NOTE: Considering it’s December already, I thought it useful to reprise this somewhat updated article from December of 2018. We can all use a reminder of the kind of insanity that is keeping good people from beginning teaching careers, chasing excellent teachers out of the profession, and doing enormous damage to our culture and western civilization.
One might consider this the “bah, humbug!” edition of my weekly education column, which, given the season, is particularly fitting. I never cease to be appalled at the bizarre behavior of supposed educators. Campus Reform reports on a satanic, Scrooge:
A Minnesota professor suggested in a series of tweets that the Virgin Mary did not consent to the conception of Jesus Christ and suggested that God may have acted in a ‘predatory’ manner.
Minnesota State University, Mankato psychology professor and sex therapist Dr. Eric Sprankle critiqued the story of the Virgin Mary in a tweet Monday, suggesting that the Virgin Mary did not consent to being impregnated by God.
‘The virgin birth story is about an all-knowing, all-powerful deity impregnating a human teen. There is no definition of consent that would include that scenario. Happy Holidays,’ Sprankle said.
And this would be related to the Professor’s area of expertise how, exactly? His smug closing indicates he thinks himself clever.
‘The biblical god regularly punished disobedience,’ Sprankle rebutted. ‘The power difference (deity vs mortal) and the potential for violence for saying ‘no’ negates her ‘yes.’ To put someone in this position is an unethical abuse of power at best and grossly predatory at worst.
Sprankle engages in projection, imposing a very leftist human view of human relations upon God. Such projection is ludicrous. Perhaps we should review the record from Luke 1:26-38:
In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. The angel went to her and said, ‘Greetings, you who are highly favoured! The Lord is with you.’
Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favour with God. You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.’
‘How will this be,’ Mary asked the angel, ‘since I am a virgin?’
The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. For nothing is impossible with God.’
‘I am the Lord’s servant,’ Mary answered. ‘May it be to me as you have said.’ Then the angel left her.
Given a distinction above all women who have yet lived, Mary willingly, humbly accepted the miracle. No doubt, Sprankle would whine about power differentials, but again, he is imposing human conventions on the Creator of all. This is manifestly not a pedestrian sexual transaction. But Sprankle is pedestrian indeed:
Sprankle is public with his anti-religious views and endorses ‘secularism’ in his Twitter biography. Earlier in December, he tweeted a photo of a toy Christmas elf with his arm around a statue of what appears to be Baphomet, an occult depiction of an entity regularly associated with Satanism, according to The Church of Satan’s website.
Sprankle also decorated his Christmas tree with Satanic decor, as shown in another tweet he sent this past weekend.
Once again, Sprankle tries, like a surly teenager, to be outrageous and clever. Sprankle, however, does not reject all supernatural actors. Outing himself as overtly hostile to Christianity, and particularly claiming an affinity for Satan, is not only dangerous to one’s soul, but extraordinarily foolish for any teacher. Of course, college teachers, particularly in a left-leaning state–which Minnesota is–take no real risks in ridiculing normal, Christian Americans. But he is surely alienating a substantial portion of the population and prospective students.
Should he retain his hostility toward God, Sprankle will, eventually, find his faux cleverness has a price.
The discussion of religion and related issues in schools is widely misunderstood. Such things may be discussed, and many schools have biblical literature classes. The study of mythology obviously touches on faith and its evolution, and comprises a not insignificant part of my mythology I and Mythology II curriculums. What is prohibited is proselytizing. One may not enact specific religious dogmas and rites–this includes compelled prayer–or claim any given faith is the one true faith. One surely may not, in any way, attempt to convert students.
Unfortunately, some school authorities, in trying to obey the law and behave ethically, even if entirely well intentioned, sometimes go overboard, as an elementary school principal in Nebraska did. Local12.com reports:
An elementary school principal was placed on leave after a memo to staff banning Christmas-related things, including candy canes.
This happened in Omaha, Nebraska and the principal, identified as Jennifer Sinclair, has been placed on leave from Manchester Elementary School.
Ms. Sinclair sent this memo:
The holiday season is here and we are all reminded to be sensitive to various religions, cultures and beliefs,’ reads a portion of the memo that had been sent in 2017. ‘All students need to feel included and accepted at school every day. Our job, as public school educators, is to keep activities focused on clear instructional purposes while neither promoting nor inhibiting the free exercise of religion and speech.’ [skip]
‘I feel uncomfortable that I have to get this specific, but for everyone’s comfort, I will,’ said the principal in the memo.
The only person’s comfort involved is Sinclair’s. MyFox8 adds detail:
The list included red and green items (Christmas colors), playing Christmas music, Christmas trees, making Christmas gifts, reindeer and Christmas videos.
Also banned were candy canes, which according to KETV, ‘historically, the shape is a ‘J’ for Jesus. The red is for the blood of Christ, and the white is a symbol of his resurrection.’
The principal also provided a list of acceptable things which included snowmen, gingerbread people, sledding, hot chocolate, polar bears and penguins.
The alternate explanation is candy canes are shaped like canes, which also has the benefit of allowing them to be hung on Christmas trees, mantles, etc. One might also take note that most candy canes are peppermint flavor, and peppermint is most commonly associated with the colors red and white. The school district had this to say:
Elkhorn Public Schools District administration promptly addressed the issue at Manchester Elementary School regarding the memo that was sent by the principal to Manchester elementary staff. The memo does not reflect the policy of Elkhorn Public Schools regarding holiday symbols in the school. The District has since clarified expectations and provided further direction to staff in alignment with District policy. This issue was limited to Manchester Elementary School and did not arise at any other schools within the District.
Get woke, get suspended. Ho, ho, ho.
Postscript: D/S/Cs have, for many years, been doing all they can to damage Christmas. This is, of course, only part of their war on all that is good, decent, kind and loving, and an essential part of their campaign against God–they’ve actually booed Him at their national convention and elsewhere–and Christians. Since taking office, President Trump, while not an overtly religious man, has forthrightly defended normal Americans. God needs no defense from such as these, though our school children do.