anti-Christian remarks by teacher

[Classact]

I do believe the school district better have deep pockets on this one.


Court papers cite statements tape-recorded by Farnan such as "Conservatives don't want women to avoid pregnancies – that's interfering with God's work" and "When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth." The Christian legal group that filed the lawsuit, Murrieta-based Advocates for Faith and Freedom, released additional quotes Monday attributed to Corbett, including "When you pray for divine intervention, you're hoping that the spaghetti monster will help you get what you want."
http://www.ocregister.com/news/lawsuit-corbett-case-1996882-attorney-court

[Hagbard Celine]

Give me a break. Is it "Christian" to ruin this guy's life over this? Does that go hand-in-hand with the "love thy neighbor" message? Methinks that message has been usurped by a general attitude of militancy in all areas of life. The proper recourse for this "offended" student was to report this teacher to the administration.

[retiredman]

the religious right rarely turns their cheek, they just demand that everyone else should.

[Kathianne]

Give me a break. Is it "Christian" to ruin this guy's life over this? Does that go hand-in-hand with the "love thy neighbor" message? Methinks that message has been usurped by a general attitude of militancy in all areas of life. The proper recourse for this "offended" student was to report this teacher to the administration.

I just took a look at the AP European History course summary and really don't see that his discussion on current 'Christians' was a great idea since the essays wouldn't be on the period, it states so on the summary by College Board. Other than overwhelming secularization in Europe, the only religion making noises today is Islam, not evangelicalism. Seems 'discussion' of political, economic, and European Union might have been a better way to have spent class time. Did you read the article?

[Kathianne]

the religious right rarely turns their cheek, they just demand that everyone else should.

Did you read the article?

[retiredman]

Did you read the article?
of course I did. And I agree with Hagbard that the student should have merely complained to his principal.

[Hagbard Celine]

I just took a look at the AP European History course summary and really don't see that his discussion on current 'Christians' was a great idea since the essays wouldn't be on the period, it states so on the summary by College Board. Other than overwhelming secularization in Europe, the only religion making noises today is Islam, not evangelicalism. Seems 'discussion' of political, economic, and European Union might have been a better way to have spent class time. Did you read the article?

It doesn't matter what his lesson plan was. What matters is that he made inappropriate disparaging comments about Christians and instead of going to his boss, these people sued him. It's pretty ridiculous. It doesn't matter what the context of his comments were. Even if he made them in passing, the kid should've raised his hand and made his offense noted. If the teacher didn't let up then the kid should've gone to the administration. Case closed.
"Conservatives" are always griping about frivolous lawsuits clogging up the legal system, but I guess this is an exception to the rule?

[jimnyc]

Should black people, or just the students offended, have only complained to Imus's bosses, or was it proper for the entire black community to get involved and go after advertisers and sponsors to try and ruin his career?

[Kathianne]

of course I did. And I agree with Hagbard that the student should have merely complained to his principal.

Of course you would feel the same if the teacher were preaching for a religion? The school obviously has mission students there. What if instead they were Muslims and the teacher generalized some unflattering bias against them? Said they needed 'to wise up to the stupidity of their religion?


...The lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages and attorney fees, says that Corbett typically spent "a large portion of class time propagating his personal views to a captive audience." He railed against Christianity and traditional Christian viewpoints on topics such as birth control, teenage sex, homosexuality and erectile dysfunction, according to the lawsuit.

Court papers cite statements tape-recorded by Farnan such as "Conservatives don't want women to avoid pregnancies – that's interfering with God's work" and "When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth." The Christian legal group that filed the lawsuit, Murrieta-based Advocates for Faith and Freedom, released additional quotes Monday attributed to Corbett, including "When you pray for divine intervention, you're hoping that the spaghetti monster will help you get what you want."

... What do any of the type of quotes have to do with AP European History since 1402? Nada. Sorry, I disagree.

[retiredman]

Should black people, or just the students offended, have only complained to Imus's bosses, or was it proper for the entire black community to get involved and go after advertisers and sponsors to try and ruin his career?


national airwaves versus a AP European History classroom.

not apples and apples.

[Kathianne]

It doesn't matter what his lesson plan was. What matters is that he made inappropriate disparaging comments about Christians and instead of going to his boss, these people sued him. It's pretty ridiculous. It doesn't matter what the context of his comments were. Even if he made them in passing, the kid should've raised his hand and made his offense noted. If the teacher didn't let up then the kid should've gone to the administration. Case closed.
"Conservatives" are always griping about frivolous lawsuits clogging up the legal system, but I guess this is an exception to the rule?

If it was any other type of captive audience high schoolers, I doubt you'd be quite so understanding. The judge refused to dismiss the case.

[Kathianne]

national airwaves versus a AP European History classroom.

not apples and apples.

Agreed, one can turn off the tv, boycott that station and/or sponsors. There usually is only 1 AP European qualified teacher in a school.

[jimnyc]

national airwaves versus a AP European History classroom.

not apples and apples.

So as long as a teacher makes disparaging comments in school it's ok? The point was that the girls on the Rutgers BB team were offended at the remarks, and I guarantee not a single one of them listened to his program. Now you have a teacher who made disparaging remarks, and many people are hearing about them that aren't in the class.

[Hagbard Celine]

Should black people, or just the students offended, have only complained to Imus's bosses, or was it proper for the entire black community to get involved and go after advertisers and sponsors to try and ruin his career?

Just the students should've complained to his bosses.

[jimnyc]

Just the students should've complained to his bosses.

Well, you and I agree on this one. But MANY on the left were in concert with Sharpton and crew that he should have been fired for his remarks and have his livelihood taken away. An entire community of blacks and a large political segment went to bat against Imus.

[Kathianne]

Just the students should've complained to his bosses.

Personally, I would have handled it the way you suggested. However, if I worked in a mission, I may well feel offended that not only was the teacher including irrelevant material into a very difficult course, but actively attacking the belief system of a known group of students in the school. As I said, if it were Islam hell would likely be breaking out.

[Immanuel]

of course I did. And I agree with Hagbard that the student should have merely complained to his principal.


It doesn't matter what his lesson plan was. What matters is that he made inappropriate disparaging comments about Christians and instead of going to his boss, these people sued him. It's pretty ridiculous. It doesn't matter what the context of his comments were. Even if he made them in passing, the kid should've raised his hand and made his offense noted. If the teacher didn't let up then the kid should've gone to the administration. Case closed.
"Conservatives" are always griping about frivolous lawsuits clogging up the legal system, but I guess this is an exception to the rule?

The only thing going to the principal would have accomplished is to get the kid an "F" in that class and possibly other classes as well.

However, I agree with HC that it is a ridiculous suit. The teacher is entitled to his beliefs even if they are wrong. I don't think that the teacher should be limited in his right to speak either. However, I think that the teacher should use better judgment in how he presents his viewpoints.

So, this teacher and the school district is being sued for having poor judgment.

The teacher is not indoctrinating these students any more than any other teacher in any other grade, school or classroom is.

If the kid is in an AP course, he should either learn to accept the challenges of the class or ask to be reassigned to another class, but tacitfully rather than on religious grounds.

Immie

[Kathianne]

The only thing going to the principal would have accomplished is to get the kid an "F" in that class and possibly other classes as well.

However, I agree with HC that it is a ridiculous suit. The teacher is entitled to his beliefs even if they are wrong. I don't think that the teacher should be limited in his right to speak either. However, I think that the teacher should use better judgment in how he presents his viewpoints.

So, this teacher and the school district is being sued for having poor judgment.

The teacher is not indoctrinating these students any more than any other teacher in any other grade, school or classroom is.

If the kid is in an AP course, he should either learn to accept the challenges of the class or ask to be reassigned to another class, but tacitfully rather than on religious grounds.

ImmieNot when the material the teacher is including is irrelevant to the class, c'mon people! Teachers in public schools should not be discussing the types of interpretation he was making about a particular religion in a negative manner either. Now if it were ap comparative religions, ancient history, or philosophy, religion certainly should be discussed, not not in disparaging ways about those who practice whichever.

[Immanuel]

Not when the material the teacher is including is irrelevant to the class, c'mon people! Teachers in public schools should not be discussing the types of interpretation he was making about a particular religion in a negative manner either. Now if it were ap comparative religions, ancient history, or philosophy, religion certainly should be discussed, not not in disparaging ways about those who practice whichever.

I disagree.

The teacher should have leeway to teach the class as he sees fit as long as the material is covered.

Personally, I would have been offended myself by his remarks, but it is fascism when we start taking away a persons right to speak freely. I don't have to like what the man is saying to support his right to say it. Bigotry is bigotry. Snuff it out by exposing it, but don't snuff it out using the tacits of bigots.

Immie

PS: the best classes were always the ones that the teacher let the class go off on tangents and have real discussions. Simply reading out of the book was boring!

[Kathianne]

I disagree.

The teacher should have leeway to teach the class as he sees fit as long as the material is covered.

Personally, I would have been offended myself by his remarks, but it is fascism when we start taking away a persons right to speak freely. I don't have to like what the man is saying to support his right to say it. Bigotry is bigotry. Snuff it out by exposing it, but don't snuff it out using the tacits of bigots.

Immie

PS: the best classes were always the ones that the teacher let the class go off on tangents and have real discussions. Simply reading out of the book was boring!

There are 'tangents' that can be circled to come back to the point, this discussion was not of that type. This was the equivalent of a teacher discussing their own beliefs regarding sex or something, totally and completely unprofessional.

There is no room in public school curriculum to discuss through denigration religion, especially a particular religion. It's wrong, on any level.

As I said, I would have gone to the administration, if necessary the superintendent and school board, suing would not be an early course of action. However, I can see if I thought my kid was being targeted or my community and there was no relief.

[avatar4321]

Give me a break. Is it "Christian" to ruin this guy's life over this? Does that go hand-in-hand with the "love thy neighbor" message? Methinks that message has been usurped by a general attitude of militancy in all areas of life. The proper recourse for this "offended" student was to report this teacher to the administration.

i get it. It's alright to ruin everyones life if they are stupid and say something some group doesnt like, unless they are attacking Christians. Then its perfectly alright.

The students aren't ruining this guys life. The guy ruined his own life by making stupid statements. We may have freedom of speech, but there are always consequences for what we say.

[avatar4321]

national airwaves versus a AP European History classroom.

not apples and apples.

Yeah you are right. You can turn off the airwaves. you cant avoid the classroom. The difference is one has a captive audience.

[Hagbard Celine]

i get it. It's alright to ruin everyones life if they are stupid and say something some group doesnt like, unless they are attacking Christians. Then its perfectly alright.

The students aren't ruining this guys life. The guy ruined his own life by making stupid statements. We may have freedom of speech, but there are always consequences for what we say.

Yes. That's exactly what I said. I'm glad you "get it." :rolleyes:

[avatar4321]

Yes. That's exactly what I said. I'm glad you "get it." :rolleyes:

Yeah i do get it. And that is exactly what you were saying. Christians should be held to a different standard. If they shouldn't be allowed to pursue their rights simply because it might end someone's career.

Christianity is more than just being nice. it also includes standing up for justice.

[Hagbard Celine]

Yeah i do get it. And that is exactly what you were saying. Christians should be held to a different standard. If they shouldn't be allowed to pursue their rights simply because it might end someone's career.

Christianity is more than just being nice. it also includes standing up for justice.

Suing people isn't a "right" and neither is never having to hear anything you don't like. And disagreeing with someone's philosophy isn't "injustice." The issue should've been taken up with the administration. I'm sure these idiots have decried the evils of "lib" lawyers who clog the legal system with frivolous lawsuits in the past. Hypocrites.
Oh, and I wasn't aware that Christians were now claiming to be members of the Justice League. Thanks for the heads up :laugh:

[Hobbit]

I'm seeing a lot of stupid bullcrap being thrown around by people who have no idea what they're talking about, so here it comes.

1. If you think 'turning the other cheek' is an absolute, inviolate rule and that all Christians are required by their religion to lay back and take whatever is handed to them, then you have not only completely missed the entire point of the Sermon on the Mount (where that passage is from), but you are also choosing to ignore the multiple times in the New Testament where Christians are urged to carry swords to defend themselves and assert their legal rights if they run afoul of the law.

2. This guy was VERY much in the wrong for degrading and decrying another's religion like that. It would be the exact same thing as a Christian teacher telling the class that anybody who hasn't accepted Jesus is just an evil sinner who deserves to go to Hell or a Muslim teacher telling his students that if they don't worship Allah according to the Koran as given to the Prophet Muhammad, then they are infidels who will suffer the wrath of jihad. It's hostile to the students, and it's a personal opinion that is irrelevant to the source material being covered. Yes, Christianity played an important role in European history, but whether or not Christianity is true is not only unproven, but it irrelevant to how it affected Europe.

3. If the guy felt bold enough at this school to say things like this, it's reasonable to assume that he's been given a bit of leeway in the past or is fairly secure in his job, due to tenure or connections. It is also a growing trend in schools that outrageous teachers (who aren't Christians) are slapped on the wrist and put right back in the classroom. In this case, I'd say it is entirely possible that faced with a teacher so obviously hostile to Christianity and the administration which hired and continued to employ said teacher (I refuse to believe this is the first time he's said something like this), that a student would feel his grade would be in jeopardy if he told his teacher or the principal (or the student was otherwise intimidated by the prospect of going to the principal, as most students are). Therefore, the student did what I think was the reasonable option. He told his PARENTS! Now, whether coming out immediately with a lawsuit before going to the school board was the best idea is up for debate, but given the factors listed above, isn't it possible that the parents, after thoughtful consideration, decided that this was the best course of action, bypassing a possible stonewalling by the school (more likely than not) to ensure that no other children are mentally assaulted by this jerk?

I also find it completely possible that they did not foresee national media attention, as schools being sued over establishment clause issues in nothing new, and most cases never see national media attention. They failed, however, to account for the fact that those quiet ones are usually Muslims and Atheists suing over some teacher wearing a cross necklace to school, or a true case (which I cannot find right now, as I said, little media exposure) in which a biology teacher currently teaching on ancient life was fired over the establishment clause for showing his students an article on the discovery of a stratum of late Pre-Cambrian fossils that looked to shatter the myth that the Cambrian Explosion is just an illusion created by an incomplete fossil record.

What I'm seeing that disturbs me the most is that everybody now claiming that this kid was way out of line for not standing up to his teacher and then going over his head to the principal are the same ones who claim the suer righteous high ground in EVERY OTHER HALFWAY SIMILAR CASE THERE IS, so long as the religions involved are reversed.

You're all a bunch of cynical, snarky, holier-than-thou, stuck up, brain-dead, self-righteous, knee-jerk, lock step hypocrites who see Christianity as some horrendous boogeyman that will jump out of your closet and erase thousands of years worth of science unless it is constantly beaten back by lame attempts at humor, snarky comments, immature attacks, baseless arguments, personal attacks, and frivolous lawsuits. Oh yeah, Christianity needs to just sit back in its corner and mind its own business, but as soon as Atheism comes out swinging, it's the Christians' job to just sit there and take it. Yeah, way to have a nice little double standard. Have fun in your little ivory tower. I happen to think it's far less lonely here in the real world.

[Hagbard Celine]

I'm seeing a lot of stupid bullcrap being thrown around by people who have no idea what they're talking about, so here it comes.

1. If you think 'turning the other cheek' is an absolute, inviolate rule and that all Christians are required by their religion to lay back and take whatever is handed to them, then you have not only completely missed the entire point of the Sermon on the Mount (where that passage is from), but you are also choosing to ignore the multiple times in the New Testament where Christians are urged to carry swords to defend themselves and assert their legal rights if they run afoul of the law.

2. This guy was VERY much in the wrong for degrading and decrying another's religion like that. It would be the exact same thing as a Christian teacher telling the class that anybody who hasn't accepted Jesus is just an evil sinner who deserves to go to Hell or a Muslim teacher telling his students that if they don't worship Allah according to the Koran as given to the Prophet Muhammad, then they are infidels who will suffer the wrath of jihad. It's hostile to the students, and it's a personal opinion that is irrelevant to the source material being covered. Yes, Christianity played an important role in European history, but whether or not Christianity is true is not only unproven, but it irrelevant to how it affected Europe.

3. If the guy felt bold enough at this school to say things like this, it's reasonable to assume that he's been given a bit of leeway in the past or is fairly secure in his job, due to tenure or connections. It is also a growing trend in schools that outrageous teachers (who aren't Christians) are slapped on the wrist and put right back in the classroom. In this case, I'd say it is entirely possible that faced with a teacher so obviously hostile to Christianity and the administration which hired and continued to employ said teacher (I refuse to believe this is the first time he's said something like this), that a student would feel his grade would be in jeopardy if he told his teacher or the principal (or the student was otherwise intimidated by the prospect of going to the principal, as most students are). Therefore, the student did what I think was the reasonable option. He told his PARENTS! Now, whether coming out immediately with a lawsuit before going to the school board was the best idea is up for debate, but given the factors listed above, isn't it possible that the parents, after thoughtful consideration, decided that this was the best course of action, bypassing a possible stonewalling by the school (more likely than not) to ensure that no other children are mentally assaulted by this jerk?

I also find it completely possible that they did not foresee national media attention, as schools being sued over establishment clause issues in nothing new, and most cases never see national media attention. They failed, however, to account for the fact that those quiet ones are usually Muslims and Atheists suing over some teacher wearing a cross necklace to school, or a true case (which I cannot find right now, as I said, little media exposure) in which a biology teacher currently teaching on ancient life was fired over the establishment clause for showing his students an article on the discovery of a stratum of late Pre-Cambrian fossils that looked to shatter the myth that the Cambrian Explosion is just an illusion created by an incomplete fossil record.

What I'm seeing that disturbs me the most is that everybody now claiming that this kid was way out of line for not standing up to his teacher and then going over his head to the principal are the same ones who claim the suer righteous high ground in EVERY OTHER HALFWAY SIMILAR CASE THERE IS, so long as the religions involved are reversed.

You're all a bunch of cynical, snarky, holier-than-thou, stuck up, brain-dead, self-righteous, knee-jerk, lock step hypocrites who see Christianity as some horrendous boogeyman that will jump out of your closet and erase thousands of years worth of science unless it is constantly beaten back by lame attempts at humor, snarky comments, immature attacks, baseless arguments, personal attacks, and frivolous lawsuits. Oh yeah, Christianity needs to just sit back in its corner and mind its own business, but as soon as Atheism comes out swinging, it's the Christians' job to just sit there and take it. Yeah, way to have a nice little double standard. Have fun in your little ivory tower. I happen to think it's far less lonely here in the real world.

Should've gone to the faculty instead of suing. (shrug)

[Hobbit]

Should've gone to the faculty instead of suing. (shrug)

And how often did you stand up to your high school teachers and then go over their heads to complain about them to the principal when you were in high school? Yeah, I thought not.

[Immanuel]

And how often did you stand up to your high school teachers and then go over their heads to complain about them to the principal when you were in high school? Yeah, I thought not.

I still think the suit is the wrong way to go about this.

The teacher is wrong to degrade student's beliefs. I don't disagree there, but suing him for his bigotry is not the way to win his soul.

Immie

[Hagbard Celine]

And how often did you stand up to your high school teachers and then go over their heads to complain about them to the principal when you were in high school? Yeah, I thought not.

I was never a whiny b*tch religious freak who needed to complain about my highschool teachers Hobbit. I was too busy trying to get laid and have fun to worry about what my lame-ass teachers' opinions on religion were. Maybe you and this kid should take a page out of my book.

[Hobbit]

I was never a whiny b*tch religious freak who needed to complain about my highschool teachers Hobbit. I was too busy trying to get laid and have fun to worry about what my lame-ass teachers' opinions on religion were. Maybe you and this kid should take a page out of my book.

Then switch your argument from "He should have gone to the principal," to "He should have just ignored it." Oh, that's right, you CAN'T, because, in your heart, you know that there's no way any self-respecting Christian can sit in a classroom listening to some holier-than-thou intellectual dolt spew this stuff to a room fully of vulnerable teenagers who have no choice but to listen, nor should any self-respecting lover of academic freedom, for that matter. If one of my college professors said that, I'd walk out of class and go demand my money back, but this kid didn't have the option, as the government used force both to require his attendance and confiscate his tuition from his parents.

So instead of maybe trying to find some understanding for what would cause this reaction, which you keep telling Christians they should do when folks get mad at them, you come back with all the snark, sarcasm, and disingenuous criticisms you can come up with, excusing professor proselyte while demonizing the one person who finally stood up to the creep. Now, if you're any kind of decent, you can imagine the kind of enraged reaction you would have if your teacher started stating, as actual, true fact, that your mother was a filthy whore and your dad was a drunken deadbeat in such a context that the class actually believed him. You'd march straight up to whoever was in charge and demand his butt in a sling, or else. Now, imagine that, only multiplied, and it's the kind of righteous anger a Christian SHOULD feel when a teacher abuses the trust and authority given to him by telling a room full of impressionable captives that belief in God is stupid.

And what about this guy warrants him being called a 'whiny [deleted] religious freak?' So far, nothing he has done seems out of the ordinary. A teacher unlawfully, as well as unethically and immorally, abused his power to preach a message that was not only strongly against one religion in particular, but was mocking that religion, clearly violating Constitutional provisions as an employee of the government. That screams 'believer of religious ethics in the classroom' more than 'religious freak,' and what would it qualify to remove the 'whiny [deleted]' label? The teacher was obviously hostile to what he had to say. It was reasonable to believe he wouldn't get anywhere talking to the principal. What was he supposed to do? Stand by and watch his teacher mentally abuse the class and break the law? Challenge the teacher to a fistfight? Shout down the teacher in front of the class? If it's at all comprehensible to somebody so completely hostile to religion as yourself, put yourself in the boy's shoes long enough to ask what you would have done.

Somehow, I expect this will be met with another brief, snarky response in which you attempt to paint yourself as some 'live and let live' peacemaker but actually expose yourself as yet another pseudo-intellectual hack who thinks poking fun at all things religious makes you smart and is completely dishonest about about how you would actually behave towards behavior you found criminally upsetting.

[Hagbard Celine]

Then switch your argument from "He should have gone to the principal," to "He should have just ignored it." Oh, that's right, you CAN'T, because, in your heart, you know that there's no way any self-respecting Christian can sit in a classroom listening to some holier-than-thou intellectual dolt spew this stuff to a room fully of vulnerable teenagers who have no choice but to listen, nor should any self-respecting lover of academic freedom, for that matter. If one of my college professors said that, I'd walk out of class and go demand my money back, but this kid didn't have the option, as the government used force both to require his attendance and confiscate his tuition from his parents.

So instead of maybe trying to find some understanding for what would cause this reaction, which you keep telling Christians they should do when folks get mad at them, you come back with all the snark, sarcasm, and disingenuous criticisms you can come up with, excusing professor proselyte while demonizing the one person who finally stood up to the creep. Now, if you're any kind of decent, you can imagine the kind of enraged reaction you would have if your teacher started stating, as actual, true fact, that your mother was a filthy whore and your dad was a drunken deadbeat in such a context that the class actually believed him. You'd march straight up to whoever was in charge and demand his butt in a sling, or else. Now, imagine that, only multiplied, and it's the kind of righteous anger a Christian SHOULD feel when a teacher abuses the trust and authority given to him by telling a room full of impressionable captives that belief in God is stupid.

And what about this guy warrants him being called a 'whiny [deleted] religious freak?' So far, nothing he has done seems out of the ordinary. A teacher unlawfully, as well as unethically and immorally, abused his power to preach a message that was not only strongly against one religion in particular, but was mocking that religion, clearly violating Constitutional provisions as an employee of the government. That screams 'believer of religious ethics in the classroom' more than 'religious freak,' and what would it qualify to remove the 'whiny [deleted]' label? The teacher was obviously hostile to what he had to say. It was reasonable to believe he wouldn't get anywhere talking to the principal. What was he supposed to do? Stand by and watch his teacher mentally abuse the class and break the law? Challenge the teacher to a fistfight? Shout down the teacher in front of the class? If it's at all comprehensible to somebody so completely hostile to religion as yourself, put yourself in the boy's shoes long enough to ask what you would have done.

Somehow, I expect this will be met with another brief, snarky response in which you attempt to paint yourself as some 'live and let live' peacemaker but actually expose yourself as yet another pseudo-intellectual hack who thinks poking fun at all things religious makes you smart and is completely dishonest about about how you would actually behave towards behavior you found criminally upsetting.

If he felt that strongly about the issue and had absolutely no hobbies and no dates lined up for the forseeable future, he should've taken the issue up with the administration instead of wasting the court's time and costing himself and the teacher a fortune in legal costs. It's neater, it's cheaper and it's a hell of a lot nicer (i.e. Christianier)

[Hobbit]

I still think the suit is the wrong way to go about this.

The teacher is wrong to degrade student's beliefs. I don't disagree there, but suing him for his bigotry is not the way to win his soul.

Immie

From the wording of the article, it had been going on for quite some time, and since I see no allegations in the article either way concerning whether or not the parents and student spoke to school officials prior to signing a lawsuit, I'd say it was a distinct possibility that they tried to deal with it through those channels, but were stonewalled. To hear most of the people on this thread talk, you'd think the teacher slipped up once, so the student ran straight to a lawyer, but by the wording of the article, this was a very long-term thing. So, what if they DID, in fact, go to the principal and the school board, but they decided to do nothing about it, as government schools always do. Are you suggesting that the teacher be allowed to continue doing such things? Do you think a granting of mercy that would fall upon this buffoon's deaf ears is worth the possible hundreds of young minds he could corrupt, possibly costing them their souls? Or do you think that enough is enough and that a school board that fails to follow even the Constitution should be brought up before the court to be made to answer what they would not in private?

[Hobbit]

If he felt that strongly about the issue and had absolutely no hobbies and no dates lined up for the forseeable future, he should've taken the issue up with the administration instead of wasting the court's time and costing himself and the teacher a fortune in legal costs. It's neater, it's cheaper and it's a hell of a lot nicer (i.e. Christianier)

I'm going to say this one...more...time. There's nothing in the article that even implies that neither he nor his parents tried to take it up with the administrator, yet you assume that he didn't because that makes it easy to attack him. Judging by my past knowledge of the behavior of government schools when confronted with teacher wrongdoing outside court, my guess is that they DID talk to the principal, and the superintendent, and possibly even the school board, but being a government school, they either said 'There's nothing we can do,' or decided to simply ignore him and hope he went away. So, it's off to court we go, to MAKE them address the issue.

Oh, and that's really classy alleging that he has no social life because his parents and a legal fund filed a lawsuit on his behalf, which is such a time-waster compared, to, say, posting pseudo-intellectual drivel on a message board in the middle of the afternoon with the sole intent of boosting your own self-esteem by provoking anger in your fellow posters, and probably using more time and energy coming up with lame ways of attacking the guy than he actually used making headlines. Yeah, this guy's a real loser compared to you.

P.S. Whatever gave you the impression that Christians were always supposed to be nice. When Jesus saw a bunch of jackasses using the temple as a moneymaking scam, He made a whip and tore up the place. Personally, I like to follow His example rather than cram myself into some box dreamed up by self-righteous jackasses who haven't even read the Bible.

[Immanuel]

From the wording of the article, it had been going on for quite some time, and since I see no allegations in the article either way concerning whether or not the parents and student spoke to school officials prior to signing a lawsuit, I'd say it was a distinct possibility that they tried to deal with it through those channels, but were stonewalled. To hear most of the people on this thread talk, you'd think the teacher slipped up once, so the student ran straight to a lawyer, but by the wording of the article, this was a very long-term thing. So, what if they DID, in fact, go to the principal and the school board, but they decided to do nothing about it, as government schools always do. Are you suggesting that the teacher be allowed to continue doing such things? Do you think a granting of mercy that would fall upon this buffoon's deaf ears is worth the possible hundreds of young minds he could corrupt, possibly costing them their souls? Or do you think that enough is enough and that a school board that fails to follow even the Constitution should be brought up before the court to be made to answer what they would not in private?

Good questions. I'm not going to try and answer at the moment, but as for my first thoughts upon reading this article, a couple of months ago, my first thoughts were that this is just another frivolous law suit. Someone and someone's attorney, trying to dig into the deep pockets of an insurance company.

I couldn't tell you what my high school teachers said or what they believed if you held a gun to my head... who even listened to them? But then the decades have warn on me too! :D

I'll guarantee you that most high school students don't care or know what a high school teacher thinks. Which is why I think this student heard the teacher say something objectionable and then started documenting the instances and the family sees $$$ in their future. I may be reading them wrong, but who knows?

Immie

[avatar4321]

Suing people isn't a "right" and neither is never having to hear anything you don't like. And disagreeing with someone's philosophy isn't "injustice." The issue should've been taken up with the administration. I'm sure these idiots have decried the evils of "lib" lawyers who clog the legal system with frivolous lawsuits in the past. Hypocrites.
Oh, and I wasn't aware that Christians were now claiming to be members of the Justice League. Thanks for the heads up :laugh:

actually, it is a right if you have a case. That is what lawsuits are all about, advocating for your rights before a judge.

[avatar4321]

I was never a whiny b*tch religious freak who needed to complain about my highschool teachers Hobbit. I was too busy trying to get laid and have fun to worry about what my lame-ass teachers' opinions on religion were. Maybe you and this kid should take a page out of my book.

not very surprised that you never succeeded.

Maybe you should actually care about something higher than yourself. Women tend to like that.