A big controversy that seems to occur often in classrooms is the difference between preaching religion and teaching religion through history. In this article it is stated that for this case, the federal judge determined that school officials cannot make a school teacher remove signs inside of his classroom proclaiming, " In God We Trust," " All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator" and various other sayings. It was labeled as " One sided censorship," and they were told there was nothing they could do about it except try again.
Personally I think it should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. I feel that statements in different contexts can result in different things. This would be the case if we took the anti-federalists point of view. If we were to have local governments that made there own decisions, they could decide in certain cases. The federalists believe in one central government, and with that, the rules and regulations have to be the same throughout the states.
This makes me remember when I was younger, I had a teacher once who would relate everything we learned to the bible. We would talk about math, and he would tell us, using the bible as evidence, how what we were learning came from the bible. But the way he did it made it sound like he was " referencing the bible" instead of preaching it, which is what he was doing. At the time there was a rule allowing referencing as long as it was to show facts vs. opinions. If we were to have a local structure of government, I feel that this teacher could have been stopped, and there would be less students offended by what was being taught in his class.
Article;
Judge rules for teacher in classroom banners case, By Onell Soto, Published September 9, 2008, San Diego Union Tribune.
No comments:
Post a Comment