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?

I first brought hitler up in my 19.45 post last night, sorry if you're copping it fluffy.

I think he's a good example to use for discussing when When Things Get Knocked Over Spill Or Fall Out Of Cupboards 'Things Go Wrong In Society'.

Not only do they show what happens when the state can justifying overruling ethical considerations to bring in social policies eliminating certain groups, but the nazis documented everything they did (like all such arrogant dictatorships) so we can see how they got to that point.

Which is why godwins law is so true, anything can be twisted to fit into a comparison with them somewhere.

But a big part of that kind of communism was its intolerance of religion. Franco was a badass, but the republicans murdered a lot of Catholics in Spain, for example.

I btw never said you brought up Hitler, fluffy. I just rather nerdily noted that he'd been described as Catholic, which is untrue.

Does everyone know that Stangl, who was Commandant of Treblinka and Belzec, was a catholic and was given a Red Cross passport by a Vatican official to help him flee to South America? Said Vatican official thought he was protecting a Catholic from Communism. IN a way he was. Still makes me want to be violently sick.

Grimma

"unfortunately not everyone takes the same view of the Bible as you"

You don't say :o

"And my quote was from the NT which was either Jesus warmongering or Jesus not making it clear."

I think the quote you gave was definitely a metaphor. The Bible is full of metaphors. Jesus used them a lot, as that was what the ordinary people at the time understood best, rather than the dry theology of the hypocritical pharisees. So far from being unclear, the metaphorical stories and parables are what brought the ideas to life for ordinary people at the time.

As for "warmongering" I think it's safe to say that doesn't tally with the character of Jesus as seen elsewhere, at all.

Hope you have a good evening :)

You'd be hard pressed to judge which is the most tedious of the two Purty.

And you two have read the bible? Jeeez

Mein Kampf is the most unchristian and the most boring book I've ever had to read. Twilight doesn't seem to me especially dreadful to an RC -might be different to a Protestant because they have more fixed ideas about the afterlife.

I've read the bible too. notfluffy, try it in the King James version. even if you loathe the content, the poetry is astounding, and it's part of your culture whether you want it to be or not.

popcorn - while much of what Jesus is reported as saying was doubtless metaphorical, that particular part and verses following isn't obviously so. Perhaps it was more a prediction that division would follow rather than an intent to cause strife (that's the flannel I was given on it) but if so, and if this is supposed to be god's word why would god be ambiguous rather than clear, when 'wrong' interpretation can lead to such dire consequences?

Mein Kampf and the bible have a lot in common, both written by the deluded therefore full of crap. I use the bible for reference but I'd rather stick hot pins in my eyes than sit and read it for any length if time. I treasure my sanity too much.

notfluffy, I see you aren't afraid of sweeping generalisations. Trouble is that genneralisations like this don't help people make rational moral choices - that is, you won't convince anyone by saying 'crap' a lot. The delusions were different, and therefore the outpourings are different too.

Oh, and reverting to Horizon and the faith expressed in it...

"Rupert Sheldrake, who has long called for this development, spells out this need forcibly in his new book. He shows how materialism has gradually hardened into a kind of anti-Christian faith, an ideology rather than a scientific principle, claiming authority to dictate theories and to veto inquiries on topics that don't suit it, such as unorthodox medicine, let alone religion. He shows how completely alien this static materialism is to modern physics, where matter is dynamic. And, to mark the strange dilemmas that this perverse fashion poses for us, he ends each chapter with some very intriguing "Questions for Materialists", questions such as "Have you been programmed to believe in materialism?", "If there are no purposes in nature, how can you have purposes yourself?", "How do you explain the placebo response?" and so on."

see the whole piece www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/jan/27/science-delusion-rupert-sheldrake-review

"notfluffy, I see you aren't afraid of sweeping generalisations. Trouble is that genneralisations like this don't help people make rational moral choices - that is, you won't convince anyone by saying 'crap' a lot. The delusions were different, and therefore the outpourings are different too."

If you're going to get pissed off with my opinions try not to misrepresent me while doing so.

It was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a sweeping generalisation. I compared the authors, at no point did I compare the content. The only comparison I will make with the content is that they are the ramblings of deluded authors, both allegedly have meaningful messages that are, to say the least, well hidden in guff.

And I said 'crap' once.

"Oh, and reverting to Horizon and the faith expressed in it..."

"Rupert Sheldrake" - The telephone telepathy guy! Fuck, you'll need to try harder than that, one of his biggest fans is Deepak Chopra.

"Rupert Sheldrake" - the morphic resonance guy. Riiiighht.

Merrylegs

This comic strip is Twilight in a nutshell.

It explains all you need to know in four simple frames.

Brilliant NoOne

I can reduce it down to <a class="break-all" href="http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=twilight+funny&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1146&bih=697&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=zgxsEyig7JlnJM:&imgrefurl=www.heropress.net/2010/08/sunday-funny-twilight-special.html&docid=8CB-t9a2pd78_M&imgurl=3.bp.blogspot.com/_jvBFHkK2ZXc/THdCi4Oa3bI/AAAAAAAAIiw/8lY_rPrjm4k/s400/sunday_funny%252B%2813%29.jpg&w=400&h=341&ei=muEiT5jpComi8gPKh7HdBw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=863&vpy=377&dur=4127&hovh=207&hovw=243&tx=103&ty=122&sig=112379514407926695039&page=3&tbnh=151&tbnw=180&start=44&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:19,s:44" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">one...

Faith schools do not qualify as "normal" schools in my book.

Normal school are schools where a narrow minded religious ethos does not underpin everything that goes on - including what books they are allowed to read.

As ostensibly "normal" as you may perceive any faith school to be, you cannot get away from this fact.

They are bonkers and if parents choose to send their children to them they have to be prepared to buy into the sort of lunacy that goes on in them.

It's put up or shut up - or preferably both!

Using the words bonkers and lunacy perri, are you suggesting anyone sending their DC to a faith school has to be mentally ill?

Or are you just using mental illness as a way of making those people seem less credible?

Oh, and whilst "Twighlight" books may be crap, surely you have to defend any child's right to be able to read them and make up their own minds for themselves without having some zealot school teachers/governers dictating to them what they can and can't read?

Parents do have to realise though, that if they send their chidlren to faith schools, a critical and enquiring mind is not going to be one of the things that they leave with.

I would certainly question the judgement of any parent (who claims to be of sound, reasonable and rational mind) who sent their child to a faith school AgentZigZag.

My DD has a very critical and enquiring mind perri.

Her teachers aren't zealots.

She makes up her own mind what to read, not being able to read them at school doesn't stop her at home.

'I would certainly question the judgement of any parent (who claims to be of sound, reasonable and rational mind) who sent their child to a faith school AgentZigZag.'

Please don't use the mental health problems some people suffer from to make a point about a book, or your thoughts on faith schools.

Question their judgement all you like, but don't try to discredit them using mental illness.

That's fine if she reads them at home but there should be no issue with her reading these books at school too Agent. And therin lies the problem. Don't you see that? If you don't accept that it's bonkers to stop her, surely you must concede that it's dictatorial, irrational and an unfounded hysterical overreaction to what is only a book.

What are these people so afraid of?

'If you don't accept that it's bonkers to stop her'

Now you're suggesting the people who work in faith schools also suffer from mental health issues?

What? All of them?

Parents do have to realise though, that if they send their chidlren to faith schools, a critical and enquiring mind is not going to be one of the things that they leave with.

Actually that doesn't follow. My DH went to a cathedral school, primary and secondary and he left with an extremely enquiring mind. Partly because he could observe the hypocrisies and inconsistencies, and partly because the RE teacher, an ordained vicar, encouraged diverse views (DH thinks the teacher was actually an atheist or at most a non-realist theist)