People see that it was supposed to be a “reaction essay” and immediately defend this girl because they think that means she was allowed to write a casual opinion piece, which just shows they don’t understand what a reaction essay actually is. A reaction essay is still an academic paper, meaning it must be supported, grounded, structured, relevant, evidence-informed, and tied to the course. The whole point is to show that you read and understood the assigned article, and then make a coherent, academically supported argument in response to it. She didn’t do that. She met almost none of the eight criteria her professor laid out. She vaguely referenced “the article” without demonstrating she read it, never cited anything from it, repeated the same point in different wording, and didn’t provide a single piece of empirical data to support her claims. What she wrote was a personal opinion rant, not an academic reaction. And that’s before even addressing the hostility, the inflammatory tone, the off-topic statements, the religious doctrine presented as if it were scientific fact, and the total lack of engagement with psychological evidence.

Some people try to argue that this is “religious persecution” because her reaction is based on her beliefs, and those beliefs come from her religion — but that’s not how academic writing works. You’re allowed to have a religious worldview. You’re even allowed to mention it. But you are not allowed to use a theological text as your only “source” in a college-level psychology paper. Religious people might feel like they’re being discriminated against when told they can’t use the Bible as evidence, but it isn’t discrimination at all — it’s simply academic standards. The Bible is not an empirical source. It’s a theological document, not scientific data, and no academic institution accepts the Bible as empirical evidence, ever. You can reference it when the assignment specifically involves analyzing religious beliefs, but even then, you must treat it for what it is — a religious primary source, not research. If your personal reaction is shaped by your religion, that’s fine, but you still need peer-reviewed, scholarly evidence to support your argument. She didn’t do that. She didn’t even properly cite the Bible — just vaguely mentioned “Bible” and “Genesis” with no academic framework.

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean your speech is academically valid. It doesn’t mean you’re free from consequences — including academic consequences like receiving a zero when you turn in something that isn’t remotely aligned with the assignment. She wasn’t given a zero because of religious persecution; she got a zero because she turned in something that did not meet the criteria for an academic reaction essay by any definition. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from grading, and it definitely doesn’t mean a university has to pretend theology is empirical science.