three hours due to fog (this is typical), so I’m able to write this post passing on some good news.

You may have forgotten the case of Emerson T. McMullen, the Georgia Southern University (GSU) history professor (actually, an associate professor) who proselytized both Christianity and creationism in his history/science classes. (For relevant posts, go here.) Such pushing of creationism and religion in a public university violates the Constitution’s provisions for separation of Church and State. Or so we all thought.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation and the Richard Dawkins Foundation then sent a complaint to GSU (I drafted the scientific critique of McMullen’s arguments for Biblical creationism), and the University said it would investigate. After doing so, the chief counsel for Georgia Southern sent the fellowing response yesterday to Andrew Seidel, an FFRF attorney pursuing the matter:

Dear Mr. Seidel, This email is to follow up with you concerning the recent investigation prompted by a letter from your client, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., to Georgia Southern University. I am writing to inform you that the investigation has been completed and the University has taken steps to prevent any activity that is inappropriate for a public, state-funded institution. As a student-centered University and an EEO institution, the University places a high priority on the well-being of its diverse student body. We appreciate your assistance in calling this matter to our attention. Please share this information with your client and do not hesitate to let me know should you have questions or concerns. Sincerely, Maura Copeland

This is a masterpiece of noncomittal prose, and I was prepared for a long wait to see what, if anything, had been done. But then we got a copy of this letter from the GSU Dean giving the case’s outcome. It is a memo from the Dean to McMullen himself, reproving him and demanding changes in the way he teaches: in particular, keeping his personal religious beliefs out of the classroom and not testing students on religious issues. McMullen has agreed, as you can see by the fact that he had to sign the letter. If he hadn’t, huge legal problems would have ensued for GSU.

It is very favorable; a solid victory for secularism, in fact. As I predicted, McMullen can’t proselytize for either religion or creationism any longer. I will cite the “executive summary” prepared by the FFRF’s Andrew Seidel (indented):

GSU “investigate[d] whether problematic speech and/or conduct was, in fact, occurring in [his] classroom. This inquiry included review of ten (I 0) course syllabi, fifty-two (52) examinations, sixteen (16 )extra-credit opportunities, and thirty-seven (37) course evaluations, all dated between 2008 and 2014.” The course evaluations revealed a pattern of religious proselytizing, one noted by the students and criticized by some of them. A summary of the students’ evaluations: To GSU, these comments bespoke a pattern of religious coercion, even if unintended, and McMullen was told “it is inappropriate for you to interject your personal religious beliefs into classroom and class-related discussions with students, and you are accordingly directed to stop doing so immediately.” You can’t get clearer than that. More from Seidel’s summary: This [investigation] revealed some interesting facts: In each examination given between Fall 2012 and Fall 2014, there ·was an extra credit question asking students to identify one of the Ten Commandments.

In Spring 2014, [McMullen] assigned as optional extra credit the opportunity to see the movie entitled, “Is God Dead” and “write a two-page report on the movie, concentrating on the arguments given in class” And McMullen was told to follow these guidelines from now on (quotes from GSUs memo): “To that end, you are directed to avoid asking religion-based questions on examinations where such questions are not related to the curriculum of the course.” Re McMullen’s requiring that his students see and report on the ludicrous atheist-bashing movie “God is dead”: “To that end, you are directed to cease any such interjection of your personal beliefs into classroom discussions.” I believe this also refers to creationism, which at any rate would fall under “religious beliefs,” as specified by Federal courts in previous cases. McMullen’s creationism, which is straight Biblical creationism, and which I refuted in my part of the complaint, is certainly a “religious belief,” for it’s sure not science! “we are directing that you “not discuss your religious beliefs or opinions under the guise of University courses.” “Please review this memo closely and make certain to comply with the restrictions contained therein. Failure to do so will place the University at risk of violating the Establishment Clause and will result in undue pressure on the students in your courses to conform to your personal religious views.” The FFRF (and I, too) see this as a hands-down victory for the First Amendment, an amendment specifically cited by Georgia Southern. Kudos to the university for acting promptly and strongly. The letter to McMullen is given below; as it’s from screenshots of pdfs, please forgive the blurriness. It’s only 2.5 pages long, and I urge you to read it in its entirety. This outcome will no doubt serve as a precedent of sorts about how public universities should deal with First Amendment violations by faculty. It is also heartening that GSU is located in the deep South, a hotbed of both religiosity and creationism. I believe the yellowing in the letter came from the FFRF lawyers.

here and the GSU memo here. You can read the FFRF’s press releaseand the GSU memo

Nice, eh? I am proud to have worked with the Dawkins Foundation and the FFRF on this issue, though we’ll no doubt be denounced as “censors.” But passion in the defense of the First Amendment is no vice.