Once again, you have a definition of academic freedom that is quite peculiar. What about speech codes at schools? What about research on genetics? Research universities have institutional review boards where research has to clear a variety of hurdles before it can ever be conducted, and one of those hurdles is the idea of public benefit, a standard that tends to change across time. I love your enthusiasm for science, but you need to spend some time in a research university and take a course or two on the philosophy of science.

As for saying that something is "true" or not, that is again a thorny matter. Can a researcher at BYU explore the development of LDS public opinion on abortion? The answer is "yes." Can a researcher or teacher explore the development of an idea such as the arguments for and against abortion? Once again, the answer is "yes." Academic freedom for those two kinds of activity at BYU are alive and well and are certainly covered by your definition of academic freedom. How science can ever "prove" the truth claims of a religion is one of those questions that has roiled philosophy for the past several centuries. Anybody who argues that science can "disprove" a religion has wandered from the realm of science into the realm of ontology and probably doesn't know much about which they are speaking.