From a post on Spectrum by Ron Osborn: The [LSU PR] …

Comment on LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC by Sean Pitman.

From a post on Spectrum by Ron Osborn:

The [LSU PR] letter mentions the charge that he [Diaz] is an Agnostic and then proceeds to say absolutely nothing contradicting that assertion. The only sentence they produced to answer this charge they are supposedly responding to: 1. Says nothing about his beliefs. 2. Says nothing about the present and 3. Says nothing about the regularity of his religious practice whenever it was “throughout the span of his academic career” that he attended these “various” churches. It’s not too comforting when in response to the charge of agnosticism you don’t even confirm his belief in God, let alone his Christian belief, let alone his Adventist belief, or even present religious practice, but instead have to appeal to some undefined amount of church attendance at some undefined point of his life. I can think of three explanations: 1. Diaz is a committed, believing, Adventist who was falsely accused and LSU’s PR rep. had a bad day and wrote an incredibly weak defense. 2. He’s a committed, believing, Adventist, but the PR doesn’t think that’s any of our business. In which case, they should have been honest and said that, instead of insulting our intelligence by a response that doesn’t even come to addressing the charge. 3. The worst possibility: that response was actually good PR. It was the best “response” that could possibly be given.

http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2013/01/27/la-sierra-university-responds-recent-attacks#disqus_thread

Sean Pitman Also Commented

LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC

Your readers might think Professor Kent has a better grasp on the situation than you do. Moreover, they would be very disappointed in, or refuse to believe, any report that LSU upholds SDA beliefs.

Not true. I’d personally be very happy to publish credible evidence that LSU is now active in upholding and promoting the SDA position on origins. Such news would be very encouraging to me personally…

As far as someone else having a better grasp on what’s happening at LSU, that’s certainly possible since I’m not there. I live in N. Cal. after all and have to depend on what people who are there are telling me.


LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC
Why don’t you tell us? After all, I’ve spoken there a couple times myself. Again, this is irrelevant to the fact that LSU hires and maintains professors who believe and promote neo-Darwinism as the most plausible story of origins.


LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC
If you are refering to a very quitely held lecture by Walter Veith at LSU last year, what’s your point? A single lecture from a outside professor in support of creation, having nothing to do with what the science or even religion departments at LSU are themselves teaching, doesn’t remotely negate the effects of hiring and maintaining neo-Darwinists who believe in and promote just the opposite in their classrooms, press releases, public statements, and publications. Bringing on Dr. Raul Diaz only confirms the lip service attitude that LSU’s leadership pays to the name their school is supposed to represent – “Seventh-day Adventist University”.


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!


The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…


The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…


Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?


Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.

Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).

Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.