Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (14735)	5/28/2001 6:50:14 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

X's response was not neutral, it was evasive, and loaded with philosophical assumptions. Yes, it was evasive. I just don't see how it could have been otherwise. Parents have the right to bring their kids up in whatever religious tradition they wish. Parents get really cranky when they think their kids are being taught something contrary to their own beliefs. A teacher just can't go there. It is the responsibility of the teacher to keep order, to be sure kids work and play nicely together, and to motivate the kids. I don't like the evasiveness of it either. That's what made me uncomfortable, but I don't see any alternative. You suggest talking to the girl separately and reinforce her beliefs. X doesn't know what her family's beliefs are. She may not even know if the girl is a Christian let alone a Pentacostal vs. a Unitarian. The girl could be Jewish or Muslim or a non-aligned Deist like Neo. If you reinforce her belief in God, what do you do with her next question, which might be "Will little Greg go to hell?" Then what does she say? Or perhaps the girl is satisfied with X's affirmation and then runs and tells the little boy that Mrs. X just said there was so a God and nya, nya, nya. And the boy starts crying, etc. etc. I just don't see how she could have answered the question your way. Yes, it's loaded with philosophical assumptions. But not religious assumptions. We have freedom of religion. That means that the state, in the form of a public school teacher, doesn't advocate one over another. However certain philosophical assumptions are extant in the Constitution, for example, all citizens are treated equal, regardless of their religion, that kids need to learn to live together and respect each other, regardless of religion, stuff like that. I think it's quite appropriate to reinforce our political philosophy in the class room. Regarding neutral, if you don't see that as neutral, I think that you should take a step back from your beliefs and look again. Affirming either kid's religion would not be neutral. Interjecting X's religious beliefs would not have been neutral. Sending the kids home to talk to their parents is not perfect but it is as neutral as you can get. When they're a little older you can do a comparative religion exercise. But not in the first grade. Karen