When Should You Ignore a Proselytizing Teacher?

I think it’s possible to be thankful for someone’s good deeds, but be critical of the actions they do. It’s not like if she stops proselytizing she will stop caring about these kids. It needs to be clear to her that what she is doing is not respecting these kid’s autonomy when she preaches to them. She can hold a bible study, and she can teach kids about the bible there, but being in her class, where students have no choice being in, she is crossing a line. 

To me this is no different than your argument about Christians who oppose gay marriage. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/08/02/if-you-oppose-marriage-equality-what-else-am-i-supposed-to-call-you/ It doesn’t matter how nice you are. It doesn’t matter how much good you do. You are still wrong if you preach in class.

EDIT: added clarifying language in the last sentence.

Exactly, stopping her from proseletyzing  shouldn’t make her a crappy teacher all of a sudden.

 If she’s doing the preaching in class, that’s just wrong, even if her net effect or intent is good. The fact that good teachers exist who DON’T preach to kids in class is proof that she can do even better, and doesn’t need to break the law to be a good teacher.

What if she weren’t pushing religion?  What if, instead, she were leading all her female students in “modeling classes”, telling them they needed to to wear heavy eyeliner, high heels, short skirts,  and start saving up for implants in order to get ahead in life?  That’s just as accepted by society as Christian lifestyles, and equally likely to have a positive outcome for the student and for our society. 
Anyway, this is fraternization and favoritism, as well as illegal.

Why would you think you are blinded by your atheism? This has nothing to do with atheism at all. Do you think that a Muslim or Hindu wouldn’t be disturbed by the methods of this teacher? This is a simple question of legality, and what this teacher is doing is illegal. If you believe that the ends justify the means, you can support her actions. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter how much good she might be doing to some of the students (and of course, not discussed is the possible harm she is doing to others).

And really, does anybody seriously think it’s the proselytizing that’s making the difference, as opposed to the simple fact that she cares about her students and spends time with them? Will a Bible study session really make them better than, say, a study group?

It seems to me that a competent administrator ought to be able to explain to Candice exactly why her proselytizing is unacceptable and find a way for her to channel that energy into making her an even better teacher, even more capable of reaching even more students.

But life is complex, maybe she’d have quit if she couldn’t mix her religion with her teaching, maybe the religious angle was actually important to being able to reach kids who may already have been taught that religion is the only source of goodness.

Nevertheless, what she was doing was against the law, and the question becomes is the impact of one teacher more important than allowing a flagrant violation of the law. Hopefully she would stick around and still have a positive impact after being told to stop proselytizing, and hopefully she’s not the only great teacher reaching at risk kids.

How long would she get away with it if she was a Wiccan, or a Muslim, or a Satanist?
Proselytization is potentially harmful, because sometimes it works.

She’s breaking the law. You don’t ignore that. It’s not harmless. 

Look at it this way: If she was sleeping with the kids but otherwise doing all this good, would you be considering ignoring it? How about if she was handing out drugs? This is just as bad as those two situations. She’s blatantly abusing power and ignoring laws. She needs to be fired.

Or, we could just say that’s her thing and thank goodness we live in a free country where our best teachers can do such things.  A couple years ago, my oldest son had an 8th grade Social Studies teacher who was crystal clear on where she stood on a host of secular and liberal ideals, and she was more than willing to attempt to get kids to see the light.  You name it, there wasn’t a topic on social, moral, or religious views she didn’t draw a line in the sand about, and encourage others to see it her way – all on the school’s time.  At first, I thought hey!  What’s all this religion sucks and is wrong stuff?  To the lawyers!  And then I paused.  I noticed something.  First, she actually cared about the students.  When there was a fire drill, she emailed me to tell me that my son stopped to make sure a special needs student who had become mixed up got to where he needed to go.  A caring teacher notices those things.  A really caring teacher bothers to email about them.  Plus, another important feature: she didn’t punish students for disagreeing.  She had a typical “America as land of white racists genocidal murderers’, but when my son took her to task and disagreed with her appraisals, she gave him an A because he made his case.  The big thing is, in the end, it was a great educational experience.  It showed my son that there are other viewpoints in the world, and believe it or not, even if they sound harsh to your ears, they can still be held by people of good cheer and hearts.  So in hindsight, I would say more of them. 

This is a no-brainer: teachers are not allowed to proselytize, and that’s that.  Demanding that she follow the law is not “push[ing] aside all the good she’s doing because she’s clearly breaking the law.”  If you were demanding she be fired even if she agreed to stop, that might count as pushing it all aside, but simply saying that she is not above the law does not.

To me your case is not comparable. A social studies teacher is discussing politics and history and making a case on political and historical issues is reasonable, as long as she isn’t penalizing students for disagreeing if they can support their views, then she’s doing nothing wrong (well, if she really said religion sucks and is wrong, then she IS exceeding her purview and violating separation of church and state and ought to be at least reminded of the bounds she needs to stay within).

This case involves a *chemistry* teacher, and religion has no place in the chemistry classroom at all. Beyond which, she is providing extra attention to students who choose to participate in religious activities with her, effectively discriminating against students who aren’t comfortable with that, whether they be Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, atheist, or other.

Really, while your story sounds lovely, and is meant to show us how we atheists are chomping at the bit to attack religious teachers while you’re willing to let liberal, secular teachers go as long as they teach well, what it really shows is that you don’t fully understand exactly what is and isn’t permissible in public schools. Religious proselytizing, whether for a particular god or against gods, is not permissible. Having an opinion on politics and history and expressing it in a social studies class is permissible.

She sounds like an amazing teacher with (or preferably without) the religious indoctrination. 

 I try to put myself in the students place. What if I had a wonderful caring teacher who really went out of his/her way to help me but yet was a devout Muslim and kept pushing Islam on me. How would I feel?  I would feel conflicted. On the one hand I would appreciate the care and help but on the other I would wish the teacher would stop trying to convert me.  So the teacher should be told in no uncertain terms to knock off the preaching and at the same time be congratulated for being such a helpful teacher.

I think in her case it’s her faith that leads her to care for the kids in the way that she does, so it’s hard to separate the two. 

What David Kopp is trying to say (and that I agree with) is that both teachers are in the wrong here.  

If she is stopped from forcing kids to go to bible school, she can still do the other good stuff.

You view sleeping with the kids and handing out drugs is as bad as sharing her faith with them?
–
I would be far more upset if a teacher was having sex with kids or handing out drugs than proseletyzing, even if it were atheist proselytizing. “sticks and stones” and all that.

Fucking A. I know Christians who make a big deal about going to Kenya and spending time in the Kibera slum. I asked them once, don’t you think the money it costs for you to travel to and from Kenya would be better spent by sending it to those who are already there? So it could go for clean water, food, healthcare, education? It was like I took a shit in their living room. 

She’s probably proselytizing to GET to the non-Christian kids… helping them by guiding them to Christianity.

Actually, that’s 100% accurate: atheists (The ones here, anyway) are most certainly chomping at the bit to attack religious teachers, while most Christians actually are fine letting liberal, secular teachers go as long as they teach well.
–
I grew up with atheist proselytizing in public schools by several very outspoken teachers. And Christians didn’t run to their lawyers to sue the school. There was diversity, freedom, and more all around tolerance.
–
I can remember telling my parents that Mr __________ said “I do not believe in God because he does not exist” in class, to which my father replied, “Well, God believes in him.”
That was that –  no marches, no lawyers.

But is she doing that with nonreligious students or students of other faiths?  Teachers should take care not to show favoritism, in OR out of class, with any student or group of students for any reason.

 Preezackly.  Making her stop proselytizing the students isn’t making her stop all the actions that are actually helping them. 

If she was doing all the good things and then every time one of her students left she used a knife to nick his arm, you wouldn’t hesitate to stop her.  So stop her doing the damaging thing and encourage all the rest. 

 Awww, you poor persecuted thing

It is perfectly possible to be a good role model to students without bringing your religion into the picture. She shouldn’t be fired right off the bat, but this teacher is breaking the law. End of story.

Would you still feel that way if she were trying to get her students to adopt Islam?

Er… whoops. Sorry. I was reading and typing too quickly. The point remains, the classroom is NOT a place for proselytization of any kind. Secular education from a secular government. Pushing any religion (or no religion) on my tax dollar is wrong.

Now, teachers are more than welcome to answer questions about their religion factually (“Yes I am a Christian” or “Yes, I am an atheist, if you want to know more we can talk after school is out”). But when the book says “Candice, doesn’t hesitate to proselytize to her public-school students”, I have a problem with that no matter what her religion. The difference is in the motivator of information flow, whether it’s pushed or pulled.

 “And using the ‘promoting religion is wrong but bashing it is A-OK’ take
on the Separation clause is at best a gross misreading of the First
Amendment.”

Yes. It would be. Except that Gus said “well, if she really said religion sucks and is wrong, then she IS
exceeding her purview and violating separation of church and state and
ought to be at least reminded of the bounds she needs to stay within”. So you guys are in agreement there, at least.

Heh, yep. There really is a fine line sometimes.  Sometimes we, as people (not atheists) have to swallow some things we have a hard time agreeing with, because quite simple, if something is helping people and not hurting people then we should learn to leave well enough alone.  

Really, what harm is she causing these kids? Is pulling them away from possible life threatening addictions and at risk behavior and pulling them into religion SUCH a bad thing?  I would rather see these kids believe in god IF it HELPS them in the long run, rather than leading lives of crime, spreading hatred etc.  There ARE situations where religion HAS been a good thing for people. I personally am NOT religious, but that does not mean that ALL religion causes a BAD result in EVERY situation.  

People need to set aside their prejudices about religion and look at how this is beneficial to kids that may not have anyone else that gives a shit. 

Perhaps, as someone suggested below, maybe ask her to tone down the “god-talk” and keep up with the rest?  But even if she cant/wont…   would YOU want to be the one to take this away from these kids? No matter how illegal it may be?  

Yeah, it sounds like she’s doing good stuff for the kids but why does she have to break the law in the process?  Can’t she just do good for her students because it’s the right thing to do, rather than pushing her religion on them in the process?  Imagine the outcry if a Muslim teacher spent half her time trying to convert the kids to Islam, or a Satanist teacher took the kids out for Black Masses.  Nobody would be talking about all of the great things she was doing for them, they’d be calling for her job and her head on a platter.   Because it’s Christianity, however, people write a book praising her and even some atheists hem and haw over whether to call out the illicit nature of her actions.

I’ve always been annoyed by the idea that an entity (a person, an organization, a religion, whatever) can be summed up as “good” or “bad” as though their collected acts could be tallied on a moral balance sheet.

When the Catholic Church builds a hospital, this is an incredibly good thing. Increasing supply of medical resources reduces their cost, increasing the geographical distribution of medical care improves emergency outcomes and reduces the medical disadvantage to rural living. More hospital beds and more doctors and nurses attending the patients in them means more lives saved, period. Building a hospital makes the entity doing it a force for good in the lives of those affected by the act.

When the Catholic Church facilitates the molestation and rape of little boys and girls, this is a hideously bad thing. Actively impeding investigations, not taking reports seriously, shuffling rapists around the world to shield them from their bad acts and provide them with new victims, deflecting blame onto victims or scapegoating uninvolved groups, all these acts deepen the moral stain that they participated in. Protecting and facilitating child rape makes the entity responsible a force for evil in the lives of those affected by the act.

I don’t think there is any coherent way to even compare these two acts. It’s not like building a hospital gives you morality points while covering up child rape takes them away. I am glad whenever a hospital is built, and I am also glad when a rapist is caught and punished and those who cover up their crimes are sued into oblivion. I can feel that way, I think reasonably, even if it happens to be the same entity that did both. I can say that the Catholic Church may claim without irony that it is a leader in providing medical care around the world, and then I can laugh at them and ridicule them and then ultimately ignore them whenever they desire to pontificate on sexual morality or hold themselves up as moral authorities ever again.

TL;DR:  “The good act does not wash out the bad; nor the bad act the good.”

For the sake of clarity, can you define ‘atheist viewpoints’?  If you mean teaching things like evolution, an ‘old earth’, heliocentrism, or set theory, well, those aren’t ‘atheist’ viewpoints, they’re secular concepts, and only seen as religious by those groups whose dogma opposes them.

Well, religious leaders and conservative activists  loudly declare all the time, that our schools are hotbeds of liberal activism, environmental brainwashing, and anti-religious values. They say that your experience is quite common, yet I’ve never seen any evidence that it’s even a rare phenomenon.   

Somehow, I went through 15 years of California public schools & state college in the 80’s and 90’s  without ever hearing a peep, even from teachers who were quite liberal.  In college, I even took a philosophy course from an agnostic buddhist and a logic course fom an openly gay materialist….yet that was all I ever found out about them…there was not one whif of liberal propaganda or religion bashing.  However, even in “liberal” California, I did have a handful of religious teachers over the years who, while they never preached hellfire or treated students badly because of beliefs, could barely reign it in enough to keep their jobs.  I give them a lot of credit for walking that fine line between being proud of who you are while not forcing it on others.  I read creepy articles all the time about religious teachers who are not so good at walking that line.  I also read blogs and first-hand accounts of teachers who have to keep their liberalism and/or non-belief VERY much to themselves if they want to keep working in conservative areas.  Maybe you grew up in a similar society as me, where liberals and atheists aren’t hounded out of jobs for no reason…except here, neither preaching nor atheist activism is very well accepted in schools, and for all the “liberalism” around here, there are certainly christians who would complain about atheist teachers bashing religion.     My point is, I am having a very, very hard time believing your anecdote.  You claimed “atheist proselytizing by several outspoken  teachers”.  I call BS.  Unless American schools and society have changed almost completely in less than 20 years, I have to say I think you’re full of shit.  I could believe it COULD happen, especially in a place that isn’t that churchy…but I’ve never seen any such thing or even close.  However, if you aren’t full of shit, I think your dad was on the right trackand so are you. My family was not religious, but we put up with some mighty pushy religious folks with calm and grace.  Kids should see different points of view…the problem isn’t that, it’s that there has been no shortage of christian teahers willing to shame students, threaten hellfire, treat kids differenly based on beliefs, privilege their christian students, punish the unorthodox, etc…As long as teachers of both sides are fair to students and effective teachers, live and let live.  

She can still be a positive influence without proselytizing.  You should never ignore a proselytizing teacher. They are breaking the law and intruding on these children. It is inappropriate and unprofessional. Children need teachers with healthy boundaries. 

 Should there be a Christian or Bible Study Club at a public school?

“And using the ‘promoting religion is wrong but bashing it is A-OK’ take on the Separation clause is at best a gross misreading of the First Amendment.”

Well, good thing nobody does that except once in a while on blog comments.  Maybe that’s what you hear, but what I mostly hear are people saying that a teacher can be any religion or philosophy they want, and they can do it openly and proudly, but that preaching, exclusion, or conversion attempts from anyone are not okay.   

 For every dozen or so reports I hear of religious teachers crossing the line, repeatedly, egregiously, and not even being disciplined until there are lawsuits and national news coverage, I hear maybe one personal anecdote about a liberal or atheist teacher doing something similar, and it usually takes very little complaining to get the liberal/atheist fired.  And much of the time, the liberal/atheist teacher wasn’t even preaching or trying to de-convert, but simply mentioning concepts or showing students a different perspective.  While it is getting better, there are still teachers in this country who get disciplined for bringing up evolution, environmental issues, politics, or anything that makes conservative christians uncomfortable.  For christians to be seriously discilined or fired, they pretty much have to burn crosses in kids’ arms or preach hellfire to grade school kids.

It seems like you have an interest in pretending that the two problems are identical in the facts of what happens, how often it happens, or how kids are treated in the two scenarios- but on the whole, they are not equal in rates of occurence or in the actions of the teacher toward students. Nobody is saying atheists don’t do bad things….that’s in your imagination, and frankly only highlghts your own biases.

I do applaud you for being open minded about your son’s teacher.  If she was not punishing anyone for disagreeing, and as making it a learning experience, then the only issue is possible waste of class time on unreated stuff.  Most of us have no problem with religious teachers of the same habits.  But it will always be a sticky problem that requires adult patience and tolerance.  A liberal or atheist may be passionate about social issues, but they don’t believe they are commanded by god to save kids’ souls.  They don’t believe that their students are following satan when they disagree.  The intellectual nature of belief vs. non-belief, especially in a religious society, puts a much greater force behind religious proselytizing than it does atheism or liberal political activism.  As much as everyone wants all issues to seem equal, they’re just not the same.  Nobody goes to hell or faces irrational tribal exclusion for using styrofoam, driving an SUV, going to church, or having republican parents.               

At least I’m not the only one getting more than a small whiff of fertilizer from Blacksheep!

So, when does “several” teachers become “many” teachers, anyway?  When you want it to sound more true?

What I don’t like is using their charity to convert patients, or to allow people to associate being cared for with being Catholic, thus Catholic=good. Being cared for is good, caring people are helpful and you are at their mercy. Being Catholic is still nuts. Same thing for the Salvation Army, same for mission work to poor countries. When they feel like a part of you is sick or poor is your soul and necessarily spend a lot of their charitable efforts trying to fix that, or they believe they are charitable (and get the social points) because of their beliefs, I get critical of it, and that’s all beside their worst.

If you think how they make their money – by people who are Catholics, aren’t they even exploiting people who want to be helpful in order to make even more people into Catholics? They love for the world to think of them as helpful. Mother Teresa is still used as an example of one of the most helpful people ever, inspiring so many others to not just be helpful, but helpful Catholics; they’re not just witnessing to people, they are feeding them and lifting up the poor people with the power of Jesus. Is it really helpfulness they have in mind?

 Putting aside whether or not this statement is factual, you do understand why it comes across as unlikely in the U.S., right?

It reminds me a lot of stories by Born Again Christians who massively overstate how horrible they acted before their conversion. It’s very common to find out that the former terrible sinner with an implied litany of monstrous immorality just had some casual sex and smoked pot. If you’ve seen that, you can probably get why I suspect hyperbole.

Regardless, those teachers were wrong and breaking the law also. Their actions, and your reactions to their actions, do not justify supporting this teacher.

Hey, I’ve had school teachers and administration collude to steal non-Christian reading material from me, to remove every book I had ever checked out from the school, local, and local college libraries from the shelves, and to TELL TEACHERS AT OTHER SCHOOLS TO HARASS ME ABOUT MY RELIGION. After changing schools, I reported a recently born-again student who was harassing me, and the people in the front office decided to lecture ME about MY “Satanism Problem”. I didn’t find out until 5-6 years later that they’d been called by the old school, and that my records were loaded with libel. My seventh-grade anecdote showing why people in power can’t be allowed to push their religious agenda most assuredly trumps random individual teachers exceeding their authority and being put up with.

(And before any nitwit chimes in, no, they didn’t turn me off religion or make me “hate God”. I was well aware that it was a sham, and was looking for a philosophy. The leap from “Santa Claus isn’t real” to “Jesus is just like Santa Claus” isn’t a difficult one to make.)

You’re not the only one but I am still trying to figure this out. I think because we’re a litigious society and hyper-protective generally about whom our children spend time with – rather having them join a Boys & Girls Club or other community after-school; Big Brothers/Big Sisters; take a dance class or be on a soccer team. The people who run these things are adults, and basically hand our children over to them, even putting them in school, expect the school to be looking out for our kids. We expect these systems to care enough about kids to keep them safe, and someone who is already a teacher – seems harmless. The school does not want to be liable for a teacher’s misuse or abuse of time spent with children who also attend the school. Some schools have rules that a teacher can’t be friends with students on facebook. But some teachers are great, maybe the only adult a student can talk to, and someone they would be friends with.

Teachers obviously (hopefully) enjoy spending some time in the company of children, and my experience in school was just to learn what I was taught and none of the “issues” matter -when those matter the most. Teachers are also in a position to abuse this power to attract. Holy shit, a teacher who doesn’t just tell me what’s in the book but cares how I’m doing. That is a great thing for a student to realize, the teacher as friend or mentor or role model or just some hope in the world that some adults get it. Teachers are awfully limited by time and law from being as great to students as they could be, and we let the abusers take all the joy out of becoming an adult for a child, to associate with positive people who can be responsible with them. Parents don’t like anyone else taking that role, except when they need to sign them up for soccer (aka, babysitter who makes my kid tired enough to sleep early so I can run errands; ok, maybe it helps their self-esteem and makes them more healthy and rounded individuals too). I think they want the soccer coach to stick to soccer; the chemistry teacher to stick to chemistry, and leave all the parenting-type guidance to a fraction of the day. Kids are not just kids, they are people, and adults are people, and I don’t think it’s a great strategy for the relationship to always be one of authority and subordinate.

 When someone lies about alleged atheist indoctrination, they never define what they mean, because if they keep it vague they can’t be caught contradicting their last lie. 

No, no, no.  He wants to teach his kids early that illegal activities are okay so long as the perpetrator is a CHRISTIAN!

I’m not sure I’m willing to give Candice too much credit for the “good” she does. Yes, it’s nice of her to be extra-nice to her students … but really, all she’s doing is “buying” the right to proselytize them. Sorry, but she can’t do that. She has NO right to proselytize them at all … even she does all those “good” things for them. If she were truly feeling generous, she’d give be extra-nice to them … and never once mention her religion to them. At all. Ever.

It’s not just “sharing her faith.” 

She’s breaking laws and attempting to indoctrinate children. She needs to be talking to those kids about things that will actually help them in life, or problems they actually have. Not teaching them about a hateful sky daddy. 

If you want to talk about that stuff to other adults, that’s fine. But kids should not be proselytized, especially by a teacher that they trust to give them actual facts. A school teacher has no business discussing matters of faith. 

It’s great that she cares, and it’s great that she’s doing *something* about it.  But do you really believe for a second that, if she chose, she couldn’t do exactly the same things without the Bible study?  Why can’t she have a discussion group?  Why can’t her discussion group go out for coffee without praying to Jehovah?

It’s the fact that she’s willing to do these great things in her students’ lives, but ONLY for the students who are willing to profess her religion, that makes this wrong.  She may not see it, but it’s clear to me that it’s the affection, trust, time and attention that she puts in that’s making whatever difference she makes in these kids’ lives.  If she were putting in the same time reading Shakespeare with them, it would have the same effect.  

(Yes, I am a public school teacher, and when I say it’s great that she cares, I DO mean it.  I’m not dismissing the good she’s doing at all, but a good administrator should be doing some mentoring there.)  

Kudos for the good stuff.  But I suspect as a “born again Christian” she is likely doing something inappropriate with respect to religion in the classroom.  Doing “good” does not, and should not, in my opinion, give someone a free pass when it comes to the imposition of religious beliefs on impressionable minds.

That’s not at all what I said.  Even Hemant has said he does not “Friend” his students or approve their “Friend” requests on Facebook.  There is a level of familiarity that is inappropriate with a teacher socializing with students.  If she were an atheist teacher who was taking the students to freethought events, I’d say the same thing.  It’s not the belief issue (thought I don’t approve of that either).  It’s the familiarity she is showing this specific group of students.  What if the other students, those of other beliefs or no belief, would like to have some one-on-one time with the teacher… but she’s too busy with the faithful kids?  There’s an unevenness to it that is not right.

(Note I didn’t say anything about legality.  I’m not a lawyer and I make no legal judgements at all.  I’m just saying it’s inappropriate.)

If she’s leading bible groups outside of school hours, I have no problem with it. These kids need a support network that the obviously don’t have. There is still no justification however for her preaching in her classes (if that is what she is doing).

Yeah – but you still said you would rather she had sex with the kids and gave them porn instead of discussing matters of faith.
…that’s the crazy part you skipped over.

No lies, real stories. All from the 70’s.
I had a sociology teacher who was also a celebrated NYC Irish bartender who bashed Christianity almost daily, a history teacher who made weekly jokes about Carter “talking to God” and two science teachers (One biology, one Earth science) who made fun of students who questioned evolution.

So it was 4 – maybe qualifies as several, however not “many.”

No, of course not. I’m a Christian, therefore I would love for my kids to have a teacher like that. (Note that I said MY kids, since this is my personal opinion).

Yeah, pretty much exactly this.

Student-led, or faculty-led?

I’ve heard this same argument from people where it ended up that they were being taught evolution or cosmology that went against their religious beliefs. That was “atheistic dogma” to them.

I thought they required a sponsor… or at least a teacher that assumes a non-leadership role. If that is the case, then there’s nothing illegal or wrong about that. As it would not be endorsed by the school or faculty, merely allowed to be formed and run by students.

I’m sure you’ll forgive me about being skeptical about your claims, but I’m sure you’d agree that there are plenty of Christians who love to play the victim, even when nobody’s actually oppressing them.Let’s look at your examples:
 – An Irish bartender who ‘bashed Christianity’.  Without specific examples, I’d have to lean against this being an atheist viewpoint.  Plenty of sects of Christianity bash others; see among others the whole Irish Catholic/Protestant violence, ‘papists’, and claims of ‘no true Christian’.   Can you provide any support that he was bashing Christianity as a whole, or at least from an atheistic viewpoint?
 – A history teacher who made weekly jokes about Carter “talking to God”.    First off, you’re conflating criticism about a specific person  with criticism of Christianity as a whole.  Secondly, making fun of a specific Christian’s faith is not exclusively an atheistic viewpoint.   Haven’t you ever heard other Christians make fun of, say, Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses?  Or don’t they count as True Christians?  And though Carter is a bit before my time, since then we’ve had an even more religious president, Bush Jr.  Most of the people I know who criticized Bush’s overt religiosity are fellow Christians, who’d prefer that the person with their finger on the button would listen to their advisers, rather than the voice in their head.
 – Two science teachers (biology and Earth science) who made fun of students who questioned evolution.  I’d again ask for specific examples, as I’ve heard from plenty of Christians who conflate being told their YEC views are false with persecution and humiliation.  However, let’s accept for the moment that they were actually making fun; going beyond using humor as a tool for learning to the point of using humor as a tool for mockery, which is wrong.  The majority of Christians do not believe in a young Earth – so again, were they ridiculing them from an atheistic viewpoint?  Or from a majority Christian viewpoint?  Or does the fact that they don’t agree with your specific dogma on a young Earth mean that they aren’t actually True Christians?

Well, if everything you say is true, then apparently things were much, much cooler in the 70’s! I can tell you that by the 80’s you could praise Jesus or shut the hell up if you wanted to keep your job.
The better schools and teachers avoided the subject altogether except in historical contexts, and the worst schools and teachers are still banging the gong loud and proud for Jesus Christ, Leader and Supreme Ruler of Christian America.

Thanks for reminding us all just how far to the religious right this country has shifted in the last thirty years, and why we need to protect kids from immoral christians abusing their influence. 

OK, so how do they know to come to whatever outside of class on her own free time event she’s having? How does she invite them? Does she have fliers or signs in the classroom? Make an announcement in class? Is she using her access to their personal information to contact them at home to invite them to bible study? Or does she just call it a study session and spring the bible on them halfway through? Maybe she just kind of figures out who the agreeable Christian students are and quietly approaches them. None of this seems to escape discrimination issues.

What good does it do o feed the kids if you are feeding them poison.  She is crippling these kids mentally to make hrself & her make believe giod feel better.  These kids need the truth more than they need a strong adult.