Perhaps you have heard of Katy Perry, an up and coming young singer who is working hard to shock and alarm parents while positioning herself as the anti-Miley Cyrus. A former Christian music singer, Perry is now getting all kids of attention for a song she wrote called I Kissed a Girl. I haven't heard the song, but a quick read of the lyrics indicates that the tune is about alcohol and lost inhibitions. Specifically, a girl getting drunk and kissing another girl. And liking it. A sample:

The taste of her cherry chap stick
I kissed a girl just to try it
I hope my boyfriend don't mind it
It felt so wrong
It felt so right
Don't mean I'm in love tonight
I kissed a girl and I liked it
I liked it,

Perry's fans may be teens, but a lot of parents are freaked by the song, claiming it promotes homosexuality and promiscuity. Even Perry's own parents say they are disappointed in their 23-year-old daughter and find the song "shameful and disgusting."

But Perry has made it quite clear that she has no interest in being a role model for the young people who listen to her music. "Being in the business of rock and roll means having an attitude, being sexy, being edgy and being unapologetic unless I do something wrong...I look up to people like Joan Jett, Pat Benatar, Freddie Mercury and Cyndi Lauper. I want to have that same type of appeal. If people want a role model, they can have Miley Cyrus."

Miley Cyrus and her poor choices aside, I don't think every young artist has a responsibility to be a role model for the entire youth population. That said, I don't really understand the controversy surrounding this song. She got drunk, she kissed a girl. The takeaway - at least for me - is that drinking makes you do things you wouldn't otherwise do. Maybe that is the point kids should be getting.

Source

Colorado librarian James LaRue has gotten another challenge to Uncle Bobby's Wedding, the book about a little girl guinea pig's concerns that her uncle won't play with her after he gets married. The idea is simple enough -- Young Chloe loves her uncle but worries that after he gets married, he won't have time to play with her any more. None of that is why parents are getting up set about the book.

The "problem" with the book is that it just so happens that Uncle Bobby is marrying his boyfriend Jamie. It's not really relevant to the plot, nor, as I understand it, is it gone into in detail, it's just sort of a part of the background of the story. Big deal. Apparently, to some, it is a big deal and that is cause to want the book removed from the library shelves. After the first challenge, LaRue wrote an intelligent, sensitive response that explained why, in spite of (or even perhaps because of) the reasons for the challenge, the book would remain on the shelves.

Well now a second challenge has come along, this time asking that the book be removed because gay marriage is illegal in Colorado. Once again, LaRue responds in an intelligent, polite manner -- something I'm not sure I would have been able to do. He points out that it is not specified where the story takes place, whether it is in Colorado, in Massachusetts (where the author hails from), or even "in a wholly fictitious universe with its own laws." Yeah, like one where guinea pigs talk and wear clothes and get married? Ya think?

Of course, if we were to follow that line of reasoning -- removing books that depicted illegal acts -- we'd have to get rid of the mysteries, the adventures, the newspapers and news magazines... heck, most of the library would be empty. We'd even have to pull the bible off the shelf because, last time I checked, murder and incest are still illegal most places.

Via Mombian

I'm not sure there could be a worse headline, as far as I'm concerned: "Church Attendance Boosts Student GPA's." Luckily, it's not quite that simple. Researchers did find that going to church affects a teenager's grades, chances of dropping out, and sense of school community as much as whether or not the parents had college degrees, but it's not so much God's work as it is several other, identifiable factors.

The reasons for the improved performance include:

• The students have role models they see regularly from multiple generations.
• Parents are more likely to be in touch with the parents of their kids' friends.
• It is more likely that their friends' families will have the same values and expectations as their own.
• They tend toward higher rates of participation in extracurricular activities.

Other studies that have identified benefits of church attendance also pointed to the social networking and psychological aspects of being a member of a church as the key factors. If your kids attend church already, these findings may not be of much use to you, but not everyone goes to church or has any interest in doing so. For those of us in the latter category, this research has great value.

Source

If you want to send your kid to a high school where biology classes denounce evolution and where the bible is held as the ultimate reference, that's certainly your prerogative. That doesn't mean, U.S. District Judge James Otero says, that the University of California has to give students credit for those courses when they enter college.

When the university denied credit for the courses, however, the Christian schools called foul and demanded their classes be accepted. Naturally, they took their fight to court. Last Friday, though, Judge Otero ruled that the university can reject the religious texts. The ruling "confirms that [the University of California system] may apply the same admissions standards to all students and to all high schools without regard to their religious affiliations," says Charles Robinson, vice president for legal affairs for the UC system. He added that the Christian schools are looking for a "religious exemption from regular admissions standards."

On the other hand, Jennifer Monk, an attorney with Advocates for Faith and Freedom, said that the University "is attempting to secularize private religious schools." Not surprisingly, the schools are taking their case to the next level -- San Francisco's own Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The thing is, the university doesn't really care what you teach your students; all it cares about is what its students know.

Source

In addition to being responsible for creating the most delicious chicken sandwich known to man, Chick-fil-A founder S. Truett Cathy is also known as a pretty great guy. A devout Southern Baptist and former Sunday School teacher, Truett 's religious beliefs carry over into his fast-food business. The company's official corporate purpose is "to glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us and to have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A."

Apparently, that statement guides Cathy in his personal life as well. After two pre-teen girls broke into his Florida home and caused $30,000 in damage by throwing eggs, spraying fire extinguishers and flooding the kitchen, he opted not to prosecute them. Instead, he wants them to learn the error of their ways by writing ''I will not vandalize other people's property'' 1,000 times. Oh, and instead of watching TV and playing video games, he wants them to read a good book.



Say what?! Around here, you get worse than that for talking back and not picking up your mess. Granted, Cathy is 87-years-old and maybe a little old-fashioned, but I think these girls are getting off way too easy. I wonder what he would have done had they burned the house down. Make them clean erasers and wear a dunce cap?

Source

"Where's your grandpa?" my three-year-old asked me one day, looking at a picture of my grandfather, who passed a way a couple of years before she was born. I could see that my five-year-old was looking at me intently. We've had this discussion before; she knew what my answer would be. But because she hasn't quite processed the information, she listens closely whenever we talk about a family member who's deceased.

Teaching children about death is a lesson that many parents put off for as long as possible. But even children who have never experienced loss eventually notice that living things die. They may notice dead bugs on the sidewalk, a bird in their yard. Or they may notice that family members are missing. And eventually, they start asking questions. It's a really hard bubble to burst, and parents often feel uncomfortable introducing their children to such a difficult topic.

Source

He's simply a boy anxious to start kindergarten, but even at age five, Adriel Arocha is learning that, sometimes, things just aren't that simple. Adriel's dad is Apache and believes that Adriel's hair should remain uncut for traditional reasons. Adriel himself says that he needs his long braids because,"they tell me how long I've been here."

But when the family made plans to move to Needville, Texas and enroll their child in kindergarten, they didn't exactly receive a warm welcome. Adriel's mom emailed the school to inquire about enrollment and to mention his long hair, which, she explained, was always neatly kept in two long braids. The school emailed back that their dress code did not allow boys' hair to touch their collars. After a flurry of emails, phone calls, and meetings, the district decided that they were unwilling to budge on their rules for Adriel and his family.

Source

For two years straight, And Tango Makes Three was the top most challenged library book, according to the American Library Association. This year, however, another book might just take that dubious honor away. Uncle Bobby's Wedding is a story of a young guinea pig who is worried that her uncle's impending marriage will spell the end of her good times with her uncle. He explains that instead, she'll have two uncles to have fun with.

And therein lies the rub -- Uncle Bobby is marrying his boyfriend Jamie. The first of what will likely be many complaints was filed recently and ended up in the lap of Jamie LaRue, Director of the Douglas County Libraries in Castle Rock, Colorado. LaRue considered the challenge and responded with a well thought out, reasoned answer that he then shared on his website. That's a very good thing, because LaRue came up with exactly the right answers.

In his response, LaRue addresses the challenge that the subject of gay marriage, despite being incidental to the story, is inappropriate for young children. "I think a lot of adults imagine that what defines a children's book is the subject. But that's not the case. Children's books deal with anything and everything," he writes, noting that "what defines a children's book is the treatment, not the topic."

LaRue determines that the book "is a children's book, appropriately categorized and shelved in our children's picture book area." He goes on to explain that "if the library is doing its job, there are lots of books in our collection that people won't agree with; there are certainly many that I object to. Library collections don't imply endorsement; they imply access to the many different ideas of our culture, which is precisely our purpose in public life."

His response is well worth reading, even if only to remember what libraries are all about. It really is, however, a masterpiece of reasoned explanation. Hopefully, it will be widely read by librarians and serve as a precedent when other challenges come up. Kudos to Mr. LaRue for understanding the role and value of libraries and my thanks for standing up for what's right.

via Mombian

Source

In a short while -- it's Tuesday there already -- the World Youth Day festivities will get under way in Sydney, Australia. With more than 200,000 attendees from all over the world registered already, the week-long Catholic festival promises to be quite an event. The headlining act, of course, is the Pope himself who will lead a Papal Mass next Sunday.

Activities during the week will include workshops, concerts, and films. Highlights of the week include the Stations of the Cross, played out around Sydney and a camp-out at the local racetrack. The point of the event is to bring "together young people from around the globe to celebrate and learn about their faith."

It is also expected that the Pope will use the event to apologize for the Church's handling of sexual abuses by members of the clergy. "We have to consider what was insufficient in our behaviour and how we can prevent, heal, reconcile," said Pope Benedict aboard his plane on the down under. "This is the essential content of what we will say as we apologise." Meanwhile, protesters are planning to hand out condoms to the pilgrims as a means of speaking out against the pope's stance against birth control, homosexuality, and abortion.

I guess, if you're young and Catholic, Sydney is the place to be this week -- it's billed as the biggest youth-oriented event in the world.

Source

I used to teach in an area where school shut down for two days once a year for hunting season and where gun safety classes were practically an extra-curricular activity. So I realize that there are some instances where a responsible teen, under reasonable adult supervision, may have a reason for handling a gun.

I can't think of any good reason, however, to put a semiautomatic assault rifle into the hands of a teen who may or may not have the knowledge or supervision to handle it correctly. But that's what Windsor Hills Baptist church was planning to do as a incentive for teens to come their youth retreat. Organizers say that a shooting competition was part of last year's event, and that a gun had been given away then too.

The giveaway has been canceled, not because someone finally grew some common sense, but because an event organizer couldn't attend. Maybe I just don't know enough about guns. Can someone explain this to me? Is this appropriate?

Source

I couldn't imagine being romantically involved with someone whose beliefs were diametrically opposed to my own, let alone plan on raising children with them. Sure, my own parents were a mixed Catholic/Jewish couple, but my dad wasn't as adamant about practicing as my mother, so it worked out. But even so, Judaism and Catholicism at least share a common basis. Heck, we even attended a few Jews for Jesus gatherings.

Christianity and Satanism, however, are so different that one wonders how a follower of each would meet, let alone decide to marry. And yet, Kristie and James Meyer not only got married, they had three children together. Now, however, they are separated and are at odds over the religious upbringing of the kids. He, the Satanist, has custody of the kids on the weekend, but she, a Christian, wants to curtail that so she can take the kids to church on Sundays.

Now it's up to a judge to decide. The judge, of course, cannot render a decision that favors one religion over another. Mr. Meyer may be asked to prove that Satanism is a real religion -- easy enough: the IRS says it is -- while Mrs. Meyer would have to show that his beliefs are more harmful to the kids than her own.

Wow. I'd say it's one big mess. I'm not sure what the right answer is, other than that he should get to do what he wants with his time with the kids just as she is free to take the kids to church on her time. Sadly, I don't think it's really that simple and the ones that lose out are, of course, the kids.

Source

I've heard of a lot of reasons why people avoid "Old McDodald's", as the famous fast food chain is known around our house -- the general unhealthiness of the food, the destruction of the rainforests, their marketing through school notices, and so on -- but the American Family Association has come up with a new one.

The AFA is calling for a boycott of the golden arches because the company is "promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage." According to AFA founder and chairman Rev. Don Wildmon, McDonald's is "promoting a lifestyle that would utterly destroy the traditional family." He's right, of course -- now that my neighbors are allowed to get married, my wife and I are required to get a divorce and I have to shack up with a guy.

McDonald's has said in the past that it is "a company that actively demonstrates its commitment to the gay and lesbian community" -- I guess for some, that's a reason to boycott them; for me, it's a reason to support them.

Source

The pledge of allegiance, with its references to "Richard Stans" and our "invisible" nation, is mis-quoted every morning by public school children across the nation. There are those, however, who are unhappy about this, most famously because of the two-word phrase added in the 1950's in order to ward off the communist threat.

The pledge was written in 1892 to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus' arrival in the new world by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister and Christian Socialist. The original version was "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." In the 1920's, "my Flag" was changed, against Bellamy's wishes, to "the Flag of the United States of America."

The phrase "under God" was added in 1954 due to pressure from the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal service organization. According to Bellamy's granddaughter, the original author would not have approved of this change either. There is a lot of opposition to the recitation of the pledge, as it stands, by schoolchildren, most notably by Michael Newdow, an attorney and physician who, in 2000, filed a lawsuit in order to make sure his daughter could "go to public school free from daily theistic indoctrination."

A lot of people, however, don't get what all the hoopla is about -- why not just let it be, especially since the Supreme Court has ruled that students are not required to recite it? There are a number of reasons, actually, so in the interest of fostering understanding on this, the anniversary of our nation's birth, here are some of them:

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal -- surprisingly, a biology major in college -- has signed into law a bill that allows school boards in Louisiana to select materials to be used in science classes in order to critique scientific theories. The law is supposed to be used to promote "open and objective discussion of scientific theories... including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

Given that the law was written and promoted with the help of the Discovery Institute, the Seattle "think" tank that orchestrated the Dover debacle, the point of the law seems clear: to allow school boards to select texts that question evolution -- such as the one produced by the Discovery Institute itself. Unfortunately, this will open school districts to very expensive lawsuits, a la Dover. In Oklahoma, the Governor vetoed a similar law, noting that school districts would suffer from "an explosion of costly and protracted litigation that would have to be defended at taxpayers' expense."

The scientific community, naturally, has opposed this legislation. The law will "unleash an assault against scientific integrity, leaving students confused about science and unprepared to excel in a modern workforce," according to Alan Leshner, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Biologist PZ Myers offers up a scathing analysis that includes an alternative to the Discovery Institute's materials.

Personally, I think Louisiana has enough to worry about, thanks to Hurricane Katrina, and doesn't need the financial burden of school boards trying to push Intelligent Design into classrooms, but that's just me. Luckily, my kids don't go to school in Louisiana, but I'm sure they'll feel the effects of this for a long time as they end up having to deal with others who were "educated" with the help of the Dover Institute.

Source

It isn't uncommon these days to hear stories about teachers behaving badly in the classroom. I am a big believer in consequences and I am often left mind-boggled when these rogue teachers suffer none. Fortunately, this isn't one of those stories. Oh, we've got the bad teacher alright, but at least this one is no longer in charge of children.

John Freshwater, a science teacher at Mount Vernon Middle School in central Ohio, is accused of not only preaching his Christian beliefs in the classroom, but also of branding his students with a cross. As in using a high-frequency generator to burn the skin on the arms of kids. Freshwater doesn't exactly deny the charge, but claims he was just demonstrating how the generator thing worked and that the image was actually an "X", not a cross. I don't care if the image was Mickey Mouse, you don't burn the flesh of your students.

School board members agree and last week voted 5-0 to fire him. He is entitled to challenge the dismissal and his attorney says he intends to do so. But I just don't see how he could succeed in getting his job back considering the fact that there are actual photos of a child's branded arm. Not only that, district administrators say they've been dealing with complaints against Freshwater for at least half of his 21 year teaching career.

Of course this story isn't entirely without a mind-boggling aspect. Before firing Freshwater for intentionally injuring his students, school administrators tried to find him another position in the school. Fortunately for the kids in that district, he's not qualified to do anything else.

Source