AxisMundi
E Pluribus Unum!!!
Yes? That's what I said. Are you merely agreeing or was I not clear?
And the best teachers can accomplish this without "shock jock" tacticts and insulting peoples political and/or religious beliefs.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Teacher Sued For Bashing Christianity -- Will Others Be Censored?
- Thread starter dust1n
- Start date
Yes? That's what I said. Are you merely agreeing or was I not clear?
And the best teachers can accomplish this without "shock jock" tacticts and insulting peoples political and/or religious beliefs.
dogsgod
Well-Known Member
Obviously not.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
I so not think that an atmosphere of political correctness is optimal for teaching people to think. It is hard to judge how this teacher conducted his classes on the basis of a news article. If he came off as intimidating to Christian students, then I do think that the school has an obligation to address that teaching method with the teacher. Some of my best teachers were those who challenged me enough to get my blood up. The worst were those who made me feel that I had to toe their line of thought. The absolute worst high school teacher I ever had was one who taught US history but refused to entertain any criticism of past behavior by the government. Political correctness is the enemy of education.
Yet I am troubled by the idea that a creationist might use the classroom to bash students who disagreed and get away with it on the grounds of free speech. I can see both sides of the argument here. I wish that the teacher had been less clear on his own personal positions and more challenging in an even-handed way. But, again, I am leary of drawing conclusions about what actually happened from a news article.
monta
.
I was agreeing with you.
AxisMundi
E Pluribus Unum!!!
Thanks for clarifying.
Alceste
Vagabond
I support all good teachers with an infectious passion for their subject who invite students to debate in order to engage their critical thinking. I don't care if they think the sky is green, as long as the students are invited to challenge them on it and as long as the bulk of the lecture covers legitimate course material. I don't have any kids, but if I did I would certainly trust them to be able to differentiate between fact and opinion by the time they're ready to enter college.
My gut feeling is that the comment you write above is not compatible with that kind of teacher (one who promotes critical thinking), but what the hell. If the conditions above are met, his students test higher than average and speak of him fondly, I say he's welcome to express any opinion he wants, as long as he can speak to the basis on which his opinion is supported.
BTW, the "goggles" statement was deemed relevant to the discussion at hand, which was about a ruler in Europe during the dark ages who wanted to abolish special privileges for monks and lords and redistribute land to the peasants. The religious leaders convinced the people who would have benefited from these policies that the ruler was immoral, so they turned against them - because they had "their Jesus goggles" on and could not see what was in their best interest. He wasn't talking about his Christian students, he was teaching history. That's his job.
Alceste
Vagabond
So how do you discuss current events in the US without touching on creationism? Like it or not, the "moral majority", with their strategy of methodically erasing the line between church and state, opinion and fact, myth and reality, combined with their insatiable lust for grabbing headlines whenever and wherever they can (this very case is an example), MUST be discussed in American classrooms covering current events. You can not understand American politics over the course of the last two decades without understanding the influence of fundamentalism.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
This is too dogmatic a statement to make, Axis. You have to bring up religion, including creationism, in social studies classes. That does not mean that teachers can use any method they want to teach the subject. There is a legitimate question of whether the teacher does so in a way that respects the rights of all students to hold views that are out of the mainstream.
AxisMundi
E Pluribus Unum!!!
One can certainly bring in religion, as in a generic term, without bringing specifics to the table.
Alceste
Vagabond
Well, no disrespect, but if that's the way you think it's appropriate to teach history and current events - always pussyfooting around the possible religious sensibilities of your teenage students, or their parents, or their pastors, or whomever you fear might be spying on you - I would find your classes thunderously dull and learn nothing at all.
Might I ask, how would you go about teaching about the current conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq without touching on the influence of Wahhabiism on the Islamic terrorists who handed the US their justification for war? What if you have a Wahhabi student? Should you suppress any hint of opinion - yours or your students - that the religiously motivated attack was wrong, just in case?
Buttercup
Veteran Member
I think it's perfectly acceptable to discuss religion specifics in high school classrooms so long as the instructor doesn't add slanderous comments to the discussion. While it may not be illegal to say such things as, “Everywhere in the world. From conservative Christians in this country to, um, Muslim fundamentalists in Afghanistan. It’s the same. It’s stunning how vitally interested they are in controlling women.” or, “When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can’t always see the truth” or that creationism is "religious superstitious nonsense" by doing so you're pulling down your pants waiting for your *** to be kicked by parents and administrators.
In my mind, it's a far more balanced instructor who asks "Do religious tenets suppress women?" or similar questions to students than to offer his opinions with such a slanted and hostile tone. A bit more objectivity would add longevity to the discussions.
In my mind, it's a far more balanced instructor who asks "Do religious tenets suppress women?" or similar questions to students than to offer his opinions with such a slanted and hostile tone. A bit more objectivity would add longevity to the discussions.
Alceste
Vagabond
Well, let's agree to disagree. I don't want teachers (most of the women and some of the men in my family are or have been teachers) to have to second guess their instincts all the time and censor themselves for fear of being spied on by a ruthless, despicable, headline-hungry political activist. The student and his mother were in the wrong. If either of them had a scrap of integrity or decency they would have addressed their concerns directly to the teacher. If that hadn't worked, to the principal. Then to the school board, then if all else failed, to the courts. (Note the newspapers don't come in here anywhere).
Their only objective was the public humiliation and character assassination of a teacher who by most accounts was inspiring and effective, just because they didn't like his political opinions. They went about it in a devious, cowardly, reprehensible and irresponsible way. Because of their actions, the school board has $100,000 less to spend on education and an excellent teacher has been thoroughly distracted from his teaching.
IMO, if the student had had the courage to ask the teacher to tone down the irreligious comments the whole thing could have been resolved for free.
linwood
Well-Known Member
But they didn`t want resolution they were instigating from the start .
That`s why I can give them no credence.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
My comments were basically offered in general about the topic of this teacher and what he said to his students...I didn't say anything about the mother and son.
I definitely think it's ridiculous to have taken the issue to court. However, I have four kids and am not religious. If I knew an instructor in a public school who voiced such a hostile opinion about ANY religious group in my kid's classroom, I would without doubt have said something to him. Depending on his reaction to my complaint, I would or would not press the issue to higher authorities.
Alceste
Vagabond
Exactly. They wanted to punish the teacher. To hurt, silence, humiliate and / or generally make life difficult for the teacher because of his political opinions. It's not just unethical, it's worrying. Genuine Hitler Youth stuff.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
Oh come on. That's really out there. :areyoucra
Alceste
Vagabond
Yeah, well I would respect you for taking an interest if you did so, but from reading the whole article I did not get the impression the guy is "hostile" to religion. I don't believe calling ID superstitious nonsense is an expression of hostility to religion or religious people - only to the idea that evolution is false. As was pointed out earlier, the Supreme Court of the US has already ruled that it is in fact superstitious nonsense and does not belong in a classroom.
Alceste
Vagabond
No, I don't think it is. Hitler's Youth groups were encouraged to spy on the adults in their lives and report political dissidents to the authorities so the appropriate punishment (imprisonment and / or death) could be meted out. Academics were among the first to be rounded up when the Nazis got rolling.
Authoritarians behave just like authoritarians, wherever and whenever you find them. The comparison is justified both by history and human psychology, and I think it would be naive to overlook it.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
But he didn't just comment on the ID issue. I don't think it's appropriate to say When you put on your Jesus glasses, you cant always see the truth or when he quoted Mark Twains quip that religion was invented when the first conman met the first fool". Can't you understand how a Christian might find that very offensive?
It's perfectly acceptable to ask for frank and critical discussion about religion. It's not ok to use slander as your impetus for discussion.