Would you trust a "birther" to teach your child?

Another possibility is that the class was discussing the qualifications for President and the issue came up and the teacher mentioned the issue to get the debate going. Then the child of the OP started paying attention when it got testy and did not know that the teacher was playing devil's advocate for the cause of creating a discussion. I teach, and this happens way too often. a child is not paying attention, but when the class gets loud, he wakes up and gets half the story from his neighbor who woke up seconds before he did. I suspect this is what happened here, since the kid is going home to complain about the teacher. Good kids listen carefully and get all the facts before running to mommy and daddy, who then run to letsrun or the ACLU to fight back.

gayguysarecooltoo wrote:

If a parent ever asked to see my teaching certificate, I wouldn't take it out and show it to them. Does that mean I'm not certified? No, it means that parent is an ignoramous and doesn't deserve my time.

You wouldn't? I have no problem showing my credentials to somebody who asks. You really, really look down upon parents apparently.

Another good point, racehorse. That very well could have happened.

what does being a "birther" have to do with anything. At least you can rest easy that the teacher is part of a union.....isnt that good enough for you left wing loonies?

The Stache wrote:

Another good point, racehorse. That very well could have happened.

Thank you. It happens more often than those outside of the classroom think.

actually I teach U.S. History... just making a point about the OP's kid's teacher addressing that in 6th grade.

ignorant turd wrote:

you teach world history in texas? i feel sorry for you. do your state-purchased school textbooks have the story of the great flood and noah in them?

Real American wrote:

I'd rather have my kids taught by a "birther" than by a homosexual.

so you'd rather have a stupid kid than a gay kid? just sayin.

glad to see that you are closed minded to one person's ideas. open yur mind; celebrate diversity.

so cal is real wrote:

glad to see that you are closed minded to one person's ideas. open yur mind; celebrate diversity.

Just because two people have a difference in opinion doesn't mean that both opinions have equal merit. Some opinions have a stronger factual basis than others. There's a serious lack of logic out there right now that all opinions are always equally valid. The "agree to disagree" resolution is often misapplied in cases where you're arguing with a "flat-earther" who can't back up their opinion with a single fact, yet still clings to it.

It's not a matter of having an open mind - it's about demanding that people support their opinions with sound facts. If they can't, then their opinion just doesn't have merit. done deal.

awsfasd98asdf wrote:

I wouldn't worry about it. I would check to see if evolution is being taught in your school, however. Some teachers will tell students it's just one of many theories, which is crazy.

Yet evolutionists have few if any children, which by their own theory, makes them genetic failures, "morons," you could say. Then the "morons" complain about hypothetical teachers of children that they will almost certainly never have, being too "evolutionarily unfit" to see the irony and hypocrisy of their own premise.

Genius Liberals wrote:

Yet evolutionists have few if any children, which by their own theory, makes them genetic failures, "morons," you could say. Then the "morons" complain about hypothetical teachers of children that they will almost certainly never have, being too "evolutionarily unfit" to see the irony and hypocrisy of their own premise.

I'd love to see the data you back this up with. Quality conclusions.

Cooked Data in Stolen Emails wrote:

T-man wrote:

It's not a matter of having an open mind - it's about demanding that people support their opinions with sound facts. If they can't, then their opinion just doesn't have merit. done deal.

Kinda like...oh "global warming?!"

Can you give an example of this cooked data?

Wendell Gee wrote:

I'd love to see the data you back this up with. Quality conclusions.

You really need proof that religious people have more children than secular liberals, who aren't even reproducing at replacement rate? Really? Go look for it yourself, it isn't hard to find or even disputed.

But this is impossible! All public school teachers are bisexual pedophile atheist socialists! Glenn Beck said so!

Bear of Bad News wrote:

I've never liked the idea that teachers should necessarily hold the same views as the kids and the kids' families. Having your views challenged is an important part of learning and growing. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that any belief that you hold that has not been challenged and adequately defended isn't really a belief at all, but rather just a thought that has not yet been evaluated.

If this teacher does tell your son things that go against what he believes, he should be able to argue against those things. If he can, he can walk away more confident in his own beliefs. If he cannot, he needs to think about whether he really believes what he purports to believe. This goes for any topic, not just the "birther" issue.

Differing views are valid when they're based on facts.

For example, it's fine to debate different views on how much government intervention there should be in the economy, or what US policy towards Israel should be. These are complicated situations, and debate is good.

Being a "birther" is a different story. It's nothing more than a stubborn denial of a simple fact. There aren't two sides to this and there's no place for "belief" here.

Genius Liberals wrote:

Wendell Gee wrote:

I'd love to see the data you back this up with. Quality conclusions.

You really need proof that religious people have more children than secular liberals, who aren't even reproducing at replacement rate? Really? Go look for it yourself, it isn't hard to find or even disputed.

You know, there are religious people who don't believe in evolution. And there is more to your claim than that.

gayguysarecooltoo wrote:

Why would we ever need to ask the President to show his birth certificate to the public?

If a parent ever asked to see my teaching certificate, I wouldn't take it out and show it to them. Does that mean I'm not certified? No, it means that parent is an ignoramous and doesn't deserve my time.

Good thing this guy is a teacher, because with that pompous, entitled attitude, he wouldn't get too far anywhere else. To him, parents who want to ensure their child's teacher is properly credentialed are ignorant and undeserving of his time. Typical teacher's union mentality.

Mos Def wrote:

gayguysarecooltoo wrote:

Why would we ever need to ask the President to show his birth certificate to the public?

If a parent ever asked to see my teaching certificate, I wouldn't take it out and show it to them. Does that mean I'm not certified? No, it means that parent is an ignoramous and doesn't deserve my time.

Good thing this guy is a teacher, because with that pompous, entitled attitude, he wouldn't get too far anywhere else. To him, parents who want to ensure their child's teacher is properly credentialed are ignorant and undeserving of his time. Typical teacher's union mentality.

Hey, I resent that! I am nothing like this gay.

Cooked Data in Stolen Emails wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html

Can you now shut the f uck up?

Well, you provided no cooked data, just an editorial about questionable emails. It is certainly the consensus after that whole debacle that the emails were stupid but revealed no actual scientific dishonesty. Glad you consider the NYT reliable though.