Un-Intelligent Design

[Industry7]

a few things

"He said that Kristie Griffiths, the teacher, is a visiting faculty member from Australia and did not understand U.S. standards."

which means it's the principles job to explain what's allowed here. on the other hand i find it very hard to beleive that this sort of thing would be allowed in Australia either, but i woudln't know.

"Ashlee came home with a worksheet on which she was marked wrong for answering that "chance" was the reason many animals are colored to match their surroundings."

I'm sorry Ashlee but chance really is the wrong answer no matter how you look at it. The teacher's answer of course was wrong in the sense that you can't teach religion in this country.

Finally, this coutry has gotten to lawsuit crazy. don't like your neighbor? sue them! it don'est matter why, just hire a lawyer and let him do the talking. I mean what did they think they were going to accomplish, send the guest teacher back to Australia? It's not like this is the sort of thing that changes laws. Imean if there wasn't already a law about teaching religion as fact in school, then maybe this lawsuit would actaully mean something... but as it is, it done'st.

 

[steve319]

Yeah, the distinction would be between public and private parochial schools. Private schools have a LOT of freedom with their curriculum and approach (too much maybe?), but religion should have no influence at all in public school curriculum.

A friend of mine teaches in a middle grades school locally and is dealing with a situation that involves some of the same issues. The parents of one of her students are pushing to make sure that no mention is made of holidays in class because their faith prohibits the celebration of them. No holiday decorations in December, no exchanging of Valentine's Day cards, no essays about your favorite holiday, no singing of "Happy Birthday" to other students, etc.

(Of course, this is the same school where one parent got upset that my friend spent a week on lessons related to Black History Month, so there are plenty of nutcases around.)

How do you guys feel about this? Aren't the seasonal holidays in December essentially religious holidays? What of Saint Valentine's Day?

Any feelings on this one?

*runs for cover*

 

[Leung]

wait a minute, the parents SUED the school?

You're kidding?

That is what is wrong with the states...

 

[steve319]

No, there's no lawsuit. They are just visiting the school regularly, harrassing the administration, and going to school board meetings.

Oh, and letters to the editor of the local paper too.

And their kid regularly has other kids upset and crying because he tells them they're going to be going to hell for having a birthday party or whatever. It's sad.

 

[Leung]

Originally posted by steve319@Apr 17 2005, 03:07 AM
No, there's no lawsuit. They are just visiting the school regularly, harrassing the administration, and going to school board meetings.

Oh, and letters to the editor of the local paper too.

And their kid regularly has other kids upset and crying because he tells them they're going to be going to hell for having a birthday party or whatever. It's sad.

[post=301255]Quoted post[/post]​

That is seriously demented! Mildly amusing, in a sick way. But yes, quite sad

 

[13788]

carolinacurious:

I'm sorry Ashlee but chance really is the wrong answer no matter how you look at it. The teacher's answer of course was wrong in the sense that you can't teach religion in this country.

Uh, it's the fifth grade. I'd give 'chance' a pass, particularly considering the garbage this "teacher" has been filling their heads with. If you read the article it is perfectly clear that the parent's issue is not that their little girl deserved 2 more points on a test but a slightly larger principle.

Finally, this coutry has gotten to lawsuit crazy. don't like your neighbor? sue them! it don'est matter why, just hire a lawyer and let him do the talking. I mean what did they think they were going to accomplish, send the guest teacher back to Australia? It's not like this is the sort of thing that changes laws. Imean if there wasn't already a law about teaching religion as fact in school, then maybe this lawsuit would actaully mean something... but as it is, it done'st.

From this paragraph it appears that you may have actually read the article. Actually, lawsuits are the sort of things that change laws. I'm no fan of lawsuits but what would you have the parents do? (please re-read the article if necessary and don't suggest something that they've already done)

What is it about America where we have to reduce everything to an "equal" fight. Why are you so quick to blame the parents? Sometimes it's not equal, sometimes one side IS right and the other side needs to check out a new profession. Sometimes you have no option left but a lawsuit.

 

[Industry7]

i know lawsuits change laws... i meant that it woudln't change any laws in this case. all the nessecary laws are in place, it a clear cut and dry situation where the treacher violated the law. I guess an arguement could be made taht this would set a precedent making principle copable for teachers actions... but i don't think taht would be a very good thing to do. I mean how would you like it if you were made legally responsible for the actions of your coworker?

I'm not sure waht you mean by "blaming the parents." they're sue-ing the school. i don't think they should take this to court. Just based on the article, it seems liek they did that a little prematurely. I mean they only attempted to communicate with the school once. I see that the principle's reaction was inapropriate, but i also think that the parents should have tried to work with the school more. On the other hand i woudln't be surprised if they moved their kid to a different school next year no matter waht.

 

[jonb]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of lawsuits either, but this one actually has a case.

 

[D_Barbi_Queue]

My science teacher was the same way. In one of her quizzes, she had the popular "Which came first, the chicken or the egg" question. Generally, creationists believe the answer is "the chicken" and evolutionists believe "the egg" is the answer.

She was a creationist and if you put down "the egg", you got the question wrong.



BTW CC, I just have to ask: What in the world is going on in your avatar? :huh:

 

[jonb]

Well, the egg's obviously right, since there are no birds until the Upper Jurassic, but even Cambrian eggs have been found.

I personally don't think creationists are any more than masters of three clever propaganda techniques: The soundbyte, postmodern equivocation, and delusions of persecution.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

The fundamentalist Christian creationist scientific method made easy:

* first, believe that fundamentalist Christian creationism is true

* second, convene a "study" or "research" aimed only at promoting creationism and the "young earth" geologic timeline.

* third, ignore or disparage mountains of evidence contrary to creationism.

* fourth, continue to believe that creationism is true.

* fifth, discover from the "research" mentioned above that the dinosaurs died in the great flood because they couldn't fit on Noah's ark.

* sixth, conclude that creationism mustbe correct.

Voila!

 

[steve319]

Originally posted by SpeedoGuy@Apr 18 2005, 01:03 AM
* fifth, discover from the "research" mentioned above that the dinosaurs died in the great flood because they couldn't fit on Noah's ark.

[post=301616]Quoted post[/post]​

OH! So that's it! No room in the ark! I'd always wondered about that!

And here I'd always figured that dinosaurs were just a big hoax perpetuated by the (godless) scientific community. Or that the devil had spent lots of time burying fake dinosaur bones for us to find, all in an effort to create doubt.

Enjoyed your post, SpeedoGuy.

 

[madame_zora]

Originally posted by TexAssgirl@Apr 18 2005, 12:42 AM

BTW CC, I just have to ask: What in the world is going on in your avatar? :huh:

[post=301554]Quoted post[/post]​

I would ask the same about YOURS, but I think I know. That's not you, is it? Hot stuff, lady!

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Originally posted by steve319@Apr 18 2005, 05:21 AM
Enjoyed your post, SpeedoGuy.

[post=301619]Quoted post[/post]​

Thanks.

I realized I forgot to add step seven, one of the most important, so here it is:

* seventh, create rumors that the embarrassed peer-reviewed scientific community is jealously hiding from the unsuspecting public the fact that geology and Darwinian evolution have been thoroughly discredited by creation science.

 

[D_Barbi_Queue]

Originally posted by madame_zora+Apr 18 2005, 01:34 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(madame_zora &#064; Apr 18 2005, 01:34 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-TexAssgirl@Apr 18 2005, 12:42 AM

BTW CC, I just have to ask:  What in the world is going on in your avatar? :huh:

[post=301554]Quoted post[/post]​

I would ask the same about YOURS, but I think I know. That&#39;s not you, is it? Hot stuff, lady&#33;

[post=301624]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]


ha ha - no, it&#39;s not me. I&#39;m not that daring.

 

[13788]

carolinacurious:

i know lawsuits change laws... i meant that it woudln&#39;t change any laws in this case. all the nessecary laws are in place, it a clear cut and dry situation where the treacher violated the law. I guess an arguement could be made taht this would set a precedent making principle copable for teachers actions... but i don&#39;t think taht would be a very good thing to do. I mean how would you like it if you were made legally responsible for the actions of your coworker?

Ok, it&#39;s a clear cut violation of the law, fine, so what do you do? Go to the police? I really don&#39;t know. It seems to me when you are talking about Constitutional matters lawyers need to get involved.

Should the parents have had to work with the school more before filing a lawsuit?

They went to talk to the Principal where they were told, "What&#39;s the problem? Don&#39;t you and your family go to church?" (riiight...) BUT they were promised that it wouldn&#39;t happen again, but it did. And we know now that the Principal didn&#39;t go talk to the teacher and say, "Have you lost your fucking mind&#33;?", instead she, "sent a memo to all staff asking them to use only board-approved materials but didn&#39;t communicate directly with Griffiths."

Is this the sort of hands-on involvement that gets rewarded where you work?

In case you missed it: "Anderson also told the parents she didn&#39;t understand their objections, because Ashlee earned perfect scores on the assignments."

So we&#39;ve established that:

1. The parents weren&#39;t concerned about a grade.

2. The Principal DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS WRONG&#33;
(Were they supposed to come in and read the Constitution to this numbskull on a weekly basis or what?)

Ideally I can concede that it would have been nice for the parents to go before the school board before filing suit BUT how long should they have to wait when it comes to their daughter&#39;s education?

Their lawyer did send a letter to the school Superintendent before filing suit, unfortunately we don&#39;t know what, if anything, occurred between the receipt of the letter and the filing of the suit.

What could the lawsuit accomplish?

Well,

The school system acknowledged in an agreement filed Friday that the allegations were true and pledged not to use those lessons or other religious materials. Once a judge signs that agreement, the school system could face federal criminal penalties for violating it.

**

District spokeswoman Wanda McPhaul said all principals will undergo a mandatory session in First Amendment issues, led by the school board&#39;s attorney, during their annual summer training program.

The second quote above is from: http://www.nbc17.com/news/4303078/detail.html

This looks like a success to me.

I&#39;m not sure waht you mean by "blaming the parents." they&#39;re sue-ing the school. i don&#39;t think they should take this to court. Just based on the article, it seems liek they did that a little prematurely. I mean they only attempted to communicate with the school once. I see that the principle&#39;s reaction was inapropriate, but i also think that the parents should have tried to work with the school more. On the other hand i woudln&#39;t be surprised if they moved their kid to a different school next year no matter waht.

As I said above, maybe the parents should have done a little more, but I also am impressed with the quick results that they eventually got after going to a lawyer. At this point there&#39;s nothing to indicate that they were asking for any monetary damages, only that they want to make sure that the problem doesn&#39;t happen again. If I were to find that they were asking for money it would probably change my opinion, as it is, these parents get a gold star from me.

What do I mean by "blaming the parents"?

If you read through the whole thread you may notice that you came into an argument that I&#39;ve already had, a bit late. (Welcome, by the way)

There is a sense (to me) of equivocation: "Well the school was wrong, but those parents are greedy and lawsuit happy so they&#39;re wrong too."

(I know, those AREN&#39;T your words, but that&#39;s how I took it, if you want more background read through the thread.)

The parents are heroes in my book, they deserve a round of applause, a pat on the back, a contribution for their legal fees... not criticism (IMO).

 

[13788]

carolinacurious:

BTW CC, I just have to ask: What in the world is going on in your avatar?

That was intended to be a (very) inside joke/commentary to someone here on the board. It appears to have been so "inside" that no one got it, or at least no one mentioned it.

The picture itself is of a very attractive young lady who apparently is dj&#39;ing a party, naked.

I&#39;ve noticed that my pm&#39;s have gone up quite a bit since I put that up as my Avatar, unfortunately from guys who think that she is me, sorry, I&#39;m a he, it even says so right there under the picture.

Not only am I not that pretty young lady, I do not know her, have never met her, can&#39;t get anyone a date with her ect.

Anyway, I&#39;m in the market for a new Avatar.

A present for those who are interested:

http://www.ender.com/~zoo0oop/djnude.jpg

http://www.ender.com/~zoo0oop/naked_dj.jpg

enjoy&#33;

 

[D_Barbi_Queue]

I have to admit...I thought you were a girl too. I never looked at your sex, just your name and av. I suck...sorry. My lesson is learned and I shall pay better attention next time. :lol:

 

[Freddie53]

The principal was at fault for not puting a note in writing in the teacher&#39;s file explaining that there was a complaint and this was the first notice in the file. A second notice would be consequences such as unpaid suspension.

A faculty meeting should have been called and legal experts should have explained the law and what had been done wrong and how to avoid breaking the law.

The school district at least in my state is a member of the school boards association which has a full time attorney to advise in these situations. There is an administrator&#39;s group with also has attorneys that advise daily administrators all over the state. And finally the teachers union has a huge legal staff that is always willing to come int any school and do workshops concerning any legal issues. Since my state is a right to work state the union is always looking for ways to volunteer to do workshops for all the teachers and does it for free. Usually they pick up a member or two out of it.

So there is not excuse here. Legal advice was already retained by three diferent groups in the school and all three sets fo attorneys would have given the same answer on this one.

The teacher was the problem. The principal became the problem when "he didn&#39;t put the fire out." Had he done so and the teacher came back and voilated the written instructions in the teacher&#39;s file, more than likely, only the teacher would have been in trouble and the lawsuit would have been persnally against the teacher.

So word to the wise about that. A teacher can be sued for monetary damages or in some states fined. And the school district would have grounds for dismissal on the third charge.

 

[jay_too]

Originally posted by Freddie53@Apr 18 2005, 03:20 PM
The principal was at fault for not puting a note in writing in the teacher&#39;s file explaining that there was a complaint and this was the first notice in the file. A second notice would be consequences such as unpaid suspension.

[post=301694]Quoted post[/post]​

Huh?

The issue here is "Should public schools teach crap like creation science?" I have not problem with fundamental groups believing, teaching, or promoting creationism. It is just another quaint "ism" like fascism or communism. It may not be very useful in understanding the world around us or predicting the consequences of present or projected actions, but hey, for some stupidity rules&#33;

I would expect those responsible for spending public education dollars NOT to fund programs in creationism. OR at the very least, to adhere to truth in labelling and call the courses, "Science for Idiots."

For me this is not a problem in administrative procedures but a systemic one; namely, let&#39;s get back to basics in the teaching of science and educate the next few generations of scientists and engineers. Otherwise, we will become a nation of hairdressers and manicurists who may know their scripture and little else.

jay