Do people really not know the difference between sharing a family tradition in a secular setting and inappropriate evangelism?

[Sarah CB]

Fox New's take:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/14/first-grader-told-to-stop-talking-about-bible/?intcmp=latestnews

 

Really? Can a reasonable reader not see that she was allowed to share her tradition but not "scripture?" That child was set up for conflict - John 3:16 is *insulting* to those who don't hold the Christian faith.

 

I tried to find another source, but the first 1.5 google pages were ALL conservative sites.

 

And, yes, I'd feel the same way if the verses were from the Quran, the Bagavad Gita, or the Book of Mormon.

 

Seriously?  When I read your title I thought I'd see an example of uninvited evangelizing.  However, if the teacher actually asked the kids to share their Christmas traditions then I'd expect to hear a variety of religious answers.  

[Joanne]

The child in this article didn't appear to be doing any of those things. It was a presentation of HER beliefs. Which was apparently the assignment.

Actually, the assignment was to share a family holiday tradition. Miss Brynn did just that, and was allowed to do just that.

[Mergath]

Well first of all, there is no evidence that any of that Hell talk occurred.  Second, nowadays many Christian kids aren't taught about Hell until they are older - their Christan ed focuses on love and other positive stuff.  Third, if a kid is taught to come into school and talk about Hell, she's going to do it on the playground, in the lunchroom, in the halls, etc., and I don't even think that's illegal.  How that relates in any way to this girl quoting John 3:16 during an assigned report about a Christian holiday is beyond me.  I mean, we get it, you don't like hearing about Hell.  I don't, either.

 

Silly me, thinking that talking about proselytizing children would be relevant in a thread about a proselytizing child.  :001_rolleyes:   And if you think most churches save the talks about hell until kids are older, think again.

 

Also, I never said it was illegal.  Just that it was a problem for some people.

 

Did you even read my post?

[Farrar]

I greatly dislike the manufactured supposed persecution of Christians that certain media outlets would like people to believe is somehow rampant in America.  It's not.

 

But I also greatly dislike when students are not accorded their right to free speech.  Tinker and other cases have made it pretty clear. When students initiate it, they are allowed to share their views.  The limitations have to do with things like safety, threats, profanity, etc, so the bible should not have been off limits.  I also think there's not a clear line between saying "We believe this..." and quoting the verse you believe when an assignment asks how and why you celebrate a holiday.  The assignment practically asked for it and any teacher shocked by that was incredibly naive or purposefully setting a child up, as others have said.

 

But, getting to the first point, there are a number of things that feel fishy to me about the story.  How did the teacher know she was about to read a bible verse?  How do we know that she wasn't just up against a time limit and hadn't rambled on for quite awhile?  I note that the school referred to policies, but what policies?  Also, we really only have the family's word for what happened in the class.  The teacher is not obliged to provide an unlimited public forum.  She can cut kids off for all kinds of reasons.  The classroom is not a public forum.

[Joanne]

Seriously? When I read your title I thought I'd see an example of uninvited evangelizing. However, if the teacher actually asked the kids to share their Christmas traditions then I'd expect to hear a variety of religious answers.

A variety or religious answers is appropriate. The student was able to do that, including Christian content.

[Laurie4b]

I didn't read through all the responses.

 

However, the video on the NBC link has the school district's policy: "Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, or other classwork if the expression is germane to the assignment."

 

I think that is pretty clear and her expression of her religious beliefs in an assignment about her family's holiday traditions (and Christmas is their holiday) is germane. If it was not, it was a set-up (even if unintentional) by the teacher to ask students to share their family's traditions during a holiday season.

 

I think a Muslim student, Jewish student, Hindu student , etc. should have the same right to share about their holiday traditions unhindered and uncensored including any verses from their holy scriptures as well. First graders are old enough to know or be taught that some people believe one thing; others something else.

 

In our uber liberal, progressive area, students and their PARENTS are allowed to share info in the classrooms about their religious holidays and traditions including their beliefs.  It's kind of like show and tell. It enriches all the students' understanding of religious beliefs. This is in elementary school.

 

I don't think censorship is the way to go in cases like this; I think allowing and encouraging a plurality of expression is much more productive, protects everyone's rights to religious belief and free speech, and teaches tolerance much better.

[happi duck]

If the article is correct it wasn't a time issue because she stopped the girl and spent time to say that she could not talk about the Bible.  The teacher did not hear the Bible verse but stopped the girl when she mentioned Jesus.

 

It's so silly.  School kids share about many, many things...belief based and not.  It isn't the end of the world and could be nicely handled by anyone who can think on their feet.

 

Let each kid have their one minute and at the end reiterate that "isn't it nice that we all have such wonderful traditions!"  If another child says 'Who's Jesus?' based on what the girl shared..."that's something for families and churches to talk about...time for playtime!"

[Farrar]

Okay, I think I was trying to work out what I thought about this...

 

I think what the teacher did was perfectly legal.  It did not legally trample on the child's free speech rights because the courts have consistently granted a great deal of power to teachers over controlling their own classrooms.  You might could make an argument that the teacher gave the students a open forum for this issue with the assignment, but I don't think that would ever win.

 

But I do think she infringed on the child's general right to free speech and I think it was inappropriate.  Quoting one bible verse is not evangelism to me.  It's citing an example or support for what you're saying.  And while I disagree that there's some massive war on Christians like FOX would like us to believe, I think teachers and schools are very unsure how to navigate religious issues in school and they tend to be either tone deaf and subtly evangelizing themselves or overly censorious and cutting off all legitimate discussion or assignments.

[SpecialClassical]

In what way does telling a first grader to not finish her bible verse compare with being hated, separated, reproached, name cast out as evil?

The article stated that she was separated from her class and reproached about the content of her presentation.

[Joanne]

An interesting juxtaposition today at the Chamber of Commerce event I attended - started with a prayer (content revealed a Christian assumption).

[Laurie4b]

EXACTLY. It seems to me that sharing her tradition was allowed. Even mention of Jesus and the basic Christmas story.

 

I'm sure the teacher thought it through and knew that Christmas tradition shares would include symbols of family culture, religion, and spirituality.

 

The fact that this story doesn't appear on mainstream news sites in my google search is also, IMO, telling.

 

Joanne, someone gave a link to a NBC news story about this same incident in post #14. My quote of you is post #75.

 

Does it make a difference to you that NBC is reporting it with basically the same story line?

[Word Nerd]

EXACTLY. It seems to me that sharing her tradition was allowed. Even mention of Jesus and the basic Christmas story.

 

I'm sure the teacher thought it through and knew that Christmas tradition shares would include symbols of family culture, religion, and spirituality.

 

The fact that this story doesn't appear on mainstream news sites in my google search is also, IMO, telling.

 

Yet you still brought this "news" to the board's attention.

[msjones]

I'll say it again:  this kind of thing is a regular part of being in a public school classroom.  

 

Kids say lots of things.  They are little kids. The teacher could easily have let her finish and just called the next child up and left it at that.

 

 I almost guarantee that none of the kids felt harassed or intimidated or worked up by the Bible verse.  Possibly, a kid would have blurted out that his family thinks the Bible is a big lie, or whatever.  

 

When I was teaching and 'issues' like this came up, I said something like, "Susie shared what her family believes.  Thank you, Susie.  Class, be sure to ask your parents about what they believe, and you'll have your turn to share, too.  Now, line up for recess... blah, blah, blah."

 

Normal day-to-day stuff...

 

 

[Joanne]

Yet you still brought this "news" to the board's attention.

????

 

There are a lot of topics discussed on a chat board. I am not sure of your point.

[msjones]

If the article is correct it wasn't a time issue because she stopped the girl and spent time to say that she could not talk about the Bible.  The teacher did not hear the Bible verse but stopped the girl when she mentioned Jesus.

 

It's so silly.  School kids share about many, many things...belief based and not.  It isn't the end of the world and could be nicely handled by anyone who can think on their feet.

 

Let each kid have their one minute and at the end reiterate that "isn't it nice that we all have such wonderful traditions!"  If another child says 'Who's Jesus?' based on what the girl shared..."that's something for families and churches to talk about...time for playtime!"

:hurray: 

:iagree:  :hurray: 

[Miss Marple]

I agree with this. How could a six year old know what's appropriate and what's not in the context of a secular school and a presentation of a religious holiday? So wouldn't it be the duty of the teacher to be in charge of that? I could understand if this was say, fifth grade and these reports were 10-15 min long. The teacher might remind the student to leave the evangelizing out and move on. But this was a one minute talk given to an audience of arguably, short attention span six year olds getting excited for the holiday break. We don't know if her minute was almost up anyway, or if she has a history of talking about Jesus being the savior of the world, or if the teacher has a thing about religion. None of these things we can glean from the Fox source. I don't think anyone is assigning culpability to the child, she did as she thought was right. But the teacher has a responsibility as a representative of a secular school to not show favor to one religion over another. It's a logical and practical thing to simply not promote any religion. A practice (star of david on the tree) is not promoting a religion, it's sharing a practice. Telling the class Jesus is the savior of the world is promoting a religion. Perhaps that's the line the teachers are told to adhere to. 

How is quoting from the source of the story promoting a religion?  In secular schools all over the country the Bible is taught as literature, quoted, read aloud, etc.  In our own homeschool co-op (Christian) we read the Koran, Buddhist teachings, etc., quoted them in papers, etc.  The story of the Star of Bethlehem is based in the Bible and if one applies your interpretation of  "showing favor to one religion over another", should not have been allowed to be shared.  All this girl did was paraphrase a Biblical idea. Actually quoting the words of the Bible is no different.

[Slartibartfast]

Joanne, someone gave a link to a NBC news story about this same incident in post #14. My quote of you is post #75.

 

Does it make a difference to you that NBC is reporting it with basically the same story line?

And CBS

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/01/14/1st-graders-christmas-presentation-allegedly-cut-short-for-citing-bible-verse/

[happi duck]

I just realized that when I opened this thread I expected to read about adults.

 

If the parents took this opportunity to show up with a 'Happy Birthday Jesus' cake and expected to serve the cake and lead the class in a chorus of 'happy birthday' I would have no problem with the teacher saying, 'um...no'.  Ditto if the parents showed up with Bibles wrapped as gifts for the other students.  "But cake is our tradition..."  or "gifts are our tradition..." said by the parents hijacking their child's show and tell time would be inappropriate.

 

A little girl sharing for one minute doesn't seem uproar worthy...I mean come on people, it's not like her parents showed up with cupcakes!  ;)

[SKL]

 

A little girl sharing for one minute doesn't seem uproar worthy...I mean come on people, it's not like her parents showed up with cupcakes!  ;)

 

Hmmm...  Someone needs to post a Jesus cupcake ASAP.

 

[Joanne]

And CBS

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/01/14/1st-graders-christmas-presentation-allegedly-cut-short-for-citing-bible-verse/

Actually, yes. And after reading all articles several times, I would like to amend my opinion.

 

If the teacher handled it as described, I would as a parent be upset.

 

I still do not think that sharing scripture should be allowed or encouraged in a public a school. I also think that there is a difference between a sharing a holiday tradition, including Christian content, and quoting scripture.

 

That said, I am not a fan of how the teacher handled it of that reporting is accurate.

[Slartibartfast]

It's awfully annoying when Muslims are dragged into these things like WHAT IF IT WAS THE QURAN WOULDN'T THAT BE *OUTRAGEOUS?!!*

 

Everyone benefits from freedom of, and from, religion, you guys geez chill with the Muslim comparisons.

 

This Muslim doesn't care if the piece is biased or not. The little girl should be able to talk about Jesus in any way she wants to talk about Jesus, because she was assigned to talk about what she did around December 25th. Most Christians talk about Jesus around December 25th. A lot. And read the Gospels. A lot.As long as she didn't go over her allotted time like "And furthermore, Heathens, hear this good news...." and just went straight into tent revival mode.

 

Teacher sounds like a dum dum on several levels. I shared here on this forum how how someone told my Muslim child that Christmas has "nothing to do with" being a Christian.

 

They're among us.

I certainly did not mention Muslims because I find it outrageous but because it tends to be persecuted in some areas. A lot of people would not have cared one bit if the article was about a Muslim child and a lot of those people are in my home state. My home state tried to outlaw Shariah law, so you will have to excuse me when I have crazy people in mind when saying some things.

 

It is not intended as a slight.

 

I would have been equally outraged if the article was about any faith. The 1st Amendment is very important to me.

[Joanne]

I certainly did not mention Muslims because I find it outrageous but because it tends to be persecuted in some areas.

 

I would have been equally outraged if the article was about any faith. The 1st Amendment is very important to me.

I mentioned Muslims to state my personal reality that my reaction is not anti-Christian but anti-exclusive-religion sharing in public school settings.

[Farrar]

Hmmm...  Someone needs to post a Jesus cupcake ASAP.

 

[Alte Veste Academy]

That is adorable. But is it just me, or does it seem really, really wrong to eat the baby Jesus?

[Farrar]

That is adorable. But is it just me, or does it seem really, really wrong to eat the baby Jesus? 

 

Um, I'm pretty sure that if one has been taking communion, they've been eating Jesus anyway...

[JenniferB]

In what way does telling a first grader to not finish her bible verse compare with being hated, separated, reproached, name cast out as evil?

Her motives being questioned and scorned in the starting and throughout this thread, her separation in school by being singled out and sent to the principle to prove her presentation's appropriateness, and her reproach from the teacher. This treatment is worthy of the blessings she is awarded in the Kingdom.

[Slartibartfast]

A variety or religious answers is appropriate. The student was able to do that, including Christian content.

Actually the articles state the she was the only child who wasn't permitted to finish sharing her report.

[Slartibartfast]

Um, I'm pretty sure that if one has been taking communion, they've been eating Jesus anyway...

We had a little Reformation over that bit (among others) :lol:

[bolt.]

That is adorable. But is it just me, or does it seem really, really wrong to eat the baby Jesus?

"My flesh is real food..."

[Alte Veste Academy]

Um, I'm pretty sure that if one has been taking communion, they've been eating Jesus anyway...

 

I guess, but not a smiling, pudgy-cheeked one, still in the manger... :lol:

[Elfknitter.#]

The problem is that she quoted scripture?? Because there are a lot of sayings that originate with the bible. The Golden Rule, for example.

 

And also, again, there are Christians that don't believe the teaching of Hell is biblical. Stating that Jesus was the Savior of the world is not the same as saying, "And all y'all that don't believe that are damned to eternal torture."

 

Actually, the Golden Rule can be traced further back than the Bible.  Confucious was noted for saying, "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself."

[SKL]

"Take and eat, this is my body...."

[MFG]

The facts of this particular case aside, isn't content-based prior restraint of speech by an agent of the state an almost textbook definition of censorship? Doesn't that bother people?

[Slartibartfast]

"Take and eat, this is my body...."

“I am the true grapevine, and my Father is the gardener."

 

 

This argument has been going on for hundreds of years and the best thing is, our parts are already written. :lol:

[clarkacademy]

The facts of this particular case aside, isn't content-based prior restraint of speech by an agent of the state an almost textbook definition of censorship? Doesn't that bother people?

 

A lot more than that bothers me :( We preach tolerance but we do not show it. People should all live and work and go to school with only like minded others then there will be no problems. I hate to say that because I would be away from many friends and family but that is what it seems like. Everyone is suppose to blend together and get along but all people can do is huff and puff. So what little Suzy Q heard a bible verse and she is an atheist. Who cares that the Christian is offended by the boy who dresses like a girl WHO CARES!!!!!! At the end of the day you answer for your self. And in the real end we all get a six foot hole to go too. Just get along, none of that matters and if it maters that much to you then go stick your head in the sand so you don't have to hear it.

 

The world is not Jewish, Catholic, Muslim or all believers of the flying spaghetti monster we are all different, we should all be respected. That means EVERYONE not just people who believe like you do. Threads like this only cause anger towards each other.

 

[TechWife]

Um, I'm pretty sure that if one has been taking communion, they've been eating Jesus anyway...

 

Not everyone who takes communion believes this. 

[Slartibartfast]

I want it to be clear that stating I am not eating Jesus during Communion in no way implies that I would not eat a cupcake Jesus.

[milovany]

Not everyone who takes communion believes this. 

 

True!  Although if it's not the case (that the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ), then the entire church -- including the apostles and those they taught -- did it wrong for 1500 years until someone finally figure it out and set things straight.  That's not really acceptable, either (unless Jesus was just a really, really bad at getting his point across).

 

Cute cupcakes.  :)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

The facts of this particular case aside, isn't content-based prior restraint of speech by an agent of the state an almost textbook definition of censorship? Doesn't that bother people?

 

No, as free speech is not a guarantee in all venues. 

[milovany]

No, as free speech is not a guarantee in all venues. 

 

Agreed.  A LOT of first amendment freedoms are restricted in certain settings, the school being one of them. 

[Slartibartfast]

Ttrue!  Although if it's not the case (that the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ), then the entire church -- including the apostles and those they taught -- did it wrong for 1500 years until someone finally figure it out and set things straight.  That's not really acceptable, either.  

 

Cute cupcakes.  :)

 

There were non-Catholic Christians before the Reformation. They weren't new ideas, people just stopped burning one another as heretics quite so much (though that continued a bit longer)

[MFG]

No, as free speech is not a guarantee in all venues.

Yes, I understand that. But doesn't the burden of proof rest with the school and not with the student?

[milovany]

There were non-Catholic Christians before the Reformation. They weren't new ideas, people just stopped burning one another as heretics quite so much (though that continued a bit longer)

 

Oh, yes, I'm Orthodox, so I'm aware that there were non-Catholic Christians prior to the Reformation. :) My point was that the Holy Apostles themselves, and those they discipled (and continuing, through the church as a whole), did believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, and this belief did prevail for at least 1000 years, if not the 1500 (although my historical understanding is 1500 or so, until some time after the Reformation; even the major reformers believe in the Real Presence). If there were some that didn't believe this (do you have instances?) prior to that time, it has to be admitted that it was a fringe belief. Believing that the church Christ established taught and practiced error in this very important matter until some time after the Reformation is something I can't do.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Yes, I understand that. But doesn't the burden of proof rest with the school and not with the student?

 

If the school has an improper rule or interpretation of state guidelines then they will lose when challenged in court.  I believe in this case the parents will be required to prove the school acted improperly.

As I have no idea what the actual story is behind this matter, I have no opinion one way or the other. 

[WishboneDawn]

Okay, I think I was trying to work out what I thought about this...

 

I think what the teacher did was perfectly legal. It did not legally trample on the child's free speech rights because the courts have consistently granted a great deal of power to teachers over controlling their own classrooms. You might could make an argument that the teacher gave the students a open forum for this issue with the assignment, but I don't think that would ever win.

 

But I do think she infringed on the child's general right to free speech and I think it was inappropriate. Quoting one bible verse is not evangelism to me. It's citing an example or support for what you're saying. And while I disagree that there's some massive war on Christians like FOX would like us to believe, I think teachers and schools are very unsure how to navigate religious issues in school and they tend to be either tone deaf and subtly evangelizing themselves or overly censorious and cutting off all legitimate discussion or assignments.

I think this is the first assessment in the thread.

 

ETA: I meant fairest assessment. D'oh.

[Mrs Mungo]

I agree with you Joanne. 

 

The quote from the father of the child gives this opinion, which is basically a restatement of the Tinker standard:

"Any act to suppress a student’s free speech, in this case censorship of Brynn’s presentation of her family traditions, has violated Brynn’s constitutional rights unless the school district can reasonably conclude that Brynn’s speech was going to materially and substantially disrupt the school’s work or discipline,†he wrote in a letter to the school district. “Here, the school district cannot reasonably come to that conclusion.â€

 

Daddy is not quoted as being knowledgeable of the Fraser standard, which is what he set his dd up for violating.

I don't think the girl violated the Fraser standard, if the story is as reported.

 

 

I would not be surprised if some of the local AP USH or AP Gov students now have an idea for their next paper.

? Wouldn't that also be true if the teacher reacted similarly to any other child's speech? The child came home sad and upset because she had been humiliated. She was the only one not allowed to finish and the teacher went off on an incorrect tangent about what *students* could/could not share. She's wrong that the girl's speech was not legally allowed. That's pretty ridiculous.

 

 

And I wouldn't be surprised if the offended parents sent their kid in with a graphic or porno related Valentine's Day expression of their free speech just to make the point.

What offended parents? Parents of other first graders? Parents of this little girl? I'm confused about your meaning here.

 

 

 

Yes, but did the next part of the speech fit the context?  One common occurance with K-2 show and share is the amount of wandering from the main point, and many teachers will cut the child off when the main point is finished, rather than going off on a related idea. That does seem to have happened here, and it's in keeping with the instructional goal of learning to organize one's thoughts in advance, with  main idea/supporting details.  The tradition or main idea was using the star on top of the Christmas tree as a reminder of a religious viewpoint. The symbol was defined and more details could have been added that pertained to the history of using the star and the tree, but springboarding into a related broader topic (the religious viewpoint) was attempted instead.  Kind of like asking what did you do over summer vacation, getting one sentence on what the kid actually did, used as a springboard to talk about the details of a relative's life.

 

I agree that it's normal to sometimes cut off little kids when they wander away from the point, but I disagree that is what happened here.

 

 

EXACTLY. It seems to me that sharing her tradition was allowed. Even mention of Jesus and the basic Christmas story.

 

No, she was cut off and told she was wrong for sharing it. But, I see that you amended your thoughts later in the thread, so maybe we agree now.

 

 

I think many in the media jump on the "persecuted Christians" like a dog on a bone. It gives their loyal viewers something to moan and groan about as validation for their feelings. It's sickening. The same thing would happen if a Muslim child stood up ad quoted the Koran. We'd hear screeching and gasps from the same crowd, imo.

I'm not sure what you mean here. If the same thing happened to a Muslim child, I would feel exactly the same way.

 

 

You might want to look up the law on this, see the Fraser standard or Gov. Cuomo's State of the State address.  From what I've seen in this area, if your child's beliefs are expressed in a way that verbally harasses or physically harms another child, or are discriminatory in race, creed, national origin, etc your child is going to be in court, along with the school officials who are supposed to be running a place of learning, not a place of harrassment and intimidation.

You think this 6 year old girl's speech was discriminatory? Physically harmed someone? Verbally harassed them in the 30 seconds it took her to explain about the star? Really?

 

 

 

I greatly dislike the manufactured supposed persecution of Christians that certain media outlets would like people to believe is somehow rampant in America.  It's not.

 

But I also greatly dislike when students are not accorded their right to free speech.  Tinker and other cases have made it pretty clear. When students initiate it, they are allowed to share their views.  The limitations have to do with things like safety, threats, profanity, etc, so the bible should not have been off limits.  I also think there's not a clear line between saying "We believe this..." and quoting the verse you believe when an assignment asks how and why you celebrate a holiday.  The assignment practically asked for it and any teacher shocked by that was incredibly naive or purposefully setting a child up, as others have said.

I agree.

 

 

How did the teacher know she was about to read a bible verse?

I don't think she did. I think she cut the girl off because she had mentioned Jesus.

 

 

Okay, I think I was trying to work out what I thought about this...

 

I think what the teacher did was perfectly legal.  It did not legally trample on the child's free speech rights because the courts have consistently granted a great deal of power to teachers over controlling their own classrooms.  You might could make an argument that the teacher gave the students a open forum for this issue with the assignment, but I don't think that would ever win.

 

But I do think she infringed on the child's general right to free speech and I think it was inappropriate.  Quoting one bible verse is not evangelism to me.  It's citing an example or support for what you're saying.  And while I disagree that there's some massive war on Christians like FOX would like us to believe, I think teachers and schools are very unsure how to navigate religious issues in school and they tend to be either tone deaf and subtly evangelizing themselves or overly censorious and cutting off all legitimate discussion or assignments.

I agree with all of this.

 

As an aside, I am surprised that people don't believe that the girl would come up with something religious on her own. I was in a group of kids last night and the group leader asked kids to share one of their family's Christmas traditions. Yes, kids talked about opening gifts and such, but several of them (these were kindergarten through third graders) mentioned Jesus or God in some way, and it wasn't an assignment given ahead of time that could have been influenced by the parents.

[poppy]

A couple of people said that they wouldn't be ok with this happening to a Muslim child. But I don't think it would happen to a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a Jew, or a Catholic.  There is an obligation to save others- convince others-aquire converts that exists in a certain strain of Protestant Christianity that doesn't exist in other faiths. And I do think that is a complicating factor here.

 

For those who say this is a free speech issue, if the child's religion involved white supremacy, would you want that to be protected as well?  I don't think school students have the federal protections of speech and I don't think the should, either.

[Slartibartfast]

Oh, yes, I'm Orthodox, so I'm aware that there were non-Catholic Christians prior to the Reformation. :) My point was that the Holy Apostles themselves, and those they discipled (and continuing, through the church as a whole), did believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, and this belief did prevail for at least 1000 years, if not the 1500 (although my historical understanding is 1500 or so, until some time after the Reformation; even the major reformers believe in the Real Presence). If there were some that didn't believe this (do you have instances?) prior to that time, it has to be admitted that it was a fringe belief. Believing that the church Christ established taught and practiced error in this very important matter until some time after the Reformation is something I can't do.

 

 

I am sure many fringe beliefs were as such because stating them could get you burned as a heretic.

 

I disagree, I am not going to debate doctrine on this thread. We can have a spin off or something but I am still not going to change my mind. I don't just decide my faith on a whim.

[Mrs Mungo]

A couple of people said that they wouldn't be ok with this happening to a Muslim child. But I don't think it would happen to a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a Jew, or a Catholic.  There is an obligation to save others- convince others-aquire converts that exists in a certain strain of Protestant Christianity that doesn't exist in other faiths. And I do think that is a complicating factor here.

The child was cut off for explaining about how a Christmas tree star came to be a symbol for Christmas. So, I disagree. It's like a Jewish child bringing a menorah and being cut off because they were explaining the miracle of Hanukkah.

 

 

For those who say this is a free speech issue, if the child's religion involved white supremacy, would you want that to be protected as well?  I don't think school students have the federal protections of speech and I don't think the should, either.

Hate speech *would* fit under the Fraser standard. Students have free speech, but it is limited by law and precedent. There are standards in place for a reason. I don't think this teacher (or principal) have a good understanding of those standards, if the story happened as reported.

[Slartibartfast]

Oh, OK. So you'd be totally good with my dd wearing her 'God is a myth so stop worrying and get on with your life' T-shirt to school and berating her classmates for being deluded, using a nice Dawkins quote or two ? In class, for a class assignment ? And if her teacher (rightly) sent her back to her seat before she could finish, you'd call her 'that poor persecuted young girl' ?

 

B/s. You'd call her a troublemaker. And you'd bitch about the kind of parents who allow such a thing.

 

Until Christians are prepared to lovingly respect other people's right to say what they like, compromise works best.

 

Don't set your kid up to quote scripture at her classmates and I'll make dd keep her T-shirt at home and her thoughts expressed as the censored version.

 

 

Kids are get sent home all the time for wearing religious tshirts. So...if the other kids are not allowed to wear them I would say no.

 

If she makes her Dawkins statements within the scope of an assignment I wouldn't take issue with it.

 

My dd doesn't harass others on religious issues.