Robert K. Vischer wrote:

Let’s focus on the assignment to interview a Christian family about Easter and present the findings, as that seems, at least in my view, to be the least egregious.  If Williams had given similar interview assignments covering other faith traditions at other holidays, wouldn’t that be palatable?  If he was even-handed in the religious coverage of his assignments, it seems that the assignments could be defended as attempts to let students gain insight into the lived realities of their community’s faith traditions.  The problem with learning about religion simply as an external object to be studied in a textbook is that it necessarily tends to foster an impression of religion as a relic.  Nothing eviscerates the vibrancy of faith like boiling it down to a two-page textbook synopsis.  Certainly Williams should not be allowed to present the resurrection as historical fact, but is there any problem giving the students access to individuals who do view the resurrection (or Passover, etc.) as historical fact?


Yes, that one assignment, aside from the others and in an entirely different context, might be appropriate. But would you care to lay odds on whether Mr. Williams had his students interview a Muslim family to find out how they celebrated Ramadan? I'd say they're probably slim to none. All of that will of course come out in court or in depositions.

Ed Brayton


_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to