I think your actions are unfortunate. Even public servants and public employees have a right to freely express their religious beliefs and believe as they wish. The article Mrs. Van Dordrecht wrote is entirely appropriate. Helping students learn science instead of indoctrinating belief is exactly what a secular curriculum should foster. I also see nothing wrong with Mrs. Van Dordrecht talking about the obvious cultural context that surrounds the teaching of evolution. The only thing I see her supporting is solid science education.
4 Likes
I would think that it would reassure them about their own rationality, and the realism of doing so will help everyone to learn with fewer disruptions.
Often the latter helps to achieve the former.
3 Likes
The things you are writing here are not consistent with that stance. I donât see linear political axes, but a big circle. For me, one can get to fascism from the left as easily as one can from the right.
1 Like
True, but weâre getting a little bit off-topic, she didnât teach religion in school, as far as I know, she merely posted something on Biologos.
How do you know that Ann Van Dordrecht didnât write this with the full approval of her bosses at the Sonoma County? Maybe she got their approval and okay. Only an open records search will find out. If she was writing as a private citizen as practicing her religion, she could have said this and NOT mention where she worked. Dr. Collins, every time he speaks at Biologos Conference says 'I come today not as the Director of the NIH but as a Christian would enjoys the fellowship at Biologos"
Thatâs exactly what Ms. Van Dordrecht is doing.
Really? Teachers in the public schools do that all the time. For example:
(1) Even if the parents believe that planet earth is flat, science teachers present the evidence that the earth is an oblate sphere.
(2) Even if the parents think that climate change is bunk, science teachers teach their children that the climatology data indicates serious warming and is quantitatively and qualitatively overwhelming.
(3) Even if the parents are racist, classist, and anti-Semitic bigots, teachers explain the Constitutional rights and the basis for legal equality to their children.
Reversing the damage (or trying to reverse the damage) which happens to children at home is an important reason why public education exists, even if not the primary one. Public education has always confronted ignorance.
2 Likes
Maybe youâre right. Maybe she is just doing her job as best as she sees fit. Perhaps she could publish the same advice on NCSE? Or how about Richard Dawkins TIES? Why just Biologos?
1 Like
Did those other organizations reach out to Mrs. Van Dordrecht?
It would seem to me that her article would be just as fitting in those other venues. What would the NCSE or Richard Dawkins find wrong with this statement?
At least to me, that sounds exactly like the type of lesson plan that I would support as an atheist. It is a great way to teach science.
3 Likes
It is not a hypothetical Iâm concerned about until I see evidence. Do you have actual evidence that there was some sort of official endorsement of her off-hours activity that took place on government time?
I agree. However, in this case it was entirely topical to her talking to the general public (i.e., the Biologos general public in this case) about her familiarity with current science education and how it can be improved. If some school teacher comes to the First Avenue Church to talk on the subject, âHow can communities help disadvantaged young people in their neighborhoods?â, the fact that he/she works daily with children and knows a lot about their problems is very relevant to her talk and members of the audience would be interested in knowing that.
Stating oneâs employment is not prohibited information under the Constitution. Free speech says that I am allowed to state where I work and what I do. I know of no law which says otherwise.
2 Likes
I see no reason to doubt that.
I wouldnât be surprised if she would be quite willing (and even ecstatic) to see her article get an even wider readership.
Some website had to be the first one. Why not Biologos? Perhaps Biologos is the only website which has invited her so far.
Of course, some websites donât like to publish anything which has already been published elsewhere.
What is your evidence that she only wants her article published at Biologos?
One of my concerns with your position, Patrick, is that it appears to feed into a popular stereotype among millions of Christians which alleges that atheists want to deprive theists (and Christians) especially of their Constitutional rights under the law.
1 Like
Honestly, you really donât understand teaching.
If those Christian kids keep interrupting the lesson, that will be far more disruptive to the atheist students. If the teacher can give those Christian students the reassurance that would help them to get down to studying instead of disrupting the class, then everyone benefits.
You are being far too literalistic about this.
3 Likes
Fortunately, I see no evidence that anyone, including the FFRF, shares Patrickâs opinions on anything heâs talking about here.
2 Likes
I remember from my own elementary school experience when an incident arose about one child in the class not celebrating Christmas. The little girl said, âDoesnât everybody want to be happy about the birth of Jesus?â The teacher patiently explained to the entire class that Jewish people celebrate Hanukkah instead. She briefly explained some of the differences and similarities between Judaism and Christianity, including the fact that the Old Testament is the Jewish Bible but the New Testament is the focus of Christians. In just a few minutes the confusion was settled and the topic never came up again that year.
That teacher was a doing her job: educating students. Yes, she was teaching about religion in American society. She was not endorsing a religion.
POSTSCRIPT: That teacher also explained that some Jewish people like to decorate their houses with Christmas lights and put a wreath on their doorânot because they worship Jesus but because they like the colors and the festive atmosphere. In other words, she was explaining that being Jewish doesnât necessarily mean that one canât enjoy many of the same trappings and customs of the Christmas season. (In other words, one can be a devout Jew and also enjoy Christmas songs and other customsâjust as a Christian can accept the scientific evidence for evolutionary processes and not be riddled with conflict. That is what Ms. Van Dordrecht is advocating among other things: letting students know that lots of Christians have no conflict with evolution theory.)
3 Likes
You keep claiming âoff-hoursâ activity. It is not off-hours activity. It is clearly a job related activity. Or is she using her position in her faith activities? I am most concerned about the approval process. I think she is smart enough to realize that going rogue on this is not in her best interests. So she may have sought advice internally and was told what she was doing was fine. That is where FFRF will step in big time starting at the top levels of government and working downward. That is how little piddly things turn into Supreme Court cases.
If you are saying that she wrote the Biologos article on her work hours at taxpayer expense, then I entirely agree with you that that is another matter entirely.
2 Likes
I certainly donât. I could never be a grammar or high school teacher. It is a very difficult job.
Yes, those Christian kids are so disruptive. And their parents are worse. 
1 Like
This is always funny when I see it. Athiest are 3% of the population depriving the Christians (75% of the population) their constitution rights. Consider that finally there are 2 atheist in Congress. Until recently there was 100% of Congress and the Presidency were Christian. When did Atheist get so powerful in this country? Most atheist are still somewhat concerned about proclaiming themselves as athiests.
Okay move that to the 2018 classroom in urban Northeast. How many different religions are represented in the classroom? A third celebrate Christmas with Santa Claus only and never heard of baby Jesus. A few Muslims, a few Hinduâs and a large number of Kawanza celebrators. Huge differences in economic support levels. How would you suggest that class should be handled?
When they started hiring lawyers and suingâjust like any other group no matter how small their numbers. Lawsuits are a great equalizer. Atheists may be few but they arenât at all powerless.
The very same way: thoughtfully and patiently.
Any teacher who is unable to answer questions from students should change careers. (Young children have always been full of questions and always will be.)
Also, just as you described, todayâs students tend to be much more accustomed to a diverse and heterogeneous society. To so many of them, the fact that their circle of friends includes various skin colors, cultures, and religions is far less startlingâso the questions, in nature and quantity, are likely to be very different than they were a half century ago.
4 Likes
I do not know enough about what van Dordrecht is doing in the classroom situation to know whether a letter by the FFRF about her classroom conduct is warranted. Her conduct seems to be in a grey area, and the details would be very important.
Her writings on the Biologos site are another matter. A teacher cannot go into a classroom and âgive a testimony,â but she can go into a church and do so. She can absolutely post her Christian testimony on a privately sponsored website. She can give her testimony anywhere she so pleases other than a classroom or school-sponsored website. Your claim that she is barred from speaking about her faith outside a classroomâa free speech activity that is enshrined in the First Amendmentâis entirely without legal foundation.
I am confident the FFRF is familiar enough with the First Amendment that they will not try to threaten her writings on Biologos. Were they so foolish as to ignore the US Constitution and try to file a lawsuit against her writing on BioLogos, the FFRF would not only lose the case, but they would be required to pay van Dordrechtâs legal fees for bringing a frivolous and obviously meritless legal proceeding.
The FFRF is quite familiar with all this, I am sure. You should read up on First Amendment case law some time, Patrick.
Regards,
Chris Falter
2 Likes