Union defends 'anti-Christian' teacher

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=80036

A federal judge has allowed the California Teachers Association to become involved in a case that accuses a high school history teacher of making anti-Christian remarks during class time.


The judge allowed the teacher's union to defend the Capistrano School District and high school history teacher, Dr. James Corbett. The school and the teacher are being sued by Chad Farnan, a student in Dr. Corbett's Advanced Placement European history class. According to the lawsuit, Dr. Corbett encouraged students to remove their "Jesus glasses" so they could see the truth.


Robert Tyler, general counsel with Advocates for Faith & Freedom, says the action by the teacher's union is deplorable. "The California Teachers Association has jumped in on the side of this teacher who was preaching atheism to tenth-grade students at a public high school, in a class titled 'European History,' and teaching things that have nothing to do with European history," Tyler contends.

According to Tyler, this particular case is unique -- and he says his group is drawing the proverbial line in the sand. "f it's not appropriate or if it's supposedly unconstitutional to speak in a positive fashion about God in public schools, then you certainly cannot speak in a negative fashion about God in public schools," he argues. "And you cannot ridicule and show hostility toward Christianity or other faiths in the classroom,'" Tyler adds.

Farnan recorded many of Dr. Corbett's rants on a digital recorder. The lawsuit accuses the teacher of violating his students' First Amendment rights.

"Your Latest News from a Christian perspective": i.e., likely to be dishonest a lot of the time.

If this teacher did indeed go on anti-Christian "rants" (I'll bet they wouldn't use that word in reporting a case involving a partisan Christian teacher), he stepped over the line. But he's teaching advanced European history, in which Christianity has obviously played a huge role, often highly negative. For example, you can't discuss the history of 13th century France without talking about the Albigensian Crusade, and you can't discuss that atrocity meaningfully if you're of the opinion that the church can do no wrong. He may simply have said "try to set your religious beliefs aside for the moment and consider this series of events as objectively as you can". To a sensible person, that would be reasonable, but to a religious paranoid on a hair-trigger for any slight, it would be atheist persecution (DUN DUN DUNNN)!

They have a high school teacher with a PhD? "...high school history teacher, Dr. James Corbett"

I suspect that there is more to this than meets the eye.

I wonder if the economy is so bad in California that PhDs are reduced to teaching high school?

There is something wrong with that picture. But I can't tell what it is.

Or a doctor of divinity: sorry, I can't take that seriously as a doctorate.

Why would a school hire a teacher with a mail-order degree? Don't they check these things?

At my middle school there was a PhD teaching computer class. It seemed weird then, but looking back now it seems downright bizarre. I mean, this was like the most basic computer shit that any teenager could teach nowadays, and I can't imagine a degree was ever necessary to teach it. These are kids aged 11 to 14. But she was mean. One of the nastiest people I've ever met in my life. I imagine she was damn near unemployable any place else. I imagine a university would not tolerate her attitude and her confrontations.

Otherwise, maybe it's a test case, like Dred Scott. Although, I can't really see anything that is intentionally open to litigation. All the guy did was ask the kids to look at history from a secular, neutral point of view.

Particularly in history. Teachers have to continue their education and a lot of teachers have more than enough credit hours for a PhD - some of them choose to complete the process and write the dissertation. Many don't, because the pay differential between an "MA + 30" and a PhD is relatively small (at least where I live).

Or, he could be a PhD who couldn't find a college teaching job, but still wanted to teach. History is so devalued in this country that there just aren't enough positions available.

Or he could be a PhD who wanted to teach high school.

It would be nice to know more about this. I know how frustrating it is to try teaching the Enlightenment to students who have the Bible tattooed on their corneas . . . what's that phrase? There are none so blind as those who will not see? It's entirely possible that he made the "jesus glasses" comment after repeatedly trying and failing to get this student to open his eyes to alternative explanations. Trying to make students (or others, for that matter) understand that history is not clear-cut, black and white, truth versus fiction is extremely difficult - and often frustrating.

having to move every few years because colleges are avoiding giving tenured status by forcing teachers to move on every few years, no matter their talent in the classroom.

I was lucky enough to get one of those guys in high school chemistry. He went back to college level teaching the year after I left, the same job he'd held before teaching high school level. He was great. We did the thermite reaction, something that got the attention of even the most recalcitrant dunderhead in the class.

However, to address the OP, this guy was out of line the same way the pious are out of line when they push Jesus. You can teach critical thinking by the "pretend you're a Martian" method without telling students their religion is a crock of shit.

And it fills in some gaps in my knowledge of teacher's credentials and pay scales.

But the general rule in my state is that any 4 year degree and a teaching certificate will get you a dead end job in an under-achieving urban school. I've heard that this is common in states where education is a low priority. I just never imagined that some school districts could afford to hire PhDs.

Live and learn....

See compliant I posted below.

-C.

Some of the most upscale school districts are loaded with them. We had a few in my high school, Brooklyn Tech. It is a very large school.

--IMM

that Hitler was a good leader and accomplished much..nothing would happen accept a lame ass apology..Which is what happened at my High School.

It's like a bubbling cauldron of stupid. A sample:

In my view the CTA is an evolutionist, anti-God promoting association. This is not a big surprise. It smacks of Communism and a Socialist agenda. The public is being told by CTA all people must believe in evolution and fall in line. Teachers can badger students whenever a student does not repeat the evolution party line. But this squelches a free exchange of ideas which is all Christian teachers, scientists and students are entitled to have under the First Amendment. Christians are being persecuted by CTA's action and position. It is a clear violation of First Amendment Rights. The public school system is eroding the parents' rights to retain their own particular family values and beliefs. Maybe this will help bring the demise of the public school system and more private schools will again emerge."

"just another case of very 'stinkin' thinkin' here in the land of the free.. We have turnrd all our pennies over so as not to see the head,(which stands for the best we are) and we now operate from 'the tail' point of view...Lord, Come quickly!"

"We should run these anti Christian devils right out of our country. They don't belong here. We are hearing more and more on these kinds of goings on."

"When they preach their religion, the media and courts all feel that is okay. Only Christianity is banned and taken out. All other religions (look up atheism in the dictionary - it is a religion, just like Wicca and Harry Potter put forth a religion)are allowed in the classroom, and unfortunately, parents don't complain or put their foot down. Start speaking up parents!"

Shrill cries of persecution, seething hatred of the public education system (one commenter believes that "any parent who puts their children in public school should be charged with child abuse"), reds-under-the-bed paranoia, and of course rage against anyone with the temerity not to be Christian. These are not nice people.

Great article on this issue - and it's historical predecessor - here:

http://www.ocweekly.com/features/features/capo-valley-highs-james-corbett-isnt-the-first-local-educator-to-face-ocs-cultural-conservatives/28692/?page=1

The context of his comment:
********************************8
<snip>
Corbett defends his “Jesus glasses” reference by explaining the historical context in which he delivered it, which was the effect the Catholic Church had on peasants during the reign of Joseph II of Austria, who attempted to redistribute land belonging to the monasteries to the poor. The poor were turned against Joseph II by the Church, says Corbett, and rejected what was in their best interests. “In effect, the Church put Jesus glasses on the peasants, and the peasants couldn’t see their own best interests. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, but apparently other people think there is. It’s a wonderfully provocative phrase, when you put it out of context. I mean, that’s why I’ve gotten hundreds of letters from people who are just, I mean, people literally calling for my death, calling for ‘you should be tortured,’ ‘you should be fired.’”

******************************
But do read the whole thing.
Yeesh.

http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DxdRGo5rAm54

I can understand why the union is getting involved. The attorney straight up states, "Remove Dr. Corbett from the classroom and we'll dismiss our case." And the sixteen year olds comments are very enlightening. Also, the teacher has been there for 19 years.

-Cindy in Fort Lauderdale

It's oozing in irony.

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/12/capistranovalleysuitcomplaint.pdf

"violation of the constitutional guarantee found in the Establishment Clause through their exhibition of hostility toward religion and endorsement of irrelgion in a public high school classroom."

..."violation of the constitutional guarantee found in the Establishment Clause through their exhibition of hostility toward religion and endorsement of irrelgion in a public high school classroom."

Please tell me a lawyer didn't write that.

WHAT constitutional guarantee in the "Establishment Clause?" There ain't any. That clause just says Congress can't make any laws respecting an establishment of religion. I guess they mean the second clause about prohibiting free exercise. But like the rest of the amendment, it only applies to Congress.

If the Federal Constitution fully applied to the States, we wouldn't have 19 states that still require a belief in a god to hold public office. That is clearly banned, in Article 6, as all good atheists know.

The rest of the complaint has me ROFLing like a donkey taking a dirt bath. Unless the USA adopted sharia law recently, I don't remember the constitution banning hostility toward religion. Or endorsement of irreligion.

BTW, seeing that link to the Orange County Register is sort of nostalgic. That newspaper was founded by an old-time right-wing conservative, Raymond Hoiles.

While he was usually a standard-brand rightie who fretted about Mythical Monolithic Communism and such, Hoiles occasionally gave his far-right readers conniption fits.

In the Sixties he called for complete legalization of all drugs, and he was totally against the Vietnam War.

Since the passage of the 14th amendment, most of the rights defined in the first 8 amendments are considered binding on the states. This is wikipedia, but you can find other references. I'm not aware of any legal arguments currently opposed to this; although it's very possible that there is some legal opposition that I'm just not aware of.

I was thinking of Herb Silverman, an atheist who--obviously in a fit of insanity--moved to my home state of South Carolina. Mr. Silverman became determined to get the God Clause thrown out of the state constitution.

That constitution, written in 1868, says: "No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."

First Silverman ran for governor and filed a legal complaint about the belief requirement. The state court quashed the complaint on the grounds that he had no standing, since he didn't win the election.

Then he tried to become a Notary Public, which has the same requirements. It took him several years and much aggravation, but the South Carolina Supreme Court finally invalidated the belief requirement. I think the Court even used the words "clearly unconstitutional."

Positive Atheism has good article about Silverman's case.

In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states cannot require constitutional officers to profess a belief in God.

"It's been a dead issue since 1961, because we thought that the Supreme Court took care of that problem then," Boston said.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/notary.htm

Silverman was following the path blazed earlier by Roy Torcaso in Maryland, which also had a constitutional belief requirement. Torcaso sued to become a notary public.

If you want to annoy your Xian friends, Torcaso's obituary might work. Mr. Torcaso died 11 months ago.

Yes, Almighty God finally struck down this horrible, non-believing, anti-Gawd atheist...

Roy Torcaso, Atheist Pioneer, Dead at 96

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/259206.htm

:rofl: