A Hatchet Job on the Truth
The lead editorial, on at least the online edition of Thursday’s Columbus Dispatch, further fuels the fire of public opinion against recently fired middle school science teach John Freshwater. Although he has 10 days from the receipt of his official termination notice to appeal the school board’s decision to terminate his employment, which he received this week, the newspaper editors continued to lambaste and pronounce him guilty. A week ago the disgraceful Dispatch “leaked” a copy of the investigator’s report to the public. Now before he has a chance to appeal to the school board, the disgusting Dispatch editors throw more salt into the wounds of John Freshwater and issue this scathing editorial last Thursday.
In its editorial hit piece, “About time,” the editor’s praised the school board decision to terminate John Freshwater. Yet, it condemned the school board for not doing it sooner. The newspaper in its reporting and its editorializing continued to refused to note the positives or position of John Freshwater, so intent were they to besmirch, denigrate and ostracise this man.
What was not mentioned was the fact that Mr. Freshwater was named “Teacher of the Year” twice including in 2007. They refused to mention that he was beloved as a teacher by many of the his current and former students. Recently, his science class students had the best results of all the science classes for his grade in Mount Vernon City School system. Nary, no, the despicable Dispatch account were absolutely silent on the accomplishments of this teacher. However they did not hesitate to scorn him, to mock him because of his beliefs, to accuse him, to condemned him and the Mount Vernon school board, his supporters, and even the citizens of Mount Vernon who supported this godly, excellent teacher. Dispatch, I think your bias is showing
I think this editorial was a character assignation by one of the mouthpieces of the most leftist and liberal elements of society.
About time
Teacher who undermined science should have been reined in long agoThursday, June 26, 2008
The Mount Vernon Board of Education's decision to fire teacher John Freshwater for failing to stick to science in his science classroom is justified by the evidence turned up in an independent investigation.
The question is why it took 11 years for the board to challenge Freshwater.
Parents and other teachers have been complaining for at least that long about Freshwater's persistent incorporation of his Christian beliefs into his classroom teaching.
Truth #1
Ignored in this editorial was what precipitated the controversy in the first place, which was Mr. Freshwater’s refusal to remove his personal Bible from the top of his classroom desk. All this other rubbish is a smokescreen for that fact.
Truth #2
When the Ohio curriculum permitted the teaching of Intelligent Design (I.D.), Mr. Freshwater did so. Some in the Mount Vernon schools where greatly irritated by the fact that he taught I.D. When it no longer was a part of the accepted curriculum he said that he stopped. However, elements in the school system administrator and other teachers continued to harbor resentment against John Freshwater.
If asked by the students whether he believed in evolution, how could he answer it other than saying it had serious scientific flaws and that the students should look at the strengths and weaknesses of the theory and make up their own minds? Is this wrong? It seems to me that it is just serious scientific inquiry.
He used his classroom to push his religious views by displaying Bible-related posters, calling other faiths false and telling students that homosexuality is a sin. Such proselytizing in a public school violates the constitutional ban on government establishment of religion. But Freshwater went further: He undermined those parts of the approved science curriculum that don't comport with his beliefs. In doing so, he misled his students and failed in his fundamental duty as a science teacher.
Truth #3
Freshwater had a poster of Colin Powell regarding leadership with a Bible verse. He displayed the Ten Commandments in a collage of historical documents. What is wrong with that?
Truth #4
He called other faiths false. That is absolutely correct. Jesus Christ said of Himself, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father, but through Me.” This is the belief of all true Christians. This was John Freshwater's belief. Does he not have a right to that belief? Our founding fathers knew this. Why is it so hard for the leftists elements of America to recognize it? I know why, because it collapses the foundation of their secular humanist belief system.
.
Truth #5
If he expressed his opinion or belief that homosexuality is sin or wrong, that like it or not, is the truth. Like adultery, stealing, lying, etc. Homosexual behavior is immoral. It may not be politically correct. It may not be an acceptable tenet of the Secular Humanist faith. But it is the truth. Homosexual behavior is abnormal, unhealthy, immoral and unnatural.
Truth #6
This is a boldface lie, “Such proselytizing in a public school violates the constitutional ban on government establishment of religion.” There is no such constitutional ban on government establishment of religion. There is a congressional ban on approving any denomination over another, making it a state church, but that is as far as the constitution goes. ACLU attorneys and activist judges must misinterpret the First Amendment to derive such poppycock as the imaginary “separation of church and state.”
Truth #7
Isn’t the “fundamental duty” of the teacher, to TEACH? It is not indoctrination.
Students told investigators that Freshwater told them, essentially, that the law required him to tell them about evolution, but that the theory is incorrect because it isn't supported by the Bible. That disservice to Mount Vernon students showed up in the testimony of eighth-grade and high-school teachers who said that students who had been in Freshwater's classes often had to be retaught the basics of evolution.
Truth #8
What was not told was the fact that Freshwater's science classes finished with the highest test scores this year than any other class same grade science class.
Evolution is incorrect because it is not scientific.
It could be argued that his students were better prepared than those of other teachers for upper level science classes. If all high school science teachers were asked the same question, instead of those prejudiced one that the investigators talked to, than we would have a more fair judgement.
This might have gone on longer if one student's parents hadn't taken an extraordinary complaint to Mount Vernon Middle School officials: that Freshwater used an electric device normally employed by teachers to ionize gases to burn marks on their son's arm in the shape of a cross.
Truth #9
This allegation still needs to be proven. It is the subject of a lawsuit. Doesn’t Mr. Freshwater get a chance to defend himself? Anyone can produce pictures showing anything to prove a point. But will that evidence hold up in court?
Even then, school officials did no more than to write Freshwater a letter, asking him not to use the device on children.
The misuse of an electrical tool that comes with a warning against contact with skin should have prompted an immediate investigation of Freshwater's teaching, not just a scolding.
But that's all he got, and three more months went by before Superintendent Stephen Short talked to Knox County Children Services about the branding of students. Only after a lawyer for the boy's parents threatened a lawsuit did officials make any attempt to rein in Freshwater's behavior. They ordered him to remove religious displays from his room, including a Bible he kept on his desk.
Truth #10
Maybe nothing was done about the “burning” because it was investigated and judged to be inconsequential. Maybe it is a non-issue. Only when pressure was brought on the school board, did they bring the issue up again in order to build up a what was a very weak case against Mr. Freshwater.
Freshwater declared himself a free-speech martyr, summoned the assistance of religious provocateur Dave Daubenmire and called a press conference. The ensuing hubbub revealed a disturbing degree of support for Freshwater by people who do not understand or value the difference between science and religion. But it also brought out those who appreciate the Constitution's prohibition on state advocacy of religion.
Truth #11
Unfortunately, John Freshwater is a “free-speech martyr.” He quoted on a recent Geraldo Rivera TV Show as saying, ““Asking any citizen to remove from view any symbol or any book that has deep significance to his or her life borders on tyranny.”
Truth #12
The hateful Dispatch called Dave Daubenmire a “provocateur.” A provocateur, by definition, is, “A secret agent who incites suspected persons to commit illegal acts.” Mr. Daubenmire, was one of the few Christians in the community to come to the defense of Mr. Freshwater. To defend his own rights or the rights of others, Dispatch editors, is not inciting anyone to commit illegal acts. Maybe in your America it is, but in mine it is not.
Most important for Mount Vernon students, it appears to have spurred the school board into doing what it should have done long ago: insisting that its science teachers respect and teach science.
Truth #13
It seems that,above all, the expectation of the Dispatch and those on the left in academia, media and public office is their insistence that teachers WORSHIP and teach AS SCIENCE even that which is clearly FALSE.
Truth #14
The bottom line is the secular humanists who control much of education, much of the legal system, and much of the media desire to purge all godly and Christian influence from our citadels (or is that cesspools) of learning. John Freshwater, as symbolized by insisting that he draw the line on compromise with the secular humanist agenda, by refusing to remove his personal Bible from his classroom desk, is a sacrificial lamb to the god of secular humanism.
SO how was the parade today????
ReplyDeleteThere is, of course, no "constitutional ban on government establishment of religion". The first amendment, interpreted straightforwardly, clearly only limits from CONGRESS passing any laws which have anything to do with establishment of religion, including laws which prohibit states or local gov'ts from establishing religion. As I have mention before on this blog, the state of Maryland was originally a Catholic state, Virginia was Anglican, and Massachusetts was Puritan. This was no violation of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers only wanted to ensure that one sect did not take over the WHOLE NATION.
ReplyDeleteThe other side of this debate has a misconception as well. Being denied "free speech" by a local government entity is not unconstitutional. Only CONGRESS is not allowed the abridge free speech rights. The Founders were not remiss in not including reasonable exceptions to free speech like yelling fire in a theater. They knew that such issues should be rightly handled by states and local gov'ts.
Erm...Matt, have you taken Constitutional law? If you haven't, then you might want to take the opportunity to inform yourself on accepted constitutional jurisprudence.
ReplyDeleteThe Court has accepted that the First Amendment applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. This is how the Court can find that states cannot set up their own religious fiefdoms in the name of a certain religion.
Whenever I hear people who obviously do not understand what the Constitution and the Court have said about the First Amendment, I want to assign these people to spend a year in Provo, Utah. There, surrounded by a population that is 90% Mormon, you would find out very quickly why the First Amendment, as it is interpreted today to include the states, is such a very, very good thing.
When you're in the majority, it really does sound like a wonderful thing to impose uniformity in religious belief upon your compatriots. However, if you had the experience of being a minority religion, you might agree that the First Amendment gives you protections against this majority incursion upon your rights.
As for John Freshwater, he's getting what he's long deserved. I'm just shocked that he wasn't canned after he burned the CROSS (don't give me that garbage that it's an X, it's a CROSS--why is this good "Christian" denying that it's a CROSS?) in a child's arm. It's witheringly obvious that Freshwater cared more about teaching his religious ideology to the kiddies than anything resembling science.
I don't accept "accepted constitutional jurisprudence". Just because a court, even the Supreme Court, says something is true, that doesn't make it so. In the Dred Scott case, they ruled that blacks are not persons under the law, etc.
ReplyDeleteThe 14th amendment says nothing which limits states rights to establish religion. When it says, "no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the US", it means rights which are are specifically given to citizens (not just any person) by the Constitution. The first amendment does not mention the word "citizen" or the like. It clearly is only a restriction on Congress. What makes the this statement significant is the fact that at the end of the amendment it says, "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." So the federal government then gained the right to force states to uphold a citizen's Constitutional rights, whereas before it was generally left up to the states to enforce the Constitution.
According to the Book of Matthew, Jesus said, “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men….When thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret….”
ReplyDeleteI see just a few problems with this post. For example:
ReplyDeleteTruth #1
Ignored in this editorial was what precipitated the controversy in the first place, which was Mr. Freshwater’s refusal to remove his personal Bible from the top of his classroom desk.
False. What precipitated the controversy was the administration failing to take action on the parents' complaint that their child had been injured in Mr. Freshwater's "experiment." Four months later they hired a lawyer to contact the administration. That precipitated the situation.
Truth #2
When the Ohio curriculum permitted the teaching of Intelligent Design (I.D.), Mr. Freshwater did so. Some in the Mount Vernon schools where greatly irritated by the fact that he taught I.D. When it no longer was a part of the accepted curriculum he said that he stopped.
False. The State Board of Education has never permitted the teaching of Intelligent Design.
If asked by the students whether he believed in evolution, how could he answer it other than saying it had serious scientific flaws and that the students should look at the strengths and weaknesses of the theory and make up their own minds? Is this wrong? It seems to me that it is just serious scientific inquiry.
False. I have talked with several of Mr. Freshwater's students in the last two months. They parroted some of the silliest of the various creationist arguments, arguments so bad that even Answers in Genesis says creationists shouldn't use them. When pushed a little it was apparent that they didn't know why what they were saying was wrong, or even why it was a criticism; they only knew that someone had told them it was a criticism of evolution. They were like little parrots. They knew nothing of the science, only the propaganda and distortions pushed by the likes of Kent Hovind. Incidentally, Mr. Freshwater had a video tape of Hovind with those same silly arguments in his classroom.
Truth #4
He called other faiths false. That is absolutely correct. Jesus Christ said of Himself, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father, but through Me.” This is the belief of all true Christians. This was John Freshwater's belief. Does he not have a right to that belief?
He has a right to that belief. However, he does not have the right to push that belief in a public school science class. As any number of Supreme Court decisions have made clear, that is illegal.
Truth #5
If he expressed his opinion or belief that homosexuality is sin or wrong, that like it or not, is the truth. Like adultery, stealing, lying, etc. Homosexual behavior is immoral.
Once again, preaching about sin, a religious claim, is not appropriate in a middle school science classroom.
Truth #6
This is a boldface lie, “Such proselytizing in a public school violates the constitutional ban on government establishment of religion.” There is no such constitutional ban on government establishment of religion. There is a congressional ban on approving any denomination over another, making it a state church, but that is as far as the constitution goes.
False. The history of Supreme Court jurisprudence on this topic makes it absolutely clear that there is a real Constitutional ban on the government establishment of religion, any religion. That the Christian Dominionists claim otherwise only attests to their unAmerican desire to turn the United States into a theocracy. Want to see a theocracy? Look at Afghanistan under the Taliban, or Saudi Arabia under the king, or Iran under the Ayatollah.
Truth #8
What was not told was the fact that Freshwater's science classes finished with the highest test scores this year than any other class same grade science class.
Evolution is incorrect because it is not scientific.
Then hundreds of thousands (literally!) of scientists, including a fair number who are evangelical Christians, who actually do research in the multiple scientific disciplines associated with evolution (including me) are badly mistaken, and a random layman is more qualified to say what is scientific than the scientists actually doing the science.
There are more, but reading and refuting nonsense gets boring after a while.