• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FAU Student Claims He Was Suspended For Refusing To Step On Jesus

Yes off course that is the point..... Any educated person does know that is the point...

How the **** do you believe a culture becomes totalitarian?

Degrade Jesus, degrade your mother, your father, obey the state, obey the government, obey the collective authority...

so ... you don't understand the point of the exercise?
 
The one that happened in 1917 Russia after Czar Nichoals II was murdered and Lenin and his Red Army started killing innocent people, stealing their land and raping farmers in the name of Marxism.

Does that work for you?

so ... you REALLY don't understand the point of the exercise ......
 
where does it say he got booted for not stomping on Jesus?

Oh you mean after he went to administration and complained while the teacher was defended and the student in question was booted?
 
so ... you REALLY don't understand the point of the exercise ......

I absolutely do understand the point of the exercise, and don't necessarily disagree with it. The timing, of course, is "interesting." Poole had to have been aware of this too, also of course.
 
so ... you REALLY don't understand the point of the exercise ......

Why don't you tell me the point of the exercise???

Was it actual exercise?? - jumping up and down on a piece of paper that said "JESUS?".....

If the exercise had ZERO INTENT as you wish to claim than why didn't that puck fool "teacher" make the assignment of "jumping on something" (that you are told to hate) a subjective exercise?
 
Oh you mean after he went to administration and complained while the teacher was defended and the student in question was booted?

Look Nick ... this is getting REALLY REALLY tiring .... FFS go and READ what happened instead of filling in the blanks with what you IMAGINE happened!

Here's what is true about what took place in Poole's Intercultural Communication class on March 4:

The instructor's manual for the textbook, "Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach," advises teachers to have students write "Jesus" on a piece of paper and think about it.

"After a brief period of silence, instruct them to step on the paper," the manual says. "Most will hesitate. Ask why they can't step on the paper. Discuss the importance of symbols in culture."

The instructor's manual even includes this warning, though woefully understated in retrospect: "This exercise is a bit sensitive, but really drives home the point that even though symbols are arbitrary, they take on very strong and emotional meanings."


In other words, the point of this lesson was not to insult Christianity — the manual even anticipates most students won't step on the paper — but to compel students to understand the power of certain words and symbols.

Taking that a step further, because this is a course on intercultural communication, it's likely meant to provoke empathy from students when people of other cultures or faiths are offended.

Beth Kassab: Point missed on Jesus-stomping lesson at FAU - Orlando Sentinel

ALL you have done is prove that you have not got a clue about the point of the exercise.
 
Why don't you tell me the point of the exercise???

Was it actual exercise?? - jumping up and down on a piece of paper that said "JESUS?".....

If the exercise had ZERO INTENT as you wish to claim than why didn't that puck fool "teacher" make the assignment of "jumping on something" (that you are told to hate) a subjective exercise?

^^^^^
 
Thank you very much for posting this!

I haven't found much on what other students said, but there was some mention on another thread re what a former student said.

re the timing ... I am not sure what you mean there - it was several weeks ago, so probably not really related to easter.

Personally, I can see the value in the exercise ... would I use it?

No.

it would be less relevant in my context, as a relatively small number of students identify as Christian ... but even if this were not true, I wouldn't feel comfortable with this exercise. I believe that there are better ways of making this point than challenging students to do what they basically believe is desecrating something they feel is sacred, regardless of what faith they are.
 
If you love Jesus you won't stomp on "Jesus" if you love your dead mother you wouldn't stomp on her would you?

Is respect and loyalty that difficult to understand?

I suppose only in a political season.
 
Look Nick ... this is getting REALLY REALLY tiring .... FFS go and READ what happened instead of filling in the blanks with what you IMAGINE happened!



Beth Kassab: Point missed on Jesus-stomping lesson at FAU - Orlando Sentinel

ALL you have done is prove that you have not got a clue about the point of the exercise.


Yeah you go learn respect and loyalty to an individual (even if said individual is dead) ------- not to a political party or communist collectivist party but to someone you trust and love. then piss on their grave....

Because that is the only way I can comprehend such nonsense you're defending when jumping on "JESUS" is a logical lesson plan.

What the **** am I supposed to learn about that?

What the **** is the moral of that lesson?

Paper is bad or Jesus is bad? or maybe we need to deny our religion and subscribe to more secular ideas? like communism....
 
Yeah you go learn respect and loyalty to an individual (even if said individual is dead) ------- not to a political party or communist collectivist party but to someone you trust and love. then piss on their grave....

Because that is the only way I can comprehend such nonsense you're defending when jumping on "JESUS" is a logical lesson plan.

What the **** am I supposed to learn about that?

What the **** is the moral of that lesson?

Paper is bad or Jesus is bad? or maybe we need to deny our religion and subscribe to more secular ideas? like communism....

The point is that it's just a piece of paper with a name scribbled on it, so stomping on it should be no big deal. It's supposed to show how important symbols (such as Jesus' name or flags) are.
 
Yeah this isn't 1984 USA is it? Oh well I suppose it is in your opinion considering you believe it's OK for "teachers" to tell students to do whatever they want like in 1984 over the TV at 7am.

Yes, it is called class. It doesn't mean they can break the law, but they do have assignments. I would also add that during my time in school I found most assignments to be pointless and stupid, but I did not get to hide behind jesus when i cursed my teachers or if I were to have chosen to make threats on their life. I think it is nice this kid is religious just so he can get out of doing classwork and be a gigantic dick and be forgiven. I just don't use those excuses myself.
 
Yes, it is called class. It doesn't mean they can break the law, but they do have assignments. I would also add that during my time in school I found most assignments to be pointless and stupid, but I did not get to hide behind jesus when i cursed my teachers or if I were to have chosen to make threats on their life. I think it is nice this kid is religious just so he can get out of doing classwork and be a gigantic dick and be forgiven. I just don't use those excuses myself.

But students still have rights. The professor has no right to force someone to do something that would violate the tenets of their religious beliefs. Forcing students to step on the name of Jesus is offensive in the extreme. I understand the point of the exercise, but would submit that there are many other symbols that could have been chosen that don't involve the fundamental beliefs held by a large number of people.

As for the so-called 'intercultural communication' element here, what culture would do this? Christains certainly wouldn't. Buddhists wouldn't as they tend to respect all religions. Hundus wouldn't as they accept the addition of ANY god within their pantheon, including Jesus. Mainstream Muslims wouldn't as they regard Jesus as a prophet. Who would? Western athiestic anti-Christian types and neo-pagans.
 
But students still have rights. The professor has no right to force someone to do something that would violate the tenets of their religious beliefs. Forcing students to step on the name of Jesus is offensive in the extreme. I understand the point of the exercise, but would submit that there are many other symbols that could have been chosen that don't involve the fundamental beliefs held by a large number of people.

First problem with your statement. From what i understand of the assignment compliance with stepping on the paper was not a requirement. Also, I don't hear much about the student being forced to comply. What i do hear is that instead of just saying no he made threats and went on the attack against the instructor. Of course, the textbook, or whatever, that suggested the assignment should have warned about some student going way over the top in reaction to the assignment. Still, the only reason it seems there was any conflict was the student didn't just refuse to do it. The second problem with your statement, and also a problem with the assignment itself, is that the assignment was flawed as per it's intent. The assignment only works if you are a christian, and a rather devout one at that. the purpose is to step on a word that means something to you. If you are not a christian the assignment fails. Granted it is likely to effect most people in the class as america has a majority of christians, but still it should be modified per individual. However, the assignment being something that a person reacts to is the point of the assignment itself. So no it could not have been the same with a lesser term. The good part is the kids all got a nice lesson in how batcrap crazy some people get over something that doesn't mean much. It would also seem the teacher learned something also about how far some people will take their crazy.

This experiment may actually cause some people to act more respectfully. The effects do show that for some people a completely pointless gesture matters so if your point is not to offend you should be considerate of their opinions or else you could really send the wrong message. It is a lesson that seems to completely be lost on faux news who should be looking at how they attack things that mean something to others like stomping a piece of paper on the floor. Of course, if your position is one to offend then perhaps you learned a great lesson on how to piss people off. Despite the teacher and possibly the student suffering life long consequences for having this thing blown way out of proportion it is a great social lesson for us all.
As for the so-called 'intercultural communication' element here, what culture would do this? Christains certainly wouldn't.

You are referring to the christians who mock ramadan, piss on gay marriage and call it an abomination, hate on multiple religions, and make complete asses out of themselves by freaking out because their new pope touched a woman's foot? You mean those christians, right? because they certainly would do something lovely like burn a koran day at a local church. It is funny how they freak out over this, but yet when they do it to other religions they cannot see how they participate in the exact same thing they are complaining about.
Buddhists wouldn't as they tend to respect all religions. Hundus wouldn't as they accept the addition of ANY god within their pantheon, including Jesus. Mainstream Muslims wouldn't as they regard Jesus as a prophet. Who would? Western athiestic anti-Christian types and neo-pagans.

No, they all have their extremists. Right here you even join in with blaming those you don't like despite the reality you know that christians often disrespect other religions, and that other religions do the same thing. Perhaps this lesson is more needed in the world's faith than anywhere else. because nowhere else is something so meaningless sanctified to such a level as to get this much reaction.
 
First problem with your statement. From what i understand of the assignment compliance with stepping on the paper was not a requirement. Also, I don't hear much about the student being forced to comply.

Just asking a student to do this is way over the line. I would say the same if a professor asked students to step on the name of Mohammed, and he was merely a prophet, or any other symbol that is held holy by a religious faith.

What i do hear is that instead of just saying no he made threats and went on the attack against the instructor.

That is what the professor and what the school said in the beginning. Is this what really happened? It seems you may be as guilty as believing one side of the story as any else is.

Of course, the textbook, or whatever, that suggested the assignment should have warned about some student going way over the top in reaction to the assignment. Still, the only reason it seems there was any conflict was the student didn't just refuse to do it.

Were I in the class, I also would have been very vocal as it was way over the line. It is completely unacceptable.

The second problem with your statement, and also a problem with the assignment itself, is that the assignment was flawed as per it's intent. The assignment only works if you are a christian, and a rather devout one at that. the purpose is to step on a word that means something to you.

The assignment is flawed on many levels. On this, I agree with you.

If you are not a christian the assignment fails.

Or a Muslim who respects Jesus as a prophet, or any sane person who has respect for religion. Were anyone to ask me to step on a paper with the name of Budda, I would also refuse and bring up the inappropriateness with the professor.

Granted it is likely to effect most people in the class as america has a majority of christians, but still it should be modified per individual. However, the assignment being something that a person reacts to is the point of the assignment itself. So no it could not have been the same with a lesser term. The good part is the kids all got a nice lesson in how batcrap crazy some people get over something that doesn't mean much. It would also seem the teacher learned something also about how far some people will take their crazy.

The only batcrap crazy here is the liberal Democrat professor who asked students to do such a thing.

This experiment may actually cause some people to act more respectfully. The effects do show that for some people a completely pointless gesture matters so if your point is not to offend you should be considerate of their opinions or else you could really send the wrong message.

Something tells me that this is a lesson that will be completely lost on the 'instructor' of the class.

It is a lesson that seems to completely be lost on faux news who should be looking at how they attack things that mean something to others like stomping a piece of paper on the floor. Of course, if your position is one to offend then perhaps you learned a great lesson on how to piss people off. Despite the teacher and possibly the student suffering life long consequences for having this thing blown way out of proportion it is a great social lesson for us all.

Perhaps the prof isn't the only who needs lessons in respect. I think the student will be fine. The instructor should never again be allowed in the halls of an instutition of higher learning as a teacher.

You are referring to the christians who mock ramadan, piss on gay marriage and call it an abomination, hate on multiple religions, and make complete asses out of themselves by freaking out because their new pope touched a woman's foot? You mean those christians, right? because they certainly would do something lovely like burn a koran day at a local church. It is funny how they freak out over this, but yet when they do it to other religions they cannot see how they participate in the exact same thing they are complaining about.

Most Christians I know do NOT mock Ramadan. I certainly don't. Most Christians I know don't hate on other religions. I certainly don't. And the Catholics who were not pleased (not freaking out, don't get melodramatic) are in a small minority. This Catholic wasn't offended and I have actually participated in the foot washing ceremony before with women in the group of twelve. And that lunatic who burned the Qur'an was a fringe minority as well. You like to pick on the fringe minority while ignoring the fact that the vast majority of Christians are kind, hardworking, forgiving and tolerant people.

As for gay marriage, that is a completely different issue entirely, but that is not a discussion for this thread.


No, they all have their extremists. Right here you even join in with blaming those you don't like despite the reality you know that christians often disrespect other religions, and that other religions do the same thing. Perhaps this lesson is more needed in the world's faith than anywhere else. because nowhere else is something so meaningless sanctified to such a level as to get this much reaction.[/QUOTE]
 
Yeah you go learn respect and loyalty to an individual (even if said individual is dead) ------- not to a political party or communist collectivist party but to someone you trust and love. then piss on their grave....

Because that is the only way I can comprehend such nonsense you're defending when jumping on "JESUS" is a logical lesson plan.

What the **** am I supposed to learn about that?

What the **** is the moral of that lesson?

Paper is bad or Jesus is bad? or maybe we need to deny our religion and subscribe to more secular ideas? like communism....

If you look at the exercise, there is an expectation that most students WILL NOT FOLLOW THROUGH with stomping on the word, and the purpose is to discuss why people would react the way they did.

what do you think of people who deliberately offend Muslims by desecrating THEIR sacred symbols/words etc?

do you understand why they might be offended?

that is the obvious example, but in all honesty there are many others.


I am not sure with why you believe that understanding of this should be limited to secularists and communists. I know several ministers of religion who have the capacity to understand this.
 
But students still have rights. The professor has no right to force someone to do something that would violate the tenets of their religious beliefs. Forcing students to step on the name of Jesus is offensive in the extreme. I understand the point of the exercise, but would submit that there are many other symbols that could have been chosen that don't involve the fundamental beliefs held by a large number of people.

where is the evidence that anyone was forced?

As for the so-called 'intercultural communication' element here, what culture would do this? Christains certainly wouldn't. Buddhists wouldn't as they tend to respect all religions. Hundus wouldn't as they accept the addition of ANY god within their pantheon, including Jesus. Mainstream Muslims wouldn't as they regard Jesus as a prophet. Who would? Western athiestic anti-Christian types and neo-pagans.

do you think terry jones was a Christian?

Florida pastor Terry Jones burns copies of Koran outside church - NY Daily News
 
where is the evidence that anyone was forced?

Teachers are authority figures in a classroom. Some people, including many Mormons, still believe that they should be respected and remember, they have the power of the grade.


Was that the name of 'Jesus'? You obviously didn't read my post very closely. You also obviously didn't read my reply to another post in which this was already brought up.
 
First problem with your statement. From what i understand of the assignment compliance with stepping on the paper was not a requirement. Also, I don't hear much about the student being forced to comply. What i do hear is that instead of just saying no he made threats and went on the attack against the instructor. Of course, the textbook, or whatever, that suggested the assignment should have warned about some student going way over the top in reaction to the assignment. Still, the only reason it seems there was any conflict was the student didn't just refuse to do it. The second problem with your statement, and also a problem with the assignment itself, is that the assignment was flawed as per it's intent. The assignment only works if you are a christian, and a rather devout one at that. the purpose is to step on a word that means something to you. If you are not a christian the assignment fails. Granted it is likely to effect most people in the class as america has a majority of christians, but still it should be modified per individual. However, the assignment being something that a person reacts to is the point of the assignment itself. So no it could not have been the same with a lesser term. The good part is the kids all got a nice lesson in how batcrap crazy some people get over something that doesn't mean much. It would also seem the teacher learned something also about how far some people will take their crazy.

This experiment may actually cause some people to act more respectfully. The effects do show that for some people a completely pointless gesture matters so if your point is not to offend you should be considerate of their opinions or else you could really send the wrong message. It is a lesson that seems to completely be lost on faux news who should be looking at how they attack things that mean something to others like stomping a piece of paper on the floor. Of course, if your position is one to offend then perhaps you learned a great lesson on how to piss people off. Despite the teacher and possibly the student suffering life long consequences for having this thing blown way out of proportion it is a great social lesson for us all.


You are referring to the christians who mock ramadan, piss on gay marriage and call it an abomination, hate on multiple religions, and make complete asses out of themselves by freaking out because their new pope touched a woman's foot? You mean those christians, right? because they certainly would do something lovely like burn a koran day at a local church. It is funny how they freak out over this, but yet when they do it to other religions they cannot see how they participate in the exact same thing they are complaining about.


No, they all have their extremists. Right here you even join in with blaming those you don't like despite the reality you know that christians often disrespect other religions, and that other religions do the same thing. Perhaps this lesson is more needed in the world's faith than anywhere else. because nowhere else is something so meaningless sanctified to such a level as to get this much reaction.


Christ is not meaningless to many of us. It wasn't stomping a piece of paper. This is what you are not getting.
You rightly call out that the lesson was really poorly designed, and I applaud you for this bit of honesty.
But what you gloss over is the fact that Christ and Christians are regularly stomped on by those in academia and often in the media as well.
This students reaction wasn't over the top. It was simply an accumulated outrage at the constant assault on his faith.
Had the lesson instructed students to write something they hold sacred or in great respect and then step on it, the lesson may have worked, as you indicate. As it is, it specifically said write "Jesus" on the paper. This shows the serious prejudice oft displayed in our places of learning against the Christian faith.

You may paint "Christan's" as intolerant, and certainly there are some, but this isn't Christ. I've gone to many churches over the years, and never have I heard from the pulpit any direction or desire to stomp on other faiths, nor sinners.
I remember after 9/11 some Muslims came to our church, a very large church made up of primarily white middle class folks. They wanted to show their empathy with the Christians after such a horrendous attack. The pastor made a point of introducing them as such, and the response was an immediate and unrehearsed standing ovation for their courage and empathy. Those are the Christians I know.

Your rant is about how stupid the person was, and how meaningless the "paper" was, and "get over yourselves."
You have failed the lesson.
 
Just asking a student to do this is way over the line. I would say the same if a professor asked students to step on the name of Mohammed, and he was merely a prophet, or any other symbol that is held holy by a religious faith.

There are two lessons here. one is to show that some people take those symbols to a higher level than other students, and the other is to show that stepping on a piece of paper is not the same as renouncing your religion. In a course about communications between people of all different sorts the assignment does focus on one of the sticky points of communicating. if it were done in something like science class i would agree with you that the purpose was completely offensive, but the purpose of the class should be to explore human communication, and this is a part of it.

Long before the church's koran burning days, i had some fun with people online by burning bibles in their name. before you get into it, for the dollar i spent on the copies of the bible it was well worth the reaction. I burned mass produced books that cost a dollar and people freaked out like i had torched jesus himself. It is just a book to me, and to make me feel it is some sort of protected thing is ridiculous. i did not burn anyone's private keepsake religious memento. I certainly could never censor or destroy such a widely distributed work from society by burning a couple of dollar store copies. No, it was purely to show that people took things way too seriously, and they most certainly helped me with that lesson. A couple of years later those same people who sent me death threats were cheering the burning of the koran by churches. hell, some of them may even have burned a koran themselves. You really do not understand the paper contains no power unless you give it to the paper. It is just ink and some plants. It is the words that should matter over the symbol and even you cannot see that.


That is what the professor and what the school said in the beginning. Is this what really happened? It seems you may be as guilty as believing one side of the story as any else is.

I am pretty sure you don't get expelled for not doing an assignment. I did not do plenty of assignments in college, and I never got expelled for it. I may have gotten a failing grade because they were not optional assignments like this was, but I never had a teacher toss me out of school just for not doing the assignment. Certainly there would be no one left in class if that were the way the teacher handled things regularly. No, this kid went overboard in his opposition and that is why he was treated differently. had the teacher tossed everyone who didn't do assignments for him he would be a huge problem for the school and they would have already had actions against him. there is a reason this student is different, and that was his overreaction.


Were I in the class, I also would have been very vocal as it was way over the line. It is completely unacceptable.

According to everything in the assignment and that was said compliance with the act was not a requirement for the assignment. It was to create discussion and recognize the effects of such an action. Insisting on not stepping on the paper and even being offended by the action were part of the lesson. making threats against a teacher was not reasonable, though I would have expected it if i were the teacher.


The assignment is flawed on many levels. On this, I agree with you.



Or a Muslim who respects Jesus as a prophet, or any sane person who has respect for religion. Were anyone to ask me to step on a paper with the name of Budda, I would also refuse and bring up the inappropriateness with the professor.

there is respect for religion, but you are expecting people to follow your beliefs. For example it is against the rules of islam to draw pictures of the prophet muhammed. Some people take that quite seriously, but they also wish to enforce that religious law onto people who have no faith in Islam. Why should I have to obey the religious laws of something i do not even believe in? Your argument is the one used against the happiness of homosexuals. Many christians feel gays should just accept they are not allowed the benefits of marriage, and the happiness of such a thing to respect a religion that has no respect for them. If you wish to abide by the rules of a religion that is your choice, and not one you can impose on others.

As for the buddha thing I do believe his anti-pride stance would have certainly made him reject the idea that a piece of paper holds some divinity. Not to mention ignoring the wisdom of such an assignment and the realities it teaches you of the world because of said sanctified pretext over a piece of paper is probably not a part of his teachings either. What you are referring to is the basic tenant of materialism. That worthless piece of paper becomes important and valuable to you, and because of that you cause problems for yourself and others. Not very mindful if you ask me.


The only batcrap crazy here is the liberal Democrat professor who asked students to do such a thing.

yeah, seeking to destroy a man's career and livelihood, along with making a national issue complete with death threats over a piece of paper and some ink is pretty damned insane.


Something tells me that this is a lesson that will be completely lost on the 'instructor' of the class.

I am pretty sure he is acutely aware of the problems it has caused. After all he may never be able to return to his job because of the violent threats against him, and no other university is going to hire a problem employee that got national attention over such a silly issue. Yes, he has to live that life now. I am pretty sure he is well aware of it.
Perhaps the prof isn't the only who needs lessons in respect. I think the student will be fine. The instructor should never again be allowed in the halls of an instutition of higher learning as a teacher.

It was a piece of paper, and that is this guys life. not very mindful of you.

Most Christians I know do NOT mock Ramadan.

You should visit america sometime.
I certainly don't. Most Christians I know don't hate on other religions.

You should really visit america sometime.
I certainly don't. And the Catholics who were not pleased (not freaking out, don't get melodramatic) are in a small minority. This Catholic wasn't offended and I have actually participated in the foot washing ceremony before with women in the group of twelve.

You are not the pope, so you don't matter. hasn't it ever struck you as a tad odd that a religion based around humility and care for the poor would have a religious head that has more pomp than brittany Spears? One of the biggest complaints about the new pope is he isn't being an icon like the last one. Christians want the golden idol. When the highest person in their religion got beneath the feet of a woman it scared the hell out of them. that is a problem.
And that lunatic who burned the Qur'an was a fringe minority as well. You like to pick on the fringe minority while ignoring the fact that the vast majority of Christians are kind, hardworking, forgiving and tolerant people.

The vast majority of christians watch while their leaders do these things, and never object or stop giving to encourage those actions. Those people are part of christianity and it's effects on the world. They like to sweep that part under the carpet and pretend those people don't count, but they do the will of the church because the church will never oppose them. There is one thing i respected about scientology. They will go after anyone who uses their material. granted it is greed oriented, but we all know that is scientology because they make sure to try and destroy anyone who acts in their name without permission. The christian church tends to let those groups go out and act in their name and then condemns them from afar without ever doing anything to stop them. It is like those kids in Ohio who stood around filming and taking pictures as their friends raped and tortured a girl mentally for a few days. Yeah, they did not do the physical act, but they still filmed it and were silent about it. They still let it happen right in front of them without doing anything. If that counts for doing something to you, then that is great for you, but I won't respect silence as actually doing anything to stop an act they supposedly think is wrong. In this case their lack of actions speaks far more about their true intent than their occasional wagging finger and a wink.
As for gay marriage, that is a completely different issue entirely, but that is not a discussion for this thread.

Actually it is related to the message of the lesson. gay marriage means little to nothing to christians because they don't regard it as real. Sort of like how an atheist is not going to have much trouble stepping on a piece of paper with jesus written on it. You seem to find that piece of paper to take on a sanctified value and want others to respect your opinion about what is essentially garbage to most people. I am telling you that christians disrespect other's beliefs and happiness like in the case of this teacher. you want the teacher to be held accountable for not recognizing the value of a piece of paper while you try to ignore christians who don't recognize the commitment of love and marriage for homosexuals which as an institution they claim to hold dear and sanctified. They are related, and you keep on ignoring the lesson. not very mindful of you.
 
Teachers are authority figures in a classroom. Some people, including many Mormons, still believe that they should be respected and remember, they have the power of the grade.
So you are saying the "force" is determined by the individual's understanding of the teacher's authority?


Was that the name of 'Jesus'? You obviously didn't read my post very closely. You also obviously didn't read my reply to another post in which this was already brought up.

Do you think the Koran is a symbol related to the fundamental beliefs held by a large number of people?

Is there a difference in asking people to desecrate their own sacred symbol (when they have a choice not to) and desecrating the symbols of someone else?
 
When I was adopting kids, I attended a series of parenting classes. In one session we had to take 5 index cards and write on each of them five of the most important things to us in our lives. After doing so, the woman teaching the class had us choose one, crumple it up and throw it in the trash can as she walked around the room. She did this for each of the cards until it got to the last one....the card that listed the MOST important thing in our lives. Many of us had GOD on the card. It was very difficult for many to crumple it up and throw it away...it was very powerful and brought tears to almost everybody in the room. It was an incredible lesson however to understand the lives of these children who's lives have been destroyed and they have lost everything. Once you get over the idea that you are not "crumpling up and throwing GOD away" and accept the value of the lesson being taught, you can understand how this lesson would not have had the same effect if the images had not been so powerful.
 
Yeah you go learn respect and loyalty to an individual (even if said individual is dead) ------- not to a political party or communist collectivist party but to someone you trust and love. then piss on their grave....

Because that is the only way I can comprehend such nonsense you're defending when jumping on "JESUS" is a logical lesson plan.

What the **** am I supposed to learn about that?

What the **** is the moral of that lesson?

Paper is bad or Jesus is bad? or maybe we need to deny our religion and subscribe to more secular ideas? like communism....

Im pretty sure he never had to step on the paper dude. Im pretty sure he got expelled for all the other **** in his record. Expelling him because he wouldnt step on jesus just doesnt make any sense at all.
 
Christ is not meaningless to many of us. It wasn't stomping a piece of paper. This is what you are not getting.

You want me to get that you sanctify a peice of garbage by writing the word jesus on it, and yes i don't get it. It is still garbage. I understand some people take it seriously, but it is a piece of paper, and not an excuse to make death threats, destroy someone's life, or to act like an imbecile.

You rightly call out that the lesson was really poorly designed, and I applaud you for this bit of honesty.

yeah, you didn't understand what i said because if you did you would realize i thought it fit for devout christians and no one else. To get the lesson the non-christians should have had to stomp on something they cared about. Of course, without the sanctity of faith it would be hard to make garbage hard to step on. But yes i do agree the assignment had value to the christians who would be offended at the action.
But what you gloss over is the fact that Christ and Christians are regularly stomped on by those in academia and often in the media as well.

Do you need some help nailing yourself to that imaginary cross?
This students reaction wasn't over the top. It was simply an accumulated outrage at the constant assault on his faith.

Says the guy who thinks you can sanctify garbage with a few letters and a sharpie. I have a question, if someone carved jesus into a turd would you have problems flushing it? Or would you put it up on your mantle next to your cross?

Had the lesson instructed students to write something they hold sacred or in great respect and then step on it, the lesson may have worked, as you indicate. As it is, it specifically said write "Jesus" on the paper. This shows the serious prejudice oft displayed in our places of learning against the Christian faith.

No, it showed the lazy of the teacher and writer of the assignment. It should have been personalized, but instead the assignment chose the most common sanctified attribute of american society. But still, even that has it's value as one should have learned it was different for every student, and not everyone sanctifies garbage once jesus is written on it.

You may paint "Christan's" as intolerant, and certainly there are some, but this isn't Christ. I've gone to many churches over the years, and never have I heard from the pulpit any direction or desire to stomp on other faiths, nor sinners.
I remember after 9/11 some Muslims came to our church, a very large church made up of primarily white middle class folks. They wanted to show their empathy with the Christians after such a horrendous attack. The pastor made a point of introducing them as such, and the response was an immediate and unrehearsed standing ovation for their courage and empathy. Those are the Christians I know.

That is nice, and it is uncommon. Most christians are there because god is a great back up for bossy. Sorry, but one example almost 12 years ago is pretty sad considering that every day they do nasty things in the name of jesus. Maybe if all the supposed good christians started actually talking to their prejudiced brothers and sisters about the unconditional love of jesus and that they simply are not getting it right things might change. instead you just silently ignore it when it happens and throw up some meaningless moment that is supposed to make up for allt he crap dumped in every american community every single day by christians in the name of jesus. Do you really think jesus himself would ask for the destruction of some guy's life over a piece of paper with his name on it? The guy allowed himself to be tortured and nailed to a cross and supposedly forgave the people who did it. I am pretty sure he would be more forgiving to the teacher than most of his followers are.
Your rant is about how stupid the person was, and how meaningless the "paper" was, and "get over yourselves."
You have failed the lesson.

Well, I can accept failure. i do hope that you are right about things and someday you will be in front of jesus explaining how you hate someone over a piece of paper when he died on the cross while forgiving his attackers as an ultimate example to you. that will be amusing when you make jesus cry over your failure to learn.
 
Back
Top Bottom