Is it a violation of religious rights to mark a student as wrong for saying Earth is 10k years old?

[Ferguson97]

If a student whose family is Young Earth creationists is taking a test in science class, and is asked "How old is the Earth?" and they answer "10,000 years", would it be a violation of that student's religious freedom to mark them as incorrect?

[John Dule]

Being religious doesn't give you a free pass to be wrong.

[TDAS04]

No.

[Del Tachi]

Any teacher worth his salt would think of a better, more specific question to ask on a test.

A more interesting issue is about the religious freedom of teachers.  My husband was recently telling me about a high school biology teacher he had (in rural Mississippi) who refused to say the word "evolution" and instead used the word "adaptation" in notes/tests.  Refusing to say the word is silly, but do you think she should be allowed to do such, Fergie? 

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Any teacher worth his salt would think of a better, more specific question to ask on a test.

A more interesting issue is about the religious freedom of teachers.  My husband was recently telling me about a high school biology teacher he had (in rural Mississippi) who refused to say the word "evolution" and instead used the word "adaptation" in notes/tests.  Refusing to say the word is silly, but do you think she should be allowed to do such, Fergie? 

Teachers shouldn't let personal issues get in the way, as you deplorables constantly remind us any time a teacher is suspended over accidentally mentioning her wife to 2nd graders in passing.

[Del Tachi]

Any teacher worth his salt would think of a better, more specific question to ask on a test.

A more interesting issue is about the religious freedom of teachers.  My husband was recently telling me about a high school biology teacher he had (in rural Mississippi) who refused to say the word "evolution" and instead used the word "adaptation" in notes/tests.  Refusing to say the word is silly, but do you think she should be allowed to do such, Fergie? 

Teachers shouldn't let personal issues get in the way, as you deplorables constantly remind us any time a teacher is suspended over accidentally mentioning her wife to 2nd graders in passing.

So the street goes both ways?  Do teachers have freedom of speech or not?

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Any teacher worth his salt would think of a better, more specific question to ask on a test.

A more interesting issue is about the religious freedom of teachers.  My husband was recently telling me about a high school biology teacher he had (in rural Mississippi) who refused to say the word "evolution" and instead used the word "adaptation" in notes/tests.  Refusing to say the word is silly, but do you think she should be allowed to do such, Fergie? 

Teachers shouldn't let personal issues get in the way, as you deplorables constantly remind us any time a teacher is suspended over accidentally mentioning her wife to 2nd graders in passing.

So the street goes both ways?  Do teachers have freedom of speech or not?

They should teach what is factual, but they can say whatever they want after. Just wouldn't be good for their career. Freedom of speech, not freedom of consequences.

[Ferguson97]

Any teacher worth his salt would think of a better, more specific question to ask on a test.

A more interesting issue is about the religious freedom of teachers.  My husband was recently telling me about a high school biology teacher he had (in rural Mississippi) who refused to say the word "evolution" and instead used the word "adaptation" in notes/tests.  Refusing to say the word is silly, but do you think she should be allowed to do such, Fergie? 

Teachers shouldn't let personal issues get in the way, as you deplorables constantly remind us any time a teacher is suspended over accidentally mentioning her wife to 2nd graders in passing.

So the street goes both ways?  Do teachers have freedom of speech or not?

Refusing to use the word evolution in a biology class is something that directly and negatively impacts the learning of the students. A teacher mentioning that she has a wife, the same way that a straight teacher would mention she has a husband, is not something that negatively impacts the learning of the students.

Teachers have a right to freedom of speech, but that does not include including incorrect, misleading, or incomplete language in the curriculum.

[Damocles]

Yeah, Jesus was pretty based and all, getting crucified because the government didn't like what he had to say. But he'd probably think you're retarded for believing that sh#%t.

[Del Tachi]

Any teacher worth his salt would think of a better, more specific question to ask on a test.

A more interesting issue is about the religious freedom of teachers.  My husband was recently telling me about a high school biology teacher he had (in rural Mississippi) who refused to say the word "evolution" and instead used the word "adaptation" in notes/tests.  Refusing to say the word is silly, but do you think she should be allowed to do such, Fergie? 

Teachers shouldn't let personal issues get in the way, as you deplorables constantly remind us any time a teacher is suspended over accidentally mentioning her wife to 2nd graders in passing.

So the street goes both ways?  Do teachers have freedom of speech or not?

Refusing to use the word evolution in a biology class is something that directly and negatively impacts the learning of the students. A teacher mentioning that she has a wife, the same way that a straight teacher would mention she has a husband, is not something that negatively impacts the learning of the students.

Teachers have a right to freedom of speech, but that does not include including incorrect, misleading, or incomplete language in the curriculum.

Curriculum itself can be written to include "incorrect, misleading or incomplete language" so your argument isn't quite the slam dunk you think it is.

Assume a state adopted a curriculum that some say is promoting Southern "Lost Cause" mythology.  Would a teacher have the right to alter his language to avoid teaching it?     

Either teachers can teach what they like (i.e., freedom of speech/religious expression) or they are peons only able to regurgitate state-mandated curricula.  I think you'd like to have it both ways.   


I would also like to point out that your whole reason for starting this thread was to bait at least one R/R-leaning poster into voting "Yes", so that you could freak out about it.  No dice so far, LOL

[Ferguson97]

Curriculum itself can be written to include "incorrect, misleading or incomplete language" so your argument isn't quite the slam dunk you think it is.

Assume a state adopted a curriculum that some say is promoting Southern "Lost Cause" mythology.  Would a teacher have the right to alter his language to avoid teaching it?     

Either teachers can teach what they like (i.e., freedom of speech/religious expression) or they are peons only able to regurgitate state-mandated curricula.  I think you'd like to have it both ways.   

I don't want it both ways. I want teachers to teach the truth. The truth exists independently of what the state government or they personally think.

If the school curriculum is based in reality, then the teachers should stick to it.

If the school ciriculum is not based in reality, then the teacher should teach the truth.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Claims about the age of the Earth (and evolution) are falsifiable and western science is ultimately about the base of knowledge based on a system of falsification. So, of course not.

The difference between this and claims about ethics or religion is that those are typically not falsifiable. They don't belong in any science class.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

No, but it's a violation of teaching duty to test and evaluate student skill based on what amounts to trivia. That's what is always so funny about these hypotheticals. I know classroom instruction is a failure in the vast majority of this country, but you can at least see if students are capable of thinking (which still involves a lot of regurgitation admittedly but is more convincing than OP's argumentation style and teaches how and why).

E.g., "name three pieces of evidence that substantiate that the age of the earth is X." Evidence doesn't mean that they have to admit something that contradicts what they want to believe. If they fail to answer, that is objectively incorrect. There is evidence of things that are not ultimately true. It might even be funnier to add a question for evidence of 10,000 years and let the students laugh at it for themselves. Certainly teaches how to evaluate sources and remember why something is correct.

Trivia will disappear when they only know alternative facts from the deep web. Contrarians will intentionally oppose what authority tells them if they fail to develop their own rational agency.

[RFK 2024]

No, religion does not supersede the truth