As a graduate of the University of Maine and as an occasional part-time student since graduation, I have always found faculty members to be champions of the free flow of ideas — until now. Saturday’s (May 11) publication of a column signed by 67 faculty members objecting to the dissemination of ideas with which they disagree hit me like a thunderbolt straight from the early Middle Ages.

The signatories to the column (a distinct minority of the faculty of the College of Sciences) objected to the use of university facilities for a debate held a few weeks go between an evolutionist and a creationist. I was not able to attend the debate but I listened to it on the radio. I thought both speakers did an excellent job of presenting their respective points of view, the audience seemed attentive and respectful, and I learned a lot from the presentations. It was a use of publicly funded university facilities in the way they were intended. In a free society how could anyone possibly object?

To refer to creation science as mere religious dogma is just plain ignorant. Evolutionists argue that all life in the universe developed purely by accident. Creationists argue that life was created by design. There are evolutionists from many religious and academic backgrounds and there are creationists from similar backgrounds. The Institute for Creation Science, for example, has on its faculty many wityh solid academic credentials. Many are former evolutionists. Neither side has a monopoly on the scientific method. The debate between these two points of view will continue whether the “Gang of 67” likes it or not.

The evolution-creation debate is far from settled, but until now I thought the right to free speech was. Everyone should have access to all points of view and everyone should constantly examine his or her own ideas and test them against new ideas. This is what being an educated person is all about and this is what used to be taught at our state university. No doubt there were a lot of dedicated faculty members sadly shaking their heads while they read their colleagues’ bloated broadside of bigotry.

The right to free speech is encoded in both the state and federal constitutions. If these intolerant instructors cannot accept this fundamental right then they should do the only honorable thing: resign their publicly paid positions and seek employment where the free flow of ideas is not encouraged. Perhaps Iran or North Korea can use some math instructors. Charles F. Washburn Robbinston