Before the lecture on intelligent design even began, The Darwin and Socratic societies' sentiments toward University Relations turned foul Friday, Oct. 14 when University Relations reworded the lecture's title on the UAF online events calendar.

Thursday afternoon, University Relations posted the original text that Celeste Leroux, president of the Darwin Society, had submitted. On Friday, University Relations changed the original text, "The Theory of Unintelligent (and Often Nasty) Design by Eduardo Wilner," to "Eduardo Wilner, UAF Departments of Philosophy and Biology & Wildlife, will give a public lecture on Creationism vs. Evolution. This event is sponsored by the Darwin Society and The Socratic Society."

Misha Depp, of University Relations, explained to Leroux via e-mail that the title had been changed because some of the descriptions had "great potential to be interpreted as offensive to some," and asked that the organizers "be mindful of event titles and descriptions and how others may interpret them."

Leroux was outraged, she said, because the editing of the lecture title had changed the meaning of her original submission. The intent of Wilner's lecture, which was held Monday, Oct. 17, was not to argue creationism versus evolution, but to point out the flaws in using scripture as a scientific explanation.

"There is nothing wrong with using God as a scientific model," Wilner said, "if God would cooperate, become a rigid, predictable entity, but He doesn't." Wilner emphasized a separation of religion and science because, he said, "the bible is not a piece of scientific writing." He even cited several quotes of religious leaders who argue that evolution is the explanation for life's diversity.

Leroux met with the president and vice president of the student government when she found out about the changes. All agreed that this was a case of censorship. They contacted University Relations several times, and succeeded in restoring the description and lecture listing.

Though the original context was restored, Leroux believes there is more to the issue, and Wilner agrees with her.

"Academic freedom must be taken seriously," Wilner said in an e-mail interview. "And that 'somebody's' offended-ness can never be sufficient grounds for censorship."

Dr. Roy Bird, chair of the philosophy department concurs: We always have to be vigilant to protect academic freedom and the freedom of speech for all members of the university community."

Bird and others in the philosophy department are circulating a letter that had not been sent as of Friday. "My hope is that this situation will be cleared up by Provost Paul Reichardt issuing a statement affirming the university's support for the principle of academic freedom."

Tori Tragis, the calendar administrator, said that in four years this kind of issue has never come up. Sometimes she changes submissions for grammatical errors and accuracy. This entry was different, however. Tragis was immediately concerned when she ran across the words "unintelligent and often nasty." She feared that the words were referring to those who believe in creationism or intelligent design.

However, she does not claim a personal bias on the issue. "It's not a question of personal beliefs," Tragis said. "We [University Relations] have to represent many aspects and be mindful of many groups."

Tragis never expected the seemingly small changes to have such large consequences, and said she was glad to cooperate once students raised concerns. "We recognized the student's concerns and made changes within a couple of hours."

Dani Carlson, vice president of ASUAF and one of the students who supported Leroux said that they "really had to push to change things."

"I don't think University Relations will do this again," Carlson said. "I think we'll learn from this. Every day this campus is getting better for people to facilitate these kinds of discussions."

Overall, this has been a learning experience for the staff at University Relations.

"A poor judgment call turned into, in some people's minds, more significant," Tragis said. Carla Browning, Public Information Officer at University Relations agreed: "We do take these issues seriously. The title shouldn't have been changed and we will be more mindful of editing in the future."

Bird understood the oversight of the office, but hoped that it was not encouraged by a supervisor and does not accept inexperience as an excuse to undermine academic freedom. "We just want to preserve the university as an open forum for the exchange of opinions on all manner of topics of interest to members of the university community," Bird said.