Second grade student says teacher took away her Bible during rea

Uh, was it the King James version or a pretty children's bible? I had a children's Bible that I read on my own, several times. So it could have been the child's favorite book, without being incredulous. But we do not know. My guess is, it was a children's bible.

Not everybody can homeschool. That is easy said.
Some simply can not afford it.


http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/05/06...phic-sex-scene

You can google the content.

Ten years ago this book would not have been allowed. Now there is an uproar because a child is reading the Bible. The parents were in favor of the child reading the Bible. The teacher was not. The Father above was not in favor. The teacher was. Can't win for losing.

And yet you claim to have read the whole thread.

__________________
~*~Erin~*~
SAHM, ranch wife, sub and quilt shop proprietress
the Back Gate Country Quilt Shop

True, I did make the claim that I had read it a few days ago. You'll note I did not claim to be able to memorize every detail of every thread I've read in HT.

Nice dodge, BTW. Why didn't you answer my other Q. Why do you believe a parent is obligated to follow the complaint procedures dictated by the school board? It amazes me how schools have this big campaign against bullying, but many teachers and principals so frequently engage in it. And what is worse is that some people not only accept it, but defend it as appropriate.

In this case the free reading time has a book list for the kids to choose from. The kid was told he could read his bible before school, after school and during recess, but during free reading period the kids must choose from the book list. The RW outlets looking to cause outrage are conveniently skipping that part.

I do agree that the teacher's wording in her message sounded inappropriate, but the school is not banning the bible, just requiring kids to read from the book list during free reading time.

More manufactured outrage.

__________________
I saw something nasty in the woodshed

Yeah it should probably not be called "free reading time". That title makes it sound as if the only requirement is the student is to read and material selection is free choice. They should call it "selective reading time".

Can you post a link to the transcript of the teachers message? I have not been able to find it on the net.

see the link in msg 93. If you read the article, you can click on another link where you can hear the teacher on a v-mail saying, “I noticed that he has a book – a religious book – in the classroom. He’s not permitted to read those books in my classroom.”

where did you see that there is a designated book list? if there is a designated book list, why did the teacher not mention that to the parent? Why did the teacher specifically say that religious books are not allowed in her classroom - apparently at any time? You can say the school doesn't ban the bible, but I take the teacher at her word, religious books are not allowed in her classroom.

You think the teacher's wording sounded inappropriate? Gee...ya think? I might reserve my outrage if the principal had fixed the problem. With all the teachers out there, there are going to be a few idiots among them. But the principal not only didn't come down on the side of school, state, and federal policy and the constitution, he wrote a letter dodging the issue and tacitly allowing the teacher to continue to teach children that it is OK to deny religious liberty. All this happened in front of the entire class.

At what point would you believe that a little moral outrage is appropriate? When will you stand up for the constitution?

My outrage is not because I want the kid to read the bible during class. I'm sure his parents will ensure the kid gets the religious education they deem appropriate. As a Libertarian, my outrage is that the kids are being taught the wrong thing about the constitution by a bully who seems more than happy to embarrass the kid in front of the entire class.

I'm not sure why this is still a great controversy, here.

The Liberty Institute said a parent had complained to it about a Bible-reading incident during free-reading time. The school board investigated and could not confirm that the incident even happened. The school board went further to clarify that religious materials are allowed during free-reading time.

Here's a pdf file of the school boards response to the Liberty Institute: https://s3.amazonaws.com/wwwfiles.li...r+Response.pdf

In other words, the school board says that if a teacher told a student that he or she could not read a Bible during free-reading time, the teacher was not following school policy.

__________________
.

Less barking! More wagging!

With the second grader in the OP, I understand your position. It is a he said/she said sort of thing where one of them is a second grader. In the fifth grader example I posted, there is proof positive that the teacher was discriminating based on religion content and the child was publicly disciplined. Where is the public discipline for the teacher and principal who defended the teacher's actions?

Public discipline? What...do you want them flogged? Maybe put them in stocks so angry villagers can pelt them with rotting vegetables?

Do you mean something such as this, for example?


http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/05/0...ays-bible.html

__________________
.

Less barking! More wagging!

I would think a simple "I was wrong. You may feel free to read the bible, or any other religious books of your choice, during free reading time" said in front of her class would be a good start.

The superintendents public apology wasn't good enough?

Nothing short of death is good enough.

Let me know when you want to have a serious conversation.

A very good start, but not enough.

Of course not. The teacher called out the kid in front of the class. Maybe it has already happened and we don't know about it, but the teacher should be made to give a supervised lesson to her kids on the constitution and why she was wrong. She grew up and got thru college without understanding much about the constitution. I don't want her kids to suffer the same fate.

She and probably the principal should be fired for the civil rights violation, but I won't hold my breath.

An analogy. Suppose I heaped abuse on you and your ancestors, said vile, nasty things to you, about you, etc, all because I find your opinion on this subject so objectionable. You could rightly report me to Angie but in this example Angie says, "I'll give it consideration" but does nothing further. Then Angie's boss (assuming there is some sort of Overlord to whom she reports) eventually posts this message, "Ad hominem attacks are not allowed and we are sorry we didn't handle this better."

Would you be satisfied that I had not been banned, given an official warning, or something?

For the record, no heaped abuse is intended upon you or your ancestors, I just think you lack an understanding of what it takes to protect our rights and I wish you did not resort to hyperbole.

Like I said, let me know when you want to have a serious conversation.

The superintendent has affirmed the school policy. There does need to be some confirmation that the school employees have received and understood that policy.