Slashdot Mirror
Teacher Cannot Be Sued For Denying Creationism
gzipped_tar writes "A federal appeals court ruled on Friday that a public high school teacher in Mission Viejo, California may not be sued for making hostile remarks about religion in his classroom. The decision stems from a lawsuit filed by a student charging that the teacher's hostile remarks about creationism and religious faith violated a First Amendment mandate that the government remain neutral in matters of religion. A three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the lawsuit must be thrown out of court because the teacher was entitled to immunity."
Religion, by definition, is superstition. But the faithful are pretty dangerous people at times when they feel they have to defend their faith. As much as "jesus christ" has instructed his followers to turn the other cheek, it's rarely practiced.
> The question before that court was whether the classroom instructor had the
> authority to overrule the authority of the elected body responsible for setting policy.
Any attempt to answer "Life, The Universe and Everything" is religion[1]. So basically what we have here is the schools mandating teachers only teach the official State religion. Which of course perfectly fits Politically Correct teaching where in the NewSpeak 'tolerance' is defined as people of every skin pigmentation, mating preference and gender identity coming together to think exactly the same and being intolerant in the extreme to anyone who thinks even slightly different. And it is of course no accident that the official religion is totalitarian; everything within the State, nothing without.
[1] Religion being a word that does not require a belief in a old white guy in the sky. or even a pantheon of bearded white guys in the sky. Any attempt to explain the big questions that science cannot (but too many believe it can) answer is religion. Otherwise we have several very old religions which wouldn't fit the definition. The problem is that science can tackle a lot of questions as to WHAT the universe is but it can't answer WHY. Nor can it probe one femtosecond beyond the big bang and remain science. But all too many people think science CAN supply a complete philosophical/religious system.
Democrat delenda est
You excuses don't make what he said not true, it only attempts to ration why you think is acceptable.
Here is a news flash, how over worked the 9th circuit court is happens to be a left wing talking point. It is unfortunate that you have repeated it as if it's any more valid then the op's statement.
> You have a sad, strange definition of religion, my friend.
No, it is you with too limited and constraining a definition. Science cannot answer the big questions. Reason can't. Many have tried, many believed it could. Millions lie in the mass graves that resulted every time those people achieved power. Science can answer WHAT the universe is. Not that it has done so yet, but we have only been at it for a few thousand years even if you define 'science' rather loosely. I'd say science starts with the invention of the scientific method so we have only been at it for a few hundred years so feel confident in BELIEVING that it will eventually deliver an explanation of WHAT the universe is. But science, by any current understanding of the idea, can never answer WHY the universe is or even if that question has any meaning. It can't supply an answer to what our place in that universe is, how we should organize our lives, culture, civilizations, etc.
The big questions, the ones that really matter, are all still open and anyone who thinks they have the ultimate answers (or the Ultimate Question for the Douglas Adams fans.) is deeply in the hold of a religious faith. Any system that proposes an organized philosophical worldview is basically a religion. Whether it is the teachings of Budda, Jesus, Mohammad, Moses, Ayn Rand, Marx/Lennin or modern Secular Humanism as taught in American schools. All transcend reason and depend on an appeal to faith at some point, which is where they become a religion.
Democrat delenda est
Undoing accidental mod. Hopefully Tony will come back and remember to call you a bigot too, it's yet another one of those words that should be lumped into Godwin's Law.
I love how the anti-Creationists love to refute religion by citing evidence of evolution - but no one has a good explanation of time=0. I believe there's a lot that we don't (can't?) understand about space and time. All we really know is 3 dimensions and linear time - is it possible there was never a beginning because something always just was? That kind of stuff blows my mind and then you get so many schmucks that come on here chiming in about how religion is fairy tales. Makes me want to scream: Quick taking the easy way out you mindless prick! Give it a little thought and realize that NOBODY has it figured out. So religion is just as good as your exploding rock theory.