• 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!

Judges rule for teacher who called creationism "superstitious nonsense"

Should public school teachers be able to call creationism "superstitious nonsense"?

  • Yes; they have freedom of speech and academic freedom

    Votes: 27 54.0%

  • No; this amounts to the state picking sides on a religious matter

    Votes: 12 24.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 11 22.0%
  • Total voters
    50
SouthernDemocrat said:
Technically, its not an issue for the government to involve itself in. The teacher has a right to freedom of expression. However, while that right of freedom of expression means that this is not an issue for the courts, that constitutional right does not mean that the school distinct could not fire the teacher because of his or her statements.

Similarly, if a news anchor makes an overtly racist statement in a broadcast, the courts would have no business getting involved as the news anchor has freedom of expression. However, his or her employer could fire them for making such a statement.
Click to expand...

I just can't help but wonder what the outcome would've been if the teacher was being sued for making a racist statement, or a derogatory statement against some tenet of the muslim faith or a derogatory remark about homosexuality.
 
OP reminded me of great DS9 Quote.

Weyoun: All this talk of god strikes me as nothing more then superstitious nonsense
Damar: You believe that the founders are gods don't you?
Weyoun: Thats different
Damar: In what way?
Weyoun: The Founders are gods...
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Technically, its not an issue for the government to involve itself in. The teacher has a right to freedom of expression. However, while that right of freedom of expression means that this is not an issue for the courts, that constitutional right does not mean that the school distinct could not fire the teacher because of his or her statements.

Similarly, if a news anchor makes an overtly racist statement in a broadcast, the courts would have no business getting involved as the news anchor has freedom of expression. However, his or her employer could fire them for making such a statement.
Click to expand...

Slight difference there: the anchor works for a private company. A schoolteacher is a government employee. As a governmental employee, they should not take sides on the issue of religion, while acting in that role.
 
OscarB63 said:
I just can't help but wonder what the outcome would've been if the teacher was being sued for making a racist statement
Click to expand...

Nothing in the constitution says the government cannot make racist comments to the best of my knowledge, so a lawsuit on the same grounds could not happen.

or a derogatory statement against some tenet of the muslim faith
Click to expand...

Exact same outcome as this case.

or a derogatory remark about homosexuality.
Click to expand...

Again, there is no separation of sexuality and state stated or implied in the constitution, so any suit would have to be on different grounds.

Any more dumb questions?
 
Redress said:
Slight difference there: the anchor works for a private company. A schoolteacher is a government employee. As a governmental employee, they should not take sides on the issue of religion, while acting in that role.
Click to expand...
\

Ok, so lets say if a park ranger makes a controversial statement. Should the courts get involved, or should his superiors fire him for it if they see fit to do so? Freedom of speech means you are free to express yourself how you want to (other than something like yelling fire in theater) without fear of reprisal by the government. It does not mean that your employer, public or private, cannot fire you for it.
 
OscarB63 said:
I just can't help but wonder what the outcome would've been if the teacher was being sued for making a racist statement, or a derogatory statement against some tenet of the muslim faith or a derogatory remark about homosexuality.
Click to expand...

The school probably would have fired the teacher. Your problem should not be with the courts for refusing to restrict the teacher's freedom of expression, it should be with the school for not firing the teacher when that teacher made such an offensive statement to their students.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
\

Ok, so lets say if a park ranger makes a controversial statement. Should the courts get involved, or should his superiors fire him for it if they see fit to do so? Freedom of speech means you are free to express yourself how you want to (other than something like yelling fire in theater) without fear of reprisal by the government. It does not mean that your employer, public or private, cannot fire you for it.
Click to expand...

Depends on the controversial statement. if the park ranger where to say state that people had to give up the right to free speech to enter the park, a constitutional case could probably be made. Freedom of speech does not mean government employees can take sides on religion.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The school probably would have fired the teacher. Your problem should not be with the courts for refusing to restrict the teacher's freedom of expression, it should be with the school for not firing the teacher when that teacher made such an offensive statement to their students.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with the school or the court. I just wish one of my kids had been in that class. probably would've got sent home for calling the teacher a douchebag
 
RiverDad said:
Some people believe that diversity is good. Should that be taught in school? Oh wait, this myth is being taught in schools. Hmm. Bad example.

Some people believe that competition between students is a bad thing. Should schools stress cooperative learning? Oh wait, this is what is happening.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is "If I don't think it's good, then the schools shouldn't teach it." Fair opinion, most of us probably have some variation on the same thing. Including those who don't want Creationism taught in biology class. While there's no need to insult religion, they can't do both. They can't teach Creationism, and not teach it at the same time. They either do or don't.

Diversity? Living with people different from you is an important skill. In my kids' school, in my workplace, and in my neighborhood, it's necessary.

Sometimes cooperation is called for, and sometimes competition is called for. I'd agree that the lack of competition has largely gone too far -- sports, for example are meant to be competitive.
 
Tucker Case said:
I taught my nephew to call me uncle Pimp-nipples. does that count as teaching him things?
Click to expand...

oh hell yeah. all my nieces and nephews call me "uncle monkey"
 
Just1Voice said:
Sure it will. In fact it will give you several answers, but it will not provide you with the critical thinking skills to sort through those answers and have a peaceful discussion about them.

If schools insist on avoiding this topic, I predict that there will be negative consequences. Perhaps not fights, but for instance, let's say a child does their own research and comes to a conclusion that their parents or religious communities disapprove of. Now the child has two choices... stop asking questions, or be ostracized (this one has happened to people I know personally, and has led to a number of kids growing up to hate the their religious communities and become estranged from their families).
Click to expand...

Life is full of being ostracized. They're just teaching them about life.
 
Just1Voice said:
You need to read more carefully. You have pushed the parameters of what I said in order to make it appear ridiculous. Is this really the kind of tactic a moderator should be using?
Click to expand...

Really she didn't push the parameters at all and actually I think it is a mods place to call out asinine posts...:shrug:
 
Tucker Case said:
My sister in law's nickname is "christ" because her first name is cristina, so I'm planning on teaching my son to call her "auntie-christ"
Click to expand...


Ooooops Dude! You may have just earned yourself an infraction for mocking Crisco or the heads of any religious factions in the world. Plus, you are supposed to post this in the religious section,....that is another infraction, and you can be banned from this thread and given a week off to think about how silly the rules are here. LMAO!! You might also have a broken tail light, but I am sure they will let you know.:lamo
 
shintao said:
Ooooops Dude! You may have just earned yourself an infraction for mocking Crisco or the heads of any religious factions in the world. Plus, you are supposed to post this in the religious section,....that is another infraction, and you can be banned from this thread and given a week off to think about how silly the rules are here. LMAO!! You might also have a broken tail light, but I am sure they will let you know.:lamo
Click to expand...

The rules here aren't very difficult to understand, IMO. I know for a fact that comment won't get an infraction.
 
OscarB63 said:
and yet nothing you linked had a definition for "scientifcally proven". lots of talk about supported by evidence though.
Click to expand...

You did not ask. I admit that I failed to predict that you would continue your absurd requests. Since all you seem to have is requests for information, I will suggest you Google it and let us know when you've digested this info
 
Redress said:
That is absolutely inappropriate since in the setting of a science class, there is no competing theory, no other side to the coin. There is evolution, period. Religion does not belong in a science class.
Click to expand...

It is also untrue. As far as I know, every school board that has managed to get creatinism added to the science curriculum has had that reversed after the community protested. Often after the community elected a new school board
 
sangha said:
You did not ask. I admit that I failed to predict that you would continue your absurd requests. Since all you seem to have is requests for information, I will suggest you Google it and let us know when you've digested this info
Click to expand...
weak sauce

If you present the assertion, it's on you to support it. JFGI isn't actually a response.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
weak sauce

If you present the assertion, it's on you to support it. JFGI isn't actually a response.
Click to expand...

Constantly asking for definitions is not discussion or debate. And asking for a definition is not the same as asking for support for an assertion.
 
sangha said:
Constantly asking for definitions is not discussion or debate. And asking for a definition is not the same as asking for support for an assertion.
Click to expand...
If you don't provide a definition for the word as you used it then you need to be happy w/ w/e someone else's definition is. A lot can hinge on definitions I have found.
 
Tucker Case said:
The rules here aren't very difficult to understand, IMO. I know for a fact that comment won't get an infraction.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Ah, but someone ELSE'S comment did earn one.

It is not allowed to comment on moderation publicly.
 
sangha said:
I am not here to endlessly Google for you or Oscar.
Click to expand...

If you cannot bother to back up your arguments, how do you expect people to take your arguments seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom