|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Evidence |
|
|
|
|
|
How |
|
and Other |
|
Destroyed an Innocent and Decent Christian
Teenager’s |
|
Academic Career |
|
|
|
This file
contains the chain of emails involving |
|
Dean
Onesti, Chairman Watt, Dean Dunning, President Brand, |
|
and
non-respondents |
|
Dean Kim
Walker and Vice President Charlie Nelms. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction |
|
|
|
Indiana University’s Jewish President Myles Brand and two Indiana University Deans take the position that a Christian Teenager must either violate her Christian faith or forgo a degree from Indiana University. |
|
|
|
This complete email record starts
with the original request sent to the Indiana University School Of Continuing
Studies for a substitute article to be used for Lesson 2 for English W131,
Elementary Composition. It explains
that the request is based upon the sincerely held Christian beliefs of the
student and that the article used in the course is obnoxious to those
Christian beliefs. |
|
|
|
Then follows the refusal by
Indiana University officials to even consider the request because the
Christian student is “neither required by IUSCS to take this particular
course, nor is she required in any way to pursue either course or degree
requirements through the Indiana University School of Continuing Studies.” |
|
|
|
The Indiana University “Open
Door” Policy for the Christian teenager is identified as the open door to the
exit. |
|
|
|
[A hostile environment is
permissible at Indiana University under President Brand as long as the victim
denied the degree opportunity is a Christian and not a Jew.] |
|
|
|
Indiana University President Brand
finalized the matter. Brand confirmed
that the Indiana University’s policy is the policy stated by Dean Onesti and
confirmed by Dean Dunning: |
|
|
|
A
Christian’s student’s Christian-based request will not even be considered
because a Christian is not required to pursue course or degree requirements
at Indiana University School of Continuing Studies and that the only choice
for the Christian student is to withdraw from the course and thus the
possibility of earning the desired degree at Indiana University. |
|
|
|
President Brand placed the final
nail: “You may consider this email the
university's final response to your request.” |
|
|
|
All the
16-year old Christian Young Lady wanted was a fair chance |
|
to
continue working toward a degree at Indiana University |
|
without
having to compromise her Christian Faith. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
To: Indiana
University School of Continuing Studies |
|
Independent Study Program |
|
From: Eric J.
LeVin |
|
Re: Request
for substitute sample article for Lesson 2 |
|
|
|
Course Name: Elementary
Composition |
|
Course Number: English
W131 |
|
Instructor: David
Marshall |
|
Student: Christine
LeVin |
|
|
|
Date: 11
September 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
Please accept this as a formal request for a substitute
article to use for Lesson 2 (and subsequent Lessons 3 and 4) for English W131
Elementary Composition. |
|
|
|
The reason for the request is based upon sincerely held
religious beliefs. |
|
|
|
This particular text proposed for Lesson 2 is a
propaganda piece dealing with homosexual misconduct and fornication. |
|
|
|
As orthodox Christians we follow God’s Law. |
|
|
|
It is a violation of our religious tenets to indoctrinate
children with unGodly material such as this particular article. |
|
|
|
“But speak thou the things which become sound
doctrine…That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their
husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home,
good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not
blasphemed.” Titus 2: 1, 4-5. |
|
|
|
“There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor
a sodomite of the sons of Israel.” |
|
Deuteronomy 23:
17. |
|
|
|
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a
woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their
blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus
20: 13. |
|
|
|
“I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with
fornicators…” 1 Corinthians
5: 9. |
|
|
|
“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are
these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness…they which do such things shall not
inherit the kingdom of God.” Galatians
5: 19, 21. |
|
|
|
“But thou shalt utterly destroy them; the Hittites, and
the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the
Jebusites: as the Lord thy God hath
commanded thee: That they teach you
not to do after all their abominations, which they have done onto their gods;
so should ye sin against the Lord your God.”
Deuteronomy 20: 17-18. |
|
|
|
“Nothwithstanding I have a few things against thee,
because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a
prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication…” Revelation 2: 20. |
|
|
|
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one
proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell
than yourselves.” Matthew 23: 15. |
|
|
|
“Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil…” Exodus 23:
2. |
|
|
|
The use of the proposed text for Lesson 2 creates a
religious test for taking English W131.
English W131 is a prerequisite for several other courses. This proposed text thus becomes a religious
test for taking several other courses and, quite possibly, for obtaining a
degree. Making obnoxious requirements
that result in de facto discrimination against persons due to religious
beliefs is illegal. |
|
|
|
English W131 is not a course like Political Science
Y105W. Political Science Y105W is not
nearly as critical as English W131.
When Political Science Y105W is discovered to have zero value, the
matter can be resolved by simply dropping the course. |
|
|
|
Simply dropping English W131 is not an option…thus the
request for a substitute article. |
|
|
|
I am aware of the two basic tests: the “compelling interest test” and the
“burden test.” |
|
|
|
The “compelling interest test” allows the government to
force Christians to compromise their religious beliefs if there is a
compelling government need. There is
no compelling need whatsoever to require such a degraded article as a
necessary component of learning Elementary Composition. Indiana University fails the “compelling
interest test.” |
|
|
|
The “burden” test allows a party to force Christians to
comprise their religious beliefs if the burden necessary to accommodate the
Christian places an unreasonable burden on the first party. Since this is an “Independent Study
Program,” the substitution of an alternate article for Lesson 2 is a de
minimus burden. Indiana University
fails the “burden test.” |
|
|
|
Therefore, it is proper for us to make this request based
upon our sincerely held religious beliefs.
And it is correct and appropriate for Indiana University to substitute
a different article for Lesson 2. |
|
|
|
To be quite frank, I was more than surprised by the
nature of the Elementary Composition course. |
|
|
|
I’ve just reached behind my desk for a book… |
|
|
|
Here’s a quote from the Introduction to the ten volume
set “The Best of the World’s Classics, Restricted to Prose”: |
|
|
|
“The Bible stands alone, a great literary monument of the
noblest and most beautiful English, which has formed English speech and
become a part of the language as it is of the thought and emotion of the
people who read ‘King James’ version in all parts of the globe…Therefore,
putting aside the English Bible as wholly by itself, it may be safely said
that the soul of a language and the beauties of style which it is capable of
exhibiting can only be found and studied in the productions of writers who
not only think in the language in which they write, but to whom that speech
is native, the inalienable birthright and heritage of their race or
country…We have in the English language an unequalled richness of vocabulary
far surpassing in extent that of any other tongue. It possesses a great literature and a body
of poetry unrivaled in modern times.
It is not only one of the strongest bonds of union in the United
States, but it is the language in which our freedom was won and in which our
history and our laws are written. It
is our greatest heritage. To weaken,
corrupt or deprave it would be a misfortune without parallel to our entire
people. Yet we can not disguise from
ourselves the fact that the fertility of the printing-press, the
multiplication of cheap magazines, and the flood of printed words poured out
daily in the newspapers all tend strongly in this direction…Contrast this [a
long quote from Hawthorne] with the newspaper sentence and the sensation is
one of pain…Yet no one, I think, can read the great masterpieces of English
prose and not have both lesson and responsibility brought home to him. He would be insensible, indeed, if he did
not feel after such reading that he was a sharer in a noble heritage which it
behooved him to guard and cherish. If
this series serves no other purpose, it will exhibit to those who read it
some of the splendors and the beauties of English prose. It will at least open the gates of
literature and perhaps lead its readers to authors they have not known
before, or recall the words of writers who have entered into their lives and thoughts
and thus make them more mindful of the ineffable value to them and their
children of the great language which is at once their birthright and their
inheritance. Henry Cabot Lodge. Washington, D.C., July 15, 1909. |
|
|
|
At one time, the purpose of writing was to elevate the
spirit and enrich mankind. Now, to see
Indiana University select a piece of unGodly smut from a Jewish magazine to
teach Elementary Composition…it certainly is a cause for revulsion. The contrast between Lodge’s beautiful prose
and the piece of shit served up by Indiana University (for the purpose of
teaching elementary composition!) is chilling indeed. |
|
|
|
Please provide a substitute article for my daughter to
use in English W131. |
|
|
|
Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello. |
|
|
|
Two weeks ago, I sent in the
request provided below. |
|
|
|
Would you please let me know
what the status of my request is? |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
E. LeVin |
|
|
|
[[[The original request was repeated here.]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. LeVin: |
|
|
|
I am responding to your email regarding your daughter, Christine. |
|
|
|
First, universities have broad latitude to make academic decisions with regard to curriculum and material selection and I am confident that the material selection for this course is well within the department's discretion. |
|
|
|
Second, while I appreciate the analysis provided in your email, I do not believe that it is applicable to this situation since your daughter is neither required by IUSCS to take this particular course, nor is she required in any way to pursue either course or degree requirements through the Indiana University School of Continuing Studies if you find our material selection to be unacceptable or inappropriate. Since there is no compulsion on the part of the University, there is no need to analyze whether an exemption on religious groups would be appropriate. |
|
|
|
I can offer you two solutions: You may withdraw your daughter from the course for a full refund (less a withdrawal processing fee) or we you may transfer her into another course without charge. |
|
|
|
If you wish to withdraw Christine, you need only indicate that you wish to do so by response to this email and we will initiate the withdrawal/refund. |
|
|
|
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Onesti |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello! |
|
|
|
Thank you for your email. |
|
|
|
Would you please indicate your
title and the authority you have for representing the University regarding
this request. |
|
|
|
Thank you. |
|
|
|
Eric LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. Onesti, |
|
|
|
Hello. |
|
|
|
Upon reading your email for the fourth
time, I noticed your title. I
apologize for requesting your title in my prior email. |
|
|
|
(I sent my prior email
requesting your title because I was so stunned by the response and was in
such disbelief that anyone at a major university would make such statements
that I thought it was the work of some email assistant.) |
|
|
|
The particular course W131
Elementary Composition is a prerequisite for: |
|
|
|
W231 Professional Writing Skills |
|
W305A Advanced Expository Writing |
|
F301 Financial Management |
|
P301 Operations Management |
|
|
|
F301 Financial Management, in turn is a
prerequisite for: |
|
|
|
J401 Administrative Policy |
|
|
|
My daughter has previously
submitted a lesson for Education X152 Keys To Success. In this lesson, my daughter stated her
academic goal is to get a Bachelors degree with an emphasis in Business from
Indiana University School of Continuing Studies. Her lesson explains why this is her
academic goal, specifically including her reasons for selecting IU School of
Continuing Studies. In addition, her
lesson explains why this academic goal supports her life career goal. This is a document that is available should
you desire to see it. |
|
|
|
Although your counter proposals sound
generous and considerate, they are not. |
|
|
|
When the importance of W131
Elementary Composition is framed in the context of the student’s academic and
life goals and the IU prerequisites for courses necessary for her to achieve
these goals…your response is very blunt.
To me, it’s equivalent to: “I’m
denying your daughter the opportunity to get a degree from Indiana University
based solely on your Christian views.”
(All because of your personal insistence on a short article dealing
with fornicators and homosexuals.) |
|
|
|
Indiana University prominently
displays its so-called “Nondiscrimination Policy.” This policy states “Indiana University
prohibits discrimination based on…religion…” |
|
|
|
My request specifically stated that
the particular, utterly unnecessary article is a de facto religious test
imposed on students. I thought you
would understand that I was claiming that this article is elevated to a
violation of the Indiana University Nondiscrimination Policy based upon my
family’s religious beliefs. |
|
|
|
Your response: “Your daughter is neither required by IUSCS
to take this particular course, nor is she required in any way to pursue
either course or degree requirements through the Indiana University School of
Continuing Studies.” |
|
|
|
When the context of the subject
matter is considered, how can any reasonable person not interpret your
statements as a blunt act of discrimination against a person based on her
sincerely held religious beliefs? …Your
insensitive statements are outright violations of the IU Nondiscrimination
Policy. |
|
|
|
Let me reframe the matter in a
different manner that may allow you to better understand the issue. My intent’s not to be insensitive to you or
to others, but to simply massage the issue in a way that may turn a light on
in your head… |
|
|
|
If this same Elementary English
Composition course used an essay arguing that Blacks are mentally inferior to
Jews, Asians, and Whites, and that it’s a waste of resources to allow Blacks in
universities…if a Black objected to the essay …would you say Blacks “are not
required in any way to pursue either course or degree requirements through
IUSCS.”? Would you offer your personal
argument that “I am confident that the material selection for this course is
well within the department's discretion.”? |
|
|
|
Alternatively, if the essay
argued that since only twelve thousand Jews resided in Palestine in 1850
prior to the Zionist movement, the five million Ashkenazi Jews that have
invaded Palestine are nothing less than criminals stealing the land and lives
of the native Palestinians…if a Jew objected… would you say Jews “are not
required in any way to pursue either course or degree requirements through
IUSCS.”? Would you offer your personal
argument that “I am confident that the material selection for this course is
well within the department's discretion.”? |
|
|
|
I believe in the two sample
cases you would instruct that a substitute article be used for the
course. I further believe you would not
make your: You “are not required in
any way to pursue either course or degree requirements through IUSCS”
proclamation. |
|
|
|
The difference in the subject
situation is that you personally appear to be more than willing to violate the
IU Nondiscrimination policy and bluntly and forthrightly state your
discriminatory decision when it involves discrimination against a
Christian. This is wrong. |
|
|
|
If the article was used in an
elective course on personal hygiene for fornicators and homosexuals or a
course on propaganda in university courses during the first decade of the 21st
Century, I would not request a substitute article |
|
|
|
I’d like this matter to be
resolved amicably at this point. |
|
|
|
I request that you reconsider my
request based upon this supplemental information and instruct that a
substitute article be provided. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. Onesti: |
|
|
|
Hello, again. |
|
|
|
My Christian ethics require that I write to you again. |
|
|
|
Please view this email as it is intended: It’s a personal courtesy to you…my attempt to be fair and decent…and to give you prior notice of my future efforts to resolve the two acts of illegal religious discrimination by Indiana University against my daughter. |
|
|
|
I know you may view this email as a threat. I assure you that’s absolutely not the case. If my mind set was to issue a threat, my issuing a threat would be pre-empted by my greater desire to just move on with my legitimate grievance and not waste any more time with you. I want to resolve this matter and move on with life! |
|
|
|
You haven’t responded to my last overture, reprinted below. |
|
|
|
If I don’t receive a satisfactory response, my next step is to email the following individuals: |
|
|
|
Jeremy Dunning, Dean, School of Continuing Studies, and |
|
|
|
Stephen Watt, Chairperson, Department of English. |
|
|
|
I will attempt to resolve the matter with them. |
|
|
|
If I don’t receive satisfaction from either Dunning or Watt, I’ll then proceed to: |
|
|
|
Charles Nelms, Vice President of Student Development and Diversity, and, concurrently, |
|
|
|
University President Myles Brand. |
|
|
|
My communications with Nelms and Brand will include complaints about the fraudulent business practices of Indiana University. My reference is to the numerous representations regarding purported prohibitions of discrimination, IU’s purported “celebration of a rich diversity,” and other representations such as “the entire University stands behind you,” faculty members are “caring and compassionate,” “we will all reach out a hand to help you,” “we expect you to keep going even when the going gets rough,” etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. In short, my daughter’s experience proves that you individually are either a renegade, or Indiana University is actively engaged in consumer fraud. |
|
|
|
At this point with Nelms and Brand, if my matter is not resolved to my satisfaction, there will have been a third illegal act of discrimination against my daughter. |
|
|
|
My remedies will then have to be forced upon Indiana University from outside. |
|
|
|
I will seek expert counsel before taking a particular course of action. |
|
|
|
Nevertheless, possible courses of action include: |
|
|
|
Filing an Institutional Complaint with The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association. |
|
|
|
Filing a Civil Rights Complaint with the U. S. Department Of Education, Office of Civil Rights, Region V. |
|
|
|
Filing a suit in Federal Court, which would include both a remedy to the illegal discrimination and financial damages. |
|
|
|
There may be other remedies. |
|
|
|
You’ll be personally named in all of my further attempts to resolve this matter. |
|
|
|
If I need to go outside of the University, I may or may not first alert the Trustees of the fact. |
|
|
|
I’m sending this email for two purposes: |
|
|
|
The first is a last attempt to privately resolve this matter satisfactorily and amicably with you. |
|
|
|
The second purpose is simply to give you fair warning of what I plan to pursue. |
|
|
|
If you believe our relationship is sufficiently damaged by the unfortunate circumstances, I would welcome your passing this matter on to another official at Indiana University. |
|
|
|
I apologize once again for my email asking for your title and authority. Your subject email, when it was received, had a great number of skipped lines between your name at the end of the email and the second appearance of your name with your title. When I read your email, on my screen, it appeared that I had reached the end when I came to your name because the remainder was so far down it did not appear on my screen. It was only when I accidentally tabbed to the bottom of the page that I found your title. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
[[[The
prior email to Onesti to which Onesti did not respond
was attached here.]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. LeVin, |
|
|
|
I am responding to your email of
today’s date. |
|
|
|
Although you have made it very
clear that you are unhappy with the materials selected for the course in
which your daughter is enrolled, we will not agree to make a
substitution. |
|
|
|
As indicated to you previously,
the selection of course material is committed to the pedagogical expertise of
the faculty member teaching the course.
The material selection at issue here is well within the faculty
member’s discretion under University policy and core principles of academic
freedom. |
|
|
|
I have forwarded both of your
emails and my responses to the university officials referenced in your email
so that they will have the full context of any communication that you may
choose to pursue with them. |
|
|
|
I will also reiterate that your
daughter may withdraw from the course for a full refund (less a withdrawal processing
fee) or she may transfer into another course without charge. |
|
|
|
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
Larry Onesti |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello! |
|
|
|
Thank you for your answer. |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
[[[Watt is Stephen Watt, Chairman of the English Department
at Indiana University, Bloomington campus.]]] |
|
|
|
Hello. |
|
|
|
My daughter is enrolled in
English W131 Elementary Composition through the Indiana University School of
Continuing Studies. |
|
|
|
Lesson 2 revolves around a
particular magazine article. |
|
|
|
The subject matter and its
treatment is offensive to our sincerely held Christian beliefs. |
|
|
|
I believe the selection serves as
a religious test which places a significant obstacle in my daughter’s attempt
to benefit from Indiana University. |
|
|
|
I requested that a substitute
article be provided to my daughter. I indicated
that I believed my request was reasonable and that Indiana University should
provide a substitute offering. |
|
|
|
Lawrence J. Onesti, Associate
Dean Academic Programs, responded. |
|
|
|
I believe that Mr. Onesti’s
response, which went well beyond a denial of the request, is inappropriate. |
|
|
|
Mr. Onesti indicated that the
selection of the article is “well within the department's discretion.” |
|
|
|
I disagree. I do not believe establishing a de facto religious
test is within the department’s discretion, regardless of intent. |
|
|
|
Mr. Onesti has also indicated
that the selection of the article is “well within the faculty member’s
discretion under University policy and core principles of academic freedom.” |
|
|
|
Again, I would disagree. The selection, in the circumstance of the
particular student, seems to be a clear violation of the University’s
Nondiscrimination Policy and Federal Civil Rights Law. |
|
|
|
In addition, it would seem that
if the selection is within the department’s discretion, as claimed by Mr.
Onesti, then a substitution should equally be within the department’s
discretion. It astounds me that an individual
(or individuals) at Indiana University would not happily agree to a simple
substitution in the circumstances. |
|
|
|
Having related all of the above,
I am appealing to you to authorize the substitution of an article. |
|
|
|
My basis for requesting the
substitute article is my position that the article serves as an illegal
religious test. |
|
|
|
The instructor assigned to my
daughter is David Marshall who is a graduate student in your department. Thus, it’s appropriate that I appeal to you
in your departmental role…your department is at the center of the matter. |
|
|
|
I have attached all of the
emails. Obviously, you should start at
the end and work back to the top. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
[[[The email history was attached here.]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
[[[Dunning is Jeremy Dunning, Dean of the Indiana University
School of Continuing Studies.]]] |
|
|
|
Hello. |
|
|
|
My daughter has a problem at the
Indiana University School of Continuing Studies. |
|
|
|
The problem and issues should be
clear from the emails below. |
|
|
|
I’m appealing to you as the Dean
of the Indiana University School of Continuing Studies to step in and give
what I truly believe is the only correct response…a substitute article. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
[[[The email history was attached here.]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original
Message----- |
|
From: dunning
[mailto:dunning@indiana.edu] |
|
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 2:42 PM |
|
To: Eric LeVin |
|
Subject: Re: FW: My request for a
substitute article for English W131 Lesson 2 |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. LeVin, |
|
|
|
I just returned from a trip and got your email this morning. I am emailing you to let you know I have received it and am looking into the situation. |
|
|
|
Sincerely yours, |
|
|
|
Jeremy Dunning, Dean |
|
School of Continuing Studies |
|
Indiana University |
|
|
|
Now available: IU's first online bachelor's degree! |
|
Visit the School of Continuing Studies Website for details: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original
Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello! |
|
|
|
Thanks for the reply...I really appreciate it. |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. LeVin, |
|
|
|
Thank you for your e-mail. |
|
|
|
It is my understanding that you
have directed this matter to Jeremy Dunning, Dean of the School of Continuing
Studies. His is the appropriate office
to consider this matter. |
|
|
|
Best wishes, |
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Watt,
Chair |
|
Department of
English |
|
Indiana
University |
|
Bloomington, IN
47405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello! |
|
|
|
Thank you for your email. |
|
|
|
Your understanding’s correct…I
have directed the matter to Jeremy Dunning, Dean of the School of Continuing
Studies. |
|
|
|
I’d hope you’d provide your
Department’s input if requested. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
(Extra thanks for the “Best
wishes.”) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original
Message----- |
|
From: dunning
[mailto:dunning@indiana.edu] |
|
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 10:18
AM |
|
To: Eric LeVin |
|
Subject: Re: FW: My request for a substitute article for English W131 Lesson 2 |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. LeVin, |
|
|
|
I have carefully investigated your request, and after careful consideration, I concur with the recommendations of Associate Dean Onesti. |
|
|
|
Your daughter may withdraw from the course for a full refund (less a withdrawal processing fee) or she may transfer into another course without charge, as Dr. Onesti previously stated. |
|
|
|
Sincerely yours, |
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Dunning, Dean |
|
School of Continuing Studies |
|
Indiana University |
|
|
|
Now available: IU's first online bachelor's degree! |
|
Visit the School of Continuing Studies Website for details: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original
Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello. |
|
|
|
Thank you for responding. |
|
|
|
I appreciate that you "carefully investigated [my] request" and gave the matter "careful consideration." |
|
|
|
Unfortunately, your decision is tragic for all parties...my daughter, you, Mr. Onesti, Mr. Watt, the Department of English, Indiana University, and me. Why? Because it's not merely wrong, it's despicable. |
|
|
|
Your proposal offering my daughter no option other than withdrawal from the course is tantamount to denying my daughter the degree that she previously expressed she desires from Indiana University. |
|
|
|
You’ve misused your authority at Indiana University and defended and protected a clear illegal religious barrier that hinders a Christian young lady in her attempt to receive a degree from Indiana University. |
|
|
|
I’ll be taking this matter higher at Indiana University, and, if necessary, outside of Indiana University. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
[[[Brand is Indiana University
President Myles Brand, VPSDD is Indiana University Vice President Charlie
Nelms, and Walker is Indiana University Dean Kim Walker.]]] |
|
Please intervene in this matter. |
|
|
|
My daughter, Christine C. LeVin, has been the victim of ten separate acts of illegal religious discrimination and/or intimidation by Indiana University and its officials. |
|
|
|
Count One. |
|
|
|
Indiana University Bloomington Department of English and Indiana University School of Continuing Studies created a “religious test” as a component of the course English W131 Elementary Composition. This religious test is the requirement that a Christian young lady be forced to subject herself to certain course work requiring the analysis of a propagandistic Jewish magazine article dealing with fornication and homosexuality. This portion of the course determines 9.5% of the total course grade. |
|
|
|
This degrading article…degrading to Christian sensibilities…is not uniquely necessary for the course and serves only to force a Christian young lady to wallow in an exercise that is abhorrent to her sincerely held religious faith. |
|
|
|
This religious test is an act of anti-Christian intimidation. |
|
|
|
This religious test is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law. |
|
|
|
Count Two. |
|
|
|
Associate Dean Lawrence Onesti of Indiana University’s School of Continuing Studies refused to consider a religious based non-discrimination request for a substitute article. Dean Onesti wrote: “Since there’s no compulsion on the part of the University [for a Christian young lady to take a course or pursue a degree at Indiana University], there is no need to analyze whether an exemption on religious grounds would be appropriate.” |
|
|
|
[Please note: an “exemption” was never requested, a substitute article was requested.] |
|
|
|
This self-proclaimed refusal to even consider the sincerely held religious merits of the request is a blatant act of anti-Christian intimidation by Dean Onesti. |
|
|
|
This outright refusal to even consider a religious based non-discrimination request when tendered is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law |
|
|
|
Count Three. |
|
|
|
Associate Dean Onesti of Indiana University’s School of Continuing Studies refused to allow a substitute article and instead gave the victim, the Christian young lady, only one “option.” This option was simply for her to make her exit by withdrawing from the course. |
|
|
|
Dean Onesti was fully aware that the victim’s withdrawal from the course would make it impossible for the Christian young lady to earn the desired Bachelor’s degree at Indiana University. |
|
|
|
Dean Onesti’s proposal was an outright revocation by a senior Indiana University official of the Christian young lady’s opportunity to receive a degree at Indiana University for no reason other than her desire to adhere to her Christian faith. |
|
|
|
Dean Onesti’s intentional “bum’s rush” to the exit was a blatant act of anti-Christian intimidation by Dean Onesti. |
|
|
|
Dean Onesti’s denial of the Christian young lady’s right to the opportunity to receive a degree at Indiana University…directly based upon her sincerely held Christian beliefs…is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law. |
|
|
|
Count Four. |
|
|
|
Department Chair Stephen Watt of the Indiana University Department of English, Bloomington, abdicated his clear responsibility as Department Chair to intervene in the matter when he was requested to do so. |
|
|
|
Department Chair Watt’s abdication of his clear duty to intervene in a matter of alleged illegal religious discrimination within his Department when requested is itself an act of illegal religious discrimination and is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law. |
|
|
|
Count Five. |
|
|
|
Dean Jeremy Dunning of Indiana University’s School of Continuing Studies after “careful investigation” and “careful consideration” of the matter also refused to allow a substitute article and instead also gave the victim, the Christian young lady, the sole “option.” Again, this only option was for her to make her exit by withdrawing from the course (and thus the potential of a degree). |
|
|
|
As with Dean Onesti, Dean Dunning was fully aware that the victim’s withdrawal from the course would make it impossible for the Christian young lady to earn the desired Bachelor’s degree at Indiana University. |
|
|
|
Dean Dunning’s concurrence with Associate Dean Onesti’s proposal was an outright revocation by a second senior Indiana University official of the Christian young lady’s opportunity to receive a degree at Indiana University for no reason other than her desire to adhere to her Christian faith. |
|
|
|
Dean Dunning’s intentional “bum’s rush” to the exit is a blatant act of anti-Christian intimidation by Dean Dunning. |
|
|
|
Dean Dunning’s denial of the Christian young lady’s right to the opportunity to receive a degree at Indiana University…directly based upon her sincerely held Christian beliefs…is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law. |
|
|
|
Count Six. |
|
|
|
Dean Dunning, the Dean of the Indiana University School of Continuing Studies, added additional intimidation to this religious discrimination matter. Dean Dunning added a closing “P.S.” to his “drop out” email (in which he denied the Christian young lady the opportunity to earn a Bachelor’s degree through the Indiana University School of Continuing Studies). Dean Dunning ended his email with a promotion of the exact program that he just denied to the Christian young lady! |
|
|
|
Dean Dunning ended his email with: “Now available: IU’s first online bachelor’s degree! Visit the School of Continuing Studies Website for details: http://scs.Indiana.edu” |
|
|
|
Dean Dunning’s unnecessary email addition is an act of anti-Christian intimidation by Dean Dunning. |
|
|
|
Count Seven. |
|
|
|
Indiana University imposed a financial penalty on the Christian young lady in response to a request for a simple religious accommodation based upon sincerely held religious beliefs. |
|
|
|
Both Dean Onesti and Dean Dunning in their emails gave the totally unexpected and unreasonable “drop out” decree when the “religious test” aspect of the course was identified and a simple religious accommodation was requested. Both Deans were clear to point out that Indiana University would charge a “withdrawal processing fee” if the course was in fact dropped. |
|
|
|
The Indiana University School of Continuing Studies Student Handbook does not mention a “withdrawal processing fee” at all when a student withdraws from a course. The handbook simply states the net amount that will be returned when a student withdraws from a course. If no lessons are submitted, the net reimbursement is: course fee less $20 if withdrawal is within 30 days of enrollment date; one half of the course fee if between 30 and 60 days; and no reimbursement after 60 days. |
|
|
|
In the subject situation, the Christian young lady’s enrollment date was 31 July 2002. Although the Christian young lady is a U.S. Citizen, she does not currently live in the United States. She didn’t receive her course materials until 29 August 2002. Indiana University School of Continuing Studies received the original request for the religious accommodation on 11 September 2002. Dean Onesti’s response to the religious accommodation request was dated 2 October 2002…sixty-three days after the enrollment date. Even had a withdrawal been desired given Dean Onesti’s directive, and the request entered the day of the Onesti directive, the refund would be less than the fees paid and may be as little as zero. Thus, the religious financial penalty imposed by Indiana University when a Christian young lady signs up for an Indiana University course with an unknown “religious test” component may be as high as the entire course fee! (The total cost of the course including all additional fees was $502.15.) |
|
|
|
No matter what the amount, Dean Onesti’s and Dean Dunning’s financial penalty (“withdrawal processing fee”) in circumstances directly related to sincerely held Christian beliefs is a blatant act of anti-Christian intimidation by Deans Onesti and Dunning. |
|
|
|
No matter what the amount, Dean Onesti’s and Dean Dunning’s financial penalty (“withdrawal processing fee”) in circumstances directly related to sincerely held Christian beliefs is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law. |
|
|
|
Count Eight |
|
|
|
Indiana University illegally penalizes a Christian young lady with a reduced grade in English W131 Elementary Composition. |
|
|
|
The Dean Onesti/Dean Dunning “option” of withdrawing from the course has been flicked into the wastebasket…where it belongs. The refusal of the Deans to allow a substitute article thus creates the religious disability for the Christian young lady of having to take a “zero” for 9.5% of the course grade. It also denies her the benefit of instructor comments on the initial course work…that in turn will adversely impact her performance in the remainder of the English Composition course and in other courses for which the English Composition course is a prerequisite. |
|
|
|
The net result is that because Indiana University refuses to make a simple accommodation to a Christian young lady in a matter involving her Christian faith, the Christian young lady must accept a penalty of at least one full grade in English W131 Elementary Composition in order for her to continue towards earning the desired Bachelor’s degree at Indiana University. |
|
|
|
The de facto “full grade” penalty (religious disability) imposed upon a Christian young lady…directly because of her adherence to her sincerely held Christian faith…is a blatant act of anti-Christian intimidation by Indiana University, Dean Dunning, Dean Onesti, and Chair Watt. |
|
|
|
The de facto “full grade” penalty (religious disability) imposed upon a Christian young lady…directly because of her adherence to her sincerely held Christian faith…is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law |
|
|
|
Count Nine. |
|
|
|
Indiana University has a blatantly discriminatory Discrimination “Complaint Procedure.” |
|
|
|
Indiana University’s “Nondiscrimination Policy” states: “Indiana University prohibits discrimination based on arbitrary considerations of such characteristics as age, color, disability, ethnicity, gender, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sexual orientation, or veteran status.” |
|
|
|
Indiana University then immediately turns around, vaporizes its “Nondiscrimination Policy,” and selects the Indiana University Affirmative Action Hearing Board Panel based on blatant, carved-in-stone intentional color, ethnic, gender, national origin, race, and (indirectly) sexual orientation classifications. Specifically, advocates of particular groups are granted the permanent right to appoint 43% of the members of the Affirmative Action Hearing Board Panel. These group advocates being the Dean of Afro-American Affairs, the Dean of Latino Affairs, and the Dean for Women’s Affairs. |
|
|
|
Why does Indiana University violate its own Nondiscrimination Policy in order to create a demographically rigged Affirmative Action Hearing Board Panel? |
|
|
|
This overt institutionalized discrimination has created a hostile environment for the Christian young lady. The fairness of the Indiana University Formal Discrimination Complaint Procedure (http://www.indiana.edu/~affirm/FormalP.htm) is questioned to the extent that the Christian young lady cannot avail herself of this purported Discrimination Complaint Procedure. She is thus denied another of the benefits of Indiana University. |
|
|
|
This overt institutionalized discrimination by Indiana University in the selection procedure for its Affirmative Action Hearing Board Panel is an act of intimidation against non-privileged group members, specifically including the Christian young lady. |
|
|
|
This overt institutionalized discrimination by Indiana University in the selection procedure for its Affirmative Action Hearing Board Panel is a violation of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy and of Indiana and Federal Law. |
|
|
|
Count Ten. |
|
|
|
University President Myles Brand signed a “Statement” entitled “College Presidents Decry Intimidation on Campuses,” a Statement that the vast majority of college Presidents refused to endorse. |
|
|
|
This Statement endorsed by President Brand was made in partnership with The American Jewish Committee, a controversial Jewish organization that was founded in 1906 for the promotion of Jewish interests…a Jewish organization that was instrumental in the establishment of the Jewish Agency for Palestine (in 1929)…a Jewish organization that for nearly a century has constantly placed Jewish interests above the interests of non-Jewish Americans. |
|
|
|
President Brand’s Statement goes out of its way to mention particular acts of “intimidation.” Significantly, all of these alleged acts of “intimidation” only victimize Jews or “Israel” supporters. |
|
|
|
President Brand’s Statement is unbalanced to the extreme. It doesn’t mention a single non-Jew as a victim of intimidation. Nor does it mention the vast history of Jew originated intimation: the violent Jewish intimidation of Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, SDS, and their successors; the Jews’ constant screaming of “anti-Semite,” “holocaust denier,” “hater,” etc. when they’re unable to debate the facts; and the Jewish attacks on persons who cross their agenda, examples being the Jewish onslaught against Black Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Black Congressman Earl Hilliard and the acid-in-the-face physical attacks on Robert Faurisson and Michael Caignet that have left them permanently hideously deformed. |
|
|
|
The fact that President Brand went out of his way to endorse and lend the Indiana University name to a blatantly biased Jewish Statement rather than a group-neutral Statement is itself an act of intimidation. It serves to create a hostile environment for those not willing to constantly submit to the continuously escalating demands of the less-than-3% Jewish minority. |
|
|
|
Indiana University President Brand’s Jewish Statement coming at the time of Indiana University’s anti-Christian discrimination against the Christian young lady is a specific act of intimidation against the Christian young lady since it creates a hostile environment in which the Jewish religion, and only the Jewish religion, is made to appear worth more at Indiana University than all other religions. |
|
|
|
Indiana University President Brand’s Jewish Statement coming at the time of Indiana University’s anti-Christian discrimination against the Christian young lady is a violation of the purported objective of Indiana University’s Nondiscrimination Policy. |
|
|
|
==== |
|
|
|
Additional Issue: Consumer Fraud. |
|
|
|
Although this issue is not quite “ripe,” the consumer fraud issue is waiting offstage. |
|
|
|
Indiana University as a legal entity and President Myles Brand and Vice President Charlie Nelms as individuals have all publicly and repeatedly made various representations and warranties regarding Indiana University policies and the reasonable expectations of Indiana University students. |
|
|
|
The experience of Christine C. LeVin to date clearly indicates that the public representations and warranties extended by Indiana University, President Brand, and Vice President Nelms have been materially breached. |
|
|
|
==== |
|
|
|
Comments on the rejected article and Indiana University. |
|
|
|
Although the request for a substitute article was based solely on the basis of the sincerely held religious faith, the article itself is worse than valueless. |
|
|
|
The rejected article is totally inconsistent with President Brand’s campaign against alcohol abuse. President Brand has an article posted at the front of the Indiana University Internet site titled "Alcohol Abuse Must Be Addressed." The article begins: "While most Indiana University students were preparing for fall semester finals, Joseph Bisanz's parents were making funeral arrangements for their son." |
|
|
|
If President Brand is attempting to reduce one form of self-destructive behavior, why is the Department of English unnecessarily desensitizing students to other forms of self-destructive behavior? |
|
|
|
The rejected article is contra-factual and simply gives bad information. Other more knowledgeable Departments at Indiana University (in professionally created coursework rather than Jewish propagandistic magazine articles) could instruct students about the serious risks involved in fornication and homosexual behavior. These include contracting HIV/AIDS, Syphilis, Gonorrhea, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, Herpes I, Herpes II, CMV (Cytomegalovirus), HPV (Human Papilloma Virus), Chlamydia, and Tuberculosis. These diseases may result in death, insanity, sterility, cervical cancer, penile cancer, bladder cancer, blindness, genital warts, pelvic infections, still births, and mental retardation, birth defects, and deformities in live births. Homosexual activity may result in all of the above diseases, damaged internal organs and tissues, ulcers, intestinal parasites, oozing blisters, and may necessitate medical care for removal of objects from the rectum. Documented objects removed from rectums include dead animals, light bulbs, vegetables, bottles, and cans. Both forms of destructive personal behavior may also result in emotional distress. |
|
|
|
It’s likely that more Indiana University students will suffer death or serious physical or emotional impairment from fornication and homosexual behavior than from alcohol abuse. |
|
|
|
Why the need for this particular, worthless article? Does the disputed article provide any positive benefit for anyone? |
|
|
|
Indiana University School of Continuing Studies uses the service phrase “The Best in Lifelong Learning.” Surely you jest, President Brand and Dean Dunning! |
|
|
|
Nevertheless, there was never a request to replace the article in the course or change the course in anyway. The only request made was for a single substitute article for the single student. |
|
|
|
Further, there was never any intent on this appellant’s part to grab a “contrafagotto” and add a voice to a movement against Indiana University’s homosexuals and fornicators. Nor was there a desire to pursue a campaign against Indiana University and particular senior officials of Indiana University. |
|
|
|
But there’s now a desire that you address: (1) the hostile environment Indiana University illegally creates for Christian youths and (2) the fact that senior Indiana University officials, despite their positions of trust, cavalierly trash a Christian young lady’s academic career. |
|
|
|
These complaints call for your attention. |
|
|
|
=== |
|
|
|
University President Myles Brand is a Liar. |
|
|
|
President Brand has an article posted at the front of the Indiana University Internet site titled “Freshman Induction, Opening the Doors of Possibility with Courage, Curiosity, and Character.” |
|
|
|
Here’re some quotes: |
|
|
|
“I want our new freshmen—and their parents—to know that besides your families and friends, the entire university community stands behind you…They are caring, and they are compassionate. Individually, and as a group, we will reach out a hand to help you find your way. We will help you open the many doors in this house of possibility, but it is up to you to walk through them.” |
|
|
|
“We do want each of you to succeed. We know you can do it, and we are here to help you.” |
|
|
|
Only if it were true, President Brand, only if it were true. |
|
|
|
=== |
|
|
|
What’s desired? |
|
|
|
The original…simple…de minimus request remains… |
|
|
|
“Please provide a substitute article for my daughter to use in English W131. Thank you.” |
|
|
|
And, because of the great amount of time squandered in my attempts to resolve this simple matter, I’m now also requesting that my daughter’s “Enrollment Date” be reset to the date when the substitute article is provided. |
|
|
|
=== |
|
|
|
(There are five attachments to this email.) |
|
|
|
=== |
|
|
|
Sincerely yours, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
[[[The
five attachments were the entire email history.]]] |
|
|
|
[[[Dean
Kim Walker is also “Professor of Bassoon.”
A contrafagotto is an older European name for a double bassoon.]]] |
|
|
|
[[[Dean
Kim Walker and Vice President Charlie Nelms did not respond to the above
email.]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Dear Mr. LeVin: |
|
|
|
I am responding to this message as
well as your correspondence with Kim Walker and others. I have reviewed the
entire course of communications and the resultant analysis, and Dean
Dunning's response reflects the university's position on this issue. |
|
|
|
You may consider this email the
university's final response to your request. |
|
|
|
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
Myles Brand |
|
President |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Hello! |
|
|
|
Thank you for getting back to
me. I appreciate that. |
|
|
|
I’m disappointed to say the
least. |
|
|
|
Thank you, |
|
|
|
Eric J. LeVin |
|
|
|
|
|
[[[What would you do if Myles Brand and other senior
University officials occupying positions of public trust discriminated
against you or your 16-year old daughter?]]] |
|
|
|
|
|
All the
16-year old Christian Young Lady wanted was a fair chance |
|
to
continue working toward a degree at Indiana University |
|
without
having to compromise her Christian Faith.… |
|
but
Jewish President Myles Brand |
|
and his
senior Indiana University officials |
|
would
not tolerate this. |
|
|
