Student wins lawsuit regarding creationism in school

[5thIDSoldier]

I thought this was a very iinteresting article. Teachers can no longer just slam creationism.


SANTA ANA, Calif. — A federal judge ruled that a public high school history teacher violated the First Amendment when he called creationism "superstitious nonsense" during a classroom lecture.
U.S. District Judge James Selna issued the ruling Friday after a 16-month legal battle between student Chad Farnan and his former teacher, James Corbett.
Farnan sued in U.S. District Court in 2007, alleging that Corbett violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment by making repeated comments in class that were hostile to Christian beliefs.
The lawsuit cited more than 20 statements made by Corbett during one day of class, all of which were recorded by Farnan, to support allegations of a broader teaching method that "favors irreligion over religion" and made Christian students feel uncomfortable.

[Koushi Shinigami]

So, from now on, creatonism will no longer even be mentioned as existing.

Exxxxxcellent.
http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo240/koushishinigami/mr_burns.jpg

[Marleysdaddy]

1) Can you give us the link so we can read the rest of the article?

2) It sounds like the lawsuit wasn't about Creationism specifically, but rather the ridiculous statements made by the teacher

3) Why didn't you just post this in GI where it will eventually live?

[noelle12]

When I was in 9th grade (many many years ago) my Earth Science made some comments mocking LDS beliefs. I am LDS, but he didn't know it. After class I approached him and told him that I am LDS, and that I found his comments to be inappropriate. He was embarrassed and apologized. I appreciated that.

[WorldWatcher]

>


Good, as an advocate religion being a personal responsibility. Given the few facts stated in the OP (without a link) I applaud the Judge.

Just as religion should not be injected into the science classroom, a teacher (acting as an agent of the government in the performance of official duties) should not be slamming the religion of others because the occupy a position of authority.


Teach the material and keep your religious views out of the classroom.



>>>>

[captusa]

>


Good, as an advocate religion being a personal responsibility. Given the few facts stated in the OP (without a link) I applaud the Judge.

Just as religion should not be injected into the science classroom, a teacher (acting as an agent of the government in the performance of official duties) should not be slamming the religion of others because the occupy a position of authority.


Teach the material and keep your religious views out of the classroom.



>>>>

Amen!!
To a classroom teacher Creationism is something that some people believe.
Stating the fact that Creationism is "superstitious nonsense" is a clear violation.
The fact that creationism has been ruled to be a religious belief means belittling that belief is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment.

[Koushi Shinigami]

Amen!!
To a classroom teacher Creationism is something that some people believe.
Stating the fact that Creationism is "superstitious nonsense" is a clear violation.
The fact that creationism has been ruled to be a religious belief means belittling that belief is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment.

Does the fact that our almighty courts have ruled creationism a religous belief mean that it has no place in a science class? :think:

[captusa]

When I was in 9th grade (many many years ago) my Earth Science made some comments mocking LDS beliefs. I am LDS, but he didn't know it. After class I approached him and told him that I am LDS, and that I found his comments to be inappropriate. He was embarrassed and apologized. I appreciated that.

My 7th and 8th grade Social Studies teacher was a NAZI.
She glamorized Hitler.
Taught that the Moors were something other than Negroes since Negroes do not have the ability to construct something like Alhambra.
Jesus was not a Jew and a great deal of blatant racism.

She also scared the Heck out of me and she was not one that one would contradict.

[captusa]

Does the fact that our almighty courts have ruled creationism a religous belief mean that it has no place in a science class? :think:

That's what the court ruled and also ruled that Intelligent Design could not be tasught in science class since it was Creationism renamed.

The finding of the discussion of the wedge strategy was damning evidence.
WW has all the cases.

[WorldWatcher]

Does the fact that our almighty courts have ruled creationism a religous belief mean that it has no place in a science class? :think:


Pretty much, unless a scientific basis can be discovered.


See Edwards v. Aguillard and Kitzmiller v. Dover.


Aquillard is a SCOTUS ruling and sets national precedence.

Dover of course only establishes precedence for the District of Middle Pennsylvania, but it was the first true legal test of "Intelligent Design" in the courtroom and showed how "modern" Intelligent Design (as espoused by the Discovery Institute) was in fact a political front for creationists trying to circumvent Aguillard.


>>>>

[5thIDSoldier]

Link

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518864,00.html

[5thIDSoldier]

Teachers cant say just whatever they want to say in order to be demeaning to someone's religion.

[Marleysdaddy]

Teachers cant say just whatever they want to say in order to be demeaning to someone's religion.

I agree...All the teacher should have said was, "We won't be discussing religious stories in science class..."

[Conservatismfirst]

My 7th and 8th grade Social Studies teacher was a NAZI.
She glamorized Hitler.
Taught that the Moors were something other than Negroes since Negroes do not have the ability to construct something like Alhambra.
Jesus was not a Jew and a great deal of blatant racism.

She also scared the Heck out of me and she was not one that one would contradict.


where is she now? :think:

[5thIDSoldier]

I agree...All the teacher should have said was, "We won't be discussing religious stories in science class..."

Or, "we wont be discussing the fable of Darwinism either"

[TaylorW65]

Or, "we wont be discussing the fable of Darwinism either"

Darwins theories are scientific hypotheses.

Creationism is religious philosophy.

[Marleysdaddy]

Or, "we wont be discussing the fable of Darwinism either"

If he said that

1) he'd be dishonest (science doesn't deal with fables)
2) he'd be outdated (we don't teach 'Darwinism' anymore)
3) he'd be temporarily out of a job (because in the section of Biology class where the diversity of life is explained, there would be a blank...currently, evolutionary theory is the only scientific theory which addresses that subject)

[LoneStarHero]

I have no objection to the results of the lawsuit, assuming I'm not missing anything :)

There is no reason for a history teacher to slam a religious belief.

[LoneStarHero]

When I was in 9th grade (many many years ago) my Earth Science made some comments mocking LDS beliefs. I am LDS, but he didn't know it. After class I approached him and told him that I am LDS, and that I found his comments to be inappropriate. He was embarrassed and apologized. I appreciated that.

Are you telling me there didn't have to be lawyers involved or even a hierarchy?

No way did conflict resolution only involved the two people in the initial conflict!

[noelle12]

Are you telling me there didn't have to be lawyers involved or even a hierarchy?

No way did conflict resolution only involved the two people in the initial conflict!

I know. Crazy, right?

[I am the Eggman]

I thought this was a very iinteresting article. Teachers can no longer just slam creationism.

Misleading headline of the week material.

[captusa]

where is she now? :think:

She was relatively old in 1953.
I assume she is with Der Furer in one way or another.

[biggles53]

This is a non-issue.

Agreed, the teacher violated the Constitutional amendments by making such a statement, and as an agent of the government, he had no right to do so.

Agreed, the teaching of creationism has no place in a history or science class.

Next.............

[coyote1880]

This is a non-issue.

Agreed, the teacher violated the Constitutional amendments by making such a statement, and as an agent of the government, he had no right to do so.

Agreed, the teaching of creationism has no place in a history or science class.

Next.............

Actually,

In a science class it would not be legal.

But History?

It certainly does have its place in a history class.

Creationism has held a place in human history for about six thousand years.

Evolution?

150?

[biggles53]

Actually,

In a science class it would not be legal.

But History?

It certainly does have its place in a history class.

Creationism has held a place in human history for about six thousand years.

Evolution?

150?

Not so.

The study of history relies upon the scientific method. That is, the gathering of evidence to provide support for a particular hypothesis or theory.

For this reason, creationism fails as a legitimate course of study in either science or history.

It provides no evidence to substantiate its assertions.........

[Marleysdaddy]

I did study various creation stories in a world literature class in High School...I think a lit class or a philosophy/religion class is the appropriate place for those stories.

[Koushi Shinigami]

Misleading headline of the week material.

:))

[coyote1880]

Not so.

The study of history relies upon the scientific method. That is, the gathering of evidence to provide support for a particular hypothesis or theory.

For this reason, creationism fails as a legitimate course of study in either science or history.

It provides no evidence to substantiate its assertions.........

You are thinking archaeology.

[Finality]

I think a general history class might cover the topic of the extent creationism's existence throughout time, but it wouldn't study creationism itself.

Except maybe a comparative history of creationism class, which would look at how specifically creationism has changed over time, I guess.

[5thIDSoldier]

Just imagine the furror that would be created by a conservative teacher calling the fable of evolution "nonsense".

[captusa]

Actually,

In a science class it would not be legal.

But History?

It certainly does have its place in a history class.

Creationism has held a place in human history for about six thousand years.

Evolution?

150?
How do you consider Creationism being 6,000 years old.
Genesis was not even alleged to have been written that far back much less interpeted as a concept of creation.
The theories of the terra-centric universe, the spontanious generation of insects, Aristotle's theory of Gravity and many other theories are older than what science accepts today.
Should we teach that the sun revolves around the earth because that theory had been around longer than the idea that the earth revolves around the sun ?

[mchandler]

It seems that students in private schools are taught creationism, but have a hard time defending their beliefs in it. Perhaps they should research and try to prove the evolution theory. This should challenge them to wrestle with the concept of the theories or beliefs rather than trusting a textbook or a "qualified" teacher to tell them what they should believe.

[Finality]

It seems that students in private schools are taught creationism, but have a hard time defending their beliefs in it. Perhaps they should research and try to prove the evolution theory. This should challenge them to wrestle with the concept of the theories or beliefs rather than trusting a textbook or a "qualified" teacher to tell them what they should believe.
I was taught in a private, Catholic school. We were taught science. Specifically, evolution. We kicked ass at defending it. :)

[mchandler]

well the private school i work at and talking with others, the kids that apparently believe and support creationism, don't really know why they believe it and can't verbally support that claim

[Koushi Shinigami]

It seems that students in private schools are taught creationism, but have a hard time defending their beliefs in it. Perhaps they should research and try to prove the evolution theory. This should challenge them to wrestle with the concept of the theories or beliefs rather than trusting a textbook or a "qualified" teacher to tell them what they should believe.

That would actually be an excellent exercise for the students. For reasons that have nothing to do with supporting the ultimate 'truth' of either theory. It would get them to think for themselves and practice reasoning things out. Far to often, I fear we have reduced 'education' to rote memorization. This turns out drones that are good at doing what they are told, but ineffective at exploring something new.

[captusa]

That would actually be an excellent exercise for the students. For reasons that have nothing to do with supporting the ultimate 'truth' of either theory. It would get them to think for themselves and practice reasoning things out. Far to often, I fear we have reduced 'education' to rote memorization. This turns out drones that are good at doing what they are told, but ineffective at exploring something new.

As a math teacher who has taught a relatively rigid Euclidean geometry course in high school and seen the concept of proof diminish I realized when I taught precalc in college that most students were unfamiliar with mathematical derivations.

[Kea]

That would actually be an excellent exercise for the students. For reasons that have nothing to do with supporting the ultimate 'truth' of either theory. It would get them to think for themselves and practice reasoning things out. Far to often, I fear we have reduced 'education' to rote memorization. This turns out drones that are good at doing what they are told, but ineffective at exploring something new.


Yes, the existing system produces "good government servants." Few are able to think for themselves, let alone analyze.

[ThrowCop]

I have no objection to the results of the lawsuit, assuming I'm not missing anything :)

There is no reason for a history teacher to slam a religious belief.^ That

If the story is true on the small tidbit in the OP, the judge was 100% correct & the teacher was 100% wrong.

[coyote1880]

How do you consider Creationism being 6,000 years old.
Genesis was not even alleged to have been written that far back much less interpeted as a concept of creation.
The theories of the terra-centric universe, the spontanious generation of insects, Aristotle's theory of Gravity and many other theories are older than what science accepts today.
Should we teach that the sun revolves around the earth because that theory had been around longer than the idea that the earth revolves around the sun ?

I am saying that in the context of history, all of those things should be taught as having been part history.

I said nothing about them being correct or not.

But they are part of our history and therefore should be included in history classes.

[Alaric]

That would actually be an excellent exercise for the students. For reasons that have nothing to do with supporting the ultimate 'truth' of either theory. It would get them to think for themselves and practice reasoning things out. Far to often, I fear we have reduced 'education' to rote memorization. This turns out drones that are good at doing what they are told, but ineffective at exploring something new.

I attended Brigham Young University which as you probably know is a private church owned college. However BYU teaches evolution and an old Earth in biology and geology classes, and it teaches it as fact. Anyone who has been in those classes has witnessed the angst of some students in the first few days of any semester when they grapple with the fact that a church run university if challenging their beliefs with scientific facts. BYU IMO does a good job of teaching them to separate science and faith (plus the LDS doctrine can fairly easily accommodate an old Earth and evolution IMO), however there are some students who simply can not or will not bring themselves to even remotely entertain any scientific theory that contradicts their belief for long enough to evaluate it, much less understand it, and they end up doing poorly in the classes. I don't know if earlier exposure in grade school or high school will help or not but I don't think it will.

[BrittleBullet]

Just imagine the furror that would be created by a conservative teacher calling the fable of evolution "nonsense".

I would ask how the **** that person ever became a teacher as he or she is terribly unqualified.

[FidelisAdMortem]

Good ruling, the teacher was wrong.

[BillyBobUSA]

My 7th and 8th grade Social Studies teacher was a NAZI.
She glamorized Hitler.
Taught that the Moors were something other than Negroes since Negroes do not have the ability to construct something like Alhambra.
Jesus was not a Jew and a great deal of blatant racism.

She also scared the Heck out of me and she was not one that one would contradict.


The Moors were not Negroid. They were mostly Berbers, who are considered caucasian.

Why do you think that they are?

[Dem]

I love irony:

Spradlin has said Corbett was simply expressing his own opinion that the former teacher shouldn't have presented his religious views to students.


I agree with the decision, teachers should not be promoting or demoting religion in any way.

[shaveking]

That's ridiculous. So that means you can't say that it's stupid to believe that the holocaust didn't happen, or to believe that unicorns exist, or any unlimited number of other things. What if someone believes that cursing is the only way to get evil spirits out of your body or raping virgins gets rid of AIDs? It doesn't matter if it's a tenet of an established religion or not; it's absolutely ridiculous that people are allowed to get through school believing completely unfounded ideas.

[TexasGreatGranny]

If he said that

1) he'd be dishonest (science doesn't deal with fables)
2) he'd be outdated (we don't teach 'Darwinism' anymore)
3) he'd be temporarily out of a job (because in the section of Biology class where the diversity of life is explained, there would be a blank...currently, evolutionary theory is the only scientific theory which addresses that subject)

Evolution is only a theory but they teach it. If you want to say religion is not a scientific fact you can say it is a theory so why can't it be taught?

Face it socialist run the schools, they don't want a country with any GOD fearing people. They want one where there is no right and wrong morally....Its disgraceful that taxpayers have to pay for a school system with an agenda and and PBS who also has an agenda.

[Dregun]

Seperation of Church and State.

That means both sides have to respect the other, while I agree with what the professor has said he offended someone who holds that belief and a belief that unfortunatly many others hold as well.

It's only a matter of time before those who practice religion are in the minority to those who don't and even then the same rules need apply. I don't care if you believe the earth is 6 thousand years old or 100 million you should respect each others beliefs enough to not belittle them.

Court ruled correctly but I wouldn't consider this a win for Creationism..far from it. I would consider this a win for ethics!

[Marleysdaddy]

The Moors were not Negroid. They were mostly Berbers, who are considered caucasian.

Why do you think that they are?

Where did captusa say that he thought they were?

Originally Posted by captusa
My 7th and 8th grade Social Studies teacher was a NAZI.
She glamorized Hitler.
Taught that the Moors were something other than Negroes since Negroes do not have the ability to construct something like Alhambra.
Jesus was not a Jew and a great deal of blatant racism.

[Marleysdaddy]

Evolution is only a theory but they teach it. Of course they do...gravity is only a theory, and they teach that too.
They also teach the theory of magnetism, the theory of electricity, atomic theory, cell theory, the theory of plate tectonics, and hundreds of other theories.

If you want to say religion is not a scientific fact you can say it is a theory so why can't it be taught?
religion is not a scientific theory, so they can't say that. It can be taught, just not in a science class... scientific theories are taught in science class.

[Apatriot]

I agree...All the teacher should have said was, "We won't be discussing religious stories in science class..."

It wasn't even science class, it was Advanced Placement European History.

[Apatriot]

Just imagine the furror that would be created by a conservative teacher calling the fable of evolution "nonsense".


Actually, that would be protected speech, unless the teacher continued on using religious arguments.

Evolution vs. creationism wasn't the topic in the lawsuit. The reason for the law suit is that the teacher was improperly "preaching" against religion. That is just as wrong as a public school teacher preaching for a religion. Public school teachers should be neutral towards religion.

(as a conservative, if I were a principal with a science teacher on staff that called evolution nonsense, if he/she didn't have tenure, he/she would be looking for a job, though. Most conservatives don't believe that evolution is nonsense.)

[captusa]

The Moors were not Negroid. They were mostly Berbers, who are considered caucasian.

Why do you think that they are?

There are descriptions of Moors with African(Sub-Saharian African) characteristics including wooly hair.
There is some dispute.
Your point was on the net but this was also there:

http://www.africawithin.com/moors/moors_and_arabs.htm

[CaptC]

The teacher was out of line with his statement; :naughty:

The student was out of line making a federal case of it; :rolleyes:

The Court was waaaayyyyyyyy out of line not just dismissing the case instead of making a ruling. :doh:

Once again another frivolous lawsuit hits the courts and the courts make believe their ruling is the law of the land. :wall: