The following is the transcript of an email I just sent to the dean of the business department at my college, who I believe oversees subjects such as Principles of Macroeconomics. I don't mean to imply in this email that I am somehow aggressively out to attack Christianity, because I'm not. Though I don't fall in perfect alignment with Christian beliefs, I do have a lot of overlap in how I feel about God and the universe as a whole. What I am adverse to is people who attempt to impress their beliefs and opinions upon everyone around them, particularly in situations that should be neutral to any and all indoctrination (such as state-run community college).
I'm not certain that you are the correct person to address this
question, but I would like to make a comment about the required textbook
used for Principles of Macroeconomics with Bernard Weinrich. The book
is Principles of Macroeconomics, by Fred Gottheil.
The issue I have with the text is that this is supposed to be a social
science course, yet chapter one makes extensive reference to the Bible
and the creation story from Genesis. I sincerely understand the use of
metaphor to prove a point, but this particular book crosses a very solid
line between using religion as a metaphor and stating a religious
belief as fact. The section I take particular issue with is page 5, in
which the text is using Adam and Eve as an example for the human
condition of insatiable want, and states, "We inherited their genes." I
don't believe that there is any specific evidence that I inherited Adam
and Eve's genes, or that Adam and Eve themselves were real people rather
Up until I read that sentence, I found the reference unnecessary, but
accepted it as being this author's frame of mind or reference. That
sentence, however, takes the text to a place of alienation for any
student who is not a Christian. I don't want to deny anyone their right
to believe what they believe, but I do have a problem with a college
textbook at a state school which attempts to tell me that the book of
Genesis is fact. There is little scientific evidence to support the idea
that The Bible should be interpreted as any more factual or historically accurate than Homer's Odyssey or Jim Davis' Garfield At Large.
Please let me know if you are not the correct party to address this
concern, as I would like to hear STLCC's official opinion on the matter.