Durka-Durka-Muhammed-Jihad!!
This is going too far:
Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif SchoolThis makes me wonder if crap like this is happening at my daughter's school here in San Diego.LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California teacher has been barred by his school from giving students documents from American history that refer to God -- including the Declaration of Independence.
Steven Williams, a fifth-grade teacher at Stevens Creek School in the San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino, sued for discrimination on Monday, claiming he had been singled out for censorship by principal Patricia Vidmar because he is a Christian.
"It's a fact of American history that our founders were religious men, and to hide this fact from young fifth-graders in the name of political correctness is outrageous and shameful," said Williams' attorney, Terry Thompson.
"Williams wants to teach his students the true history of our country," he said. "There is nothing in the Establishment Clause (of the U.S. Constitution) that prohibits a teacher from showing students the Declaration of Independence."
Vidmar could not be reached for comment on the lawsuit, which was filed on Monday in U.S. District Court in San Jose and claims violations of Williams rights to free speech under the First Amendment.
Phyllis Vogel, assistant superintendent for Cupertino Unified School District, said the lawsuit had been forwarded to a staff attorney. She declined to comment further.
To me, this is just going waaaayyyy too far in the let's-be-politically-correct-in-every-freakin-facet-of-education scheme.
It's not like the teacher was attempting to teach the Gospel to the kids - he was trying to show one of the facets of the Founding Fathers and why they did what they did before America declared independence.
This is the one thing that bothers me about people 're-writing' history to accomidate sensitive souls today: they do not take the context of what was happening at the time into account when they analyze historical events. To look at something using todays 'standards', practically everything in history will appear barbaric, crude, and will make you wonder just how the Hell the human race survives today.
Here's a silly example: let's say that in 200 years the ability to communicate with cats & dogs is possible and they're found to be extremely intelligent.
Now, people in that time will look back on the early 21st century and go Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! for our lack of clarvoyance in seeing that kitties & puppies can do quantum physics.
The same reasoning applies here: while modern American society isn't as rooted (this is a loose definition for my arguments sake) in religion as the Founding Fathers were 200+ years ago, we cannot apply 21st century religious-secular definitions and standards to them while looking back in hindsight. Nor can we look at the documents of those days with our 21st century reading glasses.
Everything must be taken into context - the fact that the Founding Fathers were religious men is part of that context, dispite who much people get their panties all wadded up over the idea of religion.
I'm glad this is still here, because it's just like I thought, some evangelical christian fanatic
Read more in Good Grief
scroff said:
Meet loony leftie Green Party member and elementary school teacher...
better that
Read more in Good Grief
Brent said:
Mikey - If you read Frontpagemag.com you'd know that this crap is happening all over the country,
Read more in Good Grief
Rob@L&R said:
I guess if the principal has a problem with documents that refer to God, the school district shou
Read more in Good Grief
Tuning Spork said:
Scroff, which translation is that from?
The New International Version (most widely read aft
Read more in Good Grief
ruthie said:
camels and donkeys and slaves, oh my!
Read more in Good Grief
Comments on Good Grief
I consider this a hopeful development, Mike. It's so blatant a leftist overreach -- about like teaching Communism in the classroom -- that it almost can't help but provoke a massive backlash.
Of course, to make certain the backlash occurs, the incident must be publicized until Hell wouldn't have it.
|| Posted by Francis W. Porretto, November 25, 2004 02:32 AM ||Sounds like a straw that broke the camels back kinda thing to me. This Christian has probably tried to teach his fifth graders about God before and all about how this country is founded as a christian country yadda yadda yadda and each time was restrained. So he goes and gets the Declaration of Independence so he can show the little darlings that the founding fathers talked about the creator and divinity and all that crap.
Funny thing though, Islam also talks about a creator and divinity and all that crap, so do several other religions, is he going to teach them all? This whole christian country thing has gone too far, that's what's gone too far. The founding fathers went out of their way to make sure there was no state religion, no national religion, that everybody had the freedom to worship and believe what they wanted to.
I'm not a christian and I wouldn't want my kid taught that crap in school. Next thing he'll be teaching his science class that the dinosaurs died in the great flood, and the grand canyon was created by the flood, too. Let him go teach in a Catholic school somewhere.
|| Posted by scroff, November 26, 2004 02:32 PM ||Oh, I forgot... if we're going to look at things in context, then I guess we have to remember that these 'religious men' also owned slaves, and had affairs with them, and when they wrote that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..." they weren't talking about the slaves, or women, or the 'savages', just white men like them.
These men were no more religious than I am, in context. The world was a much more 'religious' place. These men grew up in the Church of England, where they had to attend church or be considered sinners or whatever. The majority of the real religious men were loyalists, the founding fathers were revolutionaries, men ahead of their time, not christian puritans as some would have us believe...
Sorry Mikey... This christian crap pisses me off almost as much as chickenhawks...
|| Posted by scroff, November 26, 2004 02:46 PM ||hey weren't talking about the slaves, or women, or the 'savages', just white men like them.
This is to what I refer when I say it has to be taken into context.
We view being slave owners as repugnant here in the 21st century whereas in the 18th century, it would have been considered "normal" in Colonial society.
|| Posted by Mad Mikey, November 26, 2004 03:06 PM ||Absolutely, I agree, as would their level of 'religiosity'... they talked about god as a matter of daily life... does that mean they were "religious men", "devout christians", or is it a reflection of the times?
btw, according to the bible, it's ok to own slaves ;), even god handed out slaves as a reward...
"The Lord has greatly blessed my master, and he has become rich. He has given him sheep and cattle, silver and gold, male and female slaves, and camels and donkeys."
Genesis 24:34
|| Posted by scroff, November 26, 2004 07:17 PM ||camels and donkeys and slaves, oh my!
|| Posted by ruthie, November 27, 2004 11:14 AM ||Scroff, which translation is that from?
The New International Version (most widely read after the King James Version) says it differently.
A servant of Abraham is sent to find a wife for his son Isaac. He tells Rebekah and Laban in Genesis 24:34-35:
34"So he said, 'I am Abraham's servant. 35The Lord has blessed my master abundantly, and he has become wealthy. He has given him sheep and cattle, silver and gold, manservants and maidservants, and camels and donkeys.'"
These were not slaves in that they are stolen from their families and forced into involuntary servitude.
They were assistants, maids, etc, who served the wealthy Abraham because it was a way of life that was better than scrounging for crumbs in a ditch somewhere.
They served willingly, and were free to leave at any time. It was a kind of patronage, not slavery.
Moses brought his people OUT of slavery, and Abraham did not then turn around enslave them.
|| Posted by Tuning Spork, November 28, 2004 02:22 PM ||I guess if the principal has a problem with documents that refer to God, the school district should not provide her with, and she should refuse, any slips of paper or metal tokens that have "In God We Trust" printed on them.
As to the Declaration of Independence: It mentions "Nature's God" in the first paragraph, a "Creator" in the second and the last paragraph mentions a "Supreme Judge of the world" and a reliance on the "Protection of divine Providence."
4 times in a 1300-word document.
I take His name in vain more times than that in a hour.
|| Posted by Rob@L&R, November 29, 2004 09:04 AM ||Mikey - If you read Frontpagemag.com you'd know that this crap is happening all over the country, but especially in California.
Meet loony leftie Green Party member and elementary school teacher indoctrinator, Sarah Lipson
|| Posted by Brent, December 1, 2004 07:42 PM ||Meet loony leftie Green Party member and elementary school teacher...
better that than the jesus freaks trying to cram jeezus and gawd down my kids throat
While quaint and interesting reading, the bible is a story book that should only be taught to those who express an interest in it, in any guise.
|| Posted by scroff, December 1, 2004 07:56 PM ||I'm glad this is still here, because it's just like I thought, some evangelical christian fanatic nutjob trying to preach jayzus in the classroom...
from Media Matters
"Even the lawsuit brought forth on behalf of teacher Steve Williams by the right-wing Alliance Defense Fund challenging the school's decision to prohibit the handouts acknowledged that the school has not imposed an outright prohibition on the mention of God or the discussion of religious beliefs in the classroom. The lawsuit recognized that "other teachers are permitted to show films and distribute handouts containing references to God," and that Williams had been permitted to teach "lessons on the origins of religious holidays" during that school year and had provided handouts relating to religion in the past "without any problems." Despite that acknowledgement, an Alliance Defense Fund press release about the lawsuit was headlined "Declaration of Independence Banned from Classroom."
The notion that the school banned that document originated in an erroneous November 24 Reuters article headlined "Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif. School." But the school prohibited only supplemental handouts distributed by teacher Steve Williams to his students that selectively chose excerpts from the Declaration of Independence making reference to God -- along with other handouts that appeared to proselytize Christianity. A December 8 article in the San Francisco Chronicle noted that parents had complained to the school about Williams, stating that his teaching "crossed the line into evangelizing." In response, Stevens Creek Principal Patricia Vidmar began reviewing Wiiliams's lesson plans and supplemental handouts in advance."
If people want to twist their kids heads around with all this jeesuz crap let them do it at home, keep it out of our schools. If Jesus could see what people are doing today in his name he'd do more than overturn tables...
|| Posted by scroff, December 8, 2004 08:11 PM ||