Every church listed in town is Christian. I cannot see any other churches listed in any of the directly surrounding towns that are not Christian either. What percentage of the people in Frisco do you think are Christian? 95%? 99%? What percentage of the people in Frisco do you think are "other"? 5%? The likelyhood of the parents complaining being Christian is very high, wouldn't you agree?
If you are questioning the MOTIVATION for the firing as being Christian Fundamentalist inspired, I agree that is more of a reach. I'll tell you why I think it is correct, though. The most likely explanation I can imagine for the firing, due to the timing of the trip, the complaints, the suspension and the firing, is that the firing was directly related to the museum trip. It could turn out that she was fired for cause, and the timing is completely coincidental, but I doubt that will be the case. But it is possible. If the teacher was fired because of complaints stemming from the museum trip, what do you think the reason for the complaints was? (of course, the news articles are clear what the complaints were, but lets pretend they aren't) Do you think the complaints were waste of tax dollars on a museum trip? Getting the kids home late? Not letting them eat their lunches at noon? Or do you think (as the articles state), that the complaints were due to exposure to nude art in the museum? If the complaints were due to the nude, what inspired the complaints? Jealousy? Complaints about the quality of the art in question? Is there another good reason I am missing? What do you think the likelyhood that the motivation for the complaints was anything other than deeply held religious belief? Probably about zero, as I would estimate? So, my chain of logic, with those few facts and deductions that ARE available, lead me to my conclusion that the teacher was most likely fired due to pressure from Christian parents offended by the nude art seen on the museum trip. Do you have a better explanation? Where does your chain of logic, with the facts and assumptions you can make, lead you? The parents certainly have the right to do so if they believe the teacher stepped over the line, just as I have the right to mock them for what I considered to be fundamentally nutty behavior. Fortunately, there are still more people in the US who think like me on this subject than think like I am assuming they are thinking. Heck, even the right-wing blogs have been siding with me over this one. BTW, that sort of thing is NOT called slander, as I have not directed it against any specific person, have not hurt their reputation, and there was no malice intended. It could be considered religious bigotry (it is not, since it is the actions I dislike, not the fact of the belief). It might be defamation. It certainly isn't slander. But it HAS been a fun thread. On 9/27/06, Chesty Puller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, from what I've seen of this thread, you have *no* facts at all > concerning Christian involvement. Not that you're wrong, but merely that > you haven't shown any evidence of the facts that you mention. That was > Hatton's point. This sort of thing is called slander. Wow you missed the > point totally. You were so concerned with talking that you didn't listen. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:216250 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
