Lds Student Resists Professor' "Stomp On Jesus" Object Lesson

[toon]

One of the older women in our ward bore her testimony yesterday and talked about this story, only she told everyone that he was the only student who refused to stomp on the paper and that he was kicked out of school for his bravery.

Awesome. I love it.

[bluebell]

If true, I can see why the suspension...but he could have said it to express the level of his offending feelings without any intent to actually follow through...after all, he didn't attempt to actually hit the professor.

In a university situation, i don't think it really matters whether or not the student tried to hit the professor. Just saying "I want to hit you" should be enough for some negative consequences of some kind.

It sounds to me like there wasn't much real communication going on from either participant, both focused on points that weren't the actual central point of the other's position.

That could be.

And it seems strange to me that the student is okay with going public with a debate and with his claims of what was being taught but refuses to be interviewed about the "alleged confrontation"....wants to have his cake and eat it too, it seems to me.

I thought that was really weird too. I'm wondering if all the positive feedback he is getting is making him feel like he's untouchable on this issue.

[bluebell]

Awesome. I love it.

Now i know what it's like to be present when a faith promoting rumor is born.

[Calm]

In a university situation, i don't think it really matters whether or not the student tried to hit the professor. Just saying "I want to hit you" should be enough for some negative consequences of some kind.

In any other context, I would completely agree with you, but there is something unique about this context...the professor was asking for the students to be open with their 'gut' feelings. If the "I want to hit you" took place during the lesson as opposed to afterwards...then it might have been an appropriate response...even if a juvenile one.

It is possible that the professor asked the student to communicate how he was feeling...that is what the lesson is about and the student was just being open and honest about it like the lesson was meant to be.

However, my doubts are raised by the student refusing to discuss the confrontation part of the encounter.

[bluebell]

In any other context, I would completely agree with you, but there is something unique about this context...the professor was asking for the students to be open with their 'gut' feelings. If the "I want to hit you" took place during the lesson as opposed to afterwards...then it might have been an appropriate response...even if a juvenile one.

It is possible that the professor asked the student to communicate how he was feeling...that is what the lesson is about and the student was just being open and honest about it like the lesson was meant to be.

I guess that is possible, but it seems like, for the teacher to actually feel threatened, as he claimed he did, that the exchange had to have been more than Rotela answering a feelings question in regards to the activity.

Not having been there though, there is room for doubt on both sides.

[Calm]

I guess that is possible, but it seems like, for the teacher to actually feel threatened, as he claimed he did, that the exchange had to have been more than Rotela answering a feelings question in regards to the activity.

Agreed, the real question for me is how accurate either description of what took place is. I wish some of the other students involved would speak up, but I can understand their desire not to get involved, especially after the death threats...

[ERayR]

Are you suggesting that I am supporting a leftish political stance with my suggestion that the student's demand to change the program based solely on his one complaint was arrogant and unreasonable?

I would never even suggest that a program be changed because of one students complaint, even if that student were me. However, I would suggest the presentation of the program be changed if it was a poor approach to start with, as IMNSHO, this one was.

http://www.rawstory....levised-debate/

That student got what he wanted. The teacher has been removed from his position at the school and is in hiding because of death threats.

I think you are reaching a bit to assert that the student was wanting the professors life threatened. As good as you are SS I don't think you can read minds.

Sounds like Rotela deserved to be suspended. In my opinion, it's the adults who have taken this story and changed it to fit their own need for religious drama, who are really embarrassing.

More adults, who should be mature enough to see the ways Rotela went wrong, should be helping him learn from his mistakes in handling this situation, not applauding him for being the hero in a story line that isn't even true.

I also do not think enough is known to assert that he deserved to be suspended.

I consider myself as a mature adult and I honestly can't say (without knowing more) that what the kid did was wrong. He considered the exercise to be improper and in poor taste and did something about it.

[ERayR]

If true, I can see why the suspension...but he could have said it to express the level of his offending feelings without any intent to actually follow through...after all, he didn't attempt to actually hit the professor.

It sounds to me like there wasn't much real communication going on from either participant, both focused on points that weren't the actual central point of the other's position.

And it seems strange to me that the student is okay with going public with a debate and with his claims of what was being taught but refuses to be interviewed about the "alleged confrontation"....wants to have his cake and eat it too, it seems to me.

According to the professor the exercise was to elicit feelings of offense. Did he not think that some might be offended enough to be confrontational. He obviously didn't think this through very far. I lay this whole thing at the feet of a professor that provoked confrontation and then handled it badly. If you are going to use controversy as a teaching tool you had better have a plan to defuse it before it gets this far.

[ERayR]

I guess that is possible, but it seems like, for the teacher to actually feel threatened, as he claimed he did, that the exchange had to have been more than Rotela answering a feelings question in regards to the activity.

Not having been there though, there is room for doubt on both sides.

Was he actually threatened or was he just incapable of dealing with the intense controversy his offensive exercise stirred up?

[Calm]

If you are going to use controversy as a teaching tool you had better have a plan to defuse it before it gets this far.

I completely agree.

[bluebell]

Was he actually threatened or was he just incapable of dealing with the intense controversy his offensive exercise stirred up?

There is no way for us to know since we weren't there.

[bluebell]

I would never even suggest that a program be changed because of one students complaint, even if that student were me. However, I would suggest the presentation of the program be changed if it was a poor approach to start with, as IMNSHO, this one was.

I think you are reaching a bit to assert that the student was wanting the professors life threatened. As good as you are SS I don't think you can read minds.

I also do not think enough is known to assert that he deserved to be suspended.

I consider myself as a mature adult and I honestly can't say (without knowing more) that what the kid did was wrong. He considered the exercise to be improper and in poor taste and did something about it.

I consider a student telling a teacher that he wants to hit him, and also demanding that he change teaching tactics or threatening his job to be an immature response to a difficult situation.

Students should expect to have their beliefs challenged in a university setting and should learn how to deal with those challenges constructively. That is part of learning to think and act in the larger world.

As an adult, i would not want to encourage the boy to handle conflict in a similar manner in the future but would hope he could gain maturity and understanding from the mess he has helped (along with others who also should know better) to create.

I recognize though that that's my opinion. Obviously there are many adults out there who think the boy deserves a medal for what he did.

[ERayR]

I consider a student telling a teacher that he wants to hit him, and also demanding that he change teaching tactics or threatening his job to be an immature response to a difficult situation.

Students should expect to have their beliefs challenged in a university setting and should learn how to deal with those challenges constructively. That is part of learning to think and act in the larger world.

As an adult, i would not want to encourage the boy to handle conflict in a similar manner in the future but would hope he could gain maturity and understanding from the mess he has helped (along with others who also should know better) to create.

I recognize though that that's my opinion. Obviously there are many adults out there who think the boy deserves a medal for what he did.

I have not seen anything that the assures me the student threatened the professor. Again if a Professor or teacher chooses to use a teaching exercise to elicit an extreme reaction or that has the potential to elicit an extreme reaction they had better be prepared to defuse those reactions. It is not a matter of the student having his beliefs challenged but rather it was done. From what I have read it is plain to me this was an ill conceived and poorly planned exercise by a professor who was unprepared and unwilling or incapable of dealing with the consequences of his actions.

Challenging beliefs is possible without insulting them. I am not advocating handing out medals to anyone. I am for ceasing the vilification of the student for having the reaction that the professors ill conceived experiment was designed to elicit and placing the blame for this fiasco squarely where it belongs. On a a shortsighted and possibly arrogant professor who was unprepared and possibly unwilling to deal with the reactions his social engineering experiment gone wrong.

[bluebell]

I have not seen anything that the assures me the student threatened the professor. Again if a Professor or teacher chooses to use a teaching exercise to elicit an extreme reaction or that has the potential to elicit an extreme reaction they had better be prepared to defuse those reactions. It is not a matter of the student having his beliefs challenged but rather it was done. From what I have read it is plain to me this was an ill conceived and poorly planned exercise by a professor who was unprepared and unwilling or incapable of dealing with the consequences of his actions.

We disagree.

I think what the student and the teacher have said is enough evidence to support that neither one handled the situation well.

I don't think there's any evidence to support the idea that the exercise was poorly planned or that the professor was unprepared to deal with it. That, in my opinion, has not at all been proven.

Challenging beliefs is possible without insulting them.

I agree.

I don't personally see the exercise as insulting to any beliefs though. If anything, i think the exercise is trying to get students to be more understanding of other people's beliefs. How many Christians do you know that think Muslims are idiots for threatening to kill someone everytime a picture of Mohammad is drawn or a Koran is put on the ground? I personally know quite a few who can't make fun of Muslims enough for being so thinned skinned. Suddenly though, when it issue is something they actually care about, death threats (for some) become appropriate.

The reaction of many Christians to this exercise says to me that more Christians need to learn the importance of symbolism, and that that includes more than just their symbols. And they need to learn the difference between having a concept like Christian symbolism challeneged in order to understand it better, and having it insulted as part of anti-Christian liberal crusade.

I am for ceasing the vilification of the student for having the reaction that the professors ill conceived experiment was designed to elicit and placing the blame for this fiasco squarely where it belongs.

First, I haven't read anything where Rotela is being vilified. Can you share an example? Surely you understanding that disagreeing with him is not the same thing as vilification.

Second, I am placing the blame for this fiasco where it belongs, on both him and the professor.

If university students can't handle having strong emotions in an appropriate way, they need to get out of school and grow up a little bit. Almost every class i had the last few years in college had something in it that was purposely meant to elicit strong emotions-that's the whole point of certain classes at the university level. If a student can't handle it, they should leave until they can.

On a a shortsighted and possibly arrogant professor who was unprepared and possibly unwilling to deal with the reactions his social engineering experiment gone wrong.

I understand this is your opinion, i just feel it's unsupported. The school, before they were forced to capitulate to save face, did not seem agree with it, and so far, i don't believe we have any other students in the class who have claimed such either.

It would be nice if others who had more information would come forward to share, but i don't blame them for not wanting to get involved.

[blackstrap]

There is no way for us to know since we weren't there.

I suspect that if 5 of us were there ,there would be 5 opinions as to the appropriateness of the interchange. Everyone,and I mean everyone involved from student to administration to anonymous cowardly threateners, are guilty of kneejerk reactions instead of reasoned communication.

[thesometimesaint]

The mere threat of violence is a criminal act. It has no place in any civil society let alone in a university/college setting.

[blackstrap]

" I want to hit you "

" I'm going to hit you "

" Stand up and I'll knock you down again "

Any legal difference?

[thesometimesaint]

" I want to hit you "

" I'm going to hit you "

" Stand up and I'll knock you down again "

Any legal difference?

Means, motive, ability. By law all I have to do is prove all three. Functionally all I have to do is prove the first and last, and motive need only be a logical conclusion. The student had all three.

[urroner]

Means, motive, ability. By law all I have to do is prove all three. Functionally all I have to do is prove the first and last, and motive need only be a logical conclusion. The student had all three.

So by merely saying "I want to just kill you" when I am very angry with another, according to what you have said TSS, I have committed a criminal act? Means, motive, and ability are important, but doesn't it also require some action is also required.

[volgadon]

So by merely saying "I want to just kill you" when I am very angry with another, according to what you have said TSS, I have committed a criminal act?

Yes, you probably split that infinitive with a hatchet.

[thesometimesaint]

So by merely saying "I want to just kill you" when I am very angry with another, according to what you have said TSS, I have committed a criminal act? Means, motive, and ability are important, but doesn't it also require some action is also required.

If that person were later found dead of unnatural causes. You'd have a nice long talk with a friendly police officer, and maybe even a DA.

[volgadon]

If that person were later found dead of unnatural causes. You'd have a nice long talk with a friendly police officer, and maybe even a DA.

Naturally, but has he committed a criminal act?

[bluebell]

Naturally, but has he committed a criminal act?

The law seems to imply 'maybe'.

"There is no legal definition in English law as to what constitutes criminal threatening behaviour, so it is up to the courts to decide on a case by case basis. However, if somebody threatens violence against somebody, then this may be a criminal offense. In most countries it is only an offence if it can be proven the person had the intention and equipment to carry out the threat."

[ERayR]

If that person were later found dead of unnatural causes. You'd have a nice long talk with a friendly police officer, and maybe even a DA.

You watch too much TV. They may have a talk with you but that doesn't translate into you having committed a crime.

[thesometimesaint]

You watch too much TV. They may have a talk with you but that doesn't translate into you having committed a crime.

I do watch too much TV. But it is overwhelmingly the Food Network.

But my example comes from personal experiences, and being forced to watch the O.J.Simpson trial from start to finish.