I had a nice long post planned for tonight, but instead, before I wrote it, this came up. Thought you'd be interested.
Douglas V. Gibbs
XXXXX XXXXXXXXX Ave.
Murrieta, CA 92563
(951) XXX-XXXX
douglasgibbs@yahoo.com
February 21, 2007
Mr. XXXXX
XXXXX XXXXXXXX High School
Murrieta, CA
Dear Mr. XXXXX,
Tonight my daughter came to me with tonight's homework from your class. The assignment, as I understand it, is for her to write a paragraph using four vocabulary words explaining why teachers must discuss morality with today's youth.
I am appalled by the assignment. It is not the school's business to explain morality to my child. That is my job as a parent. I am a Christian, and I do not approve of secular explanations of morality being taught to my children, for in most cases such secular teachings disagree with my scriptural beliefs. I have a fundamental right to be the exclusive provider of moral information to my child.
You have been placed in that position as a teacher to teach my child literature, not moral values.
I request that you do not deduct points for my daughter not turning in this assignment. I would rather you issue an alternative assignment more befitting of an English class. If there is a problem, please contact me by e-mail at the above address, or by phone in the evening at (951) XXX-XXXX. Non-compliance with my wishes will result in me taking this up with the school board.
Thank you for your time.
Douglas V. Gibbs
***************************************************
Ironically, tonight's post was going to be about how the Liberal Socialist Left/Secular Progressives believe that the teachers are more important than the parents in our children's lives. I was going to explain how to bring about the socialistic change they are indoctrinating our children. Liberals believe our children should be shaped by the community, not the parents. They believe parents have no right to know if their daughter is pregnant, or having an abortion. They support sex surveys for second graders (few years ago, Palmdale School District in L.A.), and that Christianity is narrow-minded and has no business being a part of a child's education.
Then, as I began to write, my daughter came to me with tonight's assignment. She's a Junior in High School, and I realized that I needed no sources on the internet to prove my point about tonight's post. The proof was sitting next to me with an assignment in her hand.
Douglas V. Gibbs
XXXXX XXXXXXXXX Ave.
Murrieta, CA 92563
(951) XXX-XXXX
douglasgibbs@yahoo.com
February 21, 2007
Mr. XXXXX
XXXXX XXXXXXXX High School
Murrieta, CA
Dear Mr. XXXXX,
Tonight my daughter came to me with tonight's homework from your class. The assignment, as I understand it, is for her to write a paragraph using four vocabulary words explaining why teachers must discuss morality with today's youth.
I am appalled by the assignment. It is not the school's business to explain morality to my child. That is my job as a parent. I am a Christian, and I do not approve of secular explanations of morality being taught to my children, for in most cases such secular teachings disagree with my scriptural beliefs. I have a fundamental right to be the exclusive provider of moral information to my child.
You have been placed in that position as a teacher to teach my child literature, not moral values.
I request that you do not deduct points for my daughter not turning in this assignment. I would rather you issue an alternative assignment more befitting of an English class. If there is a problem, please contact me by e-mail at the above address, or by phone in the evening at (951) XXX-XXXX. Non-compliance with my wishes will result in me taking this up with the school board.
Thank you for your time.
Douglas V. Gibbs
***************************************************
Ironically, tonight's post was going to be about how the Liberal Socialist Left/Secular Progressives believe that the teachers are more important than the parents in our children's lives. I was going to explain how to bring about the socialistic change they are indoctrinating our children. Liberals believe our children should be shaped by the community, not the parents. They believe parents have no right to know if their daughter is pregnant, or having an abortion. They support sex surveys for second graders (few years ago, Palmdale School District in L.A.), and that Christianity is narrow-minded and has no business being a part of a child's education.
Then, as I began to write, my daughter came to me with tonight's assignment. She's a Junior in High School, and I realized that I needed no sources on the internet to prove my point about tonight's post. The proof was sitting next to me with an assignment in her hand.
9 comments:
Good for you...sticking up for your beliefs and your child..Now get her out of that gov't school!!! NOW!!
Yes, tutuion sucks, bigtime...but my 10K a year for the three is spent better then what Gov't schools can provide, and I don't get this complication..EVER!!
Here's a shocker - if this transpired as you described, I agree with you.. but this part has me wondering;
The assignment, as I understand it, is for her to write a paragraph using four vocabulary words explaining why teachers must discuss morality with today's youth.
I think you probably have an autonomic knee-jerk reaction to interpreting things other than how they really are. The assignment might be "Compose an essay on the moral dilemmas illustrated in Shakespeare’s Macbeth", and you think the teacher is going to impose some "secular morals" on the children.
How was the homework assigned? Is there a written instruction from the teacher that you could quote directly, or is it an explanation from your child?
Lets assume the teacher really did want an essay on why a teacher "must discuss morality". I find that very strange - so strange I don't see how that's possible. A child develops morally from a number of sources, teachers, friends, and yes, parents have the biggest influence in teaching them. Public school, however, is NOT a place to be discussing morals in some philosophical sense, especially if there is any sort of agenda behind it at all. It doesn't matter if it's a "secular moral" or "religious moral", though I really struggle to understand what a "secular moral" is anyway.
It's all about the agenda, because kids do learn morals in public schools. There are rules, and rules teach morals.. what is acceptable to wear.. not to cheat.. not to be tardy, etc. There's a whole litany of life's lessons that are learned in school, including, to a great deal, how social interactions with peers works.
This part of your post had me chuckling..
I realized that I needed no sources on the internet to prove my point about tonight's post.
I was thinking about Mr. Mackie from South Park. Facts are bad.. mm'kay? And then.. from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, Facts? Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts!
Well.. if you want to frame your arguments around your interpretation of things, that's great. It's hard to argue against a point when there's no evidence of the point in the first place. That makes my job harder for sure.
Now.. for the big giant straw man that you nailed with a sniper rifle from 2000 yards..
Ironically, tonight's post was going to be about how the Liberal Socialist Left/Secular Progressives believe that the teachers are more important than the parents in our children's lives.
The answer is.. no.. we don't believe that at all, but I'd imagine you might be able to find a few people, out of millions of libs, that might say that. But nobody in their right mind thinks teachers are more important than parents. Please don't make that argument because it's a straw man, and it's absurd. Okay? Debate on substantive topics against positions that liberals really DO have instead of making one up and then attacking it.
You did make one substantive claim (sort of) however, so I'll respond to it;
that Christianity is narrow-minded and has no business being a part of a child's education.
Those 15 words are the only ones of your post that address a substantive issue worthy of debate.. If you had left out "narrow-minded", and added "public", it would have been perfect. Secularists really have no opinion the narrow or open-minded nature of religion. Religion is yours and what you make of it, and is personal to you. What I think of your religion is irrelevant to the topic of public policy.
Let me re-write the issue for you;
Christianity has no business being a part of a child's public education.
And that is a widely held liberal/progressive viewpoint. It also happens to agree with innumerable Supreme Court decisions, based on the logic of the Constitution of the United States, specifically the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Go read the decision in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet..
"government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion."
I hope that is very clear.
It seems to me that the only people who want Christianity involved in public schools are theocrats. Religion is taught in churches. It's taught at home. The United States is a nation of secular laws. There's no reason for it to be involved in schools, except to the extent that it attempts to "convert" children into Christianity.
If you want your child to receive a religious education in school, there are a lot of private schools to choose from. You are free to do so.
And how about this issue that is somewhat related.. the whole "voucher" thing. Maybe you should be able to get vouchers to help pay for a private education for your child? I must admit, I have a rather selfish self-interest in it as well. I don't have any kids, and I pay about $5000 a year to the local school district as part of the property taxes on my house. How about we give you a voucher to send the child to private school, and I don't pay 5 grand a year to educate somebody else’s kid?
I know.. not very liberal of me.. but boy.. 5 grand a year. ugh.
Tom,
I know.. not very liberal of me.. but boy.. 5 grand a year. ugh.
Well what can I say Tom, you libs keep wanting to raise taxes and give it out to the people who spend it on dope, I guess you just got your's through property tax. Enjoy what the Liberals did to you. LOL
Would be LOL funny.. but alas.. I live in Texas.. another of life's little ironies.. and it's completely Christian conservative republican.. and they imposed the taxes.
And I realize that "liberals want to tax good people and give it to junkies" is a good slogan.. but it's just that.
You do realize, of course, that the current administration inherited a large surplus and turned it into record deficits right? You do know that federal spending (non-military) has skyrocketed under the Republican congress and executive, right? You do know that federal entitlement spending is at record levels? Who passed the Medicare presecrption drug plan? Ouch..
If lefties really did want to tax and spend you to death (rather than have a balanced budget) we could have asked for no better champion then George Bush..
Feel free to fact check my assertions.. or I'll drown everyone in stats if you like.
Okay, Tom, just because you don't recognize what is going on around you because you are blinded by "enlightenment" let me bring you back to the real world. Knee jerk reaction? Absolutely. This is the school where a teacher has a picture of Buddha on the wall (her first semester English teacher-if it had been a cross he'd been out a job), they no longer have Christmas Vacation and Easter Break, now it is Winter Break and Spring Break (I asked, it's to not offend the non-Christians), condoms are handed out to students, one of the teachers spoke about the bill going to voters about teens being able to get abortions without telling the parents and endorsed it, this year for the first time there were no Merry Christmas signs on campus because it's offensive to non-Christians, one PE class taught yoga (which is influenced by eastern religion - fine if religion is not mentioned, but it was - teacher's exact words "our religious leaders in this country could take a lesson from easter religion" and this assignment was worded as I worded it including the word "must" - teachers "must" talk about morality with today's youth. I am a Christian and I am offended. The school is so busy trying not to offend non-Christians and in the process is offending Christians - and that's okay to you? I sure as hell don't remember this crap when I was in school. If I could afford it my kids would have been in private schools, but I couldn't afford it, and the left shot down the vouchers bill, so I'm stuck with this crap. And on top of this all, this is considered one of the better schools in the area (California Distinguished School). I am not throwing down stats, I am throwing down my observations!
But so often, literature hinges on moral questions. At least if it's any good.
(slightly off topic... but you brought the holiday thing up.)
I'm an atheist, but I call Christmas break what it is. I buy a Christmas tree, exchange presents, love, laugh and enjoy the season. Just because Jesus is not perhaps my reason for the season doesn't mean it's not CHRISTMAS. Besides, frankly, is there really a debate that Jesus did in fact once exist? So what the heck is wrong with celebrating his birth.
I mean American's en mass celebrate crap like Cinco De Mayo and St. Patricks day. Hey secular/libtards.....St. Patrick was a SAINT. Think about that happy crappy when you're sloshing down your green beer... you want to ban that day too? No... I din;t think so.
Buddha thought that the earth ewas sacred, holy. Shall we ban earth day and Arbor day as well.
Man, can't these libbies see how insane their PC agenda is?????
It's not a "PC Agenda" - it's an attempt to be inclusive with the many differences in our society so that people feel welcomed.
Once again, tons and tons of issues raised. It's late and I'm not in the mood for point-counter-point.. but just a couple things off the top of my head.
Buddhism is not a monotheistic religion. It's more a philosophy centered on meditation. There has been something on the order of 28 Buddha. Siddhartha Gautama is considered the first Buddha. He's not the big round one that's often depicted. Buddhism is also not one of the big 3, Christianity, Islam and Judaism, which mitigates much of the issue.
There are a number of issues you raised about the school that if true (and I'm not saying they are not), indeed are inappropriate from teachers in a public school. I'm not a cultist beholden to some religious viewpoint, so I'm not shy to criticize any side that tries to gain influence with inappropriate behavior in class. In other words, I don't have that glaring double standard that seems common on the right.
I could link you a litany of Christian hijack attempts in public schools, particularly in my very right-wing Christian area. The whole evolution debate is a big one around here.
By the way.. just as an aside, did you know that Christmas has it's origins in pagan rituals? Check the wiki for the readers digest version. The early church converted the "winter holiday" into the celebration of Christ's birth as a means to co-opt the pagan's own holiday. It was stupendously successful in doing so.
I'm not completely opposed to tradition in this country and I still call it Christmas, but to me the meaning is very different then what it is to Christians. If somebody says back Happy Kwanza, or whatever name they have for their particular flavor, I'll smile and shoot back a Happy Kwanza right back atcha. It doesn't bother me in the least.
And one of life's little ironies (I'm full of them) seems to me that any adherents to any religious belief are absolutely convinced that they picked (or were born into) the right religion, and everybody else is wrong. Judging by what I sense of DG's personality, I'm sure that if he were born in Iran, he'd be a devout Muslim. That is, after all, how religions tend to dominate particular regions. People are just born into it through blind luck.
So - since religion seems to be such a lottery, I withhold making any certain judgment about how it applies to me.. and voila, I'm an agnostic/Deist hybrid, because there's only one thing that the majority of people in this world believe. There is a God. I'm cool with that.
One final thing I'll say about public schools and religion. Since religion is indeed a very important topic in the world, there is a time and place for children to study it. There's absolutely no reason for some teacher to start talking about new abortion laws in math class, but I would definitely support philosophy classes, and world religion in history. There is an intellectual study that is fascinating to me. There's so much history, and there are so many different philosophical schools of thought that it seems only natural to expose students to it so they can see a wider world then beyond their community. Make them electives - great.
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to study philosophy until college, but I had a fantastic time butting rhetorical heads with the professor about any number of issues. Debate is healthy. Information is good.
But - and I will back you up until the bitter end, if there is an agenda behind it, or any attempt to "convert" or "indoctrinate" - that's completely wrong and should be stopped immediately.
Still, I'm quickly coming to the conclusion that debating here will be difficult. I'm not saying it won't be fun, or it won't be productive. I'm just saying difficult because DG's and my mind seem to work in very different ways. I'm not trying to label you or criticize your thought processes; I just think we're about as different as can be. You seem to be a "touchy feely, go with my gut" kind of guy. You just know what you know, and you're very confident that you're right. On the converse, I've mentioned I'm a professional engineer. I do nothing on gut instinct. When I decide an issue, I peruse related materials that people have done before. I examine it like a math equation, which are nothing more than a collection of "proofs". Proofs are either right or wrong, and in the scientific method, we are bound to logic. As I mentioned, I code in systems that have massive impacts on things such as patient safety. I cannot make a mistake, and therefore I am meticulous about the logic and research behind every byte of code I write. That method of thinking extends to the way I view the wider world around me. And don't think it's easy. It's hard for me not to write a design document before I change a light bulb - but that's what makes me very good at what I do.
So, while I'm sitting here, and fact checking all your assertions, and reading and researching before I post a reply, I know that you only care about what you know. It's like the deaf man communicating with a blind man.
Here's a question that sent my college philosophy class into a tizzy 20 years ago;
Are religious people inherently more "moral" than atheists?
Tom, if you're bucking for my gig over at Jenn's Jungle, then may I recommend that you just be a little more concise?
And the simple answer to your very last question, Tom, as Jenn, also an atheist will attest, is "no."
Post a Comment