Bigot
One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own church, party, belief, or opinion.
-- from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary

In the summer of 2004, several students from one of the wolf research classes followed a trail out of our base camp, and within a 100 yards or so they discovered the decomposed body of a coyote.  Although most of the flesh was gone, the skeleton was halfway intact.  Even the foot pads, which were mummified, were easily distinguishable.  The skull, however, had three small holes indicating that this animal had been shot three times in the head.

In the state of Montana, it is legal to kill coyotes whenever you wish so the students' discovery was not an uncommon one.  But I was struck by the fact that three bullets to the head seemed excessive in killing a medium sized animal.  In fact why kill it at all?  We were no where near a ranch, town, or private residence of any kind.  Our camp was located many miles deep into the woods.  Our base camp, however, was located at the crossroads of several major logging roads that allowed access through this area.  In the summer time everyone uses them.  The dead coyote was only 50 yards from one of these roads.  Perhaps the coyote was already injured in some way and a local Samaritan was doing the coyote a favor - but I doubt it.  Having spent fourteen years either traveling to Montana for extended visits or living here, it has been my experience that not many people consider coyotes their "favorite" animal.  They are shot for fun, protection of livestock, or just "because."  I suspect someone saw the coyote, shot it through the body, then found it in the woods and dispatched the animal with three shots to the head. 

I am not writing this article to complain about hunting or Montanians' right to kill what can be legally killed.  Instead, I am questioning why exercise that right even if you have it?  Hunting for subsistence makes practical sense and as my Montana friends put it, "It is just part of the food chain."  To remove an animal from existence just because you have the legal or God-given right to do so seems more like a human power trip than anything logical.  Why kill it if you don't have too?  I have another friend who sits outside in a chair or on a stump with his rifle waiting for coyotes to come by so he can shoot them.  His family members do not necessarily like this practice but he does.  I suppose it is relaxing and allows one to commune with nature.

Such disregard for life seems to be fostered, at least in northwest Montana, by the local culture, religious beliefs, and flat-out ignorance.  People who act in this way seem to conveniently forget what science already knows to be true and is quite provable.  In other words, they ignore reality and pretty much say and do as they wish.  They're bigots.  I will use two examples to make my point.  I want to stress that it is a minority of people who display such outrageous behavior but they can have a huge effect by killing wildlife and suppressing peoples' right to explore new ideas or their exposure to knowledge.
 

Ignorance
First, here is an example of sheer ignorance.  A local resident wrote an editorial about wolves which was published in the August 28, 2002 edition of The Montanian, one of our local newspapers here in Libby, Montana:

Wolves Are A Menace Editor: I believe an arousing review of some apprising history may be in order.  What's with all these new restrictions being imposed upon us; the American citizens.  I'm making reference to the reintroduction of the wolf and grizzly into the wilderness. Interesting word:  "Reintroduction," meaning something was here, but has been, for various reasons, eliminated.  So now, for various reasons, must be brought back.  To what result? The point I wish to make is by reference to Poland in the late 1940s and early 1950s. During World War II the wolves were forgotten and the packs grew and grew.  Some packs it was reported reached 1,000 strong and were extremely dangerous. Livestock had to be kept in special fences and barns that the wolf could not claw his way into.  Even some cases were reported of wolves clawing though the roofs of houses.  When the citizens of Poland were once again allowed to purchase ammunition for their guns they staged massive wolf hunts. Large groups of 20 or more sleighs, with three men per sleigh, would drive out to the hunting site.  They took with them as many guns as they could carry because the action became so intense they had no time to reload. One man per sleigh had the responsibility of not letting the horse be killed.  Slowly they headed back to the village. Small piglets were pinched to make them squeal and this brought the wolves out of hiding.  Soon a hundred or more wolves would be approaching the sleighs, and bam!!  The leader of the hunt would shoot the first wolf.  A signal for the others.  A wolf would drop and those close to it smelled blood and they would stop to eat, but then they resumed the chase. The same was happening on all sides as the men shot the wolves.  They ran out of bullets and switched to shotguns.  Not as effective as the rifle, but still, they managed to kill some more wolves.  When they ran out of shogun shells they switched to pistols.  The main pack was close now.  The horses were really frightened.  Soon the pistols were empty so the men grabbed up sabers. Slash, slash; they chopped the wolves to make them bleed so the other wolves would tear them apart and feed on them. The horses never moved faster than a trot.  These men wanted to kill the wolves, not run away from them.  Also, they kept the wolves baited to keep them close.  The more wolves killed, the less damage to the village and to their livestock.  Our college educated yahoos who are taught by college educated morons who are running our wilderness programs need to expand their learning by taking a few courses in logic.  Let's hope they will soon realize that it is "they" who are creating the problems, not us!! Marvin Lewis, Marion

I must say, as a college educated moron, I am much obliged to Marvin for opening my eyes about wolves.  It's a good thing that I have never seen the horrible things that he described in his editorial because I know I would pee my pants.  I am thankful the wolves around here do not do such things.  Think of the horror that would be created, the calamity, the humanity!  Of course Marvin was describing European wolves.  I bet they don't even shave their legs.  Marvin was toot'in on some bad weed when he wrote this one.  Thanks for the tip, dude.

Marvin is a pastor who travels into the wilds of northwest Montana to bring spiritual advice and comfort to those people living deep in the woods - a nice humanitarian gesture.  As far as I know, he even does this for free.  I first met Marvin two years ago when he came to my cabin to introduce himself.  Since then, I interact with him occasionally.  Once was when I was on my daily run down the road on which I live.  He drove by me then stopped and we had a short chat.  He told me that I was a brave person for running down the road by myself through the woods without any weapons.  He said that he wouldn't go 20 feet into the woods on either side of his car because it was too dangerous due to the wild animals.  I always thought that his comments were odd since the danger of being attacked by a wild animal around here is slim and none (provided of course you don't act like an idiot).  I've seen plenty of bears, moose, deer, elk, and even cougars on my runs and feel safer in their presence than walking through town at night!  I certainly have a gun with me on longer excursions into the woods but still, one just needs to know about their surroundings to interact with the environment successfully and safely.  I am, therefore, not surprised at Marvin's editorial comments given how little he apparently knows about the woods.

My point is that the information Marvin provided in his editorial completely contradicted what science knows to be true about wolves. To me, Marvin epitomizes what it is to be human.  We are walking contradictions.  On one hand he does wonderful things for people by sacrificing his time and money to provide them with a spiritual service, yet promotes the killing of wildlife due to his own apparent fear and ignorance.  A trip to the library would provide him with a wealth of information about wolves but only if he is open to new ideas and new ways of perceiving his surroundings.  It seems like the path of least resistance is to remain hateful and ignorant - no proof required.  Becoming educated requires that you do the opposite. 

Students all over the world and at every level must undergo the process of letting go of personal agendas to be enlightened by what is known to be true.  It is called education and it is not an easy process.  Ask pretty much any student.  It can be, however, extremely rewarding, but again only if you are open to it.  At the college where I teach there are a minority of students who not only resist their own personal growth (which makes it unfathomable as to why they are in college in the first place) but go to great lengths to stifle the education of others.  This is a much more serious problem than an editorial written by someone who chooses to be ignorant.  The process of bigotry is counterproductive and acts to diminish the accomplishments of humanity and suppress what is known to be true about the world.  A great example is in the classroom.
 

Bigotry In The Classroom
Hatred and bigotry have been displayed by a minority of students in my science classes at the college in northwest Montana, where I teach a number of science classes ranging from physical sciences to natural sciences.  Over the years, I have taught at several community colleges and for two major universities.  I have never seen such displays of arrogance and self-righteousness, even to the point of continuous classroom disruption and attempts to prevent basic science subjects from being taught.  At this campus there seems to be a growing number of students who fit the definition of a bigot as stated above.

When it comes to science, evolution seems to be the subject that sparks the most controversy for some students. They often unleash nasty behavior directed at myself, the administration, and their fellow students.  It is of no concern to me what anyone thinks of this subject or any other scientific concept.  They can think whatever they want.  School, however, is a business and everyone in the classroom has bought the right, via their tuition fees, to hear the information in an organized, timely, and enjoyable fashion.  The classroom is where information is disseminated and is not the place to vocalize and insist on ones personal views, whether you are a student or an instructor.  For discussion purposes, however, ideas are exchanged, but clearly there are some students who cannot control themselves and are intolerant of my input, the views of other students, and even the view of their textbook. 

I am concerned because the problem of bigotry in the classroom seems to be getting worse, and it reached a pinnacle in my Physical Science class.  From the first day of class, several students interrupted others when answering questions and would insist upon their viewpoint. They also verbally attacked others in class who disagreed, and in general wasted our time with their juvenile and self-serving behavior.  Acquaintances or friends of these people approached me and said not to take it personally because these people acted like that all the time.  In my opinion, that kind of compliance and acceptance of this attitude is what perpetuates it in the first place. However, I tended not to take it personally since these nasty students displayed such behavior in most or all of their classes and towards other instructors as well. 

Being politically correct for two months on my part did not help the situation, nor were personal talks effective with these students outside of the classroom.  So one day I put the definition of bigotry on the board and told the class that some of them acted in this manner.  The bottom line was that I told the bigots to get out of my class.  By the next day I was told by some students that the student government had prepared a petition to have me fired from my job. This wasn't the first time bigoted students had tried to get me into trouble. 

In the past I had a chemistry class that went ballistic at even the mention of evolution which we needed to briefly discuss and which was also in their textbook.  This class was divided in half with those who kept quiet and those who made sure they didn't via their strong opinions. They wasted our time with their demands that I prove evolution to them on the spot.  Some of these people even cheated during exams so I had to separate the class during tests as if they were in grammar school.  I found this curious because some of the best students in the school at that time were in this class.  They were so blinded by their beliefs that they acted like bigots and tried to censor what I said in class. And if that didn't work they went to the administration to try and stop me from teaching science.  They were very nasty. 

In doing my "homework" I found that the "problem students" at my college have been disruptive in most or all of their college classes, and the instructors were quite frustrated with their behavior.  There has often been some level of this behavior in most classes, but I was surprised at the aggressiveness of these people.  The lies they told and the in-your-face attitudes were quite astonishing.  For example, in the Physical Science class I showed a video about chimpanzee behavior which was concluded with an interview involving Jane Goodall and Alan Alda.  They were reviewing the research that indicated that some human behaviors may have evolved (there's that word again - evolution) from chimpanzee behavior since chimps are our closest genetic cousins.  Afterwards, one of these "problem" students blurted out that, "They should not be allowed to talk like that!!"  After class, several students approached me, clearly aggravated by the other student's response, and expressed their concern that they did not feel comfortable expressing their own views under these circumstances.

In the same class, another student constantly shook their head back and forth whenever they disagreed with something, or let out a big sigh to express their disapproval with what I said or comments from the students.  During my talks with this person, who had not been doing well on their tests or understanding basic scientific concepts, they revealed to me their lack of interaction with the world. They didn't watch TV.  They didn't read the paper.  They didn't listen to the radio.  They didn't read books.  They didn't use the internet or email.  I knew house plants that are more interactive with their surroundings than this person.  Despite their self-proclaimed ignorance, they certainly knew that evolution was wrong and disrupted class whenever the subject came up or was alluded too.  At the beginning of the semester, this same person would answer their cell phone during class and proceed to have a discussion while I was lecturing.  Most children are better behaved than this and we were in college!

Bigotry is like a disease and can spread and infect an entire town, even nations.  It is a force that cannot be reasoned with.  It feels no remorse, no pity and no compassion.  Gee, I wonder why wolves get shot by the public?  In my opinion, bigotry is the most destructive force on earth.  A bigot, of course, cannot see any of this.  Bigots.  They're like a broken pencil - always missing the point.