Christian Persecution in Public Schools Article

But the family argued successfully in court that the German government had persecuted them for their religous beliefs. In 2006 the state of Baden-Württemberg slapped the Romeike parents with a €70,000 fine for removing their children from school.

Okay, whew!  Wow… how do you begin to answer to this article?  I want to throw it out as just plain rubbish as I cannot believe what the author is trying to “sell” me.  I have seen over the years God being removed from the schools under the warped understanding of “separation of church and state”.  This is of course ridiculous in its interpretation from the get-go.  Our founding fathers are the ones who wrote that in its entirety and they were in the great majority devote Christian men.  Those that were not “of God” did not deny the need for religious freedom, far from it, and in fact they supported with dignity and grace the beliefs of those who followed God’s word faithfully even though they themselves did not.  So I submit to you, it was never their intent to have Christianity banned from schools.  Now, having said that, I recognize this same vein of thought is somehow being used in a way that would seem contradictory if other religions are being permitted in school.  So, this would lead me to believe then that there is an active purposeful movement to “kill God”, at least from our schools.  To the extent that the author of this article seems to imply, I think not.  It really seems unbelievable that it could have gotten this far, that is, God being “driven” from school.  But, under the premise of “separation of church and state, how could it be possible or rather permitted that other religions meet no resistance?  This country was founded on the principle of religious freedom.  That includes the right to choose no religion as your freedom of choice demands.  That however, does not mean that anyone has the right to prevent anyone else’s right to freedom of religion.  I believe that there is likely some truth to this article, but I also believe the tilt that it has embedded within it takes away any real credibility it might have possessed had it not been directed so pointedly.  Passion is by no means a writer’s enemy or in any way a bad thing when it is controlled by the passionate, but it precludes any sense of reason or candid value without a somewhat forbearing temperament.  I couldn’t help but feel there was a clear and strong distaste for the ACLU.  I am familiar with them; though I do not always agree with their ideal or motivations I have seen what I believe to be good things from them as well.  I do however agree that a better stand could be and should be made regarding persecution of Christian’s, or any religion for that matter, in our schools.  It is by ignorance that we condemn ourselves and by wisdom that we redeem ourselves.  Embrace the understanding of others and their ways and wisdom will come, and where in you cannot be moved to do this, learn tolerance and wisdom will not be unknown to you.

Week 3: Inequality

It is dangerous ground we tread I believe to use personal examples to express the particular view points of the various sociological perspectives.  Having said that, from the interactionist perspective, I have in fact experienced the unsavory taste of issues related to inequality.  My circumstance specifically relates to an affirmative action situation.  I was due a promotion and was one of several others who were well qualified for the same-said promotion.  There were many others that were not so qualified but, were still in the “consideration window”.  To make a long story short, I didn’t get the promotion nor did some of the other well qualified candidates.  However, a few of the other not-so qualified candidates did in fact get promoted.  Despite possessing lower performance evaluations, significantly lower academic scores and in a few instances some possessed records of reprimand. These individuals were promoted over me and the few others aforementioned.  After a formal complaint was lodged and an investigation was initiated and subsequently concluded, there was significant evidence discovered which determined that due to an affirmative action requirement regarding certain percentages of minorities of varying ethnicity and/or gender being required during all promotion cycles, I and the others were summarily set aside.  It was later stated that we were chosen (those set aside) because of lower scores or less flattering performance marks than the individuals that were promoted (of those who were also best qualified).  However, I knew better since I was privy to many of their (those that were promoted) evaluations and performance scores.  As it turned out we, those not promoted, were all male and white.  We also had the disadvantage of being younger both in age and in tenure of the other most qualified, thus would have many more opportunities for promotion.  All or nearly so of the other candidates (of the most qualified) were on their last chance to get the promotion.  This was a very unfair situation on not just one level but, on several.

I was profoundly affected as my belief in “the system” was injured.  It is extremely disappointing that hard work, great effort and positive performance could be set aside and rewards could be withheld and even given over to those that did not work as hard, make as great an effort or possess less positive performance marks, regardless of race/ethnicity or gender.   As a result my pay did not increase and my buying power did not increase with an ever increasing cost of living in the economy thus, my family was affected.  I could never accept this way of promotion or warped sense of choice that I apparently had no choice in and as such I moved on from this Job all together.  Although, I recognize this is not an isolated incidence and I am likely to experience it again to one degree or another, I could not reconcile with it at the time and made a choice for good or bad and I am thus affected by that as well.

I am aware of the reasoning behind why this type of philosophy/ action was enacted/set in motion, though I believe even at its inception it was short sighted to the point of being debilitation if not in the beginning at least later or more specifically, now for those it was designed to help.   The intention had merit, of that I am sure but, it has only served more recently in my view to allow those less inclined to concerted, dedicated and/or motivated effort to slack off and not realize their full potential since quite simply, they do not have to make the effort thereby short-selling themselves and solidifying the already unnecessary, erroneous and harmful racial stereotypes.   It is obvious to me and apparently a great many that this is not working well at all, perhaps even working towards great disadvantage for all.  We as a race, the human race are not designed to strive for mediocrity.  Let us not hobble ourselves so by lowing standards to meet those who are not up to the challenge but raise those who are not to meet if not exceed all challenges.  Then, only then will we be doing right by each other, race and gender discrimination and bias be damned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_inequality_in_the_United_States  Wikipedia

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/oct/10/britains-divided-school-system-report  Presented by Anushka Asthana of The Observer.  

Sociological Imagination #2 Native Americans

The use of Sociological Imagination is a significant tool in the understanding of how people (chosen for study) really/truly live. By separating one’s self from the equation, in as much as possible and observe from "ground zero" enables a fantastic opportunity that would otherwise be impossible. This is especially true in such situations where the subjects are very private and protective (and with good reason) of their lives, ways, thoughts and feelings as the Native American people. Through this technique much can be learned and possibly understood through all the differences and the similarities that such a unique people live through. The interpersonal interactions on all scales, socially, economically, jobs, school, diet, health can be observed and used to determine the effect it has on the subjects and then of course applied to the larger society as a whole. The power of this tool to allow the sociologist/observer to connect to/with the chosen subject(s) is invaluable.

After having said that, it all comes to naught if nothing is really done about what was learned, for the subjects as well as the larger society. The Tragic, impossible to believe, ways in which the Lakota have been living is unacceptable. Using sociological imagination to gain knowledge and understanding is NOT enough if we do not make use of the knowledge gained and allow the continued suffering of the people studied. How could this be ethical?! What is the point if nothing is done to correct such tragedy?

Week 2 Truth and Fact is NOT the same thing.

I remember on multiple occasions watching the news on television while I was in Iraq. There was coverage of terrible events but, also there were successful accomplishments. I witnessed some pretty amazing things; places, events and people, the people were the most remarkable. I had no desire to be there however, I had a duty to perform and I was actually rather lucky, my mission was one of peace. As such I was able to follow the progress of Desert Storm from an on the ground “in the middle of it” witness/ observer. I say this because, I discovered something that I would in many ways wish I had not or could at least forget. Strangely, it wasn’t the tragic events of war that hit me the hardest nor were they the heaviest burden with which I returned home. I saw news broadcasts of various networks in which they all participated in what I’m about to tell you to one degree or another. I shall not name any one network specifically. I was either a direct witness to events or was part of an evolution and thus aware of at least a significant portion of events that were covered by the news media. When I was not actually present at some events I was privy to detailed information from those that were a party to or witnesses of specific events. With dumbstruck awe, I would watch the news and the unfolding of “the story” and more often than not “the story” resembled very little what actually happened. I remember saying to myself and I suppose anyone in earshot as I thought out loud, “that’s BS! I was there and that’s not what happened!” Over and over again what was a good thing on the ground a point “zero” somehow got twisted into something not-so-good, escalating up to tragic. Things that were terrible and tragic would somehow be represented as good to awe –inspiring… it was just incredible. It was a source of much dismay and inspired great frustration and arguments amongst the troops of which I was present. I would like to believe that it was just mistakes of point-of-view but, it happened so much and to such degree that I cannot help but feel it was intentional. To me, the media was designing the news to achieve a desired (theirs) response, to the events. I have been profoundly changed by this. I know there are those that suspect or feel as though the news/networks is/are or may be slanted at least slightly one way or the other to influence the way we as a people see or think of things. But, to be a part of the events that the media covers and broadcasts and then hear/ see it represented in a way that hardly resembles what actually happened?! How could I not be affected? How do you trust again after that? Who do you trust again after that?! I feel lied to, cheated but, I now have a better understanding that nothing should be taken for granted. Be cautious of what you take at face value. Former President Regan said it best, “trust but verify.”

The particular theoretical lens of choice here, at least for me is the conflict perspective. The news was at least once thought of as factual. As in "That's the way it is..." as quoted by Walter Cronkite, a man who was known for extreme integrity. A man who in his last days on the air after nearly a score of years as a Chief News Anchor, worried deeply about the media form that he propelled to such great heights, had or would soon overstep its boundaries.

There can be no doubt of socialization by the TV news. on the Micro and Macro levels. Though there are still many well respected News Papers and Magazines still in print today, the vast majority of the world gains its news information from the TV and now gaining popularity fast, the ever-growing Internet. As any single source of information would, it becomes a significant part of our lives to such a degree we tend to lose the ability to question the truth of it. We have simply come to believe it "must be true, it was on TV". The TV media (potentially) could create or recreate the viewer’s social interaction/groups in the image of their choice. Because, well... "They can't lie to us, right?! That would be illegal, right?!" As we all begin to more or less, think and act alike... one would think things would get better... not so much as different Stations have different views/agendas/budgets etc. unscrupulous Networks could easily twist unsuspecting viewers around the proverbial axle. Certainly, this is a dangerous possibility without a lens of good judgment and understanding that they may not have all the facts. 



http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,98519,00.html The Media Slant by Jeff Edwards

http://bralls.newsvine.com/_news/2006/10/26/414867-does-the-media-slant-liberal-or-conservative Does the media slant Liberal or Conservative? By BrianR

http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=3612 And That's the Way It Is by Dan Rottenberg

sociological imagination

Generally speaking, (dangerous terminology I realize) to examine or study a social phenomenon (or anything/anyone for that matter) one must view the subject(s) from a given/chosen point (of view) or vantage. Having said that, no one vantage has the all-encompassing view.  There is a degree of error (information not accounted for) that cannot be, by unintended design corrected to 100%.  A Functionalist point of view therefore would have positive influence(s) on the perceptions of why the crimes were committed. As such, crime is expected, even inevitable in every society and perhaps sighting that no form of government or governing body (recognized authority) can be or do all things for all the people.  Some will unfortunately "fall through the cracks" and resort to what they deem is necessary for self or familial survival and therefore punishment might be somewhat less severe, or at least less so providing significant proof of the extenuating circumstances. In other words bringing a necessary fairness and/or a reasonable mindedness to the table of justice that might have been otherwise been overlooked and viewed solely on the merits of the crime, thereby improving over all a portion of our legal system.  Also, the simple fact is, crime pays... not necessarily to the criminal but to the law enforcement agencies which could improve police presence by hiring more officers (jobs). Companies that produce and sell security devices of all kinds make money and may therefore create more jobs to meet the demand of security needs. Unfortunately, this can also be viewed in a negative light.  It could be said that (at least in this example) crime is treated "softly" and could therefore provoke a hightened crime response as fear of reprimand diminished because punnishment had been lightened. There is as well, the argument of having government money funneled for other, perhaps considered more desired areas of need than to the police departments. Private security companies shouldn't necessarily be viewed adversely here since all they are doing is providing a product and/or service (obviously) for a profit, capitalism at it's best.  However, there are potential psychological impacts, measured and as yet unmeasured of being observed (big brother) constantly.

As to opportunities that maximize advantages and minimize disadvantages that shape one's sociological imagination.  I can only respond at this time in a limited fashion as my understanding of this is limited.  Perhaps by doing a truly honest self-study prior to engaging in a sociological study and gaining insight into one's own personal bias' known and potentially unknown or previously unconcidered personal bias'as well as obtaining the insight or views of friends and colleagues regarding these personal bias' could assist in providing this needed buffer. In this way, so identified, one would be more likely to keep these bias' from skewing the study.