You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. Just curious how you all feel about this. Honestly, if you substitute any religion into the case, what right or obligation does a public high school teacher have to be
Just curious how you all feel about this. Honestly, if you substitute any religion into the case, what right or obligation does a public high school teacher have to be lecturing students on his opinion of any religion? Obviously, if you are taking AP European history, there will be an ample amount of discussion on religion as it pertains to the topic, but this should only be in a historical context. What right does this public school teacher have to promote or decry any religion?
I'm no constitutional lawyer but it seems to me that this isn't a First Amendment issue seeing as how the First Amendment says
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
This guys a teacher and he's not prohibiting anyone from being a Christian. He's just repeatedly stating his distaste for Christianity (allegedly). While that may be grounds for a reprimand or possibly a dismissal (I wouldn't think so) it's hardly appropriate for a lawsuit.
Those identifying themselves as Christians (I'm assuming that include Catholics and Mormons) make up more than %80 of our nation. I think little Johnny bible thumper can stomach one year of a nasty old teacher saying unpleasant things about his Lord and Saviour.
Doc's got it right: reprimand the guy, and everyone get on with their life.
This kid needs to stop taking his politcally correct self so seriously. Your religion isn't a get out of jail free card; it's fair game in the public discourse. This is the United States, not Iran or Saudi Arabia.
Ok,,so as I indicated earlier. Change the religion in this situation to Islam, Judaism, or any other non-Christian, non-majority religion. Does your arguement still remain the same? Do public school teachers have the right to teach their students their views opinions etc on religion, out of the context of the class they are teaching? Keep in mind, I am not saying this teacher did or did not.
Ok,,so as I indicated earlier. Change the religion in this situation to Islam, Judaism, or any other non-Christian, non-majority religion. Does your arguement still remain the same?
Ok,,so as I indicated earlier. Change the religion in this situation to Islam, Judaism, or any other non-Christian, non-majority religion. Does your arguement still remain the same? Do public school teachers have the right to teach their students their views opinions etc on religion, out of the context of the class they are teaching? Keep in mind, I am not saying this teacher did or did not.
I clearly stated that if it got out of hand it might warrant a reprimand. Having not taken that class from that teacher I'm not going to speculate as to how "out of hand" it got. Based on the few quotes I read it didn't sound so horrible but I can certainly understand how a student would be upset to hear that kind of thing.
A lawsuit on the grounds that the teacher has violated the students constitutional rights, however, is beyond retarded and whiny.
Christianity IS the dominant religion in this nation and as such will be the focus of far more public criticism than other religions. It may not be fair and a double standard may seem to crop up from time to time but I'm pretty sure this teacher includes all religious fundamentalism in his opinions. He may not take the time to catalog every single faith when making a point but it seems to me that he is trying to urge these kids not to rely on religious teachings as an intellectual foundation.
That depends on the context. If he is using whatever religion criticisms in a historical context as to the teaching of the class and is part of the prescribed curriculum then that teacher should be allowed and it is a frivolous lawsuit. If that teacher is using their position to advocate their personal view of religion toward the classroom then that teacher is abusing their power and position and should be held accountable. With the big hoopla of keeping church and state separate and if religious groups are not allowed to gather and talk on campus about their religion then teachers should definitely not be allowed to express their personal opinion about religion one way or the other in a classroom setting.
__________________
Vote For Team Sexy
Quote:
"If you can accept losing, you can't win." Vince Lombardi
I'm no constitutional lawyer but it seems to me that this isn't a First Amendment issue seeing as how the First Amendment says
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
i AM, in fact, a constitutional lawyer. and while i agree with most of what doc has to say on this topic, the above statement is based on a common misunderstanding.
the first amendment, along with the rest of the bill of rights, is applicable to states and their political subdivisions (counties, cities, etc.) by operation of the 14th amendment, which states in pertinent part, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."
also, the california constitution as a similar provision, Article 1, Section 4, which states, "Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference are guaranteed. [...] The Legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
I would imagine that state and federal civil rights claims were included in the complaint.
at the end of the day, provided the teacher was operating within the parameters of the approved curriculum for the class, the case gets laughed out of court. judges are generally not in the business of prescribing lesson plans, and are very hesitant to do so.
assuming the teacher crossed the line from critical analysis to anti-religious diatribe, i assume a reprimand is likely to happen, its severity depending on the seriousness of the offense.
then again, this is the o.c. we're talking about, so all this could be rendered moot if the teacher gets shot by some cranked up rightwing nutjob.
__________________ I'm the King of Rock & Roll. If you don't like it, you can lump it.
comparing the times' article to the register's, some interesting facts come to light.
the kid's mother told the times that the kid asked her whether the u.s. was founded on the christian faith [which it wasn't; see here, especially the section on the treaty of tripoli, which pursuant to art.6, sec. 2, of the u.s. constitution became "the supreme law of the land"], "so I sent him to school with a tape recorder."
in the register, the kid says "he initially began recording Corbett's lectures as a way to supplement his note-taking."
so, one of them is lying.
question, then, is, why would they lie? my theory: this isn't just some poor put-upon christian family trying to defend their oppressed faith. i'm guessing this is a highly targeted strategic move.
one example of the advocates for faith and freedom agenda is opposition to a recently passed law that protects students from gender or sexual orientation discrimination. see here.
so, if you're doing the math at home, discrimination against christians = bad; discrimination against gays = good.
because jesus would have wanted it that way.
__________________ I'm the King of Rock & Roll. If you don't like it, you can lump it.
I read both the article in the OC Register and the LA Times and there were a couple of things that struck me as odd about the kid and his story.
First from the Times was this quote.
Quote:
Teresa Farnan said her suspicions were aroused on the first day of school when her son -- a sophomore honors student required to take Corbett's class for college admission --
Her son is not required to take AP European History for college admission. The admission requirements for the CSUs and UCs require one year of world history, one year of US History, and a semester each of government and economics. It's not required for graduation. AP European History is an ELECTIVE class that kids want to take because schools weigh the grade for that class and kids can get higher than 4.0 GPAs for AP classes and college credit if they pass the AP test, but it's not an entrance requirement for any college, it's something that will make his transcripts look better when he applies.
The really bizarre part of the articles were the reasons the kid decided to tape the teacher in class.
From the Register we have
Quote:
Farnan said he initially began recording Corbett's lectures as a way to supplement his note-taking. But he grew concerned by the repeated remarks aimed at religion and had his mother, Teresa, review the tapes.
and then from the Times the story sounds completely different.
Quote:
"He had learned in the eighth grade that our country was founded by persecuted Christians," said the mother, who describes her family as nondenominational Christian, "so I sent him to school with a tape recorder."
During the next two months, Chad Farnan said, he taped Corbett's lectures with the recorder in plain sight on his backpack.
So what's the real reason as to why the kid was taping the lectures?
I've got my teaching credential in history/social science and I took AP European History when I was in high school and from the quotes in both articles it seems like the teacher was expressing personal opinions opposed to making those comments in regards to religious issues that might come up in the history curriculum but I also understand that the full context for those comments isn't explained. If the teacher wants to debate the issues with students outside of class, that's one thing, but I will agree that in class is not the best time to be making those comments unless they were in the context of a lesson related to the curriculum.
I know, I know, an offended Christian = (or is even much worse than) an offended Muslim... I read the papers...
What is your reasoning here? This makes no sense. Nobody is saying Islam is better than Christianity. I'm better this teacher has distaste for both.
Quote:
??What are you talking about?? It's politically correct to be anti-Christian in the US. Try and keep up, k?
Uh no Butch. Politically correct does not mean anti-anything. Being politically correct has to do with tolerance. Righties "hate being PC" because homosexuals and brown people aren't dragged behind pick-up trucks as often. Lefties hate being PC because said righties then get to act offended and sue people for stupid reasons. (Also because some forms of tolerance are detrimental to society-- the actual main reason I dislike PC taken to the "extreme")
Quote:
What would happen in either of those countries if the teacher had said .... never mind.
Good point. I think that was the same point Irisher was making, no?
__________________ "If I could lead you into the Promised Land, I would not do it, because someone else would come along and lead you out."
I clearly stated that if it got out of hand it might warrant a reprimand. Having not taken that class from that teacher I'm not going to speculate as to how "out of hand" it got. Based on the few quotes I read it didn't sound so horrible but I can certainly understand how a student would be upset to hear that kind of thing.
A lawsuit on the grounds that the teacher has violated the students constitutional rights, however, is beyond retarded and whiny.
Christianity IS the dominant religion in this nation and as such will be the focus of far more public criticism than other religions. It may not be fair and a double standard may seem to crop up from time to time but I'm pretty sure this teacher includes all religious fundamentalism in his opinions. He may not take the time to catalog every single faith when making a point but it seems to me that he is trying to urge these kids not to rely on religious teachings as an intellectual foundation.
Well for someone that is not going to make conclusions because you didn't take the class, you sure make a few conclusions.
Quote:
I'm pretty sure this teacher includes all religious fundamentalism in his opinions. He may not take the time to catalog every single faith when making a point but it seems to me that he is trying to urge these kids not to rely on religious teachings as an intellectual foundation
Like I said, I honestly don't care which religion you apply this to as it should apply to all equally, by protecting citizens from any gov't interference regarding religion. Public schools seem like they should be the flagship for separation of church and state, and this teacher seems to have taken advantage of his position. I teach my kids very little about religion formally, but I do answer their questions when they have them. However, there are as you know, millions of people who feel differently, and opt to raise their families differently. Why should a gov't employed teacher, someone holding a position of great responsibility and authority over impressionable young people be given a pass to indoctrinate someone else's young ones? Granted, I don't think a few comments here and there rise to the level of a federal lawsuit, but if a pattern exists and there is more to it , it needs to be addressed.
Christian Student Sues High School Teacher for anti-Christian remarks. 
Dr. Naysay
