FPN-initiated lawsuit limits UNC Islam assignment
Summer of 2002
Each year, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill assigns its incoming freshmen and transfer students an important assignment during the summer before they enter their first semester. It’s called the “Summer Reading Program” (SRP), and its purpose is to “introduce [students] to the intellectual life of Carolina.” The program’s goals are “to enhance students’ participation in the intellectual life of the campus through stimulating discussion and critical thinking around a current topic, to enhance a sense of community between students, faculty and staff, and to provide a common experience for incoming students.”
Just months after Islamic terrorists killed nearly 3,000 Americans in attacks on New York and Washington, the University of North Carolina announced the SRP Book Selection Committee’s choice for 2002. The book was entitled, “Approaching the Qu’ran” by author Michael Sells. Students began receiving notices in the mail, informing them of the “required” nature of the assignment. (UNC’s 2002 SRP website)
FPN Chairman Terry Moffit, himself a graduate of UNC and a former basketball player under legendary UNC coach Dean Smith, learned of the assignment through a fellow alumnus whose daughter was entering her first year at the school. Moffitt called FPN President Joe Glover to discuss the book and the requirement.
After consideration by FPN’s Directors, the decision was made to challenge UNC’s reading requirement for two reasons. The first reason was because of the sectarian nature of the assignment. UNC was attempting to require all incoming freshmen and transfer students to read about one particular religion. Worse yet, they were attempting to give the students one particular mindset about that religion.
The assigned book only discussed passages from the Qu’ran that were, as UNC’s website described them: “poetic” and “peaceful.” None of the many Koranic passages that incite hatred and violence against Christians and Jews were included in the chosen book. Therefore, the students at UNC were being given a one-sided presentation on Islam, at a time when people were really wondering why so many of its followers were routinely killing Christians and Jews.
For an author to hold a particular view of Islam is his perrogative. However, a taxpayer-funded state university should not promote one view of one religion – such as in this particular case with UNC and Islam. Even if the school was not attempting to “convert” anyone to Islam, they were clearly violating established law in attempting to promote one particular view of one particular religion to students who had no choice but to comply.
The second reason FPN Directors decided to oppose UNC’s Islamic reading assignment was because it was “required.” Required reading assignments about religious doctrine may be fine for students in the school of religion, and for students electing to take religious courses. However, students seeking degrees in business and law should not be required to submit to religious indoctrination of any sort.
FPN President Joe Glover, FPN Board Chairman Terry Moffitt and FPN State Director James Yacovelli were each interviewed about the controversey by several regional and national radio stations, television shows and newspaper reporters. In several of the national interviews, Glover, Moffitt and Yacovelli called on UNC Freshmen who objected to the Islam requirement to participate in a federal lawsuit against the University.
After interviewing nearly a dozen students, three were selected and introduced to the attorneys at the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, who then represented the students in the lawsuit at no charge. The only information publicly known about the students, who were permitted to remain anonymous by the Court, was that their religious affiliation – a Protestant, a Catholic and a Jew. FPN Board Chairman Terry Moffitt and FPN State Director James Yacovelli both joined the students as taxpayer plaintiffs in the suit.
Ultimately, the UNC administration admitted in court documents that it was not able to force students to submit to the assignment. On that basis, the Court did not intervene. While the school maintains that it “won” the case, the reality is that it did not prevail in requiring students to participate in Islamic indoctrination.
RELATED INFORMATION:
UNC Lawsuit outcome – Both sides claim victory:
http://rdu.news14.com/content/top_stories/?ArID=12060
FPN President explains position vs. UNC in USA editorial:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2002-08-08-oppose_x.htm
Daily Tar Heel: Summer Reading Choice Prompts Lawsuit Threat:
http://www.dailytarheel.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2002/07/18/3d36c0f96495e
FPN News Release: UNC Wants ‘Objectors’ to Defend Religious Views
http://www.dailytarheel.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2002/07/18/3d36c0f96495e
High Point: Christian group considers lawsuit over requirement:
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=4692021&BRD=1332&PAG=461&dept_id=414366&rfi=8
FoxNews: University’s Quran Reading Stirs Controversy:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57093,00.html
CBS NEWS: Infringing on 1st Amendment Rights:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/23/print/main516044.shtml
ABC/Nightline Special on FPN’s fight against UNC’s Islamic requirement:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/koran020824.html
UNC Summer Reading Program Islam requirement:
http://www.unc.edu/srp/srp2002/