:dubious:
I’m not sure what kind of rhetoric you’ve studied, but you can never wholly separate them. It’s pretty damn hard to read political speeches and positioning statements without somehow noticing what people are saying.
Yes, I would imagine that is pretty damn hard. I probably could’ve put it better; I mean that the focus would be more on the method rather than the actual content. I’m not suggesting that you can read entirely for the latter without getting the former, just that it’s the former you’re going to be spending most of your time looking at, criticizing, analyzing and the like. The content is there but takes a back seat.
Even more so, the teacher’s obligation to the parents of her students. If I was the father of that military child who voted for McCain, I’d be thinking about pulling her out of the class.
I think “browbeat” was a bit strong, but the teacher probably should have been less dramatic. Other than that, there’s nothing wrong with telling students what the policies of the candidates are.
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s. And the man was talking about taxes: you might get away with claiming that you’re the Son of God, but not even Christ wanted to run afoul of the IRD.
Bricker has already pointed out that (my paraphrase) a church who uses the pulpit to campaign for a politician would lose its tax-exempt status.
I had to talk to the principal at our school because I was tired of hearing another teacher ranting about politics in his classes. It seemed it was happening everytime I passed his room (he was making it pretty obvious that he thought anyone voting for Obama was an ignorant socialist). I am hesitant to complain about other teachers because I feel they should have a fair amount of autonomy and things can get taken out of context. I was pleased to hear from the principal that I was not the only one who had complained about him.
How does this compare to all the clergymen tell their congregations to vote rightward?
Ok, that sheds a little different light on this video. Not on the specific content or statements, but on the fact that this was a “staged” event – she is not those students’ teacher on a daily basis. I do think that makes a difference. I’m less offended if she was a guest speaker than if she was responsible for these kids’ grades, etc.
On the other hand, what was either interesting or disturbing, depending on your perspective, was that she clearly has no idea how she really comes across. I don’t think she’s one of those people who behaves a certain way, is aware of it, and when cornered, denies it. I think she truly thinks she’s being impartial and not “brow-beating” anyone, but her tone and reaction belies her partisanship. She’s just completely unaware.
I think we are all grateful to** Bricker** and, oh! so many others who are eager to keep us advised that not all perfidy in America derives from one of the most corrupt and brain-dead administrations ever. Even though Republicans have led us straight into a turd-infested fever swamp, it is no reason to ignore such piddling and insignificant misbehavior as this.
I look forward to their efforts in the coming years of Obama awesomeness.
but only in theory…
I THINK a church can lose its status as tax exempt if it campaigns for one candidate specifically-they can merely tell you the various positions of said candidates, and say which issues are most important.
So a preacher can’t say out right “vote for so and so!”, they have to be more subtle.
You missed where she prefaced that comment with “Its a senseless war”.
Ya. Your daddy is fighting a stupid war.:rolleyes:
Yeah, cause there are IRS agents watching all the little preachers…
/anecdotal MPSIMS hijack
I used to have an AP US History teacher that would always encourage us NOT to vote whenever an election was coming up- “so that way his vote would count more”.
But he always said it in jest, as he’d always tell us how he wanted us to be good little unquestioning peons that didn’t think for ourselves and let him vote for us and that we should never question authority or try to show signs of independence and responsibility.
One of the best teachers I ever had, and one of the reasons I always vote. We always wondered how he voted back then, because he’d inspired a-many of the sillier and less intellectual of us to stand up to him to get out there and vote “so they’d cancel out his vote”.
Except he’d never tell them how he voted- and he would always praise every president- except for Nixon, who he would always mutter “those CREEP rat-bastards” under his breath.
Yeah. He was awesome.
/back to the pit now.
You’re absolutley right. There is a very distinct and real difference between a teacher (role model, authority figure, some one in whom their charges place a great deal of faith, confidence and stock) telling a class of kids who to vote for, and a priest/preacher/minister (role model, authority figure, some one in whom their charges place a great deal of faith, confidence and stock) telling their congregation who to vote for.
The kids can’t vote.
FTR, I think it’s inappropriate for a teacher to do such a thing. Very much like how pissed I was that my son’s Sunday School teacher told my son “Mr. Clinton is in favor of killing babies”.
Bricker. A question. I’m curious how you found out about this teacher/issue. Did you get an email? Do you read right-wing blogs and it appeared?
I’m certainly in your camp about the issue. But, I’m curious how you obtained the information.
I would argue that the difference is less than it probably should be, actually. There are very distinctive and effective elements in a typical preacher/congregation encounter that reinforce the position of the preacher as Authority, and it’s no accident that those elements have parallels in the classroom. I consider use of either position to push a political stance to be inappropriate. Of course, I dislike organized religion in general for much the same reason.
Here, I would much prefer that the line be drawn more finely. I agree that a religious leader should be free to sermonize on any moral issue, certainly (no matter how bigoted or irrational I may consider the religion’s stance on that issue). That includes issues that are the subject of laws currently on the ballot, or under consideration in the legislature. They should not, however, be free to direct their congregation to vote in any particular way on those laws, to financially support campaigns for or against those laws, or to direct their congregation to support such a campaign.
In essence:
“The Sacred Church of The Holy Flame of The Raging Asshole denounces gay marriage as an abomination!”–perfectly fine, even if it’s the subject of a sermon the day before the vote on Proposition 8.
“Vote yes on Proposition 8.”–out of line. It would be out of line even if Prop 8 were only a measure to impose a tax on imported toejam.
That’s all just my opinion, of course, which does not (so far as I know) match current case law. It’s where I’d prefer to see the line end up, though.
If this woman were a classroom teacher, not only would her behavior be inappropriate, it would most likely be illegal under the Hatch Act. I think it deserves more than a shrug. If her candidate of choice was some neo-Nazi, would you be more likely to protest?
In 1976 I was in 5th Grade. I was attending a school at RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk, England. Carter and Ford were slugging it out in the election. My teacher did exactly the same thing that this teacher was doing. She went around the class and asked the kids who they were supporting. The kids, of course, supported whoever their parents were supporting (which was mostly Ford, since it was all Air Force brats). Anyone who said they supported Carter got grilled and brow beaten.
I got over it. I found a way to go on somehow. I was struck by how similar this video was to my own experience, though.
I don’t think this teacher was really that bad, though she probably should be in for some kind of reprimand (firing her would be over the top). The worst thing about it is that it feeds into the already overly healthy persecution complex of political conservatives.