Stand By for Heavy Rolls

I assume you are worried that there will be similar action in FL, as to that in CA. Did you see the TV report on the girl who went to a public school, I think in KY. She was top in her class and made all A's. When she got to college, and not an Ivy League school, she found out she didn't know enough to get by basic Freshman courses. Her high school school education was a sham. I think that is possibly true with a lot of these church schools. Their primary thrust I believe is to keep their kids away from the undesirables in public school, and probably in a more segregated situation too. I think some of these parents do their kids a disservice.

Nobackup,

Unfortunately, this is just the tip of the educational iceburg.

Speaking in a highly general way, basic education & inadequate education are the two sore spots.  I did not see the story you mentioned but from what has been in the news for years, it sounds typical.  Basic education, in many forms has seen a decline for decades.  Yes, some recent reports of improvements sound good & are good, unless one scratches the surface to find out that in many cases, there was nowhere else to go but up.

A lack of history, geography, mathematics & basic science has been in decline for decades.  Now add to the mix, 1. the attempt by the Christian right to add Intelligent Design to science courses, 2. the state of Forida ALLOWING  the word "evolution" to be used for the first time in 2008, and 3. the uncertified & in many cases, unqualified, people allowed to teach in home schooling situations, & you have a disaster waiting to happen.

Another problem, as featured in the story, Christian evangelical & fundamentalist groups teaching courses from that perspective does a huge disservice to children who hope to gain entry, not only to an institution of higher learning, but then the work force in the world at large. They are so ill prepared in a number of ways.

To the best of my knowlege, not one person or group in this country has taken steps to deny any religious schooling to any child.  On the contrary, the home, the place of worship, the religious activity & the private religious school of any denomination has not only been allowed to teach their respective religions but have flourished without being hampered.  Curiously, in some cases, with the help of tax payers monies, which I consider in violation of the First Amendment.  So the charge  of being anti Christian or religious discrimination is specious, at best.

A university has the right to set minimum standards of entry within the framework of the law.  If a student can't meet these standards, blame the prior system of schooling, not the university.  If you want to teach your children a biblical view of creationism, a biblical version of history or any other subject, without proper perspective or critical thinking processes in order to fulfill your religious requirements,  blame no other person than yourself when you then attempt to enter your child into the real world where the requirements are more difficult & based on the things you refused to teach.

If parents & a community at large allows a high school to inadequately prepare their students in the basics of learning, yet passes them on, blame that system, not the university but make sure steps are taken to fix the problem.  That is one reason I'm against school vouchers.  They do nothing to fix the original problem, ei. failing schools, and they take money away that might be used to fix the problem.

With an appeal process in the making, I'm sure we'll hear more on this sad situation. JATFUR.

Rich K  

It's a pretty sad state of affairs when the DOG understands math better than the tv host!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOEA_II1bEw&feature=related 

But can the dog do stand up comedy? 

Nobody ever said you had to be smart to be TV Host. 

Mike Heemer

Unfortunately, kids see that kind of ignorance and take it to mean that you don't need to pursue schooling in order to be successful in life. This mindset lends itself to educational apathy, and then stupidity in general. And then before you know it, people who have no grasp of the written English language are posting on public blogs about things they care passionately about, but cannot be taken seriously because no one can read their posts.

I find we have a lot of views in common.

Did any of you read the LETTER TO THE EDITOR about the differences in the position on issues of Candidates for School Board, District 4?  You can find it by clicking on News in menu at top and scrolling down. 

A former teacher compared the two candidates based on their responses on the 2008 Superintentant and School Board Survey conducted by The American Family Form.  There are so many differences it make you think you're deciding between a Republican and a Democrat.  

Candidate surveys can be found online at http://americanfamilyforum.org and clicking on Online Voter Guide, then on their name.

Solo;

I apologize for assisting in the hijacking of your blog. The one above has little to do with the actual subject you proposed other than the fact that it is a letter about a school board survey by AFF from an obvious supporter of the opposing candidate.

I have a real issue with these surveys. Their on-line post does indeed show the entire survey. However, according to their previous correspondence to the candidates 'responses from selected questions' would be sent to the clergy.

Take a hard look at the questions and think about who the survey is coming from then see if you can figure out which questions they are talking about.

The guts of this survey looks like an application for a Deacon's position.

I did not fill out the last one at all. I just got the one for the November ballot and will only answer the questions that have to do with issues that the BoCC actually has control of if I send it in at all.

Mike Heemer

Mike, did you see Rich K's tag that said Education?  My post is regarding elected someone for the school board which in my book means education. 

Surveys for comission seats is titled 2008 County Survey with completely different questions than the survey titled 2008 Superintendent and School Board Survey.

Since reading your post, I've taken another look at these surveys online.  The completed surveys are available there.   The questions appear to address issues appropriate for position intended.

We must be looking at different surveys. 

alabayea;

No we're looking at the same surveys. We're just looking at them from a different perspective.

Could you explain to me what abortion legislation has to do with a school board member? When was the last time the school board ever passed legislation?

Yes there were sections that were different for each candidate but the core questions, the 'selected' answers that were going to be given to the clergy were like an application for a Deacon's position.

I really liked the one about should the county health care cover abortions. My random sample showed 100% no answers. Since when does a school board member or county commissioner control what a health care providers covers?

But here is the kicker. They all say abortion is OK as long as it is for rape, incest or there is a threat to the mother's life. Yet they all say no to health care covering abortion.

So a young lady that works for the county that is raped and becomes pregnant can have an abortion as long as she pays for it herself. Does that honestly make sense to you?

The other good one is the discrimination questions. You can't discriminate against anyone based on race, color or creed. Unless of course they happen to be homosexual then they are fair game for any cruel thing you want to do to them.

Have I missed something in my moral training and practices? I could have sworn that ALL meant ALL when it said we were created equal.

You will NOT wear a tux for senior pictures if you are a female but if you stick your bare butt in a fellow wrestler's face it's just being boys in an initiation ritual.

That's the kind of issues I want to know their stance on.

Funny how that moral high ground changes elevation at the whim of the leaders of this county. 

Mike Heemer

Mike, we both know school board membrs do not pass legislation in terms you are referencing.  The form does not indicate they do.  It's simply a candidates position on issues facing school system.  There are a lot of guidlines the school board does establish.  Parents have a right to know what position can be expected of a candidate and decide if they approve.

American Family Forum promots pro-family lifestyle.  I do not see anything wrong with that. 

i

While the different points brought up so far have been interesting, even humorous, I think one subtle aspect has escaped attention.  That aspect is the possible repercussions if this appeal processkeeps going up the judicial ladder, which it very well might.  Allow me to explain.

First, this is not a class action law suit.  It might seem like a minor point, but it can loom large.  I'm not a lawyer, so I'm only thinking out loud.  but the possibility exists that at some point, it might become one.

The suit was filed in 2005 against the U of CA by "Calvary Chapel Christian School, five Calvary students & the Association of Christian Schools International, the largest organization of christian schools in the country."  Their claims?  1.  The university was discriminating against religion. 2.  Stifling free expression & 3.  Exhibiting anti Christian bias.

The university's position?  1.  The courses in question, "Christianity's influence on America" ("whose primary text was published by the ultra fundamentalist Bob Jones University.") & "Biology for Christian Schools," which used, "experts said, characterized religious doctrine as scientific evidence, included scientific inaccuracies & failed to encourage critical thinking."

Now let's assume for a second that this cases is actually accepted by the appellate process, something I don't think will happen because of lack of merit, groundless claims.  But suppose it is accepted.  Here's what I think is a realistic scenario.

1.  On discrimination against religion.  I think this would be summarily dismissed because the same educational criteria of standards applay to everyone, regardless of religion.

2.  On stifling free speech.  I think this would also be summarily dismissed if for nothing else, lack of evidence.  No person or group was prevented from excercising their First Amendment right.

3.  On exhibiting anti-christian bias.  Here's the big one, in my opinion.  The complaining party states anti Christion bias while the university will say, in effect, absolutely not.  the standards are just that, standard.  They apply to everyone alike.  In doing so, I also assume that the university will claim that these are educational standards, not religious standards.  Now here comes the part which no one, at least to my knowlege, has brought up. 

If I were the representative of the Association of Christian Schools International, in the back of my mind I would be thinking that this would be a golden opportunity to have a judicial process not only officially recognize, but validate their type of teaching.  On one hand, they have little to loose except a bit of time & money.  OK, they'll loose a little face in the public eye also.  On the other hand, if they loose their case,they have a lot to loose because the judicial process will, in effect, state that teaching a particular, interpretive, narrow version of Christianity, is irrelevant to the larger educational process, & is substandard insofar as being compared to the minimum educational standards necessary to higher education. 

This has been going on in various states for a while,  but on a much smaller scale & hasn't been noticed enough to make the news, let alone, bringing about a law suit.  Florida is good example, at least with the subject of science in general, evolution in particular.  As I said, it will be an interesting case to follow.  JATFUR.

Rich K

Mike,

No need to apologize for any hijacking.  One of the good things About hijacking is that it brings more aspects to a single topic.

Alabayea,

I see plenty of things wrong with the American Family Forum.  I googled them & looked up their core values & found plenty of things I consider wrong behind their innocuous sounding name, especially their relationship to Focus On The Family.

Rich K

Solo;

Excellent points. I haven't studied this nor have I read much about it so I cannot go into the detail that you have. However, there are two statements you have made that kind of hit home with me.

On one hand, they have little to loose except a bit of time & money.

When it is not your money who cares. People will keep sending them more and more just to 'protect the attack on Christianity'. The list of these groups and their success at raising money is legendary.

OK, they'll loose a little face in the public eye also.

I'm not sure they care. It might in fact be a positive for them. This would be 'proof' of the attack. It just means we have to have more money to fight this insidious enemy and their coffers would swell even more.

Cynical? Perhaps. Anti Christian? No.

Mike Heemer

More and more parents are home schooling their children.  Those parents I've talked with do it because they do not like their children exposed to some of the things that go on in schools. 

Alabayea,

I have nothing against home schooling & find nothing inherently wrong with it.  Speaking for myself, I would require that whoever is teaching should be qualified & certified by the state.  Courses should be set at least at the same level & variety  that educational standards require.  I don't advocate the use of tax payers monies to subsidize home schooling unless under extraordinary circumstances.

Even though I don't have children, I can understand the concerns of parents sending their children to public schools.  The things that starches my shorts are, 1.  With all of the complaints @ problems in public schools, instead of fixing the problems, tax payers monies are spent to send children to other schools.  Here, I'm speaking of the voucher system.  I wonder how many of those proponents of vouchers would take the same  wrong headed approach to solving problems with their car or home or their health? 2.  On this particular topic, I find it yet another waste of taxpayers money in addition to yet another religious group attempting to impose their standards on someone else while crying, "discrimination," and "anti christian bias."  if it weren't so pathetic & time wasting, it might be humorous.

Mike,

I'm not sure I would characterize your view as cynical.  Pragmatic maybe, but not cynical.  Concerning groups like this, I'll have to find another adjective since I've already used the term, "pathetic," in my reply to Alabayea.  Sauce for the goose.  It gives me another chance to learn a new word.  To put it in official terminology, "that's a good thing."  JATFUR.

Rich K