UPDATE: Protecting Gina's First Amendment Rights

We continue to work on behalf of Gina, the college student in Suffolk County, New York who is experiencing problems in her college philosophy class due to her faith.

Although Gina maintains a 3.9 overall GPA and did very well on the first few philosophy class assignments, her grades in the philosophy course dropped significantly after the question of Gods existence and attributes became the focus of class discussion.  Gina read the assigned materials and participated in class discussions, presenting traditional philosophical arguments on whether God exists and whether He possesses certain characteristics such as being all-knowing or all-good.  However, Gina was unwilling to state that she would reconsider her personal religious beliefs on Gods nature and existence, and her grades suffered as a result.  The professor has stated that it is his job to get students to reject a belief in a sacred or unquestionable truth in favor of the rational view that science, logic, and philosophy are the only reliable sources of truth.  While public college professors may encourage students to discuss and debate various philosophies and worldviews, they may not grade students upon their willingness to make personal, value-based statements or to abandon their religious faith.

One class assignment is particularly troubling.  The professor stated that he would increase any students grade on a previous assignment to a 100 if he or she made the following statement on the courses online message board:  I am _____________ (put your name here). I am not free because I am determined.

The sole basis for determining whether a student would receive free points is his or her willingness to make this personal, faith-based claim.  Gina was posed with the difficult choice of either violating her religious beliefs by publicly declaring, I am Gina. I am not free because I am determined or being penalized by failing to receive extra points like her classmates.  Although most or all of the rest of the class made the required statement and took the points, Gina chose to adhere to her faith because she could not, in good conscience, make that statement.  This is not an example of philosophical discussion and debate but rather a professor using his position of authority to force students to state their personal agreement with his philosophical viewpoints.

We sent a letter to the colleges attorney regarding the denial of Ginas First Amendment rights, but the schools initial response was unsatisfactory.  We just sent a follow-up letter to the college detailing more troubling facts of this case and requesting a prompt response to avoid litigation.  We will keep you posted on this situation.