Fire John Freshwater ... For the Right Reason »
Posted by: Neophile 4 months, 2 weeks ago"When he decides to use his public school classroom to shove his beliefs down student throats, he's in the wrong and should obey the order to keep his class secular. And when his personal beliefs so scramble his judgment that he can't even teach the evidence and logic of science, his professional duty, fire him."
Read Full Story at scienceblogs.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 73
-
-
-
0%
aceofspades14 months, 2 weeks ago
"When Freshwater taught students about electrical current, he used a device to leave a red mark in the shape of a cross on the forearms of some students, Stuart said. "
SHOCKING!!!
Reply
-
-
0%
Dionys4 months, 2 weeks ago
Absolutely. They deserve a science teacher who will stick strictly to science and not expound upon religious beliefs either for religion or against it. It's a science class, not a religion class.
However that means keeping out such dogmatic books as Dawkins' and other such atheist scientists commenting upon religion.
Fair is fair, right?
Reply -
0%
libsRfunny4 months, 2 weeks ago
It's up to the local community to decide. What he is doing is no different than the liberal rantings happening daily in classrooms and lecture halls.
If he is burning kids, that would be reason enough to fire him. Nowadays, you can't even spank a kid in class.
Reply -
0%
Bkumm4 months, 2 weeks ago
No, no and furthermore NO!!!
Evolution is an accepted scientific theory like gravity or electricity. If you want our country to be like the Ottoman Empire (that is, extinct) then we shouldn't teach science.
"you speak of science and in the same breath you hail darwin, with not one shred of evidence to back it up, but this is what we should be forcing down kids throats.'
Where have YOU been for the last 140 years? The evidence supporting evolution is quite simply overwhelming.
Reply-
0%
TerryKelley2 months ago
This brings up the most important point. Creationists claim that their ideas about intelligent design are a "theory" just like evolution is a "theory". Where they are completely and totally wrong is that a theory is based on evidence, and there are millions of years worth of evidence all the earth upon which the theory of evolution is based. Regarding "intelligent design" there is not one shred of physical evidence anywhere upon which to base a theory. People can believe what they want, but those who insist on beliefs which run counter to all the evidence and common sense are usually considered crackpots and charlatans and have no right to be teaching these beliefs to students within the framework of scientific study.
Reply
-
-
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
Has anyone argued that Freshwater's students did not learn all they were suppose to learn? Have some test scores come back showing that he did not teach the materials he was suppose to? Or were his demonstrations actually effective in helping these students to better understand the material because they were engaged and actually encouraged to THINK about it and not just memorize?
Reply-
0%
ColleenNoel1 month ago
If you search the Columbus Dispatch, you will find that they reported the high schools these children are transferring to have had to UNDO what was taught them. The high schools are reporting that he in fact did not teach them what they were required to know, according to Ohio standards.
Reply
These children deserve an education, not a religious sermon. At the VERY least, he is doing an injustice to Jewish students, because THEY aren't brainwashed to believe ID or Creationism (which really are one and the same).
-
-
-
0%
jordan114 months, 2 weeks ago
The burn was severe enough that our child awoke that night with severe pain, and the cross remained there for several weeks. ... We have tried to keep this a private matter and hesitate to tell the whole story to the media for fear that we will be retaliated against.">>>>>>
I give up trying to understand these kinds of things. Any parent who lets their kid stay in that class is a moron, and any parent who allows a freak to abuse their kid & then cowers in the corner has no business having kids. As my daughter says, any cockroach can give birth.
Reply-
-
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
Further evidence that the incident never happened, or significantly exaggerated.
Even if I were a member of the same Church as Freshwater, I would call for his termination and more if he intentionally burned my child in class.
Reply
-
-
0%
Spadecaller4 months, 2 weeks ago
The arrogance of using the public school setting to spread religious dogma should be not be tolerated.
Teachers have the right to teach that stuff in parochial schools, but disregarding the diverse religious and non-religious backgrounds of public school students is a violation of their civil rights. This kind of crap has gone too far in this country and must be addressed.
Reply-
-
0%
TerryKelley2 months ago
Since when are the facts of global warming "liberal dogma" Try reading some scientific studies instead of political opinion.
Reply
-
0%
bluetexasvalley4 months, 2 weeks ago
What about the civil rights of those YOU disagree with?
Reply
-
-
0%
crespi4 months, 2 weeks ago
What's a creepy, subversive Fundamentalist Christian doing in a public school in the first place?
EVERY FUNDAMENTALIST PUNDIT, PREACHER, FORUM, RADIO STATION AND TELEVISION STATION has been openly against public education and public schools for 25 years(!), and in fact the Conservatives have put out instructional books so good "Christian" children can learn techniques on how to disrupt the classroom and block knowledge.
The ONLY reason a Fundamentalist would infiltrate a public school class room is to undermine and sabotage our great American tradition of Education.
Reply-
0%
DeadXXXManXXXTalkin4 months, 2 weeks ago
''The ONLY reason a Fundamentalist would infiltrate a public school class room is to undermine and sabotage our great American tradition of Education''
what about a paycheck?
Reply -
-
0%
llalley3 months, 3 weeks ago
Do you even live in Mt. Vernon, Ohio? Do you even know the person that is claiming their son was burned by this teacher? Are you aware that the teacher was demonstrating how electrical current worked, and after demonstrating it on himself, several students asked that he do the same to them? John Freshwater may have made a mistake by not getting parental consent before doing something like that, but he in no way forced it upon any of his students. And I do not believe that this student woke up in pain from the burn any more than I believe John Freshwater tried to "shove" any religious beliefs down anyones throats. And I can tell you that today, the community will be rallying for John Freshwater. And I will be praying for him!
Reply-
0%
TerryKelley2 months ago
Here's another crackpot who ignores evidence (a parent who says her child woke up in pain and the evidence of the burn marks on several children), in order to support the unconstitutional Christian propagandizing being done by John Freshwater. And we thought we were living in the age of reason???
Reply
-
-
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
Quite funny - and so misinformed. You want to go the rout of "great American tradition of Education"? The lets look at the primary material used in the first 100+ years of the USA's public schools.
Yep - you may have guessed - was the Bible. In fact, the first reading primer published at taxpayer expense used Bible verses to teach the letters of the alphabet.
The Bible was still considered a primary reading source in PUBLIC SCHOOLS until the 20th century in many schools.
As far as infiltration, it is quite the opposite of what you state. The infiltration has been by liberals and Athiests who have crept in and are reprogramming students to believe nothing but what is forced down their throats in public schools.
The whole "fire Freshwater" argument is based on ONE family's statement, yet they offer absolutely no proof. Further, the author of the article goes on to actually include the fact that Freshwater's evaluations by his administration were excellent.
How do you define a "Fundamentalist"? Is it anyone who professes Christian beliefs? Or just someone who shares that belief with others (which is a structural part of Christianity)?
IN Civics classes, if the teacher ONLY pushed one political party (regardless of which one), the teacher should be reprimanded for not fairly giving both sides. Yet we somehow do not hold similar standards for science classes. I am not suggesting that science teachers should "teach" creationism. On the other hand, the handout that Freshwater distributed only implores the reader to think about it and make their own decisions.
And by the way - how would anyone here answer Freshwater's example of the Legos? How do evolutionists explain how everything "began"? Take random bits and give them time, they don't magically form new things without outside influence.
Reply
-
-
0%
PsychoHosebeast4 months, 2 weeks ago
If these people are having a problem being heard, perhaps they should contact the ACLU and file a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the district. That will get the desired response, I'm relatively certain.
I imagine they could even fire him because they're concerned with his mental state--for openers, if you want to teach religion, why get a job in a public school (hiding your agenda from your new employer), and not a private one? This isn't really about "spreading the word," this is about being a religious zealot and borderline nutcase--and he got there when he started branding crosses on kids' arms. Isn't that assault, technically?
Reply-
0%
aceofspades14 months, 2 weeks ago
Does this guy teach surface tension by walking on water??
Reply
-
-
0%
Bkumm4 months, 2 weeks ago
FTA:
"In one class, Freshwater used Lego pieces to describe the beginning of the world. He dumped the pieces, then asked students if the Legos could assemble by themselves, said Joe Stuart, 18, assistant editor of the high-school newspaper."
And this is science? This guy should have his own theme-song:
"Na, na, na, na,
Na, na, na, na,
Good-byyyeeee"
Reply-
0%
Isoparm4 months, 2 weeks ago
If this teacher had half a brain, and actually understood the science he was teaching, he would see that the material aspects of this universe DO assemble themselves into manifestations of increasing complexities. A universes of hydrogen forges more complex and diverse elements in the heart of stars. These new elements will ultimately assemble themselves into more complex arrangements we call molecules. These in turn will combine to form structures of increasing complexities. This repeating pattern, goes on, and on, until you wind up with life, and ultimately, us. With increased complexity, comes increased ability to work within, and influence environment.
It is from THIS dynamic, that of coming together, that a real lesson can be learned.
Reply
-
0%
SonOfTheMask4 months, 2 weeks ago
This teacher should be removed immediately for using electricity to burn a mark on a student's forearm. It doesn't matter what the mark is. Frankly, I consider that assault on a minor and I can't imagine why there hasn't been any police/legal action.
Teachers in public schools should teach the curriculum and leave personal religious beliefs out of the mix.
Having said that, I recall several public school teachers trying to advance political beliefs in classrooms in recent years. They should keep those political beliefs out of the mix as well. I do not want to have a public school teacher try to tell students how to believe about God and don't want them to tell students how to view the President or whomever.
Reply-
0%
dunkirk4 months, 2 weeks ago
Unless of course its a Political Science class in which case looking at the gaffes of the current occupant would be part of the curriculum.
Reply -
0%
Charlson4 months, 2 weeks ago
The religious and political beliefs of an educator has no place in the curriculum of an educational institution, period. You can teach religion in a theology class or politics in a political science class but not your prejudiced opinions.
Reply -
0%
Bkumm4 months, 2 weeks ago
Can you give an example of a public school teacher espousing a particular political belief in the classroom?
I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't know of any instances.
I have heard of it happening in college classrooms, but that is a different issue.
Also, we keep saying electrical burn and I'm not sure that's accurate.
FTA:
"When Freshwater taught students about electrical current, he used a device to leave a red mark in the shape of a cross on the forearms of some students, Stuart said."
There are several electrical processes that could leave a mark that wouldn't be an electrical burn. I realize that the article states that the parents called it a burn, but we would need to see evidence of that. It's dicey.
All of that being said, political and religious beliefs belong in the public square and in the places of worship not in classrooms.
Reply-
0%
SonOfTheMask4 months, 2 weeks ago
Bkumm, the one that comes quickly to mind spent quite a bit of time right here on Netscape/Propeller. It was that Colorado teacher who had a student that surreptitiously recorded one of his classes where he was talking about President Bush in none-too-flattering terms. Remember the whole "he should be fired" vs "it's his right of expression" arguments that raged back and forth on here?
Reply -
0%
Dionys4 months, 2 weeks ago
"Can you give an example of a public school teacher espousing a particular political belief in the classroom?
I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't know of any instances. "
Sure. Ask anyone from a small town about their education regarding Native Americans and the atrocities they suffered and continue to suffer under genocidal policies.
Reply -
0%
Natureboy4 months, 2 weeks ago
We had a high school teacher here who read a letter to her students accusing Barack Obama of being an anti-american radical muslim terrorist. Had she checked Snopes.com, she would have seen that the claims were debunked, and THAT might have inspired some intelligent discussion in her class, but instead she read the letter to her class not as a teaching tool but to tell her students that she was very, very troubled about what might happen if Obama were elected.
That, my friends, is using our tax dollars to propagandize and to influence an election. It is inappropriate.
Reply -
0%
MikeFromCanada4 months, 2 weeks ago
Something that a lot of people do not realize about electrical burns, is that you may have a only minor mark on your skin, but you can have a severe burn in the muscle tissue below the skin. The reason for this is because skin is an insulator, and blood is a conductor. A science teacher should know this.
Reply
-
-
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
Maybe because the whole "burning a cross" incident never happened. The whole "case" is based on one family's statement. Yet the cross burning supposedly happened to several students (according to the article writer - he couldn't have been injecting his own bias, now could he?).
While I am a Christian, if my child came home even from a CHURCH function with a cross (or anything else) BURNED into my child's body, I would be looking for some serious action. Ye these parents supposedly didn't want to cause a stir? That just doesn't jibe.
Reply
-
-
0%
Isoparm4 months, 2 weeks ago
They should fire the bum. This is the 21st century and this cr*p still goes on. This teacher and others like him, are the true ball-and-chain on civilizational development.
Reply -
0%
memestryker4 months, 2 weeks ago
Neo, this is frightening because now we have a Supreme Court stacked with religious zealots and the creationism/ID nuts will certainly appeal. This could be tragic for public schools, and Pat Robertson could actually pull off what he set out to do in 1992--fundamentalist Christians taking over our schools.
btw, that site is mouse-trapping again (or did someone break the middleman rule?).
Reply -
-
0%
DiscipleofChrist4 months, 1 week ago
You call yourself a "Christian". Does that mean you are a true disciple of Christ as the Bible tells you to be or are you just a Christian,meaning you go to church and sit in your pew all comfortable? Don't call yourself a Christian UNLESS you know what it MEANS to be a disciple. We can no longer sit back and let government tells us what to do AGAINST the constitution. READ THE 1ST AMENDMENT!!! What is the establishment clause? Where is the seperation of curch and state. Come on-GET SMARTER THAN THAT. CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW REGARDING RELIGION! WOW READ IT WOW BELIEVE IT-YOUR FREEDOMS ARE BE STRIPPED AWAY AND YOU LET IT HAPPEN. THERE IS A WAR ON CHRISTIANITY!
Reply-
0%
TerryKelley2 months ago
See, here goes another crackpot shouting down everyone else with his primitive and dogmatic beliefs. To deny the separation of church and state is to deny why pilgrims founded this country in the first place; so they could practice their religion without interference from the state. Now, the Christians are trying to claim that although the law says you can practice religion without interference from the state, you can't practice science without interference from religion. Bunch of damn crackpot fanatics. I have a psychiatrist friend who thinks that kind of behavior (dogmatic belief in mythical beings) demonstrates clinical delusion.
Reply -
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
The "separation of church and state" concept was not in any way thought of by our founding fathers. The phrase was derived from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists and was actually an response to expression of concern that one specific denomination of Christianity (Anglicans) not become the official or "Established" denomination of the United States.
There is little doubt that the founding fathers considered America to be a "Christian" nation, founded on Christian values. Further, early leaders such as George Washington even recognized that it was religion that made the freedoms this new country enjoyed possible.
The Supreme Court of a century ago saw fit to declare officially that "our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian . . . this is a Christian nation." (Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 1892)
I have yet to hear anyone argue that John Freshwater's students were not learning the material they were suppose to. I would be interested to see their standardized test scores as compared to similar groups with other teachers. Notice that such information is conspicuously missing from the screams for his job.
The fact that the school chose to go after his Bible on his desk speaks volumes. If the supposed evidence of poor teaching, injuries to students, and failure to do his job (teach the official curriculum) were true, then the school would have a simple case that would hold up to any appeal. But they chose to go after a Bible on his desk (which has already been fought in other courts - teachers can have a Bible on their desk). So something smells - and I believe it is the anti-Christian bias, not so much a bad teacher.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Coatl4 months, 2 weeks ago
The fact is that living creatures evolve, how to we evolve? That's the theory.
Btw, why did you sink this story?
Reply -
0%
Charlson4 months, 2 weeks ago
The only closed minded fanatic on this tread would resemble YOU.
Reply -
0%
jordan114 months, 2 weeks ago
Evolution is not a 'theory.' The theories lie in HOW it transpired.
Reply -
0%
Natureboy4 months, 2 weeks ago
Evolution is taught as a theory. When it comes to explanations of how things happen, theory is as good as it gets in the scientific realm. Nobody in their right mind teaches the theory of evolution as "fact," and nobody but a fundie idiot dismisses an accepted scientific theory by saying it's only a theory and not a fact.
Reply
-
-
0%
Charlson4 months, 2 weeks ago
The smugness and pomposity of some people of religion in their certainty of truth is in direct proportion to the harm they cause. This teacher physically harmed a student as a teaching tool and he still has his job? What is wrong with this school system? Are they in agreement with this fool? Or is it, as other posters have said, that the administrators were afraid of a law suit? They should be more afraid of a suit from the parents of the harmed student or students.
Reply -
0%
quackpot4 months, 2 weeks ago
What about when the religious beliefs of ONE MAN become the defined and funded curriculum for THOUSANDS of students across the land?
What about Mr. Bush's abstinence only curriculum developed by his "faith-based-initiatives office" that has, in spite of multiple studies that have show it to be completely ineffective, continues to be a part of the Federal budget?
Reply -
-
-
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
This would not be news - he would be held up as an example of diversity and tolerance.
Much like the schools in California that have required students (without parental consent) to practice Islam while in school - including reciting Islamic prayers, wearing Islamic apparel, interrupting class time with prayers to the East, etc. Yet in those same schools, a teacher is not allowed to post the 10 Commandments on their wall, or to even wish their students a "Merry Christmas" as they leave for their "Winter Break"...
Reply
-
-
0%
mackiemesser4 months, 2 weeks ago
My granddaughter's teacher told her class that John Kerry was a murderer of babies while George Bush was a man of God and that Democrats were traitors to this country. But this same teacher has spouted off enough other inanities that my granddaughter and her friends simply ignore the teacher's rantings. It does make you wonder, though, how these idiots get hired as teachers in the first place but more importantly, how they get to keep their jobs as surely, word of their inappropriate rantings must have made it back to the administration?
Reply -
0%
digthepast4 months, 2 weeks ago
Part 1
In scientific terms, Evolution is a THEORY, which is to say it is a paradigm used as a framework to test HYPOTHESES or propositions about change in the biological world.
Most people think of a "theory" as "mere speculation." In science, THEORY is a body of coherent knowledge that is used to structure research. A scientific THEORY is proposed and then tested. A theoretical position can never logically be proven, but only disproven, or FALSIFIED. For example, Darwin proposed evolution as a theory, then looked at the distribution of finches in the Galapagos Islands as a hypothesis to test it. The distribution of finches with various traits was consistent with evolutionary theory as Darwin proposed it. So hypothesis testing did not falsify evolution, lending support to it.
Reply-
0%
memestryker4 months, 1 week ago
Karl Popper described formulating the best theory possible at a snapshot in time, and then continuing to test it, looking for errors.
Modern evolutionary theory is not Darwin's original work--science itself has questioned, rejected, and accepted parts of Darwin's hypotheses. But discounting Darwin is like discounting Des Cartes. Both made major contributions to the advancement of knowledge in their field.
Reply
-
-
0%
digthepast4 months, 2 weeks ago
Part 2
As knowledge has accumulates, the concept of how evolution works changes and grows, but the theoretical position has not been falsified. Small parts of it may have been falsified, but other, better explanations, that better suit new facts have taken their place. Just because it has not been falsified does not mean that it is "true." It is always possible that an experiment could produce verifiable results that prove evolution false, but it is very unlikely.
The fact that evolution COULD be proven false, and the fact that it has NOT been proven false combine to give scientists a lot of confidence in evolution as an explanatory theory covering change in the biological world.
Reply -
0%
digthepast4 months, 2 weeks ago
Part 3
So evolution has weight because it is hypothetically possible to prove it false, but in 150 years, no one has been able to do so.
By contrast "Intelligent Design" is not considered a valid scientific theory, because its proponents have not been able to derive a hypothesis that would falsify it. Because it "can't be proven wrong," it has no scientific value whatsoever.
TV preachers and internet loony-tunes love to say that "because it cannot be proven false it must be true," but according to the rules of logic they are wrong. Because it cannot be proven false, it can never really be true.
And the ironic thing is that evolution has nothing to say about Christianity. It is inconsistent with the 6,000 year old religious hymn that now comprises the first chapters of Genesis, but well...my vote goes to evolution based on the prepoderance of the evidence.
Science class is over for now...
Reply -
100%
DiscipleofChrist4 months, 1 week ago
As I watch and read what some of you have written my heart cries for the mess some of you believe. If you would study our American history,not the history that ONLY the schools want you to study, you would find that there is no constitutional amendment that provides for seperation of church and state, not only that but you would see that ALL of the founding fathers of this great country believed that one nation under God would survive. John Freshwater should be considered a hero for his stand in what he believes. Is it proper that we would allow the koran or the satanic bible or the gay agenda to be pushed in our schools, and it is! But that's ok, let's just not let the Christians carry their Bible's to school. That's marxism people-the beginning of communism. It's amazing to me how ignorant some of our children are. That makes me scared for the next generation. No matter what you believe, truth, will always win. Darkness cannot remain where there is light.
Reply -
100%
llalley3 months, 3 weeks ago
I would like to clear things up a little bit here, because it seems as though only part of the story has been told here. John Freshwater first showed his students how electrical current worked by demonstrating it on himself. And he had a necklace with a pendant (cross) on so he chose to use that to demonstrate. After the demonstration, there were several kids that asked that he do it to them. Although Mr. Freshwater may have shown poor judgment in agreeing to do something like this to underage students without a parent's consent, he never forced this upon anyone. John Freshwater is a good man, and for anyone to get on here and slash him this way, while not knowing the full story and not knowing any of these people on a personal level is ludicrous!
Reply-
0%
TheBattman1 month, 2 weeks ago
Don't you know, people who work on an agenda don't let facts, or complete stories, get in the way of achieving their agenda.
Reply
-
Submitted By:
Neophile
I'm a Propeller Scout so if you have any questions or concerns, send me a message and I'll be happy to help.
Also submitted:
- 1.0 - The Vanishing Republican Voter
- 5.0 - Open Letter to Scientology: Why Can My Daughter Not Visit Me?
- 5.3 - Investigation into Palin To Be Released 3 Weeks Early
- 7.9 - Palin Stonewalling the Troopergate Investigation
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Also Propping This Article
capn_caveman
pawfoots- Helixbuilder
berkeley- TGrass3001
dandt1612
engineer
BronxBomber
david_nwpa
monte-g
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?
