Teacher Sued For Bashing Christianity -- Will Others Be Censored?

[AxisMundi]

90s and 00s for me. Things have changed a great deal.

Where I went to school, the majority of teachers were... not too good, to say the least.

Absolutely agreed. I had to suppliment my son's education quite a lot.

There are a number of factors I see at work here, including unions and PC creeping into education.

 

[Alceste]

How so? Are you permitted to smoke at work? Can you go to work in a skimpy bathing suit? When one is directly invovled in their career during working hours, one faces certain limitations.

You are equating the opinion that teachers must have the freedom to express a certain amount of personal opinion in order to teach effectively with the opinion (never expressed by anyone) that teachers should be able to do or say whatever they want in class, subject to no restrictions at all. It's a straw man if you're suggesting the opinions are the same and a slippery slope if you're suggesting permitting a small amount of self-expression will inevitably lead to teachers showing up in leathers to show off their sex toys and lead the class in performing Satanic rituals.

Simple request for clarification whcih, I note, you refuse to answer.

Only because I've already answered it twice.

The best teachers I had did not include their religion or politics in the class.

From that I can only conclude you have either forgotten or were not paying very close attention.

 

[AxisMundi]

You are equating the opinion that teachers must have the freedom to express a certain amount of personal opinion in order to teach effectively with the opinion (never expressed by anyone) that teachers should be able to do or say whatever they want in class, subject to no restrictions at all. It's a straw man if you're suggesting the opinions are the same and a slippery slope if you're suggesting permitting a small amount of self-expression will inevitably lead to teachers showing up in leathers to show off their sex toys and lead the class in performing Satanic rituals.

Only because I've already answered it twice.

From that I can only conclude you have either forgotten or were not paying very close attention.

1. Again, a public elementary and/or high school is no palce to impose one's personal opinions on the children, either political or relgious.

2. I'm not going to flip back through pages of junk jsut to locate your opinions. Either clarify or drop it.

3. Ad hominem.

 

[Alceste]

1. Again, a public elementary and/or high school is no palce to impose one's personal opinions on the children, either political or relgious.

I disagree that anything was being "imposed" in this case. A personal opinion was being expressed. Differing opinions were welcomed. Everybody in the class appears to have been treated with equal dignity and respect.

2. I'm not going to flip back through pages of junk jsut to locate your opinions. Either clarify or drop it.

You're welcome to drop it if you can't be bothered to try to recall my previous replies to your posts. Please stop insisting I would not defend good teachers with personal opinions differing from mine with equal enthusiasm.

 

[AxisMundi]

I disagree that anything was being "imposed" in this case. A personal opinion was being expressed. Differing opinions were welcomed. Everybody in the class appears to have been treated with equal dignity and respect.

An educator is an authority figure. A classroom of kids is a captive audience.

Looks impsoed to me.

You're welcome to drop it if you can't be bothered to try to recall my previous replies to your posts. Please stop insisting I would not defend good teachers with personal opinions differing from mine with equal enthusiasm.

Again, good teachers do not allow their personal opinions, and biases, to intrude upon their work.

 

[Herr Heinrich]

I don't think he should have bashed a religion in school to his students, but I also don't think he should be censored.

 

[ChristineES]

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 leery of drawing conclusions about what actually happened from a news article.

Most people can handle having different opinions from others, but religious debates can be very heated because some people are very staunch in their beliefs, they can't stand for someone to have a different idea- this includes both theists and atheists. I was always taught not to discuss religion or politics, as they can lead to a fight. School is for learning and not for serious debating. But, if the whole class is in agreement, I suppose they can open up the discussion.

 

[Copernicus]

Most people can handle having different opinions from others, but religious debates can be very heated because some people are very staunch in their beliefs, they can't stand for someone to have a different idea- this includes both theists and atheists. I was always taught not to discuss religion or politics, as they can lead to a fight. School is for learning and not for serious debating. But, if the whole class is in agreement, I suppose they can open up the discussion.

The problem here, though, is when it comes to basic education. The fact is that you cannot teach biology without teaching the theory of evolution as accepted science. After all, it is the basis of modern biology. Take that away, and you've got nothing left. If the requirement is that teachers cannot point this out without trampling on the religious conscience of students, then it is a terribly flawed requirement. Ultimately, the responsibility of our educational system is to prepare people for adulthood, and that includes being able to handle controversy and differing opinions.

That said, I am not endorsing the idea of using offensive and abusive methods to teach. A basic education in biology does not require a science teacher to call religious dissent from scientific conclusions "superstition". It does require the teacher to point out that evolution is regarded as scientific fact, whether religious groups agree with that reality or not. And I make that statement in full agreement with the teacher's opinion that creationism is essentially superstitious nonsense. I just don't think that a teacher in a public school can use the same language in the classroom that he or she might use on an internet bulletin board.

 

[AxisMundi]

:sleep:

The problem here, though, is when it comes to basic education. The fact is that you cannot teach biology without teaching the theory of evolution as accepted science. After all, it is the basis of modern biology. Take that away, and you've got nothing left. If the requirement is that teachers cannot point this out without trampling on the religious conscience of students, then it is a terribly flawed requirement. Ultimately, the responsibility of our educational system is to prepare people for adulthood, and that includes being able to handle controversy and differing opinions.

That said, I am not endorsing the idea of using offensive and abusive methods to teach. A basic education in biology does not require a science teacher to call religious dissent from scientific conclusions "superstition". It does require the teacher to point out that evolution is regarded as scientific fact, whether religious groups agree with that reality or not. And I make that statement in full agreement with the teacher's opinion that creationism is essentially superstitious nonsense. I just don't think that a teacher in a public school can use the same language in the classroom that he or she might use on an internet bulletin board.

Evolution is science. Science belongs in public school curriculum.

Creationism is religious myth, and does NOT belong in public school curriculum.

Evolution also does not, in any manner, threaten Creationism.

Abiogenesis, a seperate dicipline, does and is not, to the best of my knowledge, taught in grade schools as it involves the higher microbiology criteria.

 

[darkendless]

1960's and 70's.

And we are speaking of elementary and high school levels in this thread, not college or universety. The latter are two different ballparks.

When studying the Roman Empire my history teacher at high-school would rant about how much of a pain in the rear end Christians are. I'm sure that would strike as offensive to the fundies.

In year 9 (age 14), we were taught about abortion and family planning. My science teacher (funnily enough an American) used to voice his opinion (this was only 6 years ago).

If teachers can't say what they want, critical reasoning will die and we will be stuck with a bunch of useless idiots.

 

[berrychrisc]

Absolutely wrong.

Since when is Genesis and the gospels English in origin?

Since King James had his version printed. I have seen the King James version referenced in English texts before, as it is quite a good example of English literature.

 

[Mr Cheese]

If teachers can't say what they want, critical reasoning will die and we will be stuck with a bunch of useless idiots.

What if their views were bigoted though....?

america is ultra PC....though

:sarcastic people dont even say merry xmas...they say happy holidays

 

[berrychrisc]

Religion belongs in church, at home, and in religious institutions. It has no place in public education at the elementary or high school levels.

I don't see how courses like literature, social studies, art or history can be taught without covering religion. So far, in learning these subjects my children have been exposed to Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Catholicism, Protestantism, many types of mythology, as well as Native American beliefs. You can't educate someone without teaching them religion. Learning about different belief systems hasn't undermined their faith. They understand that different people believe different things, and they don't feel threatened by that because they understand what these people believe. What the teacher can do is refrain from proselytizing or promoting a certain belief above others. As long as they are teaching the subject as an academic subject, then no harm is done.

 

[Mr Cheese]

I don't see how courses like literature, social studies, art or history can be taught without covering religion. So far, in learning these subjects my children have been exposed to Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Catholicism, Protestantism, many types of mythology, as well as Native American beliefs. You can't educate someone without teaching them religion. Learning about different belief systems hasn't undermined their faith. They understand that different people believe different things, and they don't feel threatened by that because they understand what these people believe. What the teacher can do is refrain from proselytizing or promoting a certain belief above others. As long as they are teaching the subject as an academic subject, then no harm is done.

I quite agree....

sadly america is full of small minded fundamentalists, and really its a whole can of worms...

 

[Falvlun]

Alceste, I agree with you that it would be ridiculous to bar teachers from presenting any of their opinions whatsoever in class. It would be prohibitively restrictive and would interfere with their ability to teach effectively.

However, like it or not, freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right of Americans, and the separation of church and state is an important mechanism for making sure that that right is not infringed upon. As state employees, teachers must honor this separation. Religious opinions, therefore, are necessarily barred from the classroom. They are an exception to the rule that personal opinion has a place in a teacher's repertoire.

Even though only one (strangely chosen) comment by Mr. Corbett was found to cross the line, it does appear that he did have an atmosphere of hostility towards religion in his classroom. "When he (Ishii) signed up for AP Euro in high school, “people were a little concerned -- you’re a Christian,” he remembers them saying to him." If students are warning each other about a particular teacher's religious views, then I think that's troubling. How do you know religious kids didn't avoid taking his class? And even though he promoted open discussion and debate in his class, it can be intimidating to take on the teacher. Debating the teacher just might not be an option for the timid kids.

Unless you want to take on separation of church and state, I just don't see how you can justify blatant religious bias within the classroom.

 

[ChristineES]

I did say they could discuss religion, I just said that the teachers should keep their personal opinions about it to themselves, particularly if it is very negative and you have people of that faith in your class. You can say that you disagree with someone without saying that they are PITAs, for example. And you can teach evolution without saying that people who believe creationism are stupid or superstitious.
All I am saying is you should have some compassion.

 

[AxisMundi]

When studying the Roman Empire my history teacher at high-school would rant about how much of a pain in the rear end Christians are. I'm sure that would strike as offensive to the fundies.

In year 9 (age 14), we were taught about abortion and family planning. My science teacher (funnily enough an American) used to voice his opinion (this was only 6 years ago).

If teachers can't say what they want, critical reasoning will die and we will be stuck with a bunch of useless idiots.

Stikes as offensive to me as well, but from the standpoint that such personal biases do not belong in the classroom.

BTW, we already ARE stuck with a generation or two of block heads, which began when the classroom became the personal soapbox of educators instead of places of education.

It might have been as boring as hell, but way back in my day people graduated KNOWING things. No counting on our fingers to answer 12 x 9 = x. We knew who the Pres was and where the major Nations were. We could name all of the states and point to them on a map.

All of this is absent from many public school graduates today.

 

[AxisMundi]

Since King James had his version printed. I have seen the King James version referenced in English texts before, as it is quite a good example of English literature.

The KJV is still a translation of an ancient text originally written in Aramaic.

Again, how can it be an "English work".

 

[AxisMundi]

I did say they could discuss religion, I just said that the teachers should keep their personal opinions about it to themselves, particularly if it is very negative and you have people of that faith in your class. You can say that you disagree with someone without saying that they are PITAs, for example. And you can teach evolution without saying that people who believe creationism are stupid or superstitious.
All I am saying is you should have some compassion.

Religious doctrine has no place in a government institution.

 

[Alceste]

Alceste, I agree with you that it would be ridiculous to bar teachers from presenting any of their opinions whatsoever in class. It would be prohibitively restrictive and would interfere with their ability to teach effectively.

However, like it or not, freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right of Americans, and the separation of church and state is an important mechanism for making sure that that right is not infringed upon. As state employees, teachers must honor this separation. Religious opinions, therefore, are necessarily barred from the classroom. They are an exception to the rule that personal opinion has a place in a teacher's repertoire.

Even though only one (strangely chosen) comment by Mr. Corbett was found to cross the line, it does appear that he did have an atmosphere of hostility towards religion in his classroom. "When he (Ishii) signed up for AP Euro in high school, “people were a little concerned -- you’re a Christian,” he remembers them saying to him." If students are warning each other about a particular teacher's religious views, then I think that's troubling. How do you know religious kids didn't avoid taking his class? And even though he promoted open discussion and debate in his class, it can be intimidating to take on the teacher. Debating the teacher just might not be an option for the timid kids.

Unless you want to take on separation of church and state, I just don't see how you can justify blatant religious bias within the classroom.

Sure, that's one student's story, but as I recall that student goes on to give a very favorable review, as does another former Christian student - the one he helped to get into an esteemed divinity program rather than the local Bible college. As I recall, the second guy says that debate strengthened his faith and the whole experience was positive overall, and "made him into the Christian he is today".

Anyway, I recognize the unique situation US teachers are in because of the constitution, but I also think that American schools are positively infested with religious teaching in the form of ID and Abstinence Education and becoming more so every day. I think that if separation of church and state is the objective, instead of tackling individual, excellent teachers for offhand comments some students find offensive, Americans should purge abstinence ed and ID from their schools. Surely that would relieve some of the tension that might cause teachers who care about what is true to make offensive offhand comments about religion.