"Thank you very much for demonstrating your paper’s low level of journalistic integrity in today’s reporting of the “Santa Controversy.” I was misquoted in both ofyour articles, and much of what I had to say--including the main points of the interview I agreed to give to your reporter, Mr. Schuler, were omitted entirely. Perhaps these qualities is why your circulation is so low, why free papers show up at my door all the time, as well why I get frequent nuisance calls from your telemarketers wanting me to subscribe to your three-page paper. You really do need to give it away.
I never said in my telephone interviews with Mr. Schuyler that I want everyone to “agree with” my beliefs about teaching, or not teaching, Santa Claus to children. What I said, as I stated in my letter to the editor and evidently need to clarify further, was that 1) what public school is doing by promoting Santa Claus is promoting a form of religion; that 2) religion should not be promoted in public school; 3) a teacher should not be required to promote a religion in public school; and 4) the lesson plan requiring me to promote Santa Claus was imposing religion on me, not the other way around. I certainly am not responsible for, or interested in, making people believe as I do about anything, for that is definitely not my job.
Leonard Martin, a friend of mine, is without a doubt the gentlest, humblest, meekest man I know, a devout Christian who practices his belief in God with the highest integrity. He does not believe in violence or retribution or “revenge.” Mr. Martin never used the phrase “a form of revenge” in speaking to Mr.Schuler, and yet he was represented as saying this or believing in this.
You neglected to include my entire statements about freedom of speech and religion. Don’t you like the Constitution? It read: “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.” I also said, in full: that belief in Santa is “ a distorted substitute for the Judeo-Christian God; a false form of Christianity; a zealously-protected American idol.” I also said, without edit, “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.” This statment only makes sense if you include the phrases you omitted.
I spoke in trust with Mr. Schuler, who told me the article was to be a front-page story showing Leonard Martin’s sign, and that the inclusion of my involvement at the school was to be a small part of that story. It was under those terms that I agreed to be interviewed. Instead, your editors put me on the front page- rather negatively, in fact-- and Mr. Martin’s sign, small and off to the bottom, on page five. I would never have agreed to speak to this reporter at all, had I known that your paper would distort both my words and its intentions about the use of my words. Evidently a lame front-page “contoversy” beats stating quotations and sentiments accurately and without bias. Is this how you think you will sell a few more papers?
I would wish you to print this letter in its entirety, but based on today’s experience, I highly doubt all my words will appear as I intend them to appear, which means all of my words, none deleted, without your “editing.” It might even make your paper bigger."
If she really was offended by the lesson plan, she should have walked out and not taught it.
L
And she was reading to 6 year old kids, right?
If this woman is so deeply offended by Santa Claus (and other subjects of faith and spirituality the children's PARENTS might have told their children)...and she sees it as her personal right and responsibility to disabuse small children of their belief in the magic of fairy tales (and other things unseen but felt by faith)....then what the he## is she doing teaching in elementary school?
The First Law of Holes: When you're in over your head, stop digging.
I wish people would read both of these statements before making responses. It seems like people like to spout without allowing divergent point of views to be considered. Conservatives ought to be able to do this.
Oh, so she knows this guy:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1547163/posts
What a bunch of partypoopers!
Scripted by the ACLU...
Out of the mouths of babes.
Anyone, over the age of twelve, that is unaware of the connection to reporters [?] and distortion is not only naive, buy they no doubt are still suffering from the malady that struck the day they found out Santa wasn't the one eating the milk and cookies Mom left out Christmas Eve.
I guess that doesn't apply to atheism....or to evolution, which is preached with all the passion of religion.
Reading a traditional Santa Claus poem is not teaching or preaching a "religion" - it's holiday entertainment.
It is very sad that this woman did not allow children to have that magical wonderful adventure of Santa Claus. If she can not separate Santa from Christ; then she has no business speaking about it. Fairy tales are not something you lump into reality. Life is hard; but when you are a child; you should be a child with all of the magical things that happen as a child. There is time enough for being adults and reality.
Whew these liberals must eat nails 24/7.
She makes a good case for empowering those who hire, fire, and select teachers to do so according to their own whims, values, and judgments of what's good for the children and what they should be taught--with no particular consideration for the teacher's welfare or rights.
No one should be allowed to teach children if he or she does not conform to the standards of those who hire, fire, and select teachers--regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual preference, physical appearance, need for a job, conformity to Leftist standards of political correctness, and blah blah blah blah--or anything else.
In other words, what's good for the children is the only concern, and if you don't like the teacher, fire him/her.
You know...I agree.
I despise herds with great contempt, and I have been fighting the public sector ever since.
Second grade.
ping
It's tough for liberals when they can't have total control of information.
Wow, and I always thought Ebenezer Scrooge was a man!! I hope this "teacher" got switches and coal in her stocking from Santa, and a swift kick in the butt from the little kids she "teaches."
"It was under those terms that i agreed to be interviewed."Now you know better.Journalists will take statements out of context,misquote,make inferences,yes even lie in order to further their agenda.
Nonsense.
Secularism is a religion in and of itself.
That this moron can't fit two thoughts into her head- and separate the two- demonstrates her ineptitude and quite succinctly points out the problem with state sponsored education.