Posted on 12/26/2005 8:11:14 AM PST by Conservatrix
To the Editor:
"Last week I substituted at a local elementary school in Lebanon County. The lesson plan required me to read the 1882 poem “The Night Before Christmas” by Clement Clarke Moore to two classes of students. While I can appreciate the poem for its literary value, the subject matter is offensive to me, and the reading of this poem to the children imposed values upon me which are against my deeply held religious beliefs. I could not in good conscience present the notion of Santa Claus as a truth to the children, and stated so.
No public school teacher should be required to teach a belief, or custom, or religion that he or she believes to be false, or be required to pass those purported falsehoods onto impressionable children, without the right to state a disclaimer. Furthermore, freedom of speech and religion, no matter how unpopular the speech or against cultural norms the religion, are protected rights under the Constitution of the United States. A secular public school should not be propagating any kind of religion. The belief in Santa Claus as a divine, magical, omniscient, powerful, giving, loving father-figure, to which children are taught to make supplications and requests, is a religion indeed-- a distorted substitute for the Judeo-Christian God; a false form of Christianity; a zealously-protected American idol.
In presenting the poem, I gave the children quick historical background about the Santa Claus myth-- its evolution from the historic Nickolaus, Bishop of Myrna in Asia Minor, who died in 343 A.D., to its amalgamation with ancient Western pagan traditions of German, Scandinavian and Dutch origins, to the current manifestation in the secular Christmas culture of today. (Dutch children, for example, would put their wooden shoes out at night for “Sante Klaus” to fill with candies.)
The current Santa Claus figure was popularized in the late 19th Century by artist Thomas Nast of Harper’s Weekly Magazine, who depicted “Saint Nick,” not as an elf, but a rotund, pipe-smoking man in a red and white suit. This is the deity to which countless public school children today are taught to make supplications, and about whom they sing their many songs at annual public school Christmas programs.
If people are upset about the revelation to children that Santa Claus is a myth-- which all children who are taught this lie find or figure out eventually-- perhaps it is because Santa is that zealously-guarded idol of their own modern religion. Therefore, as a religion, let Santa be kept out of the public school classroom (no more “Dear Santa” letters to line those school hallways)--or perhaps, in the interest of “diversity,” make his mythical, oversized personage share equal representation in literature, and song, and Christmas programs, with the other Person of the season: the Lord Jesus Christ, God made flesh, God with us."
Don't know what Santa Claus has to do with voting.
Considering I believed in Santa Claus, and I didn't have any problem accepting the truth.
I don't think my mind is full of mush. I have a degree in engineering from Texas A&M.
So if my kids use their minds like I do/did, then I'll be happy (and so will a lot of other freepers).
I can not believe some of these jokers are continuing with this nonsense.
I'm 45 and I still believe in Santa Calus :)
So if she was an athiest it would be okay for her to explain her belief that God is a myth?
I can't believe this thread is still going, and I really can't believe that I am still on it.
In this case it involves a public school.
This is really the ‘crux’ of the issue, especially if you are talking about First Amendment issues and the speech of this teacher and/or students. (I see no indication in the story that a student may have initiated the topic of discussion with a question or a comment.)
I don't agree that the public schools should be off limits to student prayer or a curriculum that includes study of the Bible. The foundation of our civilization is Mosaic Law. The very idea human beings have any individual rights at all not subject to the whims of a monarch comes directly from Moses and obedience subject to commandments from Yahweh.
I don't care for the public schools much. There are a few good ones, they are not all bad as some would say, but most of them have caved in to the cultural Marxism that runs amok in their administration. Santa Claus is no exception.
Now, if the offended, supposedly Christian parents (and even some here) want to crucify this teacher, taking their turn upon her with some sort of vengeance because of some imaginary hobgoblin (a golden calf, a sacred cow) they have erroneously associated with Christmas - - I will say they are no different than those that demanded crucifixion of Yeshua, for whom the holiday (holy day) is so named!
This takes us right back to the fight over the “happy holidays” vs. “Merry Christmas” where the cultural Marxists want to remove Christ from Christmas. I thought this was something people were fed up with. Illogical.
If this teacher, so maligned here in many cases, is guilty of a crime or heresy and should be punished, maybe we should dig up the petrified corpse or summon the ghost of Pontius Pilate and do the whole thing over again of putting Yeshua on trial.
And, if this teacher so believes that she is indeed following the commandments of her omnipotent God, there is no need to defend her, because if, as she believes (and others who may claim to) that God will protect her, there is no power on this earth or temporal human conceit that can condemn her.
I'm pretty sure that athiests are allowed to do that already. The difference is that everyone knows Santa Claus is a myth, but only the ignorant think that God is a myth.
Every civil right we have comes from a monarch like person or individuals. When the founders put together the Constitution, it was written by those in leadership. The monarch's of their time. That they were wise enough to include certain civil liberties is wonderful. That they have been skirted, muted and temporarily or permanently taken away throughout our nations history just proves that they do come from individuals.
In addition, simply ask the remaining populations of the world how those rights given to Moses have worked for them.
Yes, for the most part what remains of our morality does allow us to believe in a higher being and the freedoms that were given to Moses. But what God gave to Moses can only be given to us by the power of men. Otherwise, what God gave to Moses would also be enjoyed by the balance of the world. I don't see that as current practice.
The rights enumerated in the United States' Constitution are derived from here:
The Declaration of Independence..."We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…"
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Yes, for the most part what remains of our morality does allow us to believe in a higher being and the freedoms that were given to Moses.
Morals and all of those associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition that some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
But what God gave to Moses can only be given to us by the power of men. Otherwise, what God gave to Moses would also be enjoyed by the balance of the world.
Not according to Yeshua, who told Pontius Pilate that the power to torture and execute him did not come from this earth.
The “balance of the world” as you say, according to the Biblical doctrine, has every opportunity to gain Salvation, something men cannot grant. We are mortal.
If rights come from men, then nothing should lawfully prevent me from becoming a god myself and deposing them by any means I choose, especially since inherent in your premise is that men are not equal.
In the days prior to Moses, Pharaoh was a god. After Moses, men were not considered to be gods at all, even by those suffering oppression under a monarch.
Even those very wise words from the Declaration, from the beginning of the Declaration through today have been controlled by man (or monarch or whatever). Those who wrote those beautiful words in the Declaration also didn't extend those same words to all people of all nations. As a matter of fact, they didn't even extend them to all people who would be affected by that declaration.
Those freedoms are ultimately given to those who will serve by His side.
So you may claim...
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
But the freedoms guaranteed are not of this earth.
Exactly what I said about Judaic doctrine and Mosaic Law.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
They are ultimately controlled by man.
No, not according to Biblical doctrine or the United States Constitution, which is what we are discussing here.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Sadly, God does not intervene.
You don't believe in the parting of the Red Sea, the destruction of Sodom or the Great Flood?
You are a believer? I think you just cannot take the heat but do not want to leave the kitchen...
Personally, I just think it's not what she said, but how she said it and the tacit meanings that result. I personally don't see anything wrong in telling the background behind Santa, but at the same time, it is also important for me to note that she definitely should have known that many six year olds still believe in Santa--therefore, by not revealing it to be a myth.
Basically what I'm saying is that I can't find anything wrong with what she did. On the other hand, there was a much better way to meet both her objective and that of the lesson plans without torquing off the township as well. She clearly didn't give much thought to how she was going to present this material, and it literally backfired in her face.
I stopped believing in Santa when I was in first grade. Then again, I was reading at a fifth grade level in kindergarten--so maybe that was it.
But among normal kids, I've found that it's not uncommon for kids to believe, and it's equally common to not believe.
Though usually by second or third grade, these kids find out eventually. Spoiling the surprise, perhaps? Possibly Yes, possibly no.
Then again, several posters bring up the valid point that often these kids find out by either a classmate or an older student who "spills the beans." Or the fact that they're going to the malls and they see 47 Santas and it dawns on them that Santa can't possibly be everywhere at once...
Nay, what should be emphasized is that while Santa doesn't exist in reality as a person, the symbolism of unselfish giving to other people, especially the less fortunate that he inherently represents--it's not the person, but the idea. In essence, we are in fact Santa to other people. If she would have done that, I don't see any harm done.
This approach is compatible with Christianity on the grounds that on that night, God unselfishly gave man the greatest gift of all--His only begotten Son.
That can only be determined on grounds of faith. No one, neither you nor I nor anyone else on this good Earth can make such a statement.
Even those very wise words from the Declaration, from the beginning of the Declaration through today have been controlled by man (or monarch or whatever). Those who wrote those beautiful words in the Declaration also didn't extend those same words to all people of all nations. As a matter of fact, they didn't even extend them to all people who would be affected by that declaration.
The point in both the DoI and the Constitution is that rights are granted neither by man nor by government, but by our Creator (to most of us, God). The DoI and the Constitution simply guarantees, enumerates, and lists those rights, and prohibits men and governments from denying those rights on the grounds that men and government have no authority to deny said rights.
At the same time though, man has throughout history twisted and perverted, or even at times outright ignored this principle for capricious or purely evil means. While I won't doubt that, it still does not change the fact that the DoI and Constitution make note of the lack of authority of other men to deny specific rights.
This was one of, if not the key question with regard to slavery--how can a nation founded on high ideals and the principle that man cannot deny another man's freedom be ignored? Is that not hypocrisy? (note: rhetorical questions)
My claim is between me and God. Your judgement is neither biblical nor warranted. Ultimately, I will answer or will be accepted as having served him well. My belief is he will be disappointed in some of my life and will be delighted by other aspects. My overall judgement from the ultimate judge will be for a job well done.
No, not according to Biblical doctrine or the United States Constitution, which is what we are discussing here.
Clearly man does control those freedoms. Simply ask those who were held in bondage at the dawning of our country. Ask those who have been improperly executed (I know it's been few, but it has happened) or improperly detained. Even though I may agree with some aspects of it, think of what we know about the Patriot Law and what (through the NY Times expose) don't. What of out ability to display our faith in public places or discusss or faith in the public arena such as schools. All controled by man. The founder has not interceded. When was the last time the Red Sea parted or there was a great flood that destroyed all. Some may point to New Orleans. That flood will only give way to urban renovation to further moral decay.
Clearly I can take the heat when it comes to your judgement.
Again for every right granted to Moses, those can be controlled and given or taken at the whim of the ruler at any time.
God has not intervened in the third world. Even those of faith live under represive governments and represive conditions. Those freedoms that can only be endowed by the Creator don't seem to exist. The words on those documents, and yes they are wonderful and marvelous words, are simply that. The Creator doesn't crack the knuckles of the government of the day when they interfere with those freedoms. They are not zapped when they play around with those documents. So yes, it is man and the rulers who are in control.
They exist, but as I've said, man has twisted them for his own personal, and often capricious/malicious means.
To say that God doesn't come down and whip immoral leaders into shape where we all can see it when those freedoms are interfered with as a justification that God doesn't bestow base rights is a ludicrous statement.
God works in mysterious ways and often in private. If He intends man to know His presence, He will do so whenever and however He deems it appropriate. He is the Almighty, the One who knows everything, and the One we Trust in. It is therefore not up to us to question His motives.
Though, I believe that those who deny inalienable rights to others will get their day--when judgment is passed on where said people will spend eternity.
Therefore, it is a question of faith, and not one of hard evidence. Why? That's the way God intended it.
It is ultimately controlled by you and/or obedience to your God, not others - - if you are really a “believer” as you say. In the Bible, Yeshua said you cannot serve two masters and that the power given to torture and execute him were not of this earth.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
The founder has not interceded.
That is what the crucifixion of Yeshua is and the Holy Spirit is all about - - divine intercession.
Look, if you want to argue Christian Biblical doctrine, you had better read it first, because you obviously haven't the foggiest idea of what you are talking about.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Again for every right granted to Moses, those can be controlled and given or taken at the whim of the ruler at any time.
Again, you are wrong. Moses was not granted anything, he was commanded, and he obeyed. The power was not his to give, but his to receive, as it was for the Jews in captivity.
(Later, some of them chose to worship the Golden Calf and many were destroyed. This is why we still have “liberal” Jews today - - many still worship a Golden Calf.)
Moses escaped the slaughter of all Hebrew first born ordered by Pharaoh and was set adrift to be taken into the royal household.
Passover, the killing of the Egyptian first born was not subject to the rule of Pharaoh, nor was it carried out by Moses. It was an angel sent by God to punish Pharaoh.
You cannot believe all men are equal if you also believe our rights are subject to an earthly monarch. Illogical.
You cannot believe all men are a creation of God if you also believe our rights are subject to an earthly ruler. Illogical.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
My overall judgement from the ultimate judge will be for a job well done.
You make the conceited assumption you have the power to save yourself. Keep digging... Gehenna is down there somewhere...
It is ultimately controlled by you and/or obedience to your God, not others - - if you are really a “believer” as you say. In the Bible, Yeshua said you cannot serve two masters and that the power given to torture and execute him were not of this earth.
I do display my faith whereever. I don't need to have a daily prayer in school or a nativity scene on the statehouse to display my faith. I speak of my faith daily. But so many like you tell of the stealing of the rights to display faith. I don't need the government to grant that. So if you extrapolate that, then yes, we are probably closer to the Creator given rights than you would ever believe. But so many like you believe the government has infringed on those rights. Thus my thesis that those rights were given by the government and thus can and are often taken away.
The founder has not interceded.
That is what the crucifixion of Yeshua is and the Holy Spirit is all about - - divine intercession.
Look, if you want to argue Christian Biblical doctrine, you had better read it first, because you obviously haven't the foggiest idea of what you are talking about.
Actually, the word in the first sentence should have been Creator instead of founder which you correctly recognized.
Yes it is divine intercession. But it does not always apply to our life and time on earth. Otherwise, why would the slaves be held in bondage? Some, clearly were treated well, most others were not. Why then did the Creator, at least in the short term, fail to provide corrective intercession? Because they were protected under the divine intercession. But that intercession is not always about this life, because the monarchs can and do ebb and flow with the Creators intentions.
What of those who currently live under repressive regimes who from womb to tomb will only live under repression at best? Where is their intercession? As we are endowed with certain rights by our Creator, then so to are they.
You cannot believe all men are equal if you also believe our rights are subject to an earthly monarch. Illogical.
Our equality allows us to hear and if we choose heed the word. Our equality begins with our souls being clean and untarnished. From there it is up to us as to whether to keep those souls clean.
So, rights to do such do not come from an earthly ruler, as I have said...
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
But it does not always apply to our life and time on earth.
Not according to the Christian Bible. It applies from birth unto death - - and beyond death, if you believe it.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Otherwise, why would the slaves be held in bondage?
They disobey God and do not ask to be forgiven, as all have sinned.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
What of those who currently live under repressive regimes who from womb to tomb will only live under repression at best? Where is their intercession?
You, as a “believer,” should know that Christians call it Salvation.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
I don't need to have a daily prayer in school or a nativity scene on the statehouse to display my faith.
I do not either, I'm an atheist.
I also do not mind that you might want to, and recognize you have every right under our system based on Mosaic Law. The Ten Commandments are prominently displayed at the United States Supreme Court and the premise of Mosaic Law is written in the Declaration of Independence for that very reason.
The founders of the country recognized the primary importance of it as their establishing statement... they were wise beyond their times and understood the legacy of human history from what was done by Moses...
"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…"
You can quibble about it and split hairs all you like. Every king of this earth has been and will be deposed, none are immortal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.