A student and his family have filed a federal lawsuit demanding that a popular European history teacher at California's Capistrano Valley High School be fired for what they say were anti-Christian remarks he made in the classroom. Chad Farnan, a 16-year-old sophomore, says the teacher, James Corbett, told his students that “Jesus glasses” obscure the truth and suggested that Christians are more likely than other people to commit rape and murder. Farnan recorded his teacher telling students in class: “What country has the highest murder rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rape rate? The South! What part of the country has the highest rate of church attendance? The South!” Farnan said he took the tape recorder to class to supplement his class notes. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,345274,00.html
Sounds like the teach has an axe to grind. And what is he doing commenting on the South in European History?? Last I checked, Europe and the South haven't been seriously linked since the mid-1800's and the Industrial Revolution. But then again, this is California, and nothing surprises me coming from there. I would have only one question- Where's YOUR tolerance???
I don't really care about the guy's opinion, what does bother me is he is using the Authority of his position to force his students to listen to his tripe, over and over, day after day. Today's High Schools are simply pathetic, no wonder half the students in public schools do not graduate... But as noxious as this guys diatribes are, this is potentially more troublesome: The very idea of a sort of a "Thought Crime Rehabilitation Center" that anyone would be forced to attend, is to me offensive, the guy's a jerk, deal with it, isn't it enough to ask the guy to knock off the daily bashings? Now a behaviour modification program is called for. Cripes, what has happened to America?
I'm not so sure, it depends on the depth of the program. This guy clearly tried to indoctrinate his students, I don't care what his lawyer says, trying to draw a cause and effect relationship.
I'm not sure how we can say he was trying to indoctrinate, or that he was abusing his authority, brainwashing etc when we have no idea what the lecture was about, nor do we really know anything about the teacher. As to the chick being offended, get over it.
My "guess" is that he was probably reviewing the Crusades, Inquisition, or something of the sort and trying to draw some kind of religious intolerance parallel that his kids can see today. It would be a mighty big stretch, but I'm pretty sure that's how he'd fit it in. I would like to hear everything he had to say, and not just the cherry picked comments. The guy was teaching there for 15 years, I have a feeling there's more to the story, especially since the school district initially dismissed the case. That said, it probably would have made for a fine college lecture, but I don't think it was appropriate for high school. Call me a cynic, but I have little faith in the cognitive abilities of these kids to actually grab any message not conveyed billboard style. Totally agree. I'd add that I've completely lost my patience with the "Sue anyone who offends me" crowd. What a crock
This case goes nowhere. No grounds. It is sad though that teachers have to instill their own vitriolic opinions into the classroom.
It's the nature of the social sciences though. Surprisingly so this anger towards that only comes when it is left leaning thought that is seeping through teachings. Whenever is the other way around I never read these complete overreactions. And believe me I have had teachers that where just ridiculous in their political leanings...
To be consistant and fair, I don't think a right leaning teacher should take the opportunity in a European History class to expound on the shortcomings of modern liberal thinking. What value does it add to the curriculum? Maybe vitriol like this belongs in a religion class, but even then I question the almost personal anger being voiced by this teachers comments.
They should fire him for being a bad teacher IMO. How can you call yourself a good teacher, especially of history, while you spout off your own opinion and not stating it as such.
The lawsuit is "cherry-picking" remarks, the teacher is "cherry picking" statistics, and the school board is looking for cover in making a competence/arrogance question into a constitutional issue over free speech/ establishment of religion. I do disagree about the efficacy of "sensitivity training". While it is too often a joke because it is poorly taught, if one is exposed over a longer period to the pervasiness of an evil, one is more likely to begin to see the evil. With that caveat, what would they send the teacher to? Arrogance Anonymous?
Unfortunately that is the nature of the beast with these sciences. Unlike hard sciences Social Sciences are still strongly connected to subjective interpretation of situations and data. Which is fine, it is as it should be since unlike hard sciences you can't experiment with human beings or historical events over and over to see if your hypothesis can be confirmed... all you can do is interpret events and clues, but there is no way for two people to see the same event and interpret the same thing. The last attempt at making a "truly objective" theory of the study of these disciplines was when Comte created positivism. And positivism has been since replaced and beaten by so many different theoretical currents (post structuralism, postmodernism, hermeneutics, marxist materialism, semiotics... etc.) since it was proven that eliminating the interpretation of the historical facts you basically eliminated the study of history ( a history of the invasion of Mexico by the US can't end at the date it was done, who where the presidents when it was done, who where the generals on each side, what battles where the important ones... you need to have an interpretation of why it happened... was it the need of the US to establish a colonialist movement? was it the Monroe doctrine? was it a sense of threat from the Mexican goverment towards the American Settlers in Texas? Every single one of these could be true, as a matter of fact all of them might be true... but we don't know. Making connections to these could eventually bring a discussion of things that might be modern... it is just unavoidable)
No doubt, there has to be discussions and some sort of interpretations of events, but I think personal opinion should be held in check, otherwise the teacher is teaching not only subject matter, but opinion.
The only thing I have to say on the matter is this: Say and think whatever you want...while it's still legal.
