Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, May 20, 2009 7:04:44 PM
The Los Angeles Times editorial board says that courtrooms aren't the best place to settle government school student-teacher disputes. Interesting that the editorial board supports courts having all sorts of authority – including the authority to neuter state marriage licensing even though the people have voted against it – but not authority in this area.
This dispute is one of a million issues that we could solve by separating state and school. Formal education, if it is going to have any consistency, has to have some worldview basis. Why should Christians be forced to pay for schools that push atheism? Shouldn't parents who are atheists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and everyone else be able to support education that is line with their values and convictions, and not those in conflict?
The specific case involved is the successful lawsuit by a Christian student against a history teacher at Capistrano Valley High School – James Corbett.
They do concede:
Corbett's comments, recorded by the student, Chad Farnan, strike us as having crossed the line separating provocative statements designed to get students to think and indoctrination in the teacher's political views.
It is difficult to restrict a teacher to teaching a student how to think instead of what to conclude.
Yet the judge found that one of Corbett's statements did violate the Constitution's ban on an "establishment of religion" -- or, in this case, irreligion: That was his description of creationism as "religious, superstitious nonsense." Ironically, this is the one comment by Corbett that should deserve the protection of the 1st Amendment. Mainstream scientists, including believers, agree with him.
“Creationism” is too broad of a term. Is the editorial board excluding anyone who allows for the possibility of supernaturalism from the "mainstream"? Even if a majority of scientists adhere to philosophical naturalism, that doesn't mean that philosophy is true.
We worry that the judge's holding on this point will give an opening to creationists, who have been ingenious in trying to undermine science education in public schools.
And that's another example of why we need separation of state and school. Let the parents who think it is a good idea to teach their kids that nonliving materials spontaneously, without purpose or direction, form complex living organisms "protect" their kids from us crazy wild-eyed types who don't believe in such magic.
That isn't the only problem with the ruling. A proliferation of lawsuits like Farnan's could discourage teachers more tactful than Corbett from engaging their students in lively discussion.
Well then, let's get the government out of education. Then the First Amendment isn't an issue, right?
I have to wonder if the Los Angeles Times would urge going to the principle, instead of the courtroom, if the teacher had said to a student, "You have to take off your homo glasses to see this right."