This case goes back a couple of years-James Corbett, an atheist teacher, was sued by a christian student in his high school AP European History class for making disparaging remarks about religion, and christianity specifically. It has finally come to a close-




http://www.ocregister.com/news/corbett-313016-court-ruling.html?cb=1313811862&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20delicious%2Fgqlf%20%28Christian%20Headlines%20Top%20Headlines%29

I read some of the other articles linked. Fisrt of all, the teacher describes himself as a smorgasboard Catholic rather than an atheist.For the record there are plenty of people who believe in evolution who are not atheists. I agree that saying that creationism is nonsense is true, but in high school you do have to be careful how you say things.This is high school and these are kids. You can get your point across without mocking, if that is what the teacher did. I would be interested in reading all the complaints against him.That way it would be a lot easier t o see if he was out of line.Judging from some of his comments about the student and his parents, I would say tact isn't this guy's strong suite. Of course I have never been sued, but then I would probably not publically call a student a sulky little boy who didn't do homework and who has helicopter parents either. I guess I am saying that while suing him is probably over the top, he may well have brought some of it on himself.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2011 10:05PM by bona dea.

I remember how my high school biology teacher taught evolution. He taught it in a straightforward manner -- I think it was presented as a theory but we all knew that it was the best explanation that science could give us at the time. Then he told us that he was also required to present the "theory" of "creation science." We all knew from his tone and manner that he was only presenting this information because he was required to do so. He was respectful in his presentation, but we weren't stupid. He was able to teach us properly without upsetting any applecarts.

There were plenty of religious kids in my high school, of all sorts of different denominations and faiths. There were non-religious kids as well. But we all knew the difference between religion and science, and we liked to keep the two separate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQbPwdNgM1M Creation science is to science as dehydrated water is to moisture.

...a wise teacher will not piss off her parents, at least not *too* often. ;-)

We went into evolution briefly in world studies. I always told them that they were not required to believe or express belief, but they did need to know the information.If they chose to write a disclaimer at the end of the assignment or test, that was fine so long as they had the info right. I only had one student refuse to learn it on religious grounds. Her mother approved of this. I gave her an alternative assignment which she never turned in and she failed not only the unit on evolution but the whole term. Sounds like an excuse to me.There is a way to do it without getting people upset and a professional teacher doesn't publically call students and parents names either.

Touchy-feely society. Someone tell this student to harden up.

When the professor in an English class I was taking was lecturing about ancient Sumerian legends or something, but the theme was clear enough - rebirth in the spring after a death in winter.

The guy then said, rather sneeringly, "So see, all you good little Christians, your 'Easter' holiday wasn't the first of its kind."

I wasn't from an especially religious family, so I didn't have strong feelings one way or the other, but this guy's contempt for believers struck me as very rude. And this was back in the mid-60's.

I had a professor at the U who used to get in digs about religion whenever he could. He was probably my favorite teacher, but I could have done with out the editorializing on belief even though I wasn't religious.This was especially true since the remarks had little or nothing to do with what he was teaching. He taught Latin and Greek. He also taught mythology which was a little more appropriate for presenting his views, but he still was inappropriate at times in my view. Of course, this was at a university. It is different in high school.He wouldn't have gotten away with it there. He wasa great prof though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2011 10:02PM by bona dea.

going to the open house at the beginning of the school year for one of my kids.

In the science class, the young teacher was going over her material, and this Christian couple started interrogating her about evolution and what she would teach. She did her best to tell them that she follows the text as approved by the district and state, and that could adapt and oblige for their student, but these yo-yo's kept attacking her personally.

There were about 40 of us adults, standing room only, wanting to hear the teacher's presentation, but the entire time was consumed by this anti-evolution couple. Ah, what can you do.

FWIW... I wasn't impressed.

It is merely another "right to not be offended" frivolous
lawsuit.

Another Scopes trial

I found it surprising that Corbett Labelled himself as a smorgasbord Catholic. I've bean reading about this case for the last two years. The statements that got him hauled into court sounded like those of an atheist, or at least, a non-monotheist. One of his 22 statements was "when you put on your jesus glasses, you can't see the truth." Perhaps he was saying he was catholic the way other people say they are catholic simply because their parents are catholic and that's the way they were raised. He may have also said he was catholic in order to defuse accusations that he was "anti-christian".

I followed this case for quite a while, and maybe to some degree he brought this on himself by being too critical of religion, but he did notify the students prior to taking his class that he would say provocative things. From his blog:

< Chad Farnan, the boy who sued me, was an average student, who admitted under oath that he did not do the required reading for the class. If Chad's lawyers, the "Advocates for Faith and Freedom," and his parents were actually concerned with protecting the boy, why didn't they simply come to me and ask me to explain my comments? Neither they nor the Farmans ever expressed concerns to me nor to any administrators before they came to school with attorneys and reporters in tow to drop a lawsuit on the desk of Tom Ressler, our principal. Perhaps more importantly, the Farmans were aware long before Chad took my class that I go out of my way to be provocative. Every year in July, I send a letter home to students who have signed up for my class. Chad admitted under oath that he received that letter. The letter says, in part:

"Most days we will spend a few minutes (sometimes more) at the beginning of class discussing current events from either The Orange County Register or the L.A. Times. I may also use material from a variety of news Web sites. Discussion will be quite provocative, and focus on the 'lessons' of history. My goal is to have you go home with something that will provoke discussion with your parents. Students may offer any perspective without concern that anything they say will impact either my attitude toward them or their grades. I encourage a full range of views."

I included my home phone number and e-mail address in that letter and encouraged parents to contact me if they had any concerns. Chad admitted under oath that my lectures prompted many discussions with his parents. I might add, that in 20 years in the CUSD, I have never had a complaint filed against me, save this one.>

Its hard to sympathize with a kid who didn't have the guts to speak up in class, esp after he gets a letter telling him that he could do so without fear of recrimination.

I know a number of liberal Catholics and Protestants who might say very similar things. Many of them have little use for fundamentalists who insist the earth is 6000 years old and Adam and Eve were real people who had pet dinosaurs. Like I said, I think there is some blame on both sides . Unless a teacher is a glutton for punishment, he needs to try not to piss off the kids, the principal, the parents and the school board. Sounds like he pissed off some of them with needless inflamatory comments.You can teach evolution without getting people so angry they sue you. Many teachers do that every day. On the other hand, the kid needs to understand that, while he has a right to his beliefs, he does not have a right to have everyone coddle his sensitive feelings.Also the kid and his parents should have tried to work it out with the school and teacher before sueing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2011 10:44PM by bona dea.