11 YO DD1 told not to bring Twilight book into school again because it's 'unchristian'

[AgentZigzag]

DD1s teacher from last year asked her what she was reading at playtime on Friday, DD1 told her it was 'New Moon' which we'd bought her for her birthday in December.

The teacher hurried off and had quiet words with the teacher taking her class this year, they both came back and said she wasn't in trouble, but they didn't want her to bring the book in again to school because it's at odds with the christian values of the school (it's C of E).

The teacher said she'd read the first Twilight book and it's fine if her mum and dad think it's OK for her to read it, but she didn't think it was for little girls and they'd 'get into trouble if anyone saw her reading it' (DD thought the trouble would be from the vicar, although I find this hard to believe).

There are a few things I feel a bit uncomfortable about -

-this teacher had asked DD what she was reading a few times when DD took in the first Twilight book in, and just smiled and said nothing.

-they're actively encouraged to read Harry Potter books, and if you're banning Twilight because it's 'unchristian' then shouldn't that go for HP as well, and anything else with fantasy characters in? So no more fairies or Father Christmas then.

-DD was reading it at playtime, so nothing to do with lessons. Are they expecting her to spread dissent on what the Evil books are about or something?

-I feel they're somehow insinuating we're being unchristian letting her read them, although I couldn't care less about them judging me on my religious views, it annoys me because it seems a bit of a random rule when she's gone all the way through the school and no other judgments on our christian values have been mentioned.

I'm pretty much hands off when it comes to school, letting them get on with their job and do what they ask of me re homework etc. So I'm not planning on storming down there to confront them or anything, but this has really got on my wick and I'm posting to try and sort out what I think about it really.

Am I being unreasonable?

"the gods of the bible and the qu'ran (for example) show little tolerance of worshipers of other gods, both ask for them to be killed"

Don't understand this notfluffyatall. One of the Ten Commandments is "Thou shalt not kill". Jesus said "love your neighbour as yourself" and "judge not, or you will be judged". And the story of the Good Samaritan is about being kind to those with other beliefs.

Ever read the OT, popcorn? Seems its OK to kill if God tells you to.

Unfortunately some Christians and Muslims down the ages have - despite what Jesus said - found justifications for their 'Holy Wars' in their books.
Even Jesus said 'Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword' - well maybe he meant that metaphorically but you'd think an omniscient god would have more sense than to say something like that knowing that people would take what's written down literally.

Thanks Grimma, that was my point exactly, when both sides can find justification in their books there's bugger all we can do about it. Again, it's naive to deny this.

Twilight books are not appropriate reading for a primary school child - perhaps they are just using the unchristian argument because they don't want to just be honest and tell you that you have made a very very poor choice in reading material for your child (and she is a child and these books are aimed at young adults which at 11 she is not) But the themes are unchristian and that is the truth, afterlife and vampires is directly in contrast and contradiction to Christian values, you may or may not agree with that, you may want to be bogged down in what an evil book the Bible is but it makes no odds, you sent her to a Christian school so at least make the pretence of playing along or remove her. There is also other children at the school to consider and their parents view on this kind of book - this may also be a factor. You may not like their opinion but they absolutely entitled to say no to this book coming into school.

FWIW - we are Catholics and dcs go to a Catholic school. For instance I would let them read Phillip Pullman books when they are old enough (they are great) but I would not let them take them to school because I know their opinion about this series of books. It is a matter of respect. And actually the Twilight series of books is such an utter pile of cock anyway I wonder why anyone would read them in the first place.

"you sent her to a Christian school so at least make the pretence of playing along or remove her"

Yes OP, you bow and doff your cap to the all-knowing holy ones, never question them, after all people have been doing this for centuries so it's 'expected' now.

'No atrocities have been committed in the name of atheism'.

Yes, but as keeps being re-iterated, atheism is not a belief, so how could anything be done 'in the name' of it? If it is lack of belief, it is not a system or a religion or an organisation that anything can be done in the name of. Therefore the argument above doesn't really hold water. You can't have it both ways

As for Hitler, he was no more Christian than Pol Pot or Stalin. In the name of God my arse.

As for crusades, Holy Wars etc etc - they may be in the name of God, but if they don't reflect the principles of the God/religion they purport to be in the name of then they are nothing to do with that. Religion has been used for many things but it comes down to man's inhumanity against man in the end.

'you may want to be bogged down in what an evil book the Bible is'

I think you've read something into my posts that isn't there, I haven't said anything negative about the Bible at all brandy.

madhair - I agree with most of that last post, but its disingenous to try to say all the nasty stuff isn't what religion is about and. Yes, it is down to man's inhumanity to man; religions are a product of the human mind so they contain an unholy mix of the good, the bad and the ugly. If any religion was truly the product of a loving God, why would it be so riddled with the bad side?

madhairday

My response about atrocities in the name of atheism can't be taken out of context. It was in direct response to those who were trying to suggest that when you take god out of the equation all hell breaks loose. I was trying to point out that these atrocities were in the name of communism, not atheism. I'm not going to quibble about whether anything can or can't be done in the name of atheism, I think you're being a teensy bit pedantic.

Hitler may not have acted in a way that you perceive to be christian but he was a catholic, he was by no stretch of the imagination an atheist. And I never said he did what he did in the name of god. I just stated the fact that, contrary to the posters who lumped him in with Pol Pot and Stalin's beliefs, Hitler was in fact Catholic, while god may not have been his reason for invading Europe god was not absent from Hitler's life.

The same applies to the crusades and holy wars, they might not have been done in accordance with your translation of the bible or the image of god you hold, that does not negate the fact that they were because of the religion of those taking part.

No no OP, apologies, I did not mean that you had said that about the bible but as soon as faith schools are mentioned it all starts - lots of people here are starting the religion means wars things and not disputing that I just don't think that is the point. Like I said, it is up to you what you believe but honestly it is about respecting the environment your child is in, you can feel free to question it (we do a lot even being Catholic and going to a Catholic School) but I think allowing such a young child to take a controversial book into school and being surprised when they point this out is a bit rich tbh.

And re. Hitler etc. Claiming that you are a Catholic does not mean you are a Christian - it is about deeds not claims to be something. I am a Christian person but attend a Catholic Church - I do think I can make this claim because of what I do. Not sure could safely make the same claim.

What is it about posters who come along on page 11 and then start complaining about how the discussion has veered off topic somewhat? That is the nature if a discussion, it opens up lots of other ideas and positions.

And it's already stated upthread that if the banned it because it was inappropriate for the age group they should have said so, they didn't, they said it was unchristian.

Hitler was NOT an active Catholic. He stopped believing or going to church in adolescence, as Kershaw clearly shows. It seems a bit far-fetched therefore to claim that a religion he had renounced was somehow the cause of all he did. He did NOT claim to be Catholic - he actually disliked the RC Church because he thought it was a bit too Jewish. However, he and the RC Church made some unattractive accommodations with one another.

Why don't you bang on about Franz Stangl instead? Much more secure ground.

"It seems a bit far-fetched therefore to claim that a religion he had renounced was somehow the cause of all he did."

I didn't say this.

"Why don't you bang on about Franz Stangl instead? Much more secure ground."

And can we not be so fucking angsty at me? I wasn't the one to summon Godwin's Law in the first place, I had every right to correct the poster who did though.

Pedantic? Moi?

Hitler was anti-Christian. This was shown by his persecution of the Community Church and various other branches of church, and anyone really who showed any loyalty to their faith and the principles thereof which were in direct opposition of his delightful ideals of superiority and ethnic cleansing. Bonhoeffer and Niemoller spring to mind as Christians who spoke against Hitler. I don't think the fact that Hitler had Catholic beginnings could be in any way argued that he was a Catholic and certainly not that 'god was not absent from his life' - I would argue the opposite.

Twilight to Hitler in one thread - oh I love MN :)

Godwin.

Everyone off the bus.

Hitler did refer to his Christian beliefs right through his life. That doesn't of course make him a Christian...

A wholki section about it here

wholki = Wiki

DD thinks it's funny the threads taken a turn onto hitler as well

I think people like Schindler would illustrate your point well fluffy, lapsed catholic showing huge amounts of compassion (although he might have done them because he was brought up a catholic ).

Persecution of Christians at various times in various countries could be said to be in the name of atheism - or certainly political secularism - in atheistic states such as the USSR, North Korea and China.

Grimma, the OT is not an instruction book, we're meant to learn from its mistakes. The NT post-dates the OT and continues the story, with Jesus making it clear where people went wrong in the OT and suggesting a better way.

"atheistic states such as the USSR, North Korea and China."

FFS, they were COMMUNIST, they acted they way they did because of their skewed COMMUNIST ideals, not atheism.

And I really can't be arsed debating Hitler anymore, it's embarassing because it's now being assumed by those who cannot be arsed reading the thread that I brought him up in the first place. I didn't. Hitler's form of faith was very debatable, for someone who didn't believe in god (allegedly, not alleged by me) he spoke about him an awful lot both in Mein Kampf and in his speeches.

Popcorn - unfortunately not everyone takes the same view of the Bible as you. And my quote was from the NT which was either Jesus warmongering or Jesus not making it clear.

Regardless of warmongers being Catholic, christian or whatever faith, religion has acted as a rallying banner for a lot of wars.