|
|
Post by Kirby on Nov 23, 2009 19:27:26 GMT -8
www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2009/11/oregon_teachers_may_get_ok_to.htmlThis article describes an effort to repeal a law from 1923 (proposed by an open member of the KKK that more or less was directed at Catholics) that bans public school teachers from wearing religious attire in schools. This has stopped some (i'm sure qualified) Muslim and Sikh educators from being in the classroom, and also has prohibited Christians from wearing crosses etc. The ACLU is apparently afraid that some teachers will use this as an opportunity to proselytize youngsters. Can there be a balance between free exercise of religion in the classroom and promoting a particular religion? As we discussed in this thread, what is the role of teachers and schools in this? Josh, as a public school teacher, what do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 23, 2009 19:42:53 GMT -8
I know of a sub who regularly wears a burkah to school.
Hmmm, I don't know what I think of this.
For the Christian, what kind of religious attire are you talking about?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Nov 23, 2009 19:52:22 GMT -8
The article seems to indicate just crosses. I guess it depends on what sect or denomination you belong to... Growing up, none of the Christian experiences commanded any clothing requirement of me, and I do not know of any particular Christian doctrine espousing so.
The ACLU seems to be worried about teachers wering "Jesus" t-shirts etc. I think there is a difference between something your religion requires you to wear in public (burkah) and expressing your belief through clothing (JC/DC: Jesus Christ Demon Crusher T-shirt in the style of AC/DC concert shirts, or whatever popular logo some business is knocking off this week to sell shirts to Christians that want to evangelize with their clothes)
In the other thread, we were concerned about political affiliations (Can you wear campaign buttons or t-shirts in your classroom?) now, we are talking about teh religious rights of teachers. Should there be a distinction?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 23, 2009 20:01:41 GMT -8
I'm with you on the t-shirts. I think schools would just get around that by having a no logo rule in their dress code (we already have one)
I have no personal religious requirement to wear a cross. However, I think wearing one should be optional if someone can wear a burkah.
But how big of a cross are we talking is the question ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 23, 2009 20:47:03 GMT -8
 This one would probably go over pretty well, huh? |
|
|
|
Post by rbbailey on Nov 23, 2009 20:48:33 GMT -8
The political issue is close to this...
It got angry about this last year. But not because felt that I had anyone to vote for. I'm very much against the Obama Administration in almost everything they have done, or are planning to do, and I was so from the start. And McCain... well... uh... whatever. Right? In the previous election I was the one teacher in the school who still had the big secret: Who's Mr. Bailey voting for? I played Devil's advocate and the supporting roles for both candidates in class. And I kept the science of the election to... a science!
So, I'm just minding my own business when a district rep comes into my class and wants to know who I'm voting for. She gives me a survey to fill out that asks which way you lean on all the main political issues. (I refused) She then proceeds to tell me that I cannot say anything about the election in class (I teach U.S. History and Government...) and that I cannot disclose my personal beliefs about the subject in class. She tells me that several parents have been raising concerns (she doesn't say what they are). She says I cannot wear buttons, have stickers (even on my car in the parking lot) and that I should avoid being a "known teacher" at any political rallies that I might attend. (Ha! Not really my style, but OK...)
Then she asks me to vote for Obama like all the other teachers are doing, and that it would be great if I could hold an Obama sign at a rally in Salem, and that it would be great if I could make phone calls on behalf of the Obama campaign.
The teacher in the next hallway down, a woman who I respect and like, puts Obama posters in her classroom. She reads an Obama quote of the day for the weeks leading up to the election. She reads his speeches, with tears in her eyes, to her class. She gives extra credit for going to his rally. She wears his T-shirts over her dresses, she wears his buttons, has his fliers in her room for parents during the open house, and talks openly to her students about how amazing the whole thing is......
Grrrrrr....
I talk a lot about religion in class, but I don't preach. I think it would be morally wrong to do so. Even in private conversations with students, I keep it vague and mysterious like. I think symbols and small things that don't distract are fine. Dressing in drag, for instance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 23, 2009 20:50:21 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 23, 2009 21:22:46 GMT -8
rbbailey... I bet the district rep didn't say anything about you dressing in drag  I can't believe you experienced that! That's just so wrong. You could sue! I wouldn't expect that to happen out in Barlow. It wouldn't happen in my district I don't think, but I would think my district would be more liberal than yours. |
|
|
|
Post by Margot on Nov 23, 2009 23:56:33 GMT -8
So, I'm just minding my own business when a district rep comes into my class and wants to know who I'm voting for. She gives me a survey to fill out that asks which way you lean on all the main political issues. (I refused) She then proceeds to tell me that I cannot say anything about the election in class (I teach U.S. History and Government...) and that I cannot disclose my personal beliefs about the subject in class. She tells me that several parents have been raising concerns (she doesn't say what they are). She says I cannot wear buttons, have stickers (even on my car in the parking lot) and that I should avoid being a "known teacher" at any political rallies that I might attend. (Ha! Not really my style, but OK...) Then she asks me to vote for Obama like all the other teachers are doing, and that it would be great if I could hold an Obama sign at a rally in Salem, and that it would be great if I could make phone calls on behalf of the Obama campaign. Also working in public school, I am STUNNED that this actually happened to you!!! Talk about a case of harassment! You sure took it better than I would have......I guess I still have a long way to go! By the way, I came from a district out of state where a k-4 teacher dressed in drag daily....no one seemed to bother him about it. I guess he was voting the "right" way.... |
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Nov 24, 2009 8:47:33 GMT -8
I may be in the minority here, but I have no problem with a teacher cross-dressing, again, all a part of the diversity kids should be exposed to. I may be opening a can of worms by saying that, but, there, I said it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rbbailey on Nov 24, 2009 12:33:24 GMT -8
Well, I should qualify my statement -- the district rep was not actually from our school, she was one of the "overall" reps., so she didn't know me personally. I'm not 100% sure how it went with other teachers, but I was not specifically targeted or anything (that I know of). It seems to have been just what they were doing that year! They have said that they are not going to be asking for that information anymore. However, on a national stage it is becoming more and more likely that unions will check on how you vote in elections.
The reason cross dressing should not happen in a school is that it automatically steps over the line of neutrality. There isn't really any way to explain it away as they are just minding their own business. If you are a homosexual, or whatever, that may or may not be a "choice" but cross dressing is a choice of lifestyle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Nov 24, 2009 14:26:42 GMT -8
Hmmm. That's a tricky one.
What about transexuals? How are they supposed to dress if hired as teachers if we are to fairly apply the rules?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Nov 24, 2009 14:58:17 GMT -8
I would debate this. In what way is it not a choice? A person who has male anatomy but identifies as female is not a choice. This may not be the thread for this discussion though...
|
|
|
|
Post by rbbailey on Nov 24, 2009 20:13:26 GMT -8
I think this fits with the discussion on what is appropriate for school: Deciding what to wear in the morning is not a choice? If that isn't -- what is?
One could argue that my pre-disposition to listen to U2 excludes me from the no-logos on t-shirts rule -- why not? I have several nice tour shirts that I could wear. Would it not be discrimination against me if one could prove that some people have a born-with taste in music, or a musical gene?
One could then make the not-so-distant leap that people who believe in God are really just born with a god-gene.... do we want to go there?
If being, "born that way," is the criteria for all things we are too politically correct to address in our society, why do we fix children who are born with deformities? Why do we try to get people to stop drinking too much alcohol? Why do we give drugs to kids who are too hyper-active?
Why are just about all other behaviors traditionally rejected by society perfectly OK for us to regulate, but when it comes to sexuality, we must take a hands-off approach or we become offensive?
To me, a dress code is a dress code.
To me, if a teacher should not be speaking to kids about his or her sexuality, why should they be able to exercise their so-called freedom of speech to dress however they want? If it is freedom of speech to dress that way, it is assumed that dressing that way is a form of speech, it can then be assumed that by dressing that way the teacher is speaking to his or her kids about their personal sexuality -- chosen, born-with, gene-induced, or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Nov 24, 2009 22:17:13 GMT -8
I understand a dress code...I have to follow one. One of my coworkers likes to cross-dress on the weekends. He said there are times when he would like to dress as a woman on work days too, but he does not. He does not want to provide a distraction or draw attention to himself. I completely understand this, and think it is an appropriate decision in a professional workplace. So, I agree with you to a point.
The difference, though, is that "dressing up" is not a part of his gender identity. In essence, he enjoys costumes: he wants to look pretty, and it is a social activity for him. There are those who feel (whether justified by me or not) that they are not the gender that their anatomy indicates. These people should be allowed and encouraged, even, to express their identity, lest they be deprived of the rights you and I enjoy expressing ours.
Again, I must sacrifice some of that freedom in order to maintain a professional environment (you not wearing U2 shirts, me not going without a tie), but I do not have to fully sacrifice my identity, and hopefully you do not either. Someone who is transgendered, transsexual, or gender neutral should be allowed the same freedom.
Sexuality is not the only hot topic...race, religion, disability...all of these things people become offended by when others suggest they do not enjoy the same rights as others. Can we really justify that on a human level?
|
|
|
|
Post by rbbailey on Nov 24, 2009 23:13:10 GMT -8
Humm, I'm not sure this is an issue of rights, it's a dress code v. work place/school distraction issue. If cross dressing is the level to which our struggle for Civil Rights has come to... well, people used to be slaves in this country... I have a hard time making a comparison.
I'm going to assume you don't get the dress code thing, just so I can keep arguing with you. ;D
I think this applies to anything you might want to wear on the weekend, but can't at work or at school, and for whatever reason. If we are going to treat cross dressers like anyone else, well, they need to operate under the same rules as anyone else.
Cross dressing is an expression of an inner private, emotional, psychological, sexual issue (for good or ill). I cannot see how it is OK for a teacher to be able to wear that on their sleeve in the classroom.
If cross dressers are to be treated like everyone else, lets apply it to everyone else: I like to dress casually on the weekend, I get my old pants and shirt on, I crawl around under my truck and get oil and dirt all over it. This "uniform" is literally part of my identity as I enjoy the Zen of working on my old truck. This uniform, however, is not controversial, it has nothing to do with my real, private life; it has nothing to do with my sexuality -- yet I would be instantly reprimanded if I wore it to school for no other reason than it is what I feel comfortable in.
I think many people in our society are fixated on fairness and equality without really thinking about what it is they are actually talking about. Fairness only applies to certain sets of people, or to individuals. Equality applies to all. What is fair for one person is inherently unfair for another. But equality is about the inherent worth of a human, not about what they wear, feel like, do on the weekends, or do in their bedrooms. All men are created equal -- not fair. Life isn't fair, anyone who tells you otherwise is selling something (thank you, DPR) Anyone who says they can make life fair is either very confused, selling you something, or a politician. You cannot change the reality of this fact of life. But you can still treat everyone equally. Every human has equal value in God's eyes. We don't want fairness -- think of how many speeding tickets you would have if life really were fair!
If we are to be fair, we would have to be fair to everyone in their own individual way. We'd have to go around and set the dress code to the likes and dislikes of each person in the work place -- I want to wear my U2 shirts, it doesn't matter what you think, I want to. I could find a priest, a politician, a lawyer from the ACLU, or a psychologist to back me up on any single thing I could ever want to wear...
If it is fair for a teacher to wear something odd or distracting to school, it is unfair for the students who are distracted from the education they are supposed to be getting. (Even if they don't buy into it...) It is unfair for the parents who don't want their kids exposed to that. It is unfair for all the other teachers who would like to wear whatever it is they want to wear.
On the other hand, if we are to be equal, we set a norm standard, operate within the bounds of that standard... that's it. It's not racist, bigoted, insensitive, it simply is.
So, the argument comes down to this, and I'm probably putting words in your mouth, but I like to argue: I think you are saying that someone's expression of their sexual identity trumps whatever other social norms or rights are currently being recognized at the school or work place. So, if this is accurate, I wonder why a person could not simply dress in s/m attire -- black leather straps, studs, the whole bit? Why not? If they find their identity in thisway, why shouldn't they, as long as they cover the intimate bits, why shouldn't someone be able to express themselves in this way? Where, exactly, is the line -- is there a line? Why would this not be acceptable?
There is no right to being heard, only to express, only to speak. The right only goes one way. Other people cannot be forced to experience your expression of your identity outside of social norms. This is the purpose of dress codes, and it is applicable to any type of odd expression: My identity with Christ is the most important thing in my life. It is the key to my salvation, it is my eternity, it is what makes me what I am now -- yet I am barred, and rightly so, from expressing that identity from the bully-pulpit of a classroom.
Now, if we want to argue about expanding social norms, and whether the people we know who currently operate outside of them are wrong/right whatever, that is a different thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by rbbailey on Nov 24, 2009 23:45:03 GMT -8
|
|
