My daugher, Emily, the 7 year old, has been pestering me for about a week to buy the book "the Legend of the Candy Cane" It's about how the candy cane can be a symbol for Christ. I figured that they had read it at school or at church or something and she just wanted a copy at home.
Today, she was bothering me again, and I asked her why she wanted it. She said because someone at school asked if she could bring it to read to the class and the teacher told them no, there was a law that said they couldn't read that book at school. Then Emily, 1st grader, says to me "Mommy, are we breaking the law by believing in Jesus?"
Okay, that was just too much for me.
The public schools have planted the idea in my daughter's mind that it is illegal for her to be a Christian. That I cannot accept.
It wouldn't be so bad if they explained it as a separation of church and state issue. But no, they basically have convinced my child that every other religion is okay BUT hers. See, they DID talk about Hanukkah. They DID talk about Kwanzaa, they DID talk about Ramadan. They read a book from the perspective of a muslim boy, that explained the holy month and what it means to fast and everything.
So, everything else is okay, but Christianity is against the law?
Somebody want to explain that to me?
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
You need to arrange a conference with the principle and make it clear in no uncertain terms that this is unacceptable, and that corrections will be made.
posted
Another thing that annoys me is I know it isn't intentional. It isn't some conscious effort on the teacher's part to undermine the beliefs of the kids in the class - I know this teacher, I think very, very highly of her and I happen to know she is a church-going Christian.
No, this is just the effect of the current thinking out there - let's talk about Ramadan and Hanukkah because we need to teach kids to be tolerant - tolerant of everything except Christianity!
I would be willing to bet, in the middle of the Bible belt, in a small town that voted 98% Bush for president, that the vast majority of the kids in that class are Christian.
But their beliefs are the only ones that can't be represented during the holiday season.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is of course a very silly policy, unofficial or not, but Muslims and Jews are, in fact, in greater need of tolerance than Christians. Academics punch like sissies.
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag! Will you please stop using 'principle' when you mean 'principal'?! This is the second time in two days! [/Grammar Communist]
About the policy, I agree that consistency is required. Clearly, there is no particular need to have Ramadan etc in schools, either.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think they should take education about Muslim beliefs out of school; they should just put education about Christian beliefs in.
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's the same mindset that's making it acceptable to say all manner of horrible things about men, while women cannot be mocked at all. It's the same mindset that's made it so racial humor--mocking all races, by the way--is perfectly acceptable from a comedian who is "ethnic", but the moment a white person starts to make a joke about any ethnicity but his own, he is tarred and feathered, metaphorically speaking.
Basically, white Christian men have completely dominated society for so long that, now that non-whites, non-Christians, and non-men are finally (within the past few decades) gaining some of the respect and recognition they deserve, some people take it too far and have created a full-scale backlash. So now anyone who has any one of those three traits is in for a rough time for awhile.
Do I agree with it? No. I think the whole thing is stupid. And I think people are misunderstanding what "separation of church and state" means. But I predict the whole PC thing will blow over eventually. It seems like some nutjob manages to come up with a ridiculous new application of the PC dogma on a pretty regular basis, which makes it look like things are always getting worse. But at least among the people I talk to, the whole movement has long since overstayed its welcome already. I think that society as a whole is starting to get thoroughly sick of the whole thing, and sooner or later (I'm praying for "sooner", myself), the whole thing will start to fade and shrink.
(Or, alternatively, there could be a backlash against the PC folks, and minorities could start getting put under the boot again in retaliation. But I somewhat doubt it. I like to think that we've gone beyond that point anyway. At least, I desperately hope we have.)
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, my son's teacher spent the entire hour on why Santa is an impossibility from a physics point of view. And how Rudolph's nose couldn't possibly light the way.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Belle, I find it funny (in an ironic more than humorous sense) that this is happening in your fairly conservative area, while in my (quite liberal) area, my son is being given lines in a Christmas show. (He's in public school.) Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Edit: This post is responding to the "grammar communist" thing, not the "conservative area" thing. You may now continue reading the post.
Good point. Theoretically, a grammar communist would be someone who feels that we should all have an equal share in grammatical issues, and that therefore no person would have the right to dictate another person's grammar.
Well, that would be the theory. In reality, we'd get something more like grammar Stalinism, in which one person dictated the grammar for everyone. It would be different from grammar fascism only in its ostensive philosophy. In reality, it would be the same.
[lexical fascist] (And the use of "principle" when "principal" is meant isn't a grammatical error anyway--it's a lexical error. Dag's sentence was still grammatically correct, even though his use of the wrong word rendered the meaning nonsensical.) [/lexical fascist]
posted
Comrade Nato, I observe that you have not previously been exposed to the Grammar Communist Party. We are much like Grammar Nazis (who are not fascists, by the way), but are distinguished by our much cooler hats, the fact that we won the war, and our tendency to call people 'comrade'.
In other words, 'Grammar Communist' is a joke. You are now permitted to laugh. Anybody who does not laugh will be sent to Siberia.
Edit : And I use 'Grammar' to encompass errors including, but not limited to, spelling, grammar, and vocabulary. I suppose I could call it the 'Orthography Communist Party,' or something, but I'd lose the analogy to Grammar Nazi.
[ December 18, 2004, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: King of Men ]
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's ok to take shots at whites, Christians and men because we're the ones with all the power. We can afford to take some punishment - because let's face it, white christian males run the country. Suck it up and let people make fun of you.
However, excluding Christmas imagery while including other types of imagery is stupid, and isn't it illegal?
Remember the Apostle Paul. When he was illegally whipped, he didn't moan and whine about being oppressed - he took legal action, and receieved satisfaction. So go for it.
Posts: 1515 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, have you ever been threatened on the basis of being a male? I haven't. Have you ever lost anything becase you're white? I haven't.
While Christians might be given a hard time occasionally, they are a major political force. And just like your advice said, legal action can take care of any troubles with ease.
I'm not a Christian, but I'm a white male, and I recognize that in the grand scheme of things, that places me near the top of the ladder. It's just the way our society is currently structured.
It's a racist, sexist world we live in, and you and I will rarely personally face the true ugliness of that. So why get upset if we're the butt of a few jokes?
posted
My thought is that all religions' holidays' should be talked about. I would prefer that our children be taught to have open minds and be concious and educated about eachother's religions.
However, although that's what I'd prefer, here's the fact of the matter: I do not see anyone here jumping up and saying, "Oh, let's talk about Yule now children," or, "Halloween is also called Samhain by some". I am not convinced that I will ever see the day that my own religion is talked about in school, and I do recognize that it makes me a little bitter about the whole PC thing. (Okay, Grammar Communists...go! I'm sure I did all sort of things wrong in the above sentences.)
Since this is the case and the child I raise will be brought up a different religion than (probably) a majority of the children in whatever school my child ends up in, I would prefer that religion not be talked about at all in school. I feel it alienates children who do not follow main-stream religions. I know that I was alienated for it, even though I was not raised Wiccan (I was raised in a cult, for those of you who have ever heard of The Way Interational), and it was extremely confusing and unnecessary.
It comes down to this-I would love to see all religions talked about, but the reality is that they won't. I would rather sacrifice my child's knowledge about other cultures than to have my child singled out because of his/her own background. I can teach my child tolerance if public schools will not.
posted
You know, when I was in second grade, a little bit of hard work by me, my family, and a few other jewish families in the town, got our public school to figure out that they were excluding us. Just a small thought...
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There does not need to be a middle ground, there needs to be open spit in the eye defiance and long lines of parents leaving with their kids to go to private school. In our area there are two catholic schools within ten miles. Bet your life the school district does not pull this crap here. It is the ACLU suing the schools as a soft target with big dollars, using our tax dollars I might add, and schools bending over to avoid costly litigation. We do not need to support these greedy lawyers feeding like hogs at the public trough and destroying our values! Its time we changed the laws, the lawyers and the judges to reflect our values!
Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now why is it that I sympathize and agree with Belle and others here that Christianity ought not to be singled out for exclusion from schools, but reading Jar Head's posts makes me want to contribute to the ACLU?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Basically, white Christian men have completely dominated society for so long that, now that non-whites, non-Christians, and non-men are finally (within the past few decades) gaining some of the respect and recognition they deserve, some people take it too far and have created a full-scale backlash. So now anyone who has any one of those three traits is in for a rough time for awhile.
White Christian men are in for a rough time? Like, compared to black Satanist women? Really?
Belladonna:
quote:I would rather sacrifice my child's knowledge about other cultures than to have my child singled out because of his/her own background. I can teach my child tolerance if public schools will not.
Will you teach everyone else's children as well?
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Belle, does "The Legend of the Candy Cane" actually speak of Christ and Christianity as if both were facts? Somehow I doubt that the Jewish, Muslim, and Kwanzaa (areligious in the first place) discussions did so.
It is likely, in other words, that "The Legend of the Candy Cane" would be "illegal" in a way that merely having someone explain what Hanukah is would not. In fact, that it is even necessary for someone to come in to explain Ramadan is a pretty good example of the problem; has the school had to invite someone in to explain what Christmas is?
posted
But the story of the Muslim boy likely presented his belief as what he holds to be fact. If the book was read with a disclaimer that said, "Not all people believe this, this is what I believe", would it be okay?
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom - even were that the case, if they're mentioning the others they should at least mention the existence of Christianity. Even if they assume that the majority of kids already know, there's no reason to be so conspicuous about avoiding it. Mention it, mention the others, and get back to math.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because you are a coward who lacks the courage to put the fight where it needs to go. Mamby Pamby sympathy is what evil needs, good people who want to share feelings instead of acting viciously and instantly when they are threatened. Does God want your half hearted lip service? I think it is as worthless as a counterfeit penny.
Go encourage the ACLU to attack the Boy Scouts and the US military and Christianity. We will win in the end with or without you. I heard they even have a list of potential contributers, monitoring charitable contributions and personal wealth to know who to dun. Real concerned about Civil Liberty aren't they! You should fit in with the hypocrites, saying you have faith and stabbing the faithful.
Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"if they're mentioning the others they should at least mention the existence of Christianity."
I would suspect that the schools have already mentioned the existence of Christianity. I agree, however, that it would make more sense to have a day on which a Christian could come in and say "This is what some of us Christians believe," but I suspect that an enormous number of Christians would find that offensive. As it stands, there aren't enough Muslims in most places in this country to object when, say, a Sunni sums up their faith on their behalf; there are enough Baptists to throw a fit if a Catholic starts explaining how good Christians confess regularly.
Jar Head: don't be like that. You aren't always a frother; don't froth now, please.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have faith. I am not a Christian. I still think Christianity should be mentioned if the others are.
However, if you plan to force Christianity as U.S.-approved to the exclusion of all others, then we can discuss my courage and backbone.
Edited after Tom's post: this is a very emotional and stressful time for people, especially when representations of religion are being presented or blocked. The emergence of "Chrismakkuh" and the enforcement of secular holiday greetings has got to be tough on those who believe that their holy day has been co-opted by the fat guy with reindeer and a Best Buy catalog.
[ December 19, 2004, 12:31 AM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad to see that so many of you are getting into the spirit of the Airing of Grievances, but Festivus isn't until the 23rd.
Posts: 6213 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It isn't a matter of Christianity or else, minority rights, not minority rule. Respecting anothers religion does not mean giving up mine or having my son have his Christmas taken away. The minority religions are welcome to practice their holidays, I will still barbacue porkchops in the backyard weather its Ramadan or not, they have no right to tell the rest of us we cannot have Christmas, with Christ, because they don't believe in it. Too Bad! This is more then 'religion' it is tradition.
Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Strange, and here I thought you were calling Chris evil and saying your Christian God would likely think him worthless. I suppose it could be that you meant any God would think him worthless . . .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"the enforcement of secular holiday greetings has got to be tough on those who believe that their holy day has been co-opted by the fat guy with reindeer and a Best Buy catalog"
You mean the pagan Norsemen who originally burned decorated logs around the winter solstice to bring back the sun? Or somebody more recent? Because I'll agree that Norse pagans really do have to put up with a lot of crap.
"The minority religions are welcome to practice their holidays."
It's generous of you to extend them this courtesy. But, oddly, neither do I see anyone preventing you from practicing your holidays. What holiday practice do you consider essential to the expression of your Christian faith that is actually banned by any law? I was not aware that Jesus expected schoolteachers to read books about candy canes to your children, nor that you were incapable of reading those books yourself.
posted
I don't recall anyone here (or anywhere) saying that your Christmas is being taken away. You can enjoy whatever traditions you wish. The question here is how Christmas is represented in schools.
I'm making a prediction for next year. There will be a made-for-TV Christmas movie about this topic. Just like every other Christmas movie the holiday will be threatened, but this time it won't be because of lack of snow or foggy conditions or something cutesy and metaphorical. The movie will be about Christians outraged at the excision of Christ from Christmas in schools, official displays, and public caroling. And in the movie, they'll win. The movie will be wildly controversial and insanely popular, sparking tons of arguments and complaints and support. If this movie has already been made and I missed it, never mind. If someone gets the idea from here, I want a cut.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"You mean the pagan Norsemen who originally burned decorated logs around the winter solstice to bring back the sun? Or somebody more recent? Because I'll agree that Norse pagans really do have to put up with a lot of crap."
I left my statement vague on purpose Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, who needs such as this? The great 'I do not really give a shit' mass of self indulgence. In the end he will wait for the winners to emerge and jump into that line. Trying to sheepishly blend in with the cheering throng. Better to lose and die then to believe in nothing.
Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Christmas is a Commercial money grubber. Have you been to the mall recently? Religion my arse.
Posts: 2208 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Better to lose and die then to believe in nothing."
Having met Chris Bridges, I can say with some surety that he is a man who believes in many things, "nothing" not being one of them.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my School growing up we watched 'Its a Wonderful Life' every year, we saw the 'Greatest Story Ever Told' We sang O'Holy Night and Silent Night in school recitals and the Christmas Band Concert started with What Child is This, and went on to Hark the Herald' and all the rest. It was the happiest time of year for everyone and you think it is cool to take that experience away. It is sad and cynical and reeks of personal indifference.
Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In this case, I believe strongly that no one should be ashamed of their faith, and that's what was happening to Belle's daughter. That's wrong, and I think the school was going overboard to avoid lawsuits.
Of course, I also don't think the other children should be ashamed of their faiths either, which is why I argue against promotion of any faith at public or non-affiliated private schools. Explanation and acknowledgement, no worries. Promotion, no.
I'm sure it was the happiest time of the year for Christians and for the indifferent who just enjoyed the fellowship. I'm guessing the local Jews weren't quite as jolly. Seriously, I don't care if schools present Christian Christmas material as long as it's not all they present.
[ December 19, 2004, 01:07 AM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Department of Justice today announced that a federal court in Massachusetts held that a public high school violated the free speech rights of students when it suspended them for handing out candy canes with religious messages attached to them.
The students, members of a Bible club at Westfield High School, had been told that they could distribute the candy canes with a "Happy Holidays" message, but forbidden to attach a message containing a prayer and a description of the religious origins of the candy cane. The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled that the one-day suspensions given to the students violated their first amendment rights, and entered a preliminary injunction barring the school from punishing them or enforcing similar speech restrictions against them.
I saw a reference to this on the AP and thought I should bring it up.
Belle - I think you have every right to be mad. It is going too far to highlight every other religion and ban discussion of Christianity. Maybe we should start a group demanding equal rights for Christians.
Posts: 2034 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It is going too far to highlight every other religion and ban discussion of Christianity."
When exactly was discussion of Christianity banned, again? While it's certainly possible that it might have happened, I haven't heard anything of the kind in this thread.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is cool, thanks for the link...I live not 10 min from that schol, and was just there playing pool last night!
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I agree, however, that it would make more sense to have a day on which a Christian could come in and say "This is what some of us Christians believe," but I suspect that an enormous number of Christians would find that offensive. As it stands, there aren't enough Muslims in most places in this country to object when, say, a Sunni sums up their faith on their behalf; there are enough Baptists to throw a fit if a Catholic starts explaining how good Christians confess regularly.
