I'm sorry that she was upset by this. It really does not belong in the school.

What a ridiculous distraction from the learning process.

Okay, it's coming from an 8-yo, so you don't know all the details. You know what? It's not supposed to be coming from an 8-yo. It's supposed to be coming directly from the school, before the fact, and with a permission slip. If it has to happen at all.

The only acceptable excuse I can think of for them not to answer your questions immediately would be if they were still trying to figure it out themselves. Perhaps the teacher's "presentation" was different from what she had described to the principal beforehand.

Julie

While I don't have a problem with people dancing and singing about God... I completely agree with you all. It doesn't belong in a public school. I am sorry Neya was made to feel bad. Give her a hug for me!

Yeah. Even if it is cominf from an 8 y.o. kid, it's doubtful that she came up with this on her own. It seems like it was far enough from appropriate even if you are getting a distorted view.

I've been thinking about this one. I feel very bad that L. had these problems at school. I think that what happened was a catalyst for the conversations that made her feel bad.

I don't see anything wrong with religion in a public educational setting -- provided that it's being presented for educational purposes and there is no endorsement. That school needs to call you back.

All her life she's going to deal with this. You need to help her through it. I felt slapped in the face recently when I received something from Girl Scouts, and it was a new mission statement or something, and it said we were all "united by our belief in God." I would've quit if it weren't for the girls! Obviously I'm a leader for the girls, but what kind of bullshit is that? Even though "serve God and my country" is part of the Girl Scout Promise, I'd read on official GS sites that it could be modified for atheist girls. I threw the thing away when I got it in the mail, but it still makes me feel angry and I want to do something about it.

Aren't the Girls Scouts and Boy Scouts religious organizations? I thought they were, but now I'm not so sure...

The Boy Scouts is a religious organization. The Girl Scouts is absolutely not.

I'm a year and some change away from being a teacher, and I can honestly say this kind of stuff is exactly what I'm worried about dealing with. I'm an atheist, which makes it a bit easier to keep my religion out my classroom (haha), but I know I'm going to be dealing with it from coworkers... and I'm worried I'm going to be labeled as "that godless newcomer who hates Jeebus" which will probably translate to "bad teacher", because around here atheists are horrible people with no morals.

I'm curious as to what happened when the school contacted you...

Despite numerous calls the school did not respond, and we let the matter drop, as they were doubtless hoping we would. I didn't want it to be a topic constantly being bandied about the house since it made my daughter uncomfortable. Perhaps I should be more proactive, but we weren't the only ones who complained and the party responsible has since left the school. So perhaps they got the message.

I find it encouraging that you weren't the only people who complained. Too many people either don't think about these things, or assume everybody else is a Christian and so what's wrong with it?

I'm always getting the feeling from Christians that they're thinking, "Yeah, you really are, you're just saying you're not."

(Have you written those pamphlets yet? I'd like to order some. As the weather gets nice, the witnesses come out.)

This is one of the things that bugs me about christianity too. The "make em feel like they should be one" creed. I'm sorry you are made to feel this way.

I think what I'm experiencing is more a disbelief that there is any other way -- an inability on the part of the other person to see outside of himself or herself. (Usually herself, I'm afraid.)

All the people I'm thinking of recognize intellectually that I have no supernatural beliefs, so there's very little conflict. There is also no possibility of a profound relationship, but I think such a relationship would be unsatisfying in any event.

My wife is just starting her teaching career and we have different ideas on the subject. From her perspective, kids learn better if you come from something they know. So although she doesn't support teaching religion in the classroom, she does support incorporating holidays as they occur. She also sees it as a means of cross-cultural communication.

Personally, I get vexed when the kids bring me a Christmas card that they made in school. Josh had a "spring" art project that was basically a big bunny and was worked on right around Easter. Are rabbits really the main thing you think about for Spring?

In my experience, children are incredibly flexible and are at the best time of their life to learn about diversity and tolerance.

Far too many people just don't get it. I listen to talk radio now when I'm driving to and from work, and people call in and say, "If they can't have the Easter bunny at public function x, what's next? Soon we won't be allowed to celebrate Christmas! There will be no holidays left!"

Well, sorry dude, but the whole idea is that nobody's taking away your right to celebrate your holiday in your home, but at the same time you shouldn't be imposing it on anybody else in a public place! Argh. Nobody's hurting you, you idiot.

People need to be taught this as children.

Also, why teach them stuff they're learning at home, if they are? If Josh had colored something else, maybe it could have been a learning experience. Chances are he's had to color rabbits before at this time of year. It's stale.

I was initially thinking that you're wrong to be upset about the rabbit, Bri, but I've changed my mind. Why not a robin, or a crocus? And that's just northern hemisphere / eastern seaboard prejudice, too -- I don't know what's coming up in your neck of the woods. A rabbit has nothing to do with Christianity, but it's become associated with the holiday, and so I think it should be off limits for a while. The same with trees and lights. No, they don't have anything to do with Christianity, but they've become associated with it.

hmm.

I read your response and feel like I have to respond.

I agree with some parts of your response. People shouldn't be imposing their religion on other people. But at the same time saying that rabbits should be off limits because it's associated with christianity to me seems like you are imposing your being against religion on others. (I don't know if that last sentence hangs together the way I am intending). I can't help but thinking (and have no evidence to back it up other than some google searching on the origins of the easter bunny) that Easter itself has nothing to do with Christianity. The only reason there is an associateion between easter and Christians today, is that when they ruled the world (re: Crusades etc), decided to obliterate as many non christian beliefs as possible. So I can see your anger at christianity in general (and even agree with it).

I wonder tho... isn't saying something should be off limits because it's associated with christianity espousing a different form of intolerance? (there is not intended to be any accusation in that question) After all there are some good tenets within christianity... I mean there are SO many symbols that surround us every day. I would suggest that we embrace the rabbit as a spring time celebration. Take the symbol back... Don't hide it away...

Springtime is mating season, and nobody mates like bunnies... ;-) Guess that puts me in the take-the-bunnies-back crowd.

Regarding Easter, you're right Jay, there were a number of pagan holidays right around the Vernal equinox which if I recall correctly, Easter has been made proximate to in order to undermine observance of the other Holidays. Modern pagans observe Ostara around this time, which is intended to incorporate those earlier pagan traditions like Easter has. (Like for example, egg hunts.)

I originally had the same opinion as you, but when I began to try to make some sense of it, I came to think that I was wrong.

I asked myself, "Why should rabbits be featured as coloring projects in a public school every year around the Christian holiday of Easter?" There are two answers: they're a symbol of spring, or they're a symbol of Easter. Since one can come up with literally thousands of "symbols of spring," I believe the reason for the disproportionate number of rabbit drawings is because of the Easter holiday. Perhaps "banning" rabbits is a bit strong, but if they were randomly distributed as coloring projects with other symbols of spring, you'd hardly see any rabbits. Let's check off rabbits as having been done, and do some of the other thousand symbols. Children could be coloring a scientific model of the reproductive organs of a flower, for example. They could be coloring a model of the earth orbiting the sun, showing the tilt of the earth and the equinoxes and the solstices. They could color a chickadee or a robin or a chipmunk.

That is my reasoning. I'm not imposing my "being against religion" on others, I'm asking that children in a public school not draw religious symbols around religious holidays unless they are studying that religion as a school subject. If you are a Christian, then you are free to draw whatever you like with your children in your home, and I will never question that right. There is no way I can impose my 'being against religion" on you.

It's not intolerance to separate church and state -- it's the law. Send your child to a religious school if you want her drawing the Easter bunny.

I'm not sure I understand your point about Easter not being a Christian holiday. Is it not the most important of Christian holidays? Agreed, it takes place when other religions held a spring holiday, just as Christmas was used to get pagans to join the Christian religion -- it is obviously not the time of Christ's birth, and it is at the same time as a pagan holiday. Both holidays have symbols held over from the former pagan holiday. But they are associated now with the Christian holidays.

In my own home, I retain all of the pagan symbols of the December holiday. I do not go to Church and I have no religious symbols (unless somebody gave one to me and I hang it on my tree to be polite or because I like it). But that's my choice -- that's my home. Those symbols are associated with Christianity now, and should be separated from government endorsement.

The good tenets that are within Christianity, in my opinion, are the humanistic tenets, and I call that humanism. Just because they also happen to be in Christianity (and Buddhism, and other religions) doesn't mean that they originate with Christianity. They don't. Humanism exists separately from Christianity and does not in any way rely on it. So I call humanism "humanism," and Christianity is a cluster of religions that centrally hold the idea that Christ died to save its members from original sin, and that there is a place called heaven where the followers will now be able to go, whereas everybody else goes to hell (unless they live in England). There is a large supernatural component to Christianity that I don't agree with. There is also a wide variety of interpretations of the bible, because the bible is a contradictory book. There are a lot of misogynistic and violent teachings in the bible side by side with the humanistic tenets.

I will not dispute that Easter is indeed the most important Christian holiday, far more important that Christmas (remember, birthday celebrations are pagan, not Christian).

While Easter is a Christian holiday, the "easter bunny" is not a Christian symbol. It is a pagan symbol, signifying the animal companion of the goddess that vernal equinox festivals honored in prehistoric Europe. The companion of the goddess was a hare, unsurprisingly, since spring is the season of fertility and hares are pretty darn fertile. The gifts of the hare were painted eggs, also a symbol of fertility. Pagans used these symbols thousands of years ago to celebrate the coming of Spring. So the bunny (or more accurately, the hare, he just got bunnified because rabbits are cuter than hares) and the painted eggs are in fact symbols of spring, very very old symbols. If religion had disappeared entirely from the face of the planet, these symbols would likely still connote spring.

So along comes the church and plants the celebration of Christ's resurrection right around the equinox to subvert the preexisting holidays, and over time the pagan symbolism drifts into the celebration of Easter. But clearly there's nothing in the Bible or any Christian teaching about bunnies leaving painted eggs, and some Christian sects forbid the Easter Egg Hunt and the Easter Bunny as pagan, and rightly so, they are pagan, whether or not the majority of Christians have incorporated them into their holiday celebrations. If kids were being encouraged in school to draw pictures of angels rolling stones away from caves, or Christ rising from the dead, then I'd say you really have something. The Easter Bunny? Not so much.

I agree with Jay. The fact that Christians have incorporated nonchristian symbols into their holidays doesn't make them Christian symbols, anymore than the incorporation of Humanist mores into Christian teachings make them Christian mores. Like he says, there are so many symbols around us, and these symbols have had countless "hands" upon them over time, it seems a pity to declare some off limits because of the largest bunch who currently have a hand on them.

Halloween, like Easter, marks a Christian holiday timed to coincide with a pagan holiday (Samhain). "All Hallows Eve" or the "Eve of all Hallows" is so called because it is the night before "All Souls Day", a Christian holiday, just as "Christmas Eve" is so called because it is the night before Christmas, another Christian holiday. It seems to me that if the Easter Bunny should not be drawn by kids at school around Springtime, then jack-o-lanterns, pumpkins, ghosts, and black cats should not be drawn by kids at school around Fall. Those are also symbols coopted into a holiday that has Christian meaning, and which is observed by many Christians.

In point of fact, given that religions came into existence as a means to explain the natural world, practically any image can be claimed as belonging to one and probably many religions or idealogies, even with drastically different meanings... how many gods and religious stories are evoked by a simple sketch of a lightning bolt? The American Robin, unless I am mistaken, proffered as a substitute for the Easter Bunny, has religious significance to the Micmac Indians. I think if we start writing off things based on connotations, pretty soon we'll have written off just about everything to no one's benefit.

Therefore, I'd say if we are going to write off symbols being drawn in school based on the separation of church and state, they really need to be clearly identifiable as church symbols. No crosses, no stars of David, no crescent moons, etc. I don't think holiday trees, jack o lanterns, or Easter Bunnies qualify.

I didn't see a lot of MicMac knick-knacks last time I walked through Wal*Mart. ;-)

I hope those chocolate robins are on clearance now that Easter's over??

:-)

That said, I also agree with Maggie. Wanting to keep religion out of public school is not a form of intolerance. I merely take issue with what images are considered religious images.

I am initially inclined to agree that the symbols are somewhat fungible, however I know plenty of Jews who disagree (I'm thinking specifically of the Christmas tree in this case, which is in a similar situation as the Easter bunny). And I have little basis to argue with them, since they are arguing from a valid, if emotional, basis. You can't argue away someones emotions. I argue with them about the way I see the symbol, but it's only part of the story.

The swastika predates the Nazis, but I doubt a reasonable person would use that argument to say it's OK for people to have kids coloring swastikas in school.

To me, a Christmas Tree isn't a religious symbol, and a rabbit isn't a Christian symbol. However, while I can ignore what other people think.

The Easter Bunny is not a central religious symbol, but that doesn't change what it represents to most people. I'd like to take back the bunny and the tree, but I have little authority in these matters. And, in the meantime, they remain symbols of Christianity. I feel lucky that, as a nonreligious but formerly Catholic person, I have mild-to-positive feelings toward those symbols. To assume that other people can just as easily dismiss the connection would be wrong; it's a mistake I have made in the past.

All I can do is try to take back the images by using them in a positive nonreligious way, but I don't feel I'm making much progress.

Yes! I was thinking of the swastika last night. How sad that an American Hindu can't walk down the street with a sathio pin on the lapel, despite the fact that the symbol has been part of Hinduism for 5000 years, long before the Nazi's perverted it.

It's sad to have a symbol co-opted like that.

I also find it sad some of the dust-ups that occur in the media over language. "Niggardly", etc.

We are language and symbol-driven creatures. They can illuminate our minds and they cut to the heart of our emotions. We recognize the power of symbols whenever we use them. And to see how often we use them you just need to look around at all the logos within a 5 foot radius of where you sit right now.

I asked myself, "Why should rabbits be featured as coloring projects in a public school every year around the Christian holiday of Easter?" There are two answers: they're a symbol of spring, or they're a symbol of Easter. Since one can come up with literally thousands of "symbols of spring," I believe the reason for the disproportionate number of rabbit drawings is because of the Easter holiday. Perhaps "banning" rabbits is a bit strong, but if they were randomly distributed as coloring projects with other symbols of spring, you'd hardly see any rabbits. Let's check off rabbits as having been done, and do some of the other thousand symbols. Children could be coloring a scientific model of the reproductive organs of a flower, for example. They could be coloring a model of the earth orbiting the sun, showing the tilt of the earth and the equinoxes and the solstices. They could color a chickadee or a robin or a chipmunk.

I think I see your point and agree that pushing bunnies with a religious intent behind it is wrong, and shouldn't be done. I guess my intent of talking more to this point was more to say... let's take back the bunny and kick out the religious connotations ... (might not be possible I grant you).

That is my reasoning. I'm not imposing my "being against religion" on others, I'm asking that children in a public school not draw religious symbols around religious holidays unless they are studying that religion as a school subject. If you are a Christian, then you are free to draw whatever you like with your children in your home, and I will never question that right. There is no way I can impose my 'being against religion" on you.

It's not intolerance to separate church and state -- it's the law. Send your child to a religious school if you want her drawing the Easter bunny.

I can see I missed the mark with what I was trying to say. I don't have any problem with what you are saying here and agree with it. What I am trying to say is that people give power and meaning to symbols, why should we be forced to shun symbols that Christianity pretty much stole and tried to rebrand? If we fall into the trap that all drawings of the "easter bunny" around is christian and religious are we are giving christianity a victory it shouldn't have?

In my own home, I retain all of the pagan symbols of the December holiday. I do not go to Church and I have no religious symbols (unless somebody gave one to me and I hang it on my tree to be polite or because I like it). But that's my choice -- that's my home. Those symbols are associated with Christianity now, and should be separated from government endorsement.

I guess I have this fascination with symbols and how they are used and abused. My biggest fear is that if we accept that a symbol is religious and take a negative stance against it, we are polarizing that symbol in a way that could have negative effects. If I convince myself that a symbol is bad and other people adopt that stance based on my say so but don't understand my reasons completely, that could foster a chain of ill will. If I convince chuck an apple is bad and you talk about an apple he may think you are bad...

Maybe my post shouldn't have been centered in a religious thread but religions are the biggest users and abusers of symbols IMHO. Evoking emotion from a symbol allows truth to be distorted and emotionalism to overrule rationality.

Maggie, I hope I'm not being offensive, if so I apologize. I've been struggling a lot with religion lately and where it fits in for me. Writing is helping me focus and think more. I just respect the opinions of you, chuck, james et al and I think that trying to express myself here would get intelligent and thought provoking discourse... and it's working. I've been at this post for 2 hours now!

By the way... when I say "When I convince myself a symbol is bad...." I don't think bad is the right word. (I promise I previewed my post before I hit post) But I even after re-reading I can't think of a better word to use... It's late after all. maybe I should've used Polarizing?

It's a very interesting subject to me. As I said, people have been complaining on talk radio for a couple of weeks about the "war on Easter" regarding an Easter bunny at a school function, and my opinion on the matter is by no means firm. It firmed up when I thought about Brian's point of view.

I think the majority religion needs to be more careful about keeping their symbols out of school. An anthropormorphized rabbit is a symbol of Easter, IMO. A little brown rabbit huddled under a bush -- not so much. I have to go teach people about 2D arrays and sorting and searching algorithms, and then I'm going to come home and re-read this and probably spend a ridiculous amount of time posting my opinion back to you and Chuck!

Make it a 2D array of hiding spots, and then your search algorithm can be an Easter Egg Hunt! :-)

I find this subject fascinating as well, and I'm glad we're having it.

We seem to go through a bit of this every year with the trumped-up war on Christmas.

Ultimately, it's part of figuring out how to live in a pluralistic society. This country was founded on Enlightenment principles, but the majority Christian population took liberties because they could. It's understandable, but it created a certain assumption about the way things were and the way they should be. Even to the extent that you have people calling this a Christian nation. It is a nation that some see as founded on Christian values. I see it as a nation that was allowed, by Christians and Deists, to form with Humanist values in the interest of becoming a more tolerant of differences.

However, there are conflicting systems coexisting here. I believe that there is a common Humanist underpinning, but we don't really have a common Humanist culture we can all point to. So people retreat to their religions.

Actually, I guess patriotism is a nonreligious common value, but I feel pretty sour about it, considering how cynically people's patriotism is used nowadays.

I don't think I actually have a lot to add to this subject. James has been far more eloquent than I can be and our opinions are largely the same.

Jay, I don't think you could be offensive if you tried, by the way, but thank you for caring. I would also say that I hope I'm not offensive, but that's a blind hope as I usually am, despite my best efforts.

I, too, would like to take back all the symbols that the early Christians appropriated in order to "save" the pagans. In fact, I've taken back all of the symbols that I want. At the winter solstice I want light and evergreens in my house, and in they come. In spring my children desire a basket full of candy, and I give it to them. These traditions make us happy.

But I don't think that the government can take the symbols back, because they do belong to the Christians, whether we want to admit it or not.

If the rabbit were a symbol of spring, chocolate rabbits wouldn't be on clearance the Monday after Easter. Period. Commerce knows who's buying the rabbits and why. Brian isn't buying the rabbits or the green-and-red wrapping paper. Why? Because he's not a Christian.

I think the most we can do is raise consciousness a little, and say, "these are not originally Christian symbols -- Christ wasn't born under an evergreen tree, Christ wasn't resurrected by a rabbit," and make people think about the symbols a little bit, and what they're actually celebrating.

Not many Christians are pious enough to shun the old pagan symbols and celebrate their holidays in a strictly religious manner. (And in fact as birthdays are pagan celebrations, some Christians don't celebrate Christmas at all. K has a friend who doesn't celebrate any holidays or birthdays.)

In MIU* everybody would be a humanist, nobody would have supernatural beliefs**, and we'd have traditional holidays that everybody could enjoy. It would be nice to take back the pagan ones, as I think they relate deeply to feelings those of us in the northern hemisphere are experiencing as our world hurtles around the sun. If I weren't so darn lazy, I'd make up my own. I'd like to celebrate Darwin and Gandhi (I know, India celebrate Gandhi's birthday, and other people celebrate Darwin's. I'm just plain lazy.). But I still think I'd put the celebrations around the equinoxes and the solstices, because that's when we're feeling particularly close to the earth or estranged from it, and we need a little party.

Maybe, if I borrow an idea from Gandhi, I must be the change I wish to see in the world. I'm not sure how to do that, but I think it begins with recognizing these symbols for what they are and making Christians aware that they belong in their homes (or churches), not public places. I think Christians are still using them to recruit pagans, it's just that the pagans they're recruiting are the under-12 set. Christianity without these pagan rituals is not nearly so much fun.

*Maggie's Ideal Universe
**That might sound unnecessarily meddling in other people's brains, but I don't agree. Accepting things on "faith" means abandoning reason. That's a bad pattern to endorse. The group delusion is called religion. When we have individual delusions, we're institutionalized, or we make very poor decisions.

Maggie you are not being offensive at all.

"these are not originally Christian symbols -- Christ wasn't born under an evergreen tree, Christ wasn't resurrected by a rabbit," and make people think about the symbols a little bit, and what they're actually celebrating.

This is EXACTLY what I think. I believe that we need to be careful with symbols. For we all teach the next generations via our words and deeds. If we take a stance on a symbol as representative of a faith or belief structure we run the danger of influencing others without getting the chance to explain it properly.

Anyway...Thanks for the great conversations (and chuck thanks for letting me use a post that is over a year old ;))