Last Night's discussion centered around the News and Observer article for last Sunday. we began asking a lot of questions:
-Are kids really coming home and saying "I'm being persecuted for my Christian beliefs" at school? If so, could this be a case of kids blowing something out of proportion to get their family upset/ involved?
-Who is persecuting these Christian children? Individuals or the institution?
-"my question the [the parents] is what are you doing at HOME to teach your kids about their faith instead of putting them [in private schools] that will do all of the work for you?"
One statement that was made made was from a person working in the public schools in the area who said, "I've never had a Christian child come up to me and talk about being persecuted, but I have had a Muslim child with that complaint!"
-the question was asked, "what does THIS say about Christians in the school system?"
One statement that was made was that, "I find myself trying to defend myself to others in the sense that when I say I'm a Christian I have to say, 'but I'm not THAT kind of Christian."
We then switched gears a little and tried to understand better what lies underneath the decisions being made. One big thing we talked about was fear being a motivating factor!
-fear of disillusionment in their faith/beliefs?
-fear of change?
We asked the question, "are these signs of a shallow faith?" Since we are exploring our faith/beliefs/understandings in this group in order to get deeper into our own beliefs!
We talked about the flaw in our group gathered last night was that we were all looking at it through similar lenses. We discussed trying to understand the decisions made in the article, and decided the importance to continually practice seeing issues and ideas through other lenses as not to be judgmental! We stated that we wished that there was someone there that could dialogue with us from an opposing viewpoint. WE WELCOME THAT ONE HERE ALSO! FEEL FREE TO POST YOUR COMMENTS IN OUR CONTINUING DISCUSSION!
OTHER COMMENTS/QUESTIONS:
-How can EVANGELICALS wall themselves in, away from the world?
-Can REAL learning/education occur when you receive ideas with not opposing or differing ideas are present to challenge what's being taught?
-we agreed that the bigger problem is that ALL schools, both private and public, have room for reform in America
FINALLY, we asked ourselves the question, how do we as a community of people, as well as individuals, keep from pulling into our own beliefs and forming a safe bubble where we can take refuge and cut ourselves off from the world.
our goal: Continual ACTIVE dialogue with the world around us!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION ON THIS BLOG POST! WE ARE WELCOME AND AFFIRMING OF ALL IDEAS ON THIS ISSUE. AS MENTIONED ABOVE, WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ALL VIEWPOINTS IN THIS DISCUSSION!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I have transfered the two previous responses to this article here so to keep the conversation centralized for ease!
thanks,
admin
Well if any one would like to know what pisses me off, well here is an excellent description. I believe the proper expression to this particular article is the Pot Calling the Kettle Black.
Now when you hear my disdain for the rationality for these new private schools, first you may say, “Trace, didn’t you go to a private Christian School?” well yes I did, which is why I have a particular problem with this article. Now I have no problem with private schools per-se, but I have serious issues with the reasons put forth in this article for establishing them. Now if we choose to overlook some inherent flaws in numerous private schools (especially, private religious schools), like the lack of certified teachers, lack of diversity, and the open hostility toward anything which challenges the approved doctrine there are still serious issues involved in the stance this Jackass Daniel Akin takes, yeah I said jackass. If someone makes a jackass statement they deserve to be called a jackass, the same applies to me. I am also a jackass.
In the opening of the article he essentially takes the stance, which gave rise to my first offense in the article. Jackass states, “’In the public schools, you don't just have neutrality, you have hostility toward organized religion,’". Now this is probably true if you are Muslim, but the last time I checked kids were not running down the halls calling Christians towel head terrorists. If they were at least then it would be equal. The statement that public schools are openly hostile toward Christianity is simply preposterous. Hell, public schools are not allowed to take a stance on any religion simply because they must remain neutral, if they were to take an anti-christian perspective then they would be reprimanded for taking a stand on religion. Public Schools are designed to be neutral in almost all areas especially involving religion and politics. I can assure you that private Christian schools are not neutral regarding any of these issues. I can still remember float charts being drawn on the board regarding what political candidates (Vote Republican) I was suppose to encourage (vote republican) my parents to vote for (vote republican, or your going to hell).
In this article they also use what is easily refer to as double speak. They condemn Public schools for being hostile toward Christian beliefs then talk about how many Christians work in public schools and how good of a job they are doing. So essentially, these Christian are hostile toward Christianity but somehow are doing a wonderful job. I believe it would be interesting to take a little straw pole to see just how many Christians actually work in Public schools, and for that matter how many of them are science teachers. If the Public schools are so hostile towards Christianity the numbers must be terribly low.
It astounds me that these people seem to openly ignore the fact that Christian Private schools are in no way neutral. I can tell you that in my 13 years of Christian indoctrination I was taught nothing regarding other religious perspectives, very very little regarding other cultural perspectives, and I was continually told that anything that fell outside of the frame-work of a prescribed doctrine was a slippery slope and damned one straight to hell. I call bullshit. I simply find it interesting how Mr. Akin openly chastises the failed neutrality of public schools while he desires to create a system in which there is no neutrality.
Then there is their desire to teach creationism vs. evolution and abstinence vs. responsibility. Creationism despite other claims is a theological assumption directly tied to a religious institution. Now I will admit that my education was not full of theological creationism since one can only stretch out seven days so long, and aside from day long rants of how woodpeckers could not possibly have evolved, the majority of our science classes actually consisted of what can actually be called the study of science. I think it is interesting that once you get past the beginning stages, of the beginning, where no one knows exactly what the fuck was going on, that science based upon creationism and evolution look remarkably the same. However, inside Christian schools there is again open hostility toward anything that closely resembles or mentions the word evolve. We were never taught the principles of evolution, never taught why it became the predominate theory of the beginning of life, we were only taught why it was wrong. Which I am sure made us all well rounded people who had no idea what the hell we were talking about.
Oh then there is this whole rant about abstinence vs. responsibility. I remember sex education in the sixth grade and though I had no real clue what a picture of a fucked up rams head and a bloated snake in mid digestion had to do with sex, I was pretty sure the teacher was just as confused as I was since he found it necessary to clear his throat every time he said Penis or Vagina.
Of course we were taught abstinence since sex outside of marriage would damn us to hell. Apparently, this worked wonders since only about 10% of the females in each class got knocked up and were expelled from school. Oh but no worries in this respect the school was quite equal, the knocker-upper was also expelled. Apparently, the whole love and acceptance principle falls out the window when pregnant. I always found it interesting that these classes taught us to deny the very desires and actions we were intelligently designed to partake in, while never teaching anyone how to responsibly deal with them. In a sense, these classes seemed to sponsor ignorance vs. understanding since they were afraid that if we knew about something we may want to try it and fall into sin. I guess they never realized that we could figure it out on our own, which most everyone did, and since we were never taught the responsibility that went along with such actions, some paid the price of ignorance, and were openly chastised for it. Oh but what do I know, I am sure it was just some type of love and acceptance I am not familiar with.
Then there is this silly little notion that apparently parents can completely control their children’s environment, by how did they phrase it, placing values in the classroom, which of course mean their values, and no one else’s. One parent said she wanted to teach her Children decent behavior, well no shit. What parent worth half a dam does not want to teach their children decent behavior. However, I cannot see where isolation from anything outside a singular world view, open hostility towards differing viewpoints, and condemnation are a catalyst for decent behavior. A catalyst for fear and ignorance yes, decent behavior no.
I believe I have ranted on enough for today, but I suppose I should sum up the point I am trying to make. In this article and the reasoning derived from it, one gets the impression that Southern Baptists feel public schools are failing because the believe them to be openly hostile towards Christianity (which they are not). They claim they are not neutral and are thus failing. However, the remedy for these failures in public schools is not to help promote neutrality, but rather to create schools where they do not even fake being neutral.
It intreagues me that these families and churches blame public school for not teaching their children proper values rather than themselves. They blame public schools who’s duty was never to instill values, but place no blame on themselves. The fact that in some cases school provides the only outlet a child has for free expression does not matter, the fact that public schools provide children with diverse experiences and interaction does not matter. Instead they desire school to be another enforcer of doctrine, something public schools, justly, were never designed to be. We are a nation that is increasingly isolating itself, and narrowing its world view. This is simply another step in that direction ensuring neutrality, acceptance, and understanding fall by the wayside. God Bless America.
Trace
August 29, 2007 2:11 AM
Alison said...
I put this on my facebook last Sun. and thought I would share it with you guys! I enjoyed the discussion tonight. :) Trace, I loved the comment about parents wanting to teach their children decent behavior! Cracked me up!
So....I went to check out a church on Sun. and the pastor referred to an article in the N & O that talked about Southern Baptists wanting to promote going private schools over public schools. I agree with the stance the pastor of this church took, by saying that it's the parents' choice to send their kid to private or public school,or to do home-schooling based on the NEEDS of the kid. Whatever is best for a child is good with me! However...
In this article, there were many reasons why someone might choose private school over public school: teaching creationism, different sex ed. curriculum, smaller class size, modest dress, etc. Whatever the reason, the comment in the article that ticked me off was from Daniel Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He said, "In the public schools, you don't just have neutrality, you have hostility toward organized religion."
I can say that I have never experienced that in all the schools I've been a part of and nor do I experience that now working in a public school. Most of the teachers I have met are some of the nicest people who care deeply for ALL students. One of the main reasons I was led to work in a school or public sector instead of a church or private school was the scripture from Luke. In Luke 5:31-32, Jesus said,"It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Why do Christians want to seperate themselves so much from those that need Christ the most?
I LOVE the fact that I get to serve all children. I LOVE the fact that my job REQUIRES me to not judge others and to show unconditional positive regard. I LOVE the fact that I get to teach children how to show kindness, caring, compassion, courage, etc. to EVERYONE! It's a shame that some Christians siting in a church don't even get that message; a message that is promoted at public schools!
What's ironic is that many private schools were established during the 70s b/c parents wanted to avoid integration. Maybe society and the "secular" stance just might be the more "Christ-like" stance?
my ORIGINAL response to the topic (note that last night gave me more to think on) can be found here:
www.camelbo.blogspot.com
feel free to respond here if the need to respond to mine spicifically arises!
peace and love
justin
To agree with Allison, even Christ said the people of this world were wiser than the religious. Why is this? Because the religious are too busy promoting "I'm right and you're going to Hell" to search for wisdom and truth outside of their own world-view. It's a common refrain, repeated over and over throughout world history. This is the same problem the Pharisees had, and Christ condemned them to Hell. What we need is another prophet, another Mother Theresa, something here in the West so wake us up and shake us out of our "holier-than-thou-ness" and help us realize that we are SQUELCHING THOSE WHO NEED THE KINGDOM. Public schools are the single greatest mission field in our country. There are children there who are being abused physically, mentally, spiritually, etc. and private schooling and home schooling remove the missionaries from those schools. Who can better reach a trouble 12 year old than other 12 year old? NOBODY. My girlfriend wants to homeschool our children when we're married. I want them to go to public school. I intend to teach public school. She was taught public schools are the devil in her home school. Her family fits this article. Yet this will be my family. I'm trying to love them and accept them; I just hope that I can teach them to be more open minded and realize that without the diversity offered in public schools, there can be no true growth. Without sending Christians to public schools, the fields are white but the harvesters are few.
Sadly, I cannot go to the conversations this semester b/c I have a Wednesday night class, but I hope to next semester!
God bless!
There was a response in the Sunday's paper where people had written letters. A lot of people from the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship made it clear that they did not agree with the SBC on the issue. I'll try to remember to bring a copy of it on Wednesday for those of you that missed it.
yes, please do chris! I didn't see that!
To Daniel,
man, first off I want to say thanks for honestly adding your voice to this topic. Like i said on facebook, you're still considered a part of the community even if you can't come right now, and you participating in the discussions via the blog is just still you being active in the community. we are working on some other ideas that are not on wed. night that may interest you. we'll keep you informed on here and facebook!
I also just want to say that your response is very open and honest; EXACTLY what we are looking for in from people in this group.
A lot of what you say I think many of us would agree with. I like many of your points. I've very interested in hearing your girlfriend's opinion! Just to be fair, open, and honest, I would like to hear her own reasonings for wanting to home school. obviously since this is a point of contention then it is a big deal to BOTH of you. she is welcome to reply to this blog, and she will be respected!!!!!
All I can say (from a married point of view) is continue this conversation with her. Try to be understanding (which is the goal for all of us) even when we don't understand someone else's view. Communication is the key to any relationship, whether it be a significant other, a close friend, or a community of people like what we've started!
keep talking with us, and thanks for your imput... thanks for trusting us with how you feel!
good luck man, and we'll keep talking!
peace, justin
Great Conversation,
just to add some UPDATED VOICES:
letters to the paper concerning the article!
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/letters/story/690039.html
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/letters/story/689074.html
(copy and paste the whole thing and it will work even though it looks to be cut off!)
Justin,
Debbie and I talk about it rather often, and we both make very good points. Frankly speaking, it is a lot easier to help children excel in homeschool than in public school. That is a common and accepted fact. In fact, I wrote a paper comparing homeschool to public school for my Family class, and found that homeschool is really good...except for a few areas. 1) it tends towards indoctrination, which I despise, but not all people see a problem with it. 2) it cuts back on the children's community. All they get to socialize with (usually) is a few handpicked children of the same race and class, or their friends at church (which, if we're honest, also are usually the same race and class). In today's diverse society, children need diverse social education from a young age. 3) it doesn't teach opposing views (which is a part of indoctrination). Evolution and all other religions are automatically wrong, so children are taught to defeat the arguments of those who hold other views to protect the worldview in which they were raise. I think this is a sin.
We are still very open on the topic, and we are kind of leaning towards this idea: public pre-school (and possibly early elementary school), homeschool for 3-8 grade or so, then public highschool. But this is a topic that we talk about rather often and have purposefully kept open. I will encourage her to check out this blog so you can have her opinion from her view, without it being filtered through mine (though I tried to be impartial).
God bless.
Daniel
thanks Daniel for adding another viewpoint! I think that helps a lot, and gives us much to consider. you seem to do a good job of being impartial, however you are right, one's own views often taint even the best intentions!
it is good to see through a different lens! thanks!
i'm not sure that "protecting the worldview in which one was raised" can convincingly be argued as a "sin." perhaps only insofar as it can be perceived as a sin against one's own spiritual/intellectual growth.
however, 'worldview' is a very trendy term right now, and rightly so. each of us operates on this blog within our own worldview, and to an extent we all will argue to protect it.
i will certainly teach my children from my own worldview, as is natural and expected. i will expose them to other worldviews, of course, but ultimately, whether they are home-schooled, public-schooled, or private-schooled children, they will be taught from a certain worldview and taught to defend that framework for interpreting and deciphering the world.
and, when worldview is taught and learned without awareness or out of ignorance, can you really call that a sin?
dave,
welcome to the conversation.
I looked back, and although I can't speak for Daniel on his thought of the aspect of sin (as you said it his personal belief whether we agree with it or not).
But you do bring up an interesting point. can not exposing your children, and yourself even, to a wide variety of ideas be considered a "sin". Again that would depend on that person's definition of "sin".
However, in this group we try to also think outside of the framework of Christianity and into the framework of other spiritual ideas, or just spirituality in general. So I guess I would rephrase that question to say, "is it immoral, unethical to remain purposely ignorant of other ideas in the world?" please note that I mean none of these questions sarcastically, i'm simply thinking out loud.
Is it unethical to expose your child/self to only one social class? (upper class not trying to understand/experience the lower class)
Is it immoral to expose your child to only one culture? (only the American/western/southern US culture)?
Is it unethical to expose yourself to only one religion (and I'm not talking about understanding Islam from a Christian Viewpoint, but understanding that religion from that religion's viewpoint)?
Is it immoral to only expose your child to one understanding of the religion that you practice? (other denominations, other views of the sacred texts, to allow skills like critical thinking to be applied to their inherited faith)
Is it unethical to willingly allow your child to remain ignorant because of lack of awareness?
I guess it all comes down to a person's personal understanding of ethics...i would argue that there is no easy right or wrong, but a lot of gray with which to work.
I think that, according to my personal spiritual ethics, that it is immoral to allow people to remain unaware/ignorant when I have the ability and understanding to expose them to new ideas and to lead them out of their ignorance. To me the clincher is the WILLING IGNORANCE! That's where I believe my responsibility as a spiritual being with a spiritual calling comes in.
To me personally (and this is my personal opinion, and in no way reflects a stance of the group (who actually has no unified beliefs/stances)), I would say that as a parent, it is unethical to intentionally keep my child from experiencing God in a world around them. To keep my child away from the journey that God might lead them down into their own spiritual understanding. To box/bubble a child in so that the experiences of the child are "controlled" is to not trust God enough to be the powerful being we claim him to be!
Again, that is my own personal thoughts, there is room for more exploration in there, and that thought train will continue to be explored. That's exactly what this group is all about, exposure to many ideas in order to allow the Divine (in whatever way we perceive that to be) to speak to each of us individually in our own paths!
Well Mr. Calvert Hello,
You and Daniel bring up a question regarding the issue of the enforcement of a particular world view as a sin. Now I do not know that teaching/indoctrinating a child from a particular world view due to a lack of ignorance or lack of awareness is a sin, but at the very least it does seem to display poor parenting and a lack of social responsibility.
I believe you and I sat through numerous chapel services while attending WCA where a particular world view was put forth, teaching quite a limited perception of the world around us, and numerous times openly condemning non-christians. I particularly enjoyed the blatant contradictions where we we informed that it was dangerous or bad to have non-christian friends because they would cause us to stumble down the “slippery slope” to sin, yet at the same time we were supposed to witness to people, while of course never forming a personal relationship with them. We were to go out, tell people how shitty they were, how they should be more like us, and then quickly retreat into the isolation of our own personal green zones where everyone is like “us”.
While at WCA you and I were taught from what can be associated as a very similar world views. We were never taught to accept other understandings, beliefs, or perceptions. Rather we were taught to judge or even condemn others for their differences without knowing anything about them. This judgement from my world view appears to be quite sinful.
World views, which has become quite a catchy term of the last two decades, are tricky things. You and I were exposed to a very similar world view, yet our own world views still grew independently and along separate paths. So is the nature of varying experiences and perceptions. Each of us will always have separate perceptions of the world around us, the tricky part comes when we start believing that our particular take upon the world is the only possible correct perception and begin to judge others for their own. You ask if it is a sin to teach a particular world view out of ignorance. If you are teaching from ignorance maybe you should not be trying to teach, since an ignorant teacher rarely creates a wise pupil, and if this ignorance leads the judgment of others how is it not sin?
Trace
a couple of things i mentioned wednesday night that justin asked me to post, and i'm finally getting around to that...
1. in USA Today on Wednesday, there was an article about private Catholic schools in New York comprised of low income students. They have a program in place in which the students hold jobs in corporate settings doing basic administrative work among other tings. Instead of paying the students for their work, the companies send the would-be paychecks to the school, which drives down the cost of tuition. At the same time, it gives the students the opportunity to see that there is life beyond high school and beyond their ghetto neighborhoods, that they really can have a good job that provides a decent life...most likely one better than they are currently experiencing.
2. In my assessment class on Wednesday morning, we were talking about the potential differences in intelligence testing scores between students in public and private schools. My professor noted that it's interesting to test children who attend private Christian schools "where the teaching tends to be rote learning and information for regurgitation" because they tend to NOT utilize higher order thinking or critical thinking skills. I don't know what my professor's faith/spiritual leanings are or if she even has any. I do know that she runs our clinic and does assessments of all kinds for all kinds of children all the time. I certainly considered that a nonbiased viewpoint, though, admittedly, none of us are without bias.
Post a Comment