Former Marine Launches Fed. Lawsuit: Banned from La Plata H.S. Property after Objecting to "Islamic

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Well, wait a minute. What if the kids were required to recite the Lord's Prayer or make confession? I'm sure a lot of people would be having a problem with that.

Not terribly long ago students and parents were having a fit because a group of kids used the school cafeteria for after school youth group meetings. That one nut sued because he didn't want his snowflake saying "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. So how is it that now, only a few years later, schools are actually giving religious instruction, prayers and all? Why aren't the extremist atheists all over this, considering they gripe about everything else under the sun?
If the kids had a homework assignment that asked what the Lord's Prayer was, would you consider that a requirement to recite it?

Schools are not "giving religious instruction, prayers and all", that's ridiculous. Look at the exhibit. Seriously.

It's a god damn homework assignment most likely given by a teacher who identifies as a Christian who couldn't help the fact that they had a student who's dad was so insecure in his faith to think that a portion of his daughter's world history class that teaches the history of Islam would somehow deny her the ability to rationally believe in whatever deity she wants. I also have a feeling that she's pretty immersed in Christianity in her everyday life outside of that 2 week course that (god forbid) teaches her something other than what she's been taught her whole life.

I'm an atheist (not an "extremist) and don't view this as a religious indoctrination. Most rational people see it this way.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
Islam homework thing

1A: All three are correct and factual.
1B: True, and I happen to like the Beduoins. They get life. "I against my brother, I and my brother against our cousin, I, my brother and our cousin against the neighbors, All of us against the foreigner". Of course no one likes them in the Middle East because they refuse to be subjugated. Not entirely sure why the Bedouins were included by hey whatever.

1C: True, though it should be pointed out these are the legends regarding mecca rather then raw fact, but since it's about belief, it makes sense to be included.

2: All true and factual.

3: All true and factual.

4: Ditto.

5. Yes, though again 5C is a gross oversimplification.

Summary: There's nothing in there about taking the oaths, merely what they are. It's like me knowing that the Confiteor is a thing.

Next paper:

1: All of these are facts.

2a: They misspelled "Byzantium". Otherwise factual.

2b: True and factual.

2c: Sort of more or less true? It's glib. As far as Imperial conquerors go they weren't the worst, but this is the kind of thing I expect to see on a middle grade paper, not an high school one.

3: Most of these aren't filled in but the questions all seem reasonable.

4. Ditto.

Written Portion:

1. I'd have put "Asia", "Europe" and "Africa", since the trade routes ran through the middle east but I suppose that answer works to.
2. Acceptable answer

Ugh picking through this is difficult, sufficed to say I see no question in here that are dumb/misleading.

I do think some of the presentation was glib and below a high school level.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
The part people are supposedly taking issue with does not exist in the evidence presented. The relevant piece on page 9 simply says "Shenada - Testimony/decleration of faith"

This is not "writing out the oath" or "taking the oath", this is knowing what its called and what it is.

I know the definition of Confiteor, I know it's purpose in the catholic lexicon, i'm not catholic because I know it.

I know what baptism is, I know it's purpose, I'm pretty sure that doesn't make me a Christian.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
The issue isn't "homework"; its what is being taught. However, generally speaking, math is a well defined concept (well except for the Common Core BS) and the results are generally described in absolutes such as as "right" or "wrong"...there's very little gray area in most math. Religion, even in a historical perspective, isn't usually defined in absolutes such as "right" and "wrong". Religion is conceptual...your beliefs, no matter how "right" they are to you does not mean they are "right" for me.

Really?? For it to be equivalent to your example, the school would have to be actively promoting slavery, not just presenting the historical context of slavery.

And how does that equate what is allegedly being taught about Islam in this particular case? I have no problem with teaching all kinds of things in a historical perspective because that's what "history" is...experiences that evolve and shape our understanding of people, places, cultures, and events. On the surface, it appears the school is going a little overboard, not only in the lessons, but the fact that they apparently disregarded the wishes of the parents. Now, I'm not advocating that parents demand that their child be only taught certain things, but when subject touches on religion or morals or ethos, then there are going to be some that will have concerns about what is being taught in school and what is being taught in the home. I don't think its unreasonable for a parent to have some say in what their child is being taught.

I do think that there's more to this story as a school doesn't get a No Trespass order unless things got out of hand. There's no information on that part to make a judgement, so I hope the school just didn't get the order just to avoid the subject.
Because if I declare at the start of a lesson that "this thing is bad" then I've poisoned the well of discussion.

You don't want teachers teaching your children moral and ethics do you? At all? Because if you allow them to teach 'good", you're opening them to teach "bad" if it swings the other way. I don't want to force my views on my students, I want them to understand the history and draw their own conclusions on it.

I've reviewed the PowerPoint and the homework, there's nothing in there that is preaching or advocating that Islam is superior.

There are things I disagree with, mostly based on wording and the supposed education level. This is High School and this is looking like middle school social studies.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
most likely given by a teacher who identifies as a Christian
How do you know that?

This is why these internet discussions piss me off: information is given, then people just sit around and make up crap to "support" whatever viewpoint they've decided to take.

Chris, you want everyone to stick with the facts, so how about you do the same.

I'm an atheist (not an "extremist) and don't view this as a religious indoctrination. Most rational people see it this way.
I don't necessarily view it as indoctrination, I'm just wondering why our schools are suddenly teaching religion when in the past they've been so hell bent (ha) on prohibiting any religious expression at all. You say it's part of world history, but two weeks of it?? And specific assignments about it? Good lord, there's so much to teach with regard to world history that specific religious practices shouldn't even be a part of it in any meaningful way.

I think any rational person would question why this is such a large part of public school curriculum.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
If the kids had a homework assignment that asked what the Lord's Prayer was, would you consider that a requirement to recite it?

Schools are not "giving religious instruction, prayers and all", that's ridiculous. Look at the exhibit. Seriously.

It's a god damn homework assignment most likely given by a teacher who identifies as a Christian who couldn't help the fact that they had a student who's dad was so insecure in his faith to think that a portion of his daughter's world history class that teaches the history of Islam would somehow deny her the ability to rationally believe in whatever deity she wants. I also have a feeling that she's pretty immersed in Christianity in her everyday life outside of that 2 week course that (god forbid) teaches her something other than what she's been taught her whole life.

I'm an atheist (not an "extremist) and don't view this as a religious indoctrination. Most rational people see it this way.
Why do you feel the need to swear to make your point? There's something moderately hypocritical about an avowed atheist taking the lords name in vain.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
How do you know that?

This is why these internet discussions piss me off: information is given, then people just sit around and make up crap to "support" whatever viewpoint they've decided to take.

Chris, you want everyone to stick with the facts, so how about you do the same.



I don't necessarily view it as indoctrination, I'm just wondering why our schools are suddenly teaching religion when in the past they've been so hell bent (ha) on prohibiting any religious expression at all. You say it's part of world history, but two weeks of it?? And specific assignments about it? Good lord, there's so much to teach with regard to world history that specific religious practices shouldn't even be a part of it in any meaningful way.

I think any rational person would question why this is such a large part of public school curriculum.
'teaching religion" and "teaching about religion" is two separate things. I'm of the personal opinion that teaching the history of western civilization without at least a module on Christianity is like pea soup without peas.

Also we did just fight two major conflicts in a highly muslim region, and it looks like that's going to be the big scary thing of this century rather then say, Communism. Know thine enemy and all that.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
I'm of the personal opinion that teaching the history of western civilization without at least a module on Christianity is like pea soup without peas.
You would certainly mention it but not do a whole unit on it. Religion is so intangible and personal that there's no way any teacher could possibly cover it in any meaningful way. You could spend a whole school year just on the various denominations of Christianity alone and still only touch on the basics.

Is it correct that they spent 2 weeks of class time on Islam alone? Or did I misunderstand that? I looked at the Exhibits filed and that seems like an AWFUL lot of detail just on one religion, not to mention it's highly subjective and biased. "Radicals are only a small percentage of Muslims...." They don't know that, so why is it being taught?

I think the family is right in challenging this.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
What does your drivel above have to do with this? How does this equate with "teaching history"?
The far left has an overwhelming need to apologize for things real or imaginary. Since we've been at war with "not Islam" for the last couple of decades we've got to apologize and show that there are no hard feelings.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
You would certainly mention it but not do a whole unit on it. Religion is so intangible and personal that there's no way any teacher could possibly cover it in any meaningful way. You could spend a whole school year just on the various denominations of Christianity alone and still only touch on the basics.

Is it correct that they spent 2 weeks of class time on Islam alone? Or did I misunderstand that? I looked at the Exhibits filed and that seems like an AWFUL lot of detail just on one religion, not to mention it's highly subjective and biased. "Radicals are only a small percentage of Muslims...." They don't know that, so why is it being taught?

I think the family is right in challenging this.
Depends on the structure of the class. Two weeks out of a 24 week semester, while significant, is completely robbed of the context of everything else being done with the 22.

Besides of which, if you're teaching contemporary geopolitics, a lot of this is stuff you need to have some idea of. history can be studied in chunks, but a lot of times a single thrust is built on a thing. If you don't understand some of the reasons Muslims, for example, deface religious icons, you won't understand why they would blow up Buddha statues. If you don't understand why mecca is important , you don't understand Saudi Arabia's influence outside of its massive oil industry.

There's simply a ton of context here we don't have.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
I hope he wins. You learned scholars that are atheist can think anything you like.

I hope he busts their ass wide open. End of comments on this subject for me.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
I hope he wins. You learned scholars that are atheist can think anything you like.

I hope he busts their ass wide open. End of comments on this subject for me.
Would you rather have no religion taught in school, robbing children of an important academic line, or would you rather have your children exposed to many different areas of knowledge.

You know, I'm pretty sure I've argued in other forums I would love to see more religion taught in school, about religions, and this is EXACTLY why it's not. Because people like this, and I think I even brought up this as a possible example of what might happen.

Does anyone remember which thread that was? I'll have to dig for it.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Would you rather have no religion taught in school, robbing children of an important academic line, or would you rather have your children exposed to many different areas of knowledge.

You know, I'm pretty sure I've argued in other forums I would love to see more religion taught in school, about religions, and this is EXACTLY why it's not. Because people like this, and I think I even brought up this as a possible example of what might happen.
Since religion is a matter of faith and not fact, there's no way some teacher or whoever designs the curriculum could be objective about it. Or even universally knowledgeable, for that matter. You can't even just say, "These people believe this..." because there is no religion where all the adherents believe exactly the same thing.

I think teachings of faith have no place in public school. Once you get all the kids so they can communicate effectively, read for context, write a coherent sentence, and do maths accurately, then maybe we can worry about teaching them religion.
 

TheLibertonian

New Member
Since religion is a matter of faith and not fact, there's no way some teacher or whoever designs the curriculum could be objective about it. Or even universally knowledgeable, for that matter. You can't even just say, "These people believe this..." because there is no religion where all the adherents believe exactly the same thing.

I think teachings of faith have no place in public school. Once you get all the kids so they can communicate effectively, read for context, write a coherent sentence, and do maths accurately, then maybe we can worry about teaching them religion.
It's high school. "Teachings of faith" and "Teaching about a faith" are separate things.

If I can't talk about Christianity in Europe I can't talk about why monarchies arose, or how ideas about marriage changed, why we have what we call the 'nuclear family'.

Found it BTW: http://forums.somd.com/threads/306678-Project-Veritas-Common-Core-Exposed?p=5615443&viewfull=1#post5615443
 
Last edited:

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
It's high school. "Teachings of faith" and "Teaching about a faith" are separate things.
Exactly. And exactly why this lawsuit was brought and needs to go forward. Teaching world history that includes the Muslim conquests of southern/eastern Europe, the rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire, etc is one thing....reciting the Koran and conversion verses quite something else.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
How do you know that?

This is why these internet discussions piss me off: information is given, then people just sit around and make up crap to "support" whatever viewpoint they've decided to take.

Chris, you want everyone to stick with the facts, so how about you do the same.

I don't know that, nor did I claim to. In a country where 77% of the population identify as a Christian, I'd say it's a good possibility. Which is what I eluded to in the 8th post of this thread:

"I'd be willing to bet that the very teacher that gave her this assignment was, *gasp* Christian."


I don't necessarily view it as indoctrination, I'm just wondering why our schools are suddenly teaching religion when in the past they've been so hell bent (ha) on prohibiting any religious expression at all. You say it's part of world history, but two weeks of it?? And specific assignments about it? Good lord, there's so much to teach with regard to world history that specific religious practices shouldn't even be a part of it in any meaningful way.

I think any rational person would question why this is such a large part of public school curriculum.
"Large part"?? That's assuming it was 2 full weeks of talking about it. 2 full weeks, yet the dad came up with a power point and a single assignment?

Anyway, this was a World History class. In the assignment, there are questions regarding Islam relating to history (The entire 2nd exhibit).

It's been awhile since I was in high school, but I specifically remember things like this being taught.

Why do you feel the need to swear to make your point? There's something moderately hypocritical about an avowed atheist taking the lords name in vain.
I'm an agnostic swear-er (and I tend to cuss, a lot). If I don't believe there's a "god", I'm technically not using his name in vain, am I? I certainly don't use that or "Oh Jesus Christ" or similar phrases in order to piss anyone off.

You would certainly mention it but not do a whole unit on it. Religion is so intangible and personal that there's no way any teacher could possibly cover it in any meaningful way. You could spend a whole school year just on the various denominations of Christianity alone and still only touch on the basics.

Is it correct that they spent 2 weeks of class time on Islam alone? Or did I misunderstand that? I looked at the Exhibits filed and that seems like an AWFUL lot of detail just on one religion, not to mention it's highly subjective and biased. "Radicals are only a small percentage of Muslims...." They don't know that, so why is it being taught?

I think the family is right in challenging this.
So if a teacher can't teach something as profound as religion in any meaningful way, why do you believe the family is correct in the fact that the school in indoctrinating their daughter to Islam?

I'll disagree whole-heartedly that those few questions are too much when discussing the past and modern teachings and information of one of the largest and oldest religions in history.

The last paragraph of yours is a bit different from your previous postings. I'm pretty sure you've admitted that in a world where Islam is the largest, radical Muslims make up a small percentage.

The far left has an overwhelming need to apologize for things real or imaginary. Since we've been at war with "not Islam" for the last couple of decades we've got to apologize and show that there are no hard feelings.
Perhaps you can point to what you believe to be "apologizing"?

Since religion is a matter of faith and not fact, there's no way some teacher or whoever designs the curriculum could be objective about it. Or even universally knowledgeable, for that matter. You can't even just say, "These people believe this..." because there is no religion where all the adherents believe exactly the same thing.

I think teachings of faith have no place in public school. Once you get all the kids so they can communicate effectively, read for context, write a coherent sentence, and do maths accurately, then maybe we can worry about teaching them religion.
Sure, but the facts about how that religion came to be and how they shaped a certain portion of the world in a World History class is something that should be taught, no?

Or should religion not be brought up when discussing world history?

I'd agree with you if it seemed like the school was trying to teach someone to be Christian, Muslim, etc., but I just don't see that here. 2 weeks (assumed) of discussing the origins up to modern times of Islam shouldn't worry someone as devout as this guy and his family (as he claims). If the story is how he told it, then the school could have handled someone who gets their panties in a wad better (be more PC, the thing we've rallied against when discussing Trump), but the terms of this lawsuit are ridiculous with no proof of his claims.
 

BlueBird

New Member
Hope they win!
Me too. They have a strong case if what they claim their child was told to recite and memorize in the linked story is true.

Schools are indoctrinating our children to be accepting of everything except christianity. This is my issue with what these modern "world history" classes are teaching. Are they also teaching about Jesus and his impact on the world? The answer is no, I looked it up!
 
Last edited:

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
"Large part"?? That's assuming it was 2 full weeks of talking about it. 2 full weeks, yet the dad came up with a power point and a single assignment?

Anyway, this was a World History class. In the assignment, there are questions regarding Islam relating to history (The entire 2nd exhibit).

It's been awhile since I was in high school, but I specifically remember things like this being taught.



I'm an agnostic swear-er (and I tend to cuss, a lot). If I don't believe there's a "god", I'm technically not using his name in vain, am I? I certainly don't use that or "Oh Jesus Christ" or similar phrases in order to piss anyone off.

It seems kind of childish to use a term that you don't believe in to add expletives to your statement.


So if a teacher can't teach something as profound as religion in any meaningful way, why do you believe the family is correct in the fact that the school in indoctrinating their daughter to Islam?

I'll disagree whole-heartedly that those few questions are too much when discussing the past and modern teachings and information of one of the largest and oldest religions in history.

The last paragraph of yours is a bit different from your previous postings. I'm pretty sure you've admitted that in a world where Islam is the largest, radical Muslims make up a small percentage.



Perhaps you can point to what you believe to be "apologizing"?

Three or four decades ago when I was in school they taught that there was such thing as Islam and that was about the extent of it, now they teach examples directly from the Koran, serve Halal meals and provide prayer breaks, we'll call this under the radar apologizing
Sure, but the facts about how that religion came to be and how they shaped a certain portion of the world in a World History class is something that should be taught, no?

Or should religion not be brought up when discussing world history?

I'd agree with you if it seemed like the school was trying to teach someone to be Christian, Muslim, etc., but I just don't see that here. 2 weeks (assumed) of discussing the origins up to modern times of Islam shouldn't worry someone as devout as this guy and his family (as he claims). If the story is how he told it, then the school could have handled someone who gets their panties in a wad better (be more PC, the thing we've rallied against when discussing Trump), but the terms of this lawsuit are ridiculous with no proof of his claims.
Agree with me or not, it's all the same to me.
 
Top