From Sir, with Love
Saw an item the other day about a school teacher who had been sacked because she had admitted, when asked, that Santa Claus wasn't real. On the other hand I saw another article about a fundamentalist christian school teacher who wasn't sacked even though, in a class supposedly about evolution, he had referred the students to scripture. And someone else who had prepared a dvd for use in schools which tells children that global warming isn't happening (and ends with a gun-toting teacher chasing a cartoon Al Gore from the classroom).
Got me to wondering. What would happen if a teacher honestly answered the question, when asked "Please Miss, is God real?", with the answer "No Johnny, no more real than Santa Claus. Some children do believe in god because their parents want them to, but when they grow up they realise it was just a make-believe story about a man with a big beard who gives them presents if they are good".
Call me naive if you must, but I see a teacher's role as being the central truth-teller in a child's life. Children can't rely on their parents, who have been indoctrinated in various political, social, and religious ways, and need an independent oracle who can supply them with whatever doses of reality are absent from their upbringing. What the child does with the truth is up to them, and it may well be later knocked out of them by a local pastor, or shock jock radio hater, or the Fox tv network, but at least they have had equal opportunity to start life without a head full of rubbish.
So encourage your teacher to explain to children that creationism is a bunch of scientifically illiterate nonsense, last taken seriously in the real world 200 years ago; that global warming is real and gathering speed and that their world is going to be inconceivably worse as a result; and that religion is based on the totally imaginary concept of "god", first used to keep women and peasants in their places, and explain thunder, about four thousand years ago.
Or you could just refer them to the Watermelon Blog where these topics, among others, are often touched on.
Follow David Horton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/watermelon_man
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
American reactions always seem delayed, a day late and a dollar short. The truth in classrooms is what we need -- and that truth is what? How long has the truth that is now deemed a lie been taught to countless millions for them to start life on and base life on? Now we are enlightened and we can shed that old God stuff. We do not need it anymore. Next generation of packaged truths are ready for the next generation of fertile minds to be shaped, to be formed, to be filled. It is like new technology the truth is -- I guess. The elites get it first and then we pass it on down when the elites move on to the next version of whatever. Perhaps teaching should be less attempt to supply content and more attempt to teach about the thing that is filled with content; how to protect it, how it will be broached by society (advertisement, propaganda, BS, etc...). What it is that thing (the mind, the brain, the processing unit) brings to the table, in terms of living life. Perhaps these are more valuable lessons than names, dates, places, culture, religion, or any of the other curriculums, for if one knows how to use the apparatus that is their brain, then one can pick up the infinite minutia of available content (the ten thousand things).
Foundational, is not what to think, but how to think, how to assess, critique, analyze, and choose.
Were we not thinking critically prior to the encapsulation of the idea in words -- Critical Thinking? Was it not important before, to be aware of your surroundings, even more so in places known for falling objects (cracked skulls on the ground with rocks all around are a sure sign)? Did it only become so when we were told in school? The whole thing seems a lie and religion is just a part of the lie. Perhaps we should throw out other aspects of the lying curriculum. That requires a change of heart and mind, and one known truth is that changing hearts and minds is the most difficult of tasks. The constitution, when written, was flawed. We hold it up with its Band-Aids as pristine, as pure enlightenment. The words continue to pale in the presence of the practice.
It is not going to change. The thing is self-fulfilling, self-actualizing by this point. Like having a ferocious tiger by the tail, we do not know how to let go, when letting go would be the very thing to save us. Learning has nothing to do with American public schools -- as currently structured. It is all about indoctrination and assimilation up in there -- the docile’ izing and dumb’ ing down of certain aspects of America, those not fortunate enough to live in a district where public schooling is excellent or not able to afford their private choice, and even those schools are not necessarily teaching “The truth”.
Here's a better idea. Why don't we just take children from their ignorant parents soon after they are weaned, and make them all wards of the State?
Education is a 24/7/365 job, and if we don't want our children exposed to bad ideas, they shouldn't spend a single minute with their parents.
Are you serious?
Absolutely. Teachers only have kids a for few hours a day, five days a week for about eight months.
The rest of the time they are with their parents, and will be taught religion. The only way we can prevent that injustice, is by taking the kids out of the homes, long before they can develop attachments.
I am so glad to see the emergence of atheism and atheists into public view! We need to continue to buttress the church/state separation, and atheists are well positioned to make the case. Teachers need to be supported for cleaving to rational explanation in the classroom, where they provide an important opening for students to examine the validity of the stories they hear outside, whether they come from parents, peers, or churches.
I don't attend church on a regular or any other basis, mostly because literalists dominate the "conversat
I know that stories in sacred works stand the test of time because they enable humans to transcend what they may think are perfectly adequate ways of being, but in fact are so flawed that primitive is too tame a word to describe their status quo. Literalists of the atheistic and theistic stripes both like to think of "God" as a white haired being, but my view and the view of most enlightened main line religious authorities is that "he or she" is so far beyond people's conception of reality that only older physicists and inspired mystics can understand how people can access what is often called a higher power in and out of A.A. and new age circles.
Great fictions are great because they capture reality better than the sterile commonplaces of rational thought, linear thinking, and self-satisfied complacency.
To tell kids your limited, circumscribed version of reality and think that you are telling them the truth about man and god, well, I think you know, should know, you'd be better off smiling and admitting no one has all the answers.
I've read 4 books by Karen Armstrong, who discusses this extensively. I have no problem with embracing our inner human nature.
"Literalist Atheist" Author Sam Harris practices meditation, he spent 2 years in India learning from the masters--I'll bet you didn't know that--and he knows well what a transcendent experience is.
Atheists don't deny that there are altered states of mind and deep mysteries in the universe; if you want to call these god, fine; but don't ascribe a fundamentalist mindset to people who simply say there is NO reason to believe our "essence" will transcend physical existence.
Saying there is not sufficient reason to believe something exists is not equivalent to saying something does not exist..
What if things like Reincarnation and the immortal nature of the soul were proven to be true? How would that change science curriculums taught in schools and science spoken about freely in society?
http://www
Part II
http://www
This is proof?
They neglect to tell you in that story that at 18 months of age they visited the Kavanaugh Flight Museum in Dallas, Texas. His mother said, he'd never seen any WW2 documentaries, but they conveniently left out this museum visit, where he was transfixed by the planes. Oh, they have a corsair there, and a drop tank. Funny they left that out.
Soon after he began having the nightmares. His granmother suggested he was remembering a past life, and they started finding facts to fit that narrative. They didn't tell you all the ones that don't fit, because they ignore them.
Now how many guys named James flew Corsair's in the Pacific? I'll bet there were lots and lots of them. Would it be hard to find one who got shot down? If they didn't find one, you wouldn't have heard this story. You didn't hear the one about Jamil who dreamed he was a corsair pilot did you? No, it didn't make the news.
Get a good book on the philosophy of science. There's plenty out there. I'm in the middle of a good one now--"Fooled by Randomness".
Hello HeevenSteven,
I'd agree that 20-20 is guilty of shoddy journalism in the past but disagree that they are guilty in this instance. Here is a list of things you can't explain away HONESTLY:
1. He recalled his name from his past life which was James III.
2. Recalled his old navy friend he flew with which was Jack Larson.
3. The location of where his plane was shot down, which was Iwo Jima. Verified that James Houston III was shot down in Iwo Jima. Only 1 plane was ever shot down in Iwo Jima.
4. Remembered that his plane took off from a ship.
5. Remembered the name of the ship. Natoma (Bay).
6. Recalled that his plane was hit head on and crashed.
7. Remembered he died in the crash.
8. Had frequent violent nightmares of his crash and death.
7. Has emotional scars specific to this type of death.
8. Knew peculiarities of one of the planes he flew such as that the plane frequently got flat tires.
9. Knew that it was the Japanese military that shot his plane down.
10. His parents, who are devout Christians and know their son better than anyone, know with certainty that their son had a past life.
11. His sister in the past life is certain that this child is her previous brother.
12. He was much too young and protected to have been exposed to most if not all of this information.
I second HeevenSteven.
My three-year-old is crazy about farm tractors and can identify John Deere, Farmalls, and Minneapolis Molines on sight. My five-year-old knows more about dinosaurs than this kid knows about airplanes. So are they having past-life experiences? Or are they just being smart little kids who fixate on one interest?
These types of stories are always shaped by True Believers after the fact. Vague, meaningless acts are amplified to miracle status, and contradictory phenomena are ignored. This is just the modern version of ghost stories and children seeing fairies.
:-)
Not only did the young child in this video know detailed information about planes that no 2 year old would ever have known, he also recalled from his most recent past life his specific name, his occupation, the exact location of where his plane was shot down, names of previous family members, the emotional scars of being killed in battle etc., all which were validated in the investigation. Part II of the video shows how they validated the memories.
This is just 1 example among tens of thousands on record where children can remember specific details of their past lives and where investigations took place to validate the information. There is a wealth of scientific research that's already been done for you, you just have to Google it to find it.
Don't let beliefs, atheist or otherwise, get in the way of obtaining new knowledge. We always have something new to learn that isn't generally known or accepted.
Well, I checked the google, and it seems James starting calling himself James 3, ever since he was 3 years old. How weird is that? Oh James Huston Jr. was shot down in a Wildcat, not a Corsiar; oops!
EXACTLY what detailed information did this 2 year old have that could never be known by a 2 yr old? Do we know he didn't see it in that museum, or have it suggested to him when he was trying to relate his dreams?
There isn't any proof of anything here. There are 3 yr olds learning ancient Greek, grade school aged kids taking college courses, and even writing symphonies. Precocious kids exist; that's a fact. His father had all kinds of WW2 book to research this stuff and we can't know what the kid saw there. In order to accept this stuff as fact, you have to be able to rule out simpler explanations.
Something that isn't generally accepted by True Believers is that our minds spin narratives around disconnected and random information. We ignore information that doesn't fit the narrative, and take in even unrelated info if it does.
I'm not closing off my mind to new information; I just organize it differently and examine it critically.
Hello HeevenSteven,
I'd agree that 20-20 is guilty of shoddy journalism in the past but disagree that they are guilty in this instance. Here is a list of things you can't explain away HONESTLY:
1. He recalled his name from his past life which was James III.
2. Recalled his old navy friend he flew with which was Jack Larson.
3. The location of where his plane was shot down, which was Iwo Jima. Verified that James Houston III was shot down in Iwo Jima. Only 1 plane was ever shot down in Iwo Jima.
4. Remembered that his plane took off from a ship.
5. Remembered the name of the ship. Natoma (Bay).
6. Recalled that his plane was hit head on and crashed.
7. Remembered he died in the crash.
8. Had frequent violent nightmares of his crash and death.
7. Has emotional scars specific to this type of death.
8. Knew peculiarities of one of the planes he flew such as that the plane frequently got flat tires.
9. Knew that it was the Japanese military that shot his plane down.
10. His parents, who are devout Christians and know their son better than anyone, know with certainty that their son had a past life.
11. His sister in the past life is certain that this child is her previous brother.
12. He was much too young and protected to have been exposed to most if not all of this information.
Cloris Leachman as Phyllis: "When I was six years old, Daddy told me there was no Santa Claus. For months I prayed to God for Daddy to be wrong! Then he told me there was no god."
I don't want the teacher to automatically tell the kids that there is no santa clause, or no god, but I DO want the teacher who DID that to be re-hired! I ALSO want the teacher who told the kids to look at the scripture FIRED!
I'm a retired teacher; here's my take. Our schools are set up so there is local control. If any teacher were to speak truths unacceptable to their community they would be sacked, and the "powerful" NEA wouldn't be able to do anything about it.
Jim Vait
Bethel, Alaska
See David Horton's Profile
I'm sure you are right Jim. My post really asks the question of whether we are happy that it is demanded of teachers that they tell lies so as not to upset parents.
I see Bethel isn't exactly in the mountains. Well if the local there want to tell the kids there's no global warming, ok; but maybe the NEA should make sure you at least teach 'em how to swim...lol
Perfect, Mr Horton. A former girl friend, a self-admitted atheist, called this afternoon while shopping for a Christmas tree! "You put up Christmas trees?," I asked. She said it was all for the family. Yikes! My head hurts.
What does that have to do with anything? I've been a deist for most of my life, and I still put up a tree because it is something that I like to do!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
