Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Manchu wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
but if it was implied being a person, it's gotta be a person

This line exemplifies the thorny debate that can arise. Christians claim God is three persons and that one of those persons was fully human and completely historical.

I really sympathize with the teacher here. Even without considering the kerfuffle any mention of religion in public schools is bound to generate one way or the other, I highly doubt the assignment contemplated this kind of answer.

I don't. They made a mountain out of a molehill. Suck it up or quit.

 Frazzled wrote:
They made a mountain out of a molehill.

Nah, the girl's mom did that by making a teacher's decision into a First Amendment issue.

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
They made a mountain out of a molehill.

Nah, the girl's mom did that by making a teacher's decision into a First Amendment issue.

Because it is.

There you go again, making mountains out of molehills.

 Manchu wrote:
There you go again, making mountains out of molehills.

Tell that to the ACLU.

 Manchu wrote:
There you go again, making mountains out of molehills.

Took the words out of my finger tips.

While I can empathize with the Teacher... I think all parties here are over reacting here.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
There you go again, making mountains out of molehills.

Tell that to the ACLU.

I know you're a card-carrying member and all. On some issues at least.

Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

 whembly wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

*prepares for the thread turning into a 23 page gak storm on race and skin pigment*

 whembly wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

Doesn't matter at all. I saw "south" and "god" and immediately thought white bible beater . Really just surprised, thats all. And thats despite the fact that I'm fully aware of how predominate baptist churches are in the south.

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

Didn't know that, which makes me wonder why martin luther king jr wasn't chosen instead... or someone else that has had a profound impact on her and her family.

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
There you go again, making mountains out of molehills.

Tell that to the ACLU.

I know you're a card-carrying member and all. On some issues at least.

You're right. I am actually. The annoying thing is all the email updates however. Between them, FIRE, and the NRA, they flood my email and my snail mail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Imposter101 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

*prepares for the thread turning into a 23 page gak storm on race and skin pigment*

Well in truth, if she was blue I think it would have surprised all of us.

 Peregrine wrote:
To be fair, a school assignment about god is dangerous ground to be getting into. For example, what happens if the teacher gives her a bad grade on the assignment? Now they're in trouble for criticizing the child's religion and violating separation of church and state. What happens if they have a class discussion about their assignment and it starts an argument about my god vs. your god? Etc. I can sympathize with a teacher who just doesn't want to deal with that minefield and says "pick something safer to talk about".

I don't see how that would play out in this scenario though... When I was 10, I remember what assignments I had were VERY cut and dry. If her assignment was to provide a number of reasons why God was her idol/hero (they should avoid the use of the word idol, as it can/does offend MANY religious types) and she gave the minimum number of reasons, then there is nothing to mark her down for. If it were a High Schoolers assignment, then the instructions probably would have included caveats about grammar and spelling, for which a person could legitimately be marked down for.

The point is, some little kid could do a less than perfect as per the instructions assignment on a religious topic and get marked down. And then parents could make it out to be, and depending on the particulars perhaps compellingly, about religion.

 cincydooley wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

Doesn't matter at all. I saw "south" and "god" and immediately thought white bible beater . Really just surprised, thats all. And thats despite the fact that I'm fully aware of how predominate baptist churches are in the south.

Except the early part of the article clearly talks about Memphis.


BUT..... on the other hand, it is DESERET "NEWS" which is the LDS media outlet, so go figure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
The point is, some little kid could do a less than perfect as per the instructions assignment on a religious topic and get marked down. And then parents could make it out to be, and depending on the particulars perhaps compellingly, about religion.

all of my teachers growing up marked up my papers, either showing what I did wrong, or made a note listing the faults found.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:


I don't see how that would play out in this scenario though... When I was 10, I remember what assignments I had were VERY cut and dry. If her assignment was to provide a number of reasons why God was her idol/hero (they should avoid the use of the word idol, as it can/does offend MANY religious types) and she gave the minimum number of reasons, then there is nothing to mark her down for. If it were a High Schoolers assignment, then the instructions probably would have included caveats about grammar and spelling, for which a person could legitimately be marked down for.

You make a good point, do we even know if the homework fulfilled the minimum criteria for the assignment, barring the issue about the chosen topic?

After thinking about it, this seems like what happened, only now it's blown out of proportion.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
all of my teachers growing up marked up my papers, either showing what I did wrong, or made a note listing the faults found

It wouldn't matter because angry parents will say they are reading between the lines. As in this case. Teacher says, this work does not meet the criteria of the assignment. Mom says daughter's First Amendment rights are violated.

I must have missed the Memphis part when I was reading. I knew it was in Tennessee, but associated it with more Nashville/Spring Hill/Franklin area as thats what I'm most familiar with.

Alfndrate wrote:

plastictrees wrote:Santa Claus and Harry Potter would have also been acceptable then.

Hey!, they were supposed to write about their idols, not their favorite fictional chara.... Ohhhh I see what you did there

I don't see any problem with selecting a fictional character to be your idol. Hell, Odysseus and Achilles were both crafted to be idols, each as a teaching method on what values should be exemplified.

The problem arises if the assignment was to select a non-fiction person as your idol, in which case the US-Education-problem-nuclear-bomb detonates, because God is not real until it is proved to be, and Russell's Teapot is poison to religion, and religion always responds like a wounded animal.

Manchu wrote:The point is, some little kid could do a less than perfect as per the instructions assignment on a religious topic and get marked down. And then parents could make it out to be, and depending on the particulars perhaps compellingly, about religion.

Also this. Parents will go bugnuts crazy over their precious snowflakes' school experiences, and if you throw their faith into the mix, then the level of fervor will be comparable to giving a machine gun to a chimpanzee on PCP.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Russell's Teapot is poison to religion

So he thought. The mistake lies in assuming faith is a collection of fact claims in the same sense that physics is. I'm not saying atheists are the only ones to make that mistake.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:



Now that is just a ridiculous stance to take on it. The question was asked "who is your idol?" Whats wrong with the girl picking God? If thats her idol, thats her idol, the school isnt teaching or preaching about God, nor the teacher, so they would be safe from any fallout because its the LITTLE GIRLS idol. She stuck to the theme of the project end of.

Nothing is wrong, but the teacher should not have to deal with religion in class. IT is a touchy subject that can end up in hurt feelings and possible lawsuits and loss of job.

 sebster wrote:
I think the bigger point is that God doesn't make any sense in the context of the original question. Picking God as a hero makes about as much sense as picking applesauce.

There's a reason that Christianity teaches that God came to Earth in the form of Jesus, afterall.

Sorry, that is wrong theology sebster. Prior to the incarnation of Jesus it was difficult to know God, though some claimed to do so they were very few; so you would be correct that Jesus was sent to open the way. In the New Testament era however one can know God because of the Holy Spirit, it fact it is best to say that one can know God, the Holy Spirit and only know of God, the Son.

 cincydooley wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

Doesn't matter at all. I saw "south" and "god" and immediately thought white bible beater . Really just surprised, thats all. And thats despite the fact that I'm fully aware of how predominate baptist churches are in the south.

There are a lot of black Christians in the US, fewer ministers probably and fewer ultra rich televangelists, but I would not be surprised is there is a larger percentage of Christians in the black community than in the white.

In the UK black Christians help fill the urban churches, to the extent the denominations involved are growing rapidly.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Senden wrote:
Just like we cannot keep his believers out of children

Yes, because every Christian minister is a child molester...

That is not acceptable at all, and I have to call you out on that.

Yes there is child abusers in the churches and we regret this and the damage they do. However two points must be made clear.

1. Under no circumstances whatsoever is there ANY excuse to accuse all Christian ministers of child molesting, or even to imply it is more than a minority. That is just bigotry, and is not acceptable even as a joke.

2. The Roman Catholic church, which bears the brunt of these accusations is one of the largest organisations in human history, and is almost certainly the largest today, dwarfing even the Chinese armed forces in terms of numbers of employees, paid and voluntary. The Roman Catholic church has more employees than many established and sovereign nations have people.
With that in mind is it not inevitable that a portion will be bad? It would be like realising there are paedophiles in Danish prisons so Danes are therefore child molestors. No one would be allowed to get away with that conclusion and there are more Catholic employees than there are Danes.

<_<

I'm assuming you're talking to senden and not me?

 Orlanth wrote:

 sebster wrote:
I think the bigger point is that God doesn't make any sense in the context of the original question. Picking God as a hero makes about as much sense as picking applesauce.

There's a reason that Christianity teaches that God came to Earth in the form of Jesus, afterall.

Sorry, that is wrong theology sebster. Prior to the incarnation of Jesus it was difficult to know God, though some claimed to do so they were very few; so you would be correct that Jesus was sent to open the way. In the New Testament era however one can know God because of the Holy Spirit, it fact it is best to say that one can know God, the Holy Spirit and only know of God, the Son.

 cincydooley wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Was anyone else sorta surprised that the little girl was black? Surprised me a little bit.

o.O

Why does that matter?

Doesn't matter at all. I saw "south" and "god" and immediately thought white bible beater . Really just surprised, thats all. And thats despite the fact that I'm fully aware of how predominate baptist churches are in the south.

There are a lot of black Christians in the US, fewer ministers probably and fewer ultra rich televangelists, but I would not be surprised is there is a larger percentage of Christians in the black community than in the white.

In the UK black Christians help fill the urban churches, to the extent the denominations involved are growing rapidly.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Senden wrote:
Just like we cannot keep his believers out of children

Yes, because every Christian minister is a child molester...

That is not acceptable at all, and I have to call you out on that.

Yes there is child abusers in the churches and we regret this and the damage they do. However two points must be made clear.

1. Under no circumstances whatsoever is there ANY excuse to accuse all Christian ministers of child molesting, or even to imply it is more than a minority. That is just bigotry, and is not acceptable even as a joke.

2. The Roman Catholic church, which bears the brunt of these accusations is one of the largest organisations in human history, and is almost certainly the largest today, dwarfing even the Chinese armed forces in terms of numbers of employees, paid and voluntary. The Roman Catholic church has more employees than many established and sovereign nations have people.
With that in mind is it not inevitable that a portion will be bad? It would be like realising there are paedophiles in Danish prisons so Danes are therefore child molestors. No one would be allowed to get away with that conclusion and there are more Catholic employees than there are Danes.

I'm currently praying god gifts you with a sense of humour.

 Orlanth wrote:
With that in mind is it not inevitable that a portion will be bad? It would be like realising there are paedophiles in Danish prisons so Danes are therefore child molestors. No one would be allowed to get away with that conclusion and there are more Catholic employees than there are Danes.

And you just missed the point entirely. The Catholic Church doesn't get criticized because some of its priests raped children, it gets criticized because the organization's response to priests raping children was to cover it up and send them elsewhere to rape more children because telling the police would have been bad for their image. We aren't just talking about a few bad people here, this was a problem with the organization itself.

Bullockist wrote:


I'm currently praying god gifts you with a sense of humour.

If anyone were to say that 'all blacks/whites/gays/gamers/French/doctors/Americans/priests are child molestors', whether in jest or not I would hope Dakka would see fit to chastise them for doing so rather than attack anyone who critiques such a vile comment as lacking a sense of humour.

Bigotry is not a laughing matter.

 Alfndrate wrote:
<_<

I'm assuming you're talking to senden and not me?

I was addressing both of you, if you meant to be sarcastic then I suggest you rewrite your post.
Dont blame anyone but yourself if someone calls you out when you in plain text declare an entire profession to be made up of child molestors.

 Imposter101 wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
Considering all the horrible things god it said to have done in the bible, I feel it's more concerning that the child is looks up to god.

The teacher in question has every right to say if someone/something is unacceptable for an assignment. I found no concrete information on what the assignment was besides a single line, but if it was implied being a person, it's gotta be a person. You can't idolize your cat/dog.

Most Christian children do not know of God's divine assassinations (other than Noah's Ark) and have a limited understanding of the Bible, as do numerous believers, since they haven't read the Bible at all.

FTFY.

Otherwise clearly this little girl needs to be removed from this terrible forced brainwashing she's receiving... at the hands of her parents.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
<_<

I'm assuming you're talking to senden and not me?

I was addressing both of you, if you meant to be sarcastic then I suggest you rewrite your post.
Dont blame anyone but yourself if someone calls you out when you in plain text declare an entire profession to be made up of child molestors.

*sigh* I'm not going to edit it because I felt that the sarcasm was pretty much dripping out of every orifice.

I don't agree with how the Catholic church handled the molestation charges, but I also would be an idiot to assume that just because there were a few priests that had strayed from their path that that every priest in the Catholic church, and every Christian minister was a child abuser/molester.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
With that in mind is it not inevitable that a portion will be bad? It would be like realising there are paedophiles in Danish prisons so Danes are therefore child molestors. No one would be allowed to get away with that conclusion and there are more Catholic employees than there are Danes.

And you just missed the point entirely. The Catholic Church doesn't get criticized because some of its priests raped children, it gets criticized because the organization's response to priests raping children was to cover it up and send them elsewhere to rape more children because telling the police would have been bad for their image. We aren't just talking about a few bad people here, this was a problem with the organization itself.

No I didnt, the point was 'all priests are child molestors'. I oppose it vehemently.

Catholic officials covered up because they lacked the courage to do the right thing. It was a very bad call and it came out as well it should. However some of the fears that led the Vatican to hide the abuses have come true, people assume that there are more paedo priests than there actually are, as demonstrated comments on this thread.

Besides the whole church has had a shakedown right from the top, and we should credit them for that. Even if it is at least 400 years overdue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
<_<

I'm assuming you're talking to senden and not me?

I was addressing both of you, if you meant to be sarcastic then I suggest you rewrite your post.
Dont blame anyone but yourself if someone calls you out when you in plain text declare an entire profession to be made up of child molestors.

*sigh* I'm not going to edit it because I felt that the sarcasm was pretty much dripping out of every orifice.

I don't agree with how the Catholic church handled the molestation charges, but I also would be an idiot to assume that just because there were a few priests that had strayed from their path that that every priest in the Catholic church, and every Christian minister was a child abuser/molester.

But you posted as if you were such an idiot, and even refused to edit. As far as anyone can tell you were echoing Sendens 'joke'.

Sarcasm is detected by tone of voice and body language, not text. This is why we have emoticons, you could even post [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] its generally safer.

Besides there are one or two people on Dakka who have a serious hate issue regarding religious people, and I would not put it past them to come up with gak like that for real.