The school is insanely different than Brigham Young and the Mormon lifestyle. Minimal research would show you this. Students are allowed to drink off campus, there is not dress code violation (except for nudity), we aren’t even forced to go to church! The chapel requirement only entails 16 chapel attendances a semester. Chapel credit opportunities include speakers (20 minutes, on a variety of topics), AIDS awareness events, Service/missions discussions and experiences, academic lectures, or traditional college adresses. The college does not dictate which you must attend and offers at least 60 different opportunities to choose from a semester.

My guess is that this “university” is more akin to Brigham Young and Mormon lifestyle promoting colleges than it is to, say, Hillsdale. Just my impression.

I don’t actually expect you to answer this, because I have asked it over and over, but seeing as these three things (accreditation through Middle States, high rating through Princeton Review, and a high student success rate in entry to prestigious graduate programs and competitive employment) are definitive proof that you are wrong about the academics at GCC, I figured I would just throw them out there again. But if you acknowledge that this proof exists, your argument dies. So feel free to ignore this and continue with your witch hunt, I just don’t want rational people to be fooled.

Presenting a theory is not a lie as a theory is not a fact, nor does Throckmorton call his theories or research fact in any of his writing I have seen. Discussion of it, even if it is a lie (which I admit is not in my depth or position to determine) does not equal the teaching of lies. Could you please name ONE college that doesn’t have classes in which they discuss theories that aren’t necessarily true? If you have some kind of evidence proving that Throckmorton teaches his theories as cold hard facts to the students, I’m sure the college wouldn’t be too enthused with it either. Espeically because it would be a dillineation from the curriculum of all of his courses.

You seem to be contradicting your prior statement that you are not saying that the educational authorities are wrong. They know about Throckmorton, they know he teaches here. We still receive high ratings, accreditation, and send students off into extremely successful futures and prestigious institutions. How does the school achieve this? Are you attributing it to miracles? That seems out of character…

You see, even if he were to tangentially discuss it, it is nonetheless a mark against not only him, but the institution he represents in his capacity as a lecturer.

Not at all. I am the person. It’s a simple argument.

employing a liar to teach lies to students and voice lies in public is clearly a mark against the institution that employs him. After all, one isn’t learning when one is being taught lies.

Not caring about the truth and teaching it is a virtue held by the college, then. That speaks against the integrity and rigor of the college.

Also, even you can’t actually believe that Throckmorton sits in class and only talks about his own theories. Seeing as none of the classes the man teaches even center on the subject of his research, he obviously doesn’t sit and spout nothing but his own theories. Why do you assume that everything the man thinks, teaches, or believes is a lie? He may never bring it up in his classes, but you wouldn’t know as you haven’t taken them or observed them.

No, I’m not saying that they’re right or wrong. I’m saying that employing a liar to teach lies to students and voice lies in public is clearly a mark against the institution that employs him. After all, one isn’t learning when one is being taught lies.

And? Once again, having a liar teach lies and publically voice lies about human sexuality teach at your school is mark against that school.

Once again, that’s not my issue.

Well, I am, and so are more than 98% of his “peers” (and given his stance, I use the term loosely).

this is absolutely not the time or place for that.

It absolutely is. There’s never a wrong time to confront scientific falsehood, especially when they are based on unscientific dogma.

I’m not condoning (or condemning) his methods.

I’m condemning them, and the school that would support him through his employ.

and I am definitely not agreeing with the gccs conservative religious stance. I can respect them for standing up for what they feel is the truth, but I am most certainly not going to even attempt to convince you of it.

That’s where you and I disagree. I don’t deny that they have a right to that stance just as I don’t deny that a klansman has a right to his beliefs. I don’t, however, feel that people are entitled to be respected (tolerated, yes) simply because they have beliefs and are “standing up for them”. I don’t respect neo nazis for standing up for their beliefs, either.

the only reason I even responded to you in the first place was to correct your wrong conclusions about the academics there.

Well, I don’t think that those conclusions are, in fact, wrong. He is a quack who passes off patent falsehoods for truths in his classes. That doesn’t recommend the academic integrity of the institution that continues to sign his paychecks and enable him to lecture on falsity.

hell, even if they fired throckie now, you probably still wouldnt approve.

No, I wouldn’t. Because I disagree with christianity and the mission statements of christian education. However, my opinion of the academic integrity would be enhanced. I don’t agree with the purpose of notre dame, but I can’t quibble with the administration and faculty’s commitment to excellence in teaching the truth and not religious dogma that is inconsistent with it.

but…gcc has been around for 100+ years and is highly selective. it is, as more grovers pointed out, accredited, and recognized by princeton review as one of the best values in college education. professors are regularly published in respected, peer reviewed journals (despite, as was mentioned earlier, it not being a primarily a research institution.) and its passed the real world test of graduates getting accepted into good jobs and universities. if that doesnt satisfy your ‘concern’ for their educational rigor, clearly nothing will.

It does not given the employment of this bigot who teaches falsity…that is, as I wrote before, a mark against not just him, but the academic integrity of the institution that employs him.

I’m not saying throckies ideas are right or wrong. this is absolutely not the time or place for that. I’m not condoning (or condemning) his methods. and I am definitely not agreeing with the gccs conservative religious stance. I can respect them for standing up for what they feel is the truth, but I am most certainly not going to even attempt to convince you of it. the only reason I even responded to you in the first place was to correct your wrong conclusions about the academics there. hell, even if they fired throckie now, you probably still wouldnt approve. but…gcc has been around for 100+ years and is highly selective. it is, as more grovers pointed out, accredited, and recognized by princeton review as one of the best values in college education. professors are regularly published in respected, peer reviewed journals (despite, as was mentioned earlier, it not being a primarily a research institution.) and its passed the real world test of graduates getting accepted into good jobs and universities. if that doesnt satisfy your ‘concern’ for their educational rigor, clearly nothing will.

luckily, your opinion doesnt change the facts.

So throckmorton doesn’t receive money through the templeton foundation? No grants that go through the college go toward his research? He’s not employed by the psych department and represents the psych department whenever he lectures? Please.

Um, once again, employing a professor that teaches pseudo science as fact in a psychology department discredits the institution that he is employed at. This isn’t a strawman fallacy. This is a fact. “Controversial academics” who are controversial because they hold bigoted and/or false ideas and teach them to their students is a mark against the institution that employs them.

Tank obviously has a superiority complex and an extremely closed mind. Throckmorton in NO way receives money from the school for his research. None of the professors here do. Most of the professors I have heard of doing research usually conduct it while on sabbatical using federal or private grants given by other institutions. We are NOT a research oriented institution. Whether it is a hoax or not, if people want his therapy, they have the freedom to receive it and he has the freedom to provide it. You, who have taken both of the classes he teaches in which it may come up, have testified that his research or even the topic of his research are in no way central to his classes. He can think that Throck’s wrong all he wants, but until he finds some evidence of any of the fallacies he claims the school supports actually being supported or even taught at the school, which he won’t because the school provides a sound education, he is just being a stubborn, leftist bigot. And it’s pretty useless to try to convince a bigot he’s wrong about anything, even if all the empirical evidence contradicts them.

My family is black sourthern evangelicals/jehovah’s witness/speaking in tongues types. So, I know of family religion, but the reality is that I would not go to a school they wanted even as a kid because I knew who I was on the most basic level. I don’t get doing porn while going to a christian wingnut crazy school. That’s not a change. That’s completely ignoring who you are.

I’m not blowing this out of proportion. He is a disgrace and advocates a medieval understanding of human sexuality and apparently teaches it in his classes when it comes up. His understanding of reparative therapy is condemned by the APA and is said to cause harm. He is not teaching acceptable facts, but falsehoods that he may very believe in, but in light of his employment, do diminish the credibility of the school that employs him and, in so doing, endorses his beliefs.

I don’t care if people who go to ex gay therapies do so voluntarily. It is a hoax, and further, has the potential according to the APA of causing harm to the individual.

and seriously, quit knocking the schools academics. its a legit school, if sometimes overbearingly conservative. I was a bio and psych double major, and I now work at a prestigious (secular) university doing scientific research. I certainly do not agree with all gcc’s views, morally or politically, but the education I got there has served me well.

Now, as I said, having someone who is at odds with the APA and countless studies contradicting that person’s opinion and beliefs on human sexuality teach in a psychology department places the academic integrity of the entire school in jeopardy.

I notice you still avoid that which cannot be argued, that the school has been judged by those far more informed than you, and been appraised extremely favorably.

And you don’t think his methods and beliefs come up in a general counseling course or a cultural psych course? Please…that’s absurd.

I would also think that having a holocaust denier in a history department of a university or college renders the academic integrity of that institution questionable. Similarly, a chemistry department that signed off on a professor who taught alchemy instead of nuclear chemistry would be pretty disreputable, too.