Suspension of Disbelief Art Student Expelled—For Atheism? BY AMY JENNIGES Bob Averill's classmates at the Art Institute of Portland had finished up their work in a character development class on November 8, and were chatting to pass the time until class was over. The discussion moved toward spirituality. Averill, a Game Art Design student and a devoted atheist—he even runs a blog called Portland Atheist—sidled over and joined the conversation. It was the last time he'd be in an Art Institute class—within two weeks, he was expelled, less than a year before he'd hoped to graduate. In the classroom that day, Averill says one young woman was talking about her belief in energy layers and astral beings. "I jokingly asked her if she believed in leprechauns. It turns out, she does. They live on another energy layer," Averill wrote in notes to himself later that day. "In the interest of bringing my own view to the discussion, I began to ask her how she knew these things. Again I know all too well that people can be sensitive about their spiritual beliefs, so I was pretty much walking on glass as I did so." Averill says he wasn't trying to disprove the other student's religious beliefs, but "to convince her not to insist that they were scientifically proven." The student, apparently offended, complained to the teacher. Averill was called into a meeting that evening, he says, with the Art Institute's dean of education, associate dean, and the dean of student affairs. According to Averill, he was told the meeting was "because of my altercation with [the other student]." Averill says he pointed out that he'd "only offered a different viewpoint in a discussion that [my classmate] had started." "They didn't respond well," Averill told the Mercury. "Their mantra was 'no discussing religion in school,' which is fine except that I did not initiate the conversation, she had." Averill was suspended for four days, until a judicial hearing with the dean of student affairs. Immediately after the meeting with the deans, Averill found a classmate who had witnessed the initial conversation, and dragged him to the dean's office. "I thought I could clear this up, this is just a misunderstanding." (The witness did not respond to an inquiry from the Mercury.) But the associate dean, Averill says, "told me she didn't want to hear from me again that day. So she reported it to the dean as rude and belligerent behavior." At the judicial hearing, on November 17, Dean of Student Affairs Ron Engeldinger was more focused on the "rude and belligerent behavior" report from the associate dean, Averill says, than on the initial conversation about religion. Then Engeldinger, he says, brought up the fact that Averill had had some trouble with three instructors in October. "The thing is, I had already had a meeting with the associate dean about [that]. We resolved the issue and I apologized to the professors involved." Averill was surprised that Engeldinger brought it up again. "I expressed that I felt discriminated against as an atheist, and he informed me that mine was not a protected class of people," Averill says. Averill has since contacted the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Freedom from Religion Foundation, based in the Midwest. He says the Freedom from Religion Foundation told him to seek legal counsel, and he expects the ACLU will respond to his inquiry within 60 days. According to an emailed letter from Engeldinger, Averill had violated the student conduct policy. The decision to dismiss Averill was "not the result of a single action on your part, but a series of actions. I believe that, in several instances, your actions have been aggressive, demeaning, and threatening and that this demonstrates a pattern of inappropriate and unacceptable behavior," Engeldinger wrote. The student who complained on November 8 wished to remain anonymous, but her account backs up Engeldinger's letter. Her complaint was not the only reason he was sent into the Dean's office. The teacher even told me that my complaint was the 'last straw' as SEVERAL other complaints were stated before mine." However, she says she "did not wish for him to be expelled or get in trouble and I had no idea that it was going to happen until after the fact." On Monday morning, November 20, Averill met with the school's president, Dr. Steven Goldman, to appeal his dismissal. "He upheld the dean's decision to throw me out," Averill says. "He offered to re-admit me if I underwent—get this—psychiatric evaluation." Goldman declined to discuss specifics without Averill's permission. "I can say that we have never suspended or terminated or disciplined or otherwise troubled any student at any time about religious issues. It's never even come up as an issue," says Goldman, who also teaches a comparative religion class at the school. Given the Art Institute's liberal arts curriculum, there is no policy against discussing religion or philosophy, "or any other subject as far as I know. We have an academic community in which people are free to explore ideas." http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/Content?oid=84436&category=22101 Now, I don't know what's worse. Suspending a student for challenging someone else's ideas or not allowing discussion of religion at a college (albeit an Art college). Then again, they claim the expulsion was a result of a series of behavior, though they haven't documented it.
If Averill's account is truthful, and I openly assume it is, the action upon him is absolutely ridiculous. No one, regardless of religion beliefs or lack thereof, can legally be expelled from any government building for discussing religion. Seperation of church and state, as I've understood it, is instated on for legal and governmental matters, nothing to do with inconsequencial discussion, except in the case of education where it's to protect exclamations of one religion or the next being the only truth, or as some might believe, to uphold the scientific spectrum of what origin of life can be "proven." I think it's unacceptable deliberation to expel a student for religious discussion.
Samething I thought. Hell a real Shepherd type could get her expelled for her satanic beliefs. I read this story and I get the feeling that there is something else going on.
I note that the term "Aggressive" was used in describing his discourse. This would indicate that he tends to be a bit abusive in presenting his case. And that ain't gonna fly.
Yeah, that kid kinda sounds like the pain-in-the-ass type who delights in beating people over the head with his "superior" position. Also sounds like he invited himself into that conversation. That said, it shouldn't matter which side of the argument you're on. If he faces consequences for inflicting his beliefs on others, anyone who argues religion in that school should face the same disciplinary action.
There it is. Discuss religion all you like...but the minute you start trying to talk 'em out of their faith, you're wrong. Leave 'em be...if they already buy that load of horseshit, it's far too late.
I got about 3/4 of the way down before I'd read enough between the lines. The guy didn't get expelled for discussing religion with anyone. He got expelled because he is a belligerent, combative prick. He has a history of being a belligerent, combative prick, and this was just the last straw. (Or more accurately the last two straws.) What's the truism I'm looking for? "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"? No--"You Reap What You Sow."
No. But you should be able to expel a particular person if nearly everyone is offended by their behavior, they bring nothing to the classes, and their presence disrupts everyone else's learning.
It is an art college, and as such everyone feels they have a right not to be offended by free speech.
How ironic this was in a character development class. Oh and I am suprised someone actually came out and admitted this: I guess being offended or discriminated against only counts if you are part of a "protected class of people". What happened to all men being equal? This makes me sick.
No, for being a prick and not learning to adapt to school politics. He might as well learn it now; he'll never make it in the real world until he does.
Whether he was irritating and invited himself into the conversation doesn't matter. All he did was express his viewpoint. The fact that he was then engaged into the conversation by the person herself shows that she was more than willing to listen to him at first. Otherwise a prompt "this doesn't involve you" or "this is a private conversation" should take care of the situation. Personally, I enjoy talking to atheists about my faith. I have nothing to hide, and I also have no problem saying "I don't know". I am a profoundly spiritual person, and I believe this young man may have been treated very unfairly. And in an art college no less! It's ART! Self expression! For the love of Jesus Christ, when did self expression have to conform to the ideas of others?! Sorry, bit of a rant there. I just find this kind of situation very frustrating. Whether he was pushy or not. You want aggressive? Go to school every day wearing black and walk by a group of hardcore Christians. 9 times out of 10, you'll get aggressive. -J.
If discussion goes from polite discourse to combative and abusive argument, there's a good chance you're gonna get tossed if you can't control yourself.
Yep. It's hidden by the biased writing, but this bit is quite revealing: He didn't like the Dean's decision, so he barged in and started yelling at him. It is quite reasonable to expect that students not follow that course when expressing a grievance. The guy had a due process method, had he waited four days, his witness might have been very helpful, but he chose a temper tantrum instead.
He'd fit right in with the lot of us then. Someone find him and invite. Tell him about Shepherd, Bulldog and even Tasvir and their love for God.
