7th Grader Forced By Teacher to Say God is Not Real

Originally posted by Bardock42
Where does this stop though? If parents want to tell their children than evolution is fake, can the science teacher not undermine it? What if they don't believe in maths? Grammar? The Holocaust?

Then the parent would most likely send the kids to a school that teaches the above assertions. Or home school them. None of the above ideas (such as not believing in science/grammar/math/etc.) are protected by the public school system.

Right now, tho, they send kids to public schools because they actually believe said schools would respect their religion.

Public schools overall do respect religion. I'm not sure if you were suggesting teaching evolution is also not respectful.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
None of the above ideas (such as not believing in science/grammar/math/etc.) are protected by the public school system.

Neither is not believing in the definition of commonplace assertions though.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Neither is not believing in the definition of commonplace assertions though.

The definition of "commonplace assertion" is not the issue here.

It is the fact that they used the lesson of "commonplace assertion" to undermine children's religious belief systems.

I don't know why that even needs explaining...

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The definition of "commonplace assertion" is not the issue here.

It is the fact that they used the lesson of "commonplace assertion" to undermine children's religious belief systems.

I don't know why that even needs explaining...

Well, according to the OP the issue is that kids were forced to say that God is not real...are we at least on the same page that that's not what has happened?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, according to the OP the issue is that kids were forced to say that God is not real...are we at least on the same page that that's not what has happened?

The written assignnment didn't directly specify that, in those exact words, no. Imply/assert it? Seems like it, to me IMO. From the angle of the assignment as it is written, tho, it looks like the teacher has plausible deniability.

However, we were not privy to the conversation between the kids and the teacher. Testimonies (as the kid seemed to be very detailed on what she was portraying), however, seem to strongly point to it.

Well, lets say this. If the teacher did what the kid said in the testimony it is awful. However certain Christians also have a track record of overreacting and using children as tools. If we just go by the assignment it was tone-deaf, but definitely not a fireable offense.

Bullshit.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, lets say this. If the teacher did what the kid said in the testimony it is awful. However certain Christians also have a track record of overreacting and using children as tools. If we just go by the assignment it was tone-deaf, but definitely not a fireable offense.

No, ppl with agendas tend to "overreact" and "use children as tools" as such is not a quality exclusive only to Christians. That's kinda like saying criminals tend to be black.. Don't you think that comment sounded a bit prejudiced?

Thing is, in any court case, we go by physical evidence as well as the testimony of witnesses. If the teacher is indeed innocent, a simple investigation among the other children should easily uncover inconsistencies with the child's story.

But if even half of what the child is saying is true (forced to answer a cetain way or fail assignment, was aware of the negative effects on students regarding assignment but pushed for it anyway, etc.) then the teacher deserved to be fired.

At the very least, the teacher needs to be moved to a different class as I certainly would not be comfortable as a parent having said person teach my kids,

Originally posted by Nibedicus
No, ppl with agendas tend to "overreact" and "use children as tools" as such is not a quality exclusive only to Christians. That's kinda like saying criminals tend to be black.. Don't you think that comment sounded a bit prejudiced?

Thing is, in any court case, we go by physical evidence as well as the testimony of witnesses. If the teacher is indeed innocent, a simple investigation among the other children should easily uncover inconsistencies with the child's story.

But if even half of what the child is saying is true (forced to answer a cetain way or fail assignment, was aware of the negative effects on students regarding assignment but pushed for it anyway, etc.) then the teacher deserved to be fired.

At the very least, the teacher needs to be moved to a different class as I certainly would not be comfortable as a parent having said person teach my kids,

Did I say it was exclusive to Christians?

At any rate, we have further information:

District officials [said] that the 12-year-old girl's story is not the same one that other students told officials. They also say that the other students claim this reading teacher did not say there was not a God during an assignment in class. The district said they interviewed eight of the 22 students who were in that same classroom.

A reading teacher passed out a critical thinking worksheet in class. Students were instructed to pick if something was fact, opinion or common assertion. One of the statements on the worksheet read, "There is a God."

Jordan Wooley, 12, and her mother Chantel spoke in front of the Katy ISD school board to complain that the teacher told students that God is a myth and questioned his existence.

Katy ISD Superintendent Alton Frailey said, "In the investigation those assertions were not corroborated by the other students. Was the activity graded? It was not graded. Was it 40 percent of their grade? Were the students told they had to deny God? No one corroborated that, at all."

Chantel Wooley says she stands by her daughter. She also said that somebody is telling the truth and somebody is not.

Katy ISD says the teacher explained that a commonplace assertion exists when there is room for debate. [The district also said] the worksheet will not be used again in classrooms and that students did not get graded on that assignment.

http://www.snopes.com/2015/10/28/katy-texas-god-assignment-controversy/

So the other students have not confirmed the ones students story at all, making this further seem like Christians gone too far (especially since the teacher is a Christian herself).

So, again, the assignment was ill conceived, but most of the controversy around it are lies and sensationalism.

christians with a persecution complex? now i have seen everything

Originally posted by Star428
Oh, you mean kinda like how schools teach evolution is a "fact" when all it really is is a theory, correct? A theory that has no actual facts to back it up. Like that, right? Evolution is not based in fact regardless of what any atheist says. Atheists use it because the alternative (the truth about creation) scares the Hell out of them.

Conventionally, in the scientific community, evolution is accepted as a theory supported by proof. The existance of such proof is exactly the kind of fact that the test was trying to establish, at least that's what I get from it (I don't have the tools to describe it's definitive goal though).

I really don't think the point of the exercise was to separate truth from lies, simply to teach kids between absence of proof or such.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Did I say it was exclusive to Christians?

At any rate, we have further information:

http://www.snopes.com/2015/10/28/katy-texas-god-assignment-controversy/

So the other students have not confirmed the ones students story at all, making this further seem like Christians gone too far (especially since the teacher is a Christian herself).

So, again, the assignment was ill conceived, but most of the controversy around it are lies and sensationalism.

Never said you did. But you of all ppl should know what I mean about this, so I'll just assume you're being deliberately obtuse.

So, teacher incompetencewas plus highly over-reactive kids/parnts is the end result of the investigation? Hanlon's razor and such. Can't say I'm unhappy with the results. The investigation seems prompt enough. And for as long as religiious beliefs are respected and taken seriously by public schools (and not swept under a rug), I would gladly retract my comments.

I will keep track of the story further and see if the kid/parent will have further comments on the story, however.

In any case, I would ask that a teacher as tone-deaf/incompetent as the teacher above, I would still request my kid to be moved to another class (if I was a parent, hypothetically). The level of dumb needed for her not to realize the implication of her assignment makes me worry about what else she might be teaching my kids.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Never said you did. But you of all ppl should know what I mean about this, so I'll just assume you're being deliberately obtuse.

So, teacher incompetencewas plus highly over-reactive kids/parnts is the end result of the investigation? Hanlon's razor and such. Can't say I'm unhappy with the results. The investigation seems prompt enough. And for as long as religiious beliefs are respected and taken seriously by public schools (and not swept under a rug), I would gladly retract my comments.

I will keep track of the story further and see if the kid/parent will have further comments on the story, however.

In any case, I would ask that a teacher as tone-deaf/incompetent as the teacher above, I would still request my kid to be moved to another class (if I was a parent, hypothetically). The level of dumb needed for her not to realize the implication of her assignment makes me worry about what else she might be teaching my kids.

I'm glad you are not unhappy with the result.

From my POV it fits well into the framework of the made up "War on Christianity", that many right wingers subscribe to.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I'm glad you are not unhappy with the result.

From my POV it fits well into the framework of the made up "War on Christianity", that many right wingers subscribe to.

Literally thats the exact opposite what he said.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Literally thats the exact opposite what he said.

It's exactly what he said:

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Can't say I'm unhappy with the results.

No that's not what I'm talking about. You took one line and transformed it into like he agreed with you.

No I did not, I even said that the next line was my point of view. He made his own post stating his, I didn't change anything about it, I just added my view (which is already implied in posting, but I still pointed out that it was just my view). You need to stop your sniping at me, or at least make it more accurate in the future.

"The level of dumb needed for her not to realize the implication of her assignment makes me worry about what else she might be teaching my kids."

I don't understand what your point is, surely the discussion between Nibedicus and me should have shown to you that we have different opinions on the subject. Am I not allowed to voice mine because his is different?