The Nugget Newspaper - News and Opinion from Sisters, Oregon

To the Editor:

A number of Kris Helphinstine's supporters who wrote The Nugget last week asked what opponents of teaching Intelligent Design in our public schools were afraid of. The answer to that question is simple: we're afraid of converting our democracy into a theocracy.

Our nation was founded by immigrants fleeing religious persecution in Europe. Our founding fathers expressly wrote our government's doctrine of separation of church and state to protect against one group forcing its religious beliefs on everyone else.

If you love democracy and the core principles of what it means to be an American, then you must oppose theocracy. You cannot sincerely oppose in principle a theocracy such as Iran's, for example, on the one hand while supporting the teaching of religion as scientific fact in our public schools on the other.

Those who advocate the teaching of Intelligent Design in our public schools in the name of "remaining open to alternative theories" are being disingenuous. They're not entreating open scientific discourse. They simply want to force their religious views on others. In fact, I'm quite certain that these same "open-minded" individuals would be screaming bloody murder if the Koran's creationist viewpoint were taught in our school's biology classes.

Michael Cooper

s s s

To the Editor:

Two years ago the Sisters School District leadership unanimously rebuffed my request to install a parental permission safeguard to protect our children from indent literature. This request was made in response to my 9th grader being assigned a vile and depraved book to read.

 Their explicit reason to deny my request was to protect the academic freedom of their teachers to use whatever classroom material they wished to instruct our children. The district curriculum director said she would not work in a district that restricted the teachers' academic freedom.

Now, fast forward two years. The board fired a teacher for exercising that exact freedom! After defending a vile book assignment, they considered questioning evolution to be "polluting children's minds."

Does this bias expose an anti-Christian hidden agenda or were they just complying with the law?  As a licensed teacher, I know Kris Helphinstine was well within his legal rights. A teacher has broad legal freedoms to instruct as long as he doesn't present certain views as absolute fact. 

While Oregon law requires evolution be taught, it does not forbid a teacher from examining its shortcoming too.

So why did the board fire this young teacher? Consider this: a 1997 Gallup Poll found that 44 percent of American adults believe in creation. Only 10 percent believe that man evolved apart from God, the very belief our schools force feed our students.

So, if Kris was within our cultural standards, why did the board fire him? Was it an attempt to purge religion from our school? And is the school leadership concerned about the rights of many of our children who want to hear the other side of the story? Don't they have the right to a complete and unbiased education?

John Shepherd

s s s

To the Editor:

There have been several letters to the editor concerning the appropriateness of comparing Intelligent Design to Evolution in a high school biology class. In some of the letters both are described as theories, with the further statement that evolution is not a fact and therefore Intelligent Design and Evolution are equally valid.

In common usage "theory" can mean speculation or belief; in science, theory means that the proposed concept is supported by verifiable data and that there is no verifiable data that is known to contradict the scientific theory.

No theory of science is fact. A scientific theory is only the best current explanation of all the known data.

I believe that God created the universe and set the laws of physics that allowed humans to develop and that a God who can do that can intervene in the universe to micro-manage the development of humans - but that is a belief, not a scientific theory and should not be taught in a science course.

The teaching of Intelligent Design in a comparative religion course might be appropriate.

Darrell Brownawell

s s s

To the Editor,

I just finished reading the article about Kris Helphinstine and his termination of employment due to the alledged teaching of "Intelligent Design."

I'm a senior at Sisters High School. Helphinstine was a substitute teacher for my chemistry class for a few days during the end of the winter trimester. I'm sure much of the reason he was given the job as a biology teacher was due to the way he interacted with the students.

I know chemisty is NOT the same as biology, but the teacher is the concern at hand. The immediate question in my mind upon reading the article is: did any of the parents speak with the teacher about his teaching or did it go straight to administration? Having been at the school for less than two weeks, did he even get a chance to touch on evolution as well as "intelligent design?"

I won't claim to know every detail of the situation, but it sounds to me like a vulnerable new teacher was persecuted after teaching for too short a time to commit much of an action to be persecuted for!

For those of you unfamiliar with the Scopes "Monkey" Trial of 1925, Google it. You'll find the story of a man who was prosecuted for teaching none other than the theory of evolution to his 9th grade biology class. At that time only creation was to be taught. We read a book called "Inherit the Wind" in my senior English class which tells the story of this Scopes Trial, and I couldn't see many connections with schools today, until now, but in the reverse.

Since the Scopes Trial, the teaching of evolution has been promoted in public school where any teaching of creation has been rejected. Where's the happy medium? Where plenty students sit through a biology class and see a problem with a teacher leaning toward the concept of creation, there are also students who sit through the same class and see a problem with the teaching of evolution.

Tara Hermens

s s s

To the Editor:

As a Sisters High School teacher and member of this community, I am heartbroken and exhausted.

I would never dismiss the integrity, the intent and the sacrifices of any teacher or principal in this school district, whether they've been here two weeks or 20 years.

The moment any person chooses the profession of teaching is the moment that the personal sacrifices and commitment to children begin: sacrificing time with their family in the evenings to correct endless papers and to expand and prepare curriculum, sacrificing a mere 30-minute lunch break multiple times during the week because they are spending time with a student who has either failed their math exam or is contemplating suicide, sacrificing a rare Friday night date with their spouse because there is no one to run the basketball clock or to chaperone a dance and continually making sure they show up for that student's performance so that student knows and feels they aren't just one out of 120 students that they teach every day.

Does this sound like people who are out to damage the minds of our children with reckless curriculum or any other "scandal" this community allows to fabricate or exaggerate? Don't stand around and watch our children's future and the lives of education's finest get beat down to the ground by pride, arrogance, ignorance and pure lack of support.

Like so many, I chose this "one-of-a-kind" community because of the reputation of the schools and for that "small town friendly feel." So what happened? When will the community members, district administrators and board members choose to stand up, support and trust those who so directly affect the lives of our children?

I challenge any parent and community member: before you throw one more stone, you better get out there and do your "homework." Show me one school that can match our unique, diverse, successful programs and academic standings. Show me one teacher who sacrifices more or loves these students more than those who teach in this district. Come inside our walls and see for yourself.

This is the BEST in the state, folks. We realize there is always room for improvement, and thanks to the incredible leadership, sacrificial nature and student-first mentality of our principal, Bob Macauley, we are doing just that.

It's time to find that "small town friendly feel" within each and every one of us. That is community!

Heather Johnson

Sisters High School Health Teacher

s s s

To the Editor:

Mr. Helphinstine claims he wanted to teach his students critical thinking skills. This reminded me of my favorite teacher, Mr. Merrill, who taught American History.

"Never come to class without a question," he said. "There is no way you can read 150 pages of American history a week and understand everything you have read."

I learned much from the questions Mr. Merrill was able to answer of mine. However, I learned more from the ones he couldn't answer: I learned that he only knew a finite amount of information about what he was teaching; that it took courage for him to admit he didn't have all the answers; that he was curious to find out the answers to the questions he couldn't answer and would bring that information back to the next class; that he cared about his students and what they thought; that he was excited to learn new things as a result of our questions.

Other than following the class textbook, Mr. Merrill brought no other agenda to the class. He taught us how to think by teaching us how to question. This process empowered the whole class. It fostered in us a sense of self-confidence, competitiveness and curiosity about what we were learning. Learning became a joy and a shared experience. What better way to teach students "how to think?"

Paul Bennett

s s s

To the Editor:

In the summer of 1925, a jury in Dayton, Tennessee upheld the firing of a part-time high school biology teacher named John Scopes, who was charged with illegally teaching evolution, instead of sticking exclusively to teaching creationism.

In the spring of 2007, a school board in Sisters, Oregon, fired a part-time high school biology teacher named Kris Helphinstine who was charged with illegally teaching creationism rather than sticking exclusively to teaching evolution.

We have now come full circle. God (if you happen to believe there is one) help us!

Bill Carmichael

s s s

To the Editor:

Recently a foreign exchange student from a communist country wrote an article for an Oregon high school newspaper. In it she examines cultural differences between the U.S. and her home country. She wrote, "discussing ideas is not encouraged in class. Teachers don't feel good if you are skeptical of their ideas in class. They are worried that if students know they make mistakes, students won't respect them any more. Personally, I prefer the American way. The United States is a country that has freedom of religion and ideas."

An open exchange of ideas is true in nearly all areas of school except in the case of evolution. Recently a part-time teacher at Sisters High School was fired for daring to suggest that some people may have other ideas about evolution and the origin of man other than the party line. Then, he actually had the audacity to use some quotes from an ancient historical document - which 200 years ago was the primary textbook used in American schools: the Bible.

My nieces were fortunate enough to be in some of this teacher's classes before he was summarily dismissed. They really enjoyed him and were very distressed that he was fired.

Does the United States still have freedom of religion and ideas? It is a sad commentary on the direction the United States is taking when a teacher is fired for deviating from the decidedly shaky theory of evolution and for referring to the best selling book in America, the Bible. Of course, if I was trying to prop up an illogical theory like evolution, I would be afraid of exposing it to honest debate too.

Carol Lovegren Miller

s s s

To the Editor:

I have lived in many places over my lifetime, and have never seen such unwillingness to find a middle ground on issues, work together to resolve issues in a healthy way and not have to draw a line in the sand whenever there is conflict and go on attack (whether offensive or defensive).

Did we learn nothing from the McDonald's experience where the heated war between the sides led an unstable boy to make an irrational decision to take things WAY too far? Where is the intelligent display of level-headed communication and the desire to work through things to find a solution that does not have to exact a punishing cost to the side of an issue that we feel somehow threatened by?

When heated issues come to Sisters, be it fast food or a teacher that is teaching outside the box, why do we tend to take on the "lynch mob" mentality? This is a beautiful place filled with many different lifestyles.

It doesn't feel that we have "evolved" very well when we can't approach something that threatens us or that we don't understand or that we don't agree with with the desire to bridge the gap and co-exist to enhance each other.

Learning, growing, expanding our minds and our view of the world comes with things that challenge us to think bigger and that require us to be different than the natural reaction of fight or flight. How about not fighting and not running away. How about joining together to work towards conflict-free resolution on whatever issue may present itself. We will never agree on everything; no group of people ever does on every issue, but can we agree to allow for there to be differences that we can find middle ground on?

Can we have a situation like this current one, where there is consultation, listening, voicing concerns, finding a resolution that works for everyone involved and allowing that whole process the chance to work?

Carol Stratton

s s s

To the Editor:

Why would anyone use the term "Critical Thinking" when discussing the teaching of Intelligent Design in a high school science curriculum? As I understand it ID is taken on faith ... so where is thinking involved, let alone critical thinking? As science officer Spock would say "This is not logical."

Dean Billing

s s s

To The Editor

I read with great interest the article regarding the firing of Kris Helphinstine. It appears that the Sisters School Board, the State of Oregon and even some parents have a very low view of science.

That is, they have no expectation that science should pursue truth. To the extent that they require anything of science, they require it only to preserve their own beliefs. Anything that threatens those beliefs, such as scientific evidence which challenges Darwinism's grander claim of macro-evolution and universal common ancestry, MUST be silenced regardless of its scientific merit.

According to your article, board member Glen Lasken makes it quite clear that to merely present evidence which "completely debunks evolution" is to teach creationism. According to Lasken, it's not even necessary to mention God... The mere act of questioning Darwinism qualifies as teaching creationism and thus violates the 1st Amendment. Ironically, the effect of this position is that students will learn less about evolution, not more.

What's interesting about this is that the theory Intelligent Design is not permitted to be taught in schools on the basis that it is compatible with Christianity and as such violates the constitution... and yet even prominent Darwinists such as Ken Miller at Brown University insist that Darwinism is ALSO compatible with Christianity. If that's true, why doesn't teaching Darwinism in public schools violate the constitution?

I would encourage parents and school board members to do some homework and educate themselves about the mounting weaknesses in Darwinism. And contrary to popular myth, you don't even have to pick up The Bible to do so.

Pete Chadwell

s s s

To the Editor:

As a concerned taxpayer for the Sisters schools, I would like to put forth my view regarding the firing of Mr. Helphinstine. My husband and I homeschool (although our children have attended public and private schools in this district) for the very reason of such a situation as this taking place. First, let me reference the Oregon Department of Education, under Science Curriculum:

"Schools may not refuse to teach evolutionary theory" but also states "any genuinely scientific evidence for or against any explanation of life may be taught."

Notice the word "theory" in relation to evolution. Let us not forget it is a theory.

As I understand it, Mr. Helphinstine presented another "theory." What is the fear in bringing forth information for the students to debate and critically think through? Instead of public schools providing an atmosphere where children can learn to investigate all theories of how life may have happened on earth, this teacher is fired?

If Intelligent Design was not presented by Mr. Helphinstine but, instead, Mr. Helphinstine presented the information from the many scientists who report that Darwin's theory is less than believable i.e. British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle who compares the likelihood of life appearing on Earth by chemical reactions as "equivalent to the possibility that a tornado sweeping through the junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein," would he still have his job? Or, would the fear caused by the introduction of scientists with a different viewpoint than evolution be enough to fire Mr. Helphinstine?

This decision was based on a few individuals having a fear of their children learning to assess information that they may disagree with. Shame on our school board and the superintendent for making a rash decision that affects the education of our children. I am sorry to be paying taxes to a school system that shuts down the free thinking and learning that Thomas Jefferson so rightly wanted for the citizens of America.

Lisa Woodworth

s s s

To the Editor:

The truth seems to be that a man was fired because the school board was threatened with a lawsuit.

What ever happened to due process? How do the rest of our teachers feel? Does it scare you that your job could be taken away "just like that" because someone makes claims against you, and you don't even have the right to appeal?

It scares me that while a few are angry that critical thinking was being taught (obviously with a view not to their liking) that maybe a different group of parents could have another teacher fired because they got hint of critical thinking to a viewpoint that opposes their standards.

Are we going to go back to book banning? I thought we were a community that worked together and supported one another. We used to be! I don't want to be another city that uses money, power and threats to get our way.

Laurie Francis

s s s

To the Editor:

Regarding the firing of the teacher in Sisters teaching creationism vs. evolution. Ah yes, we have freedom of speech as long as we agree with the "educational elite."

The schools can't teach "do not kill," "do not steal," "do not lie," "do not commit adultery with your neighbor's wife or your 18-year -old student," but you can teach as truth that we evolved from monkeys.

If we evolved from monkeys, why do we still have monkeys?

Pat Farr

s s s

To the Editor:

We do not mean to disrespect the school board's decisions, but we, Brook Rosauer, Marc Peck, Thomas Bennett, Spencer Gardner and Brittany Tosello, strongly disagree with the firing of Mr. Helphinstine (along with many others).

Mr. Helphinstine, for the time that we had him, was the best science teacher we had ever been with. Science is not our strongest subject, and Mr. Helphinstine explained science in a way that we could all understand.

He did not break any rules. If anything, we feel bad because he defended evolution, because he was supposed to, even when he didn't believe in it. All the kids in our class argued about evolution, and Mr. Helphinstine stood his ground and kept on explaining the theory of evolution; in no way did he force anything on us.

The only thing he ever said about creationism was that some people believed in it.

Us Christians and other kids have to put up with learning something we don't believe in every year, and we don't complain, but one thing is said about Christianity during class and our favorite teacher gets fired. He never taught anything about creationism.

The reason he only taught two days of evolution was because he was fired before he could go on. He didn't have a chance to go any further.

Mr. Helphinstine is a GREAT teacher and we think the school board should reconsider their actions. Many, many, many, kids loved him and feel the same way that we do.

Brook Rosauer, Brittany Tosello, Thomas Bennett, Spencer Gardner and Marc Peck

s s s

To the Editor:

The people of Sisters ought to be thanking Kris Helphinstine for helping them to realize the kind of bigotry that is evident on their school board. Instead of granting Kris due process and giving him a hearing where his supporters could also attend, it seems that they listened to a few emotional parents on one side of the issue, then tried to avoid a controversy by swiftly firing the supposed offender.

I would venture to guess that a majority of the people of Sisters don't mind if teachers present both theories about creation to their high schoolers. Furthermore, a majority of people in Sisters probably believe that either God or some other intelligent entity is obviously ordering creation.

Yet we allow the school board to unwisely push a minority opinion on our school children (most of whom probably don't really believe that we are descended from some other life form).

The truth of the matter is that the policies of our school board in regard to teaching scientific creationism are wrong. (Scientific creationists ask only that their theory be presented as a theory). Not only are the school board's policies wrong, they are unfair to our young people and they violate the First Amendment of the Constitution and every tenet of established principles of academic freedom.

Both opinions about creation should be presented because the citizens of Sisters obviously believe in both opinions.

Allan Lemke

Director, Exousia Christian Theater Ministries

s s s

To the Editor:

I recently heard Lt. Gen. James Mattis, commander of 50,000 U.S. Marines, speak in Bend. It was the most professional, factual and inspiring speech I have heard in my 17 years of life.

His message is one that all Americans need to hear. His account of the progress and current situation in the global war on terror was very educational and supported by frontline experiences in Middle Eastern customs, geography, history and warfare.

It is uplifting to hear a positive outlook on this conflict and a humble mindset of future success.

General Mattis reminded the hundreds in attendance that despite negative trends in media, we are making positive differences in Iraq and despite inevitable mistakes, the United States is the good guy and the fight must continue for stability. Regardless of the reason for entering this fight, the U.S. is committed in a new age struggle against individuals with extreme beliefs and violent loyalties and it must continue until the Iraqi forces can manage their fragile but promising nation.

General Mattis emitted a level-headed persona and spoke of everything from safely detecting roadside bombs to why veterans don't get their deserved benefits. People with all different views were present, and I feel he reassured every one of them. Being a high school senior and having been accepted to West Point, I wish that every young adult could hear the words General Mattis spoke and really take interest in our country's issues. I left feeling confident and accurately informed of our role in Iraq and the global war on terror.

We can easily become disconnected from the war in Iraq. I greatly appreciated hearing General Mattis' informational and positive thoughts. It's absolutely essential to support our troops and let them perform their duty so a stable situation will be achieved.

John Liming

s s s

To the Editor:

We are writing in response to the letter from Jerry Hakes regarding Panoramic Estates. We also live in Panoramic and have for four years now. We have also seen a decline in our environment, especially the last year or so.

One thing that Mr. Hakes did not mention that we feel is of utmost importance is the recent alarming shooting deaths of domestic house pets. We have now heard of three reported shootings in less than two months.

We are the parents of one of the teens who rides dirt bikes in Panoramic. We have given our teen rules regarding riding in Panoramic. We hope that he abides by these rules but realize as a teenager, that he probably does not always do this.

Officers have spoke with our son and with us and the latest that we have heard was that he could ride as long as he has the correct permit, which he does, wears a helmet and follows the speed regulations. We would encourage residents, as Mr. Hakes has asked, to contact the sheriff's department AND also contact us if our son is not following these rules. We would like to stay friendly with our neighbors.

We have seen the damage that Mr. Hakes spoke of. Someone has been coming through with what appears to be a four-wheel drive and running over our signs and ripping up the roads. Also regarding the trash on the sides of our roads: HCD recently included a notice regarding containing trash in bags. We have noted that on Fridays, after trash pick up, we do have a lot of small trash laying everywhere. As residents, we should all be aware of how we dispose of our own trash and make sure that we are not at fault.

We do need to be good neighbors and work together as a community to face these issues. We believe that many people moved to this area for the freedoms that we chose. We will continue to stay consistent with our rules and hope to have our teens respect our neighbors and earn respect in exchange.

Henry and Kerry Zenich

s s s

To the Editor:

After 31 years as a good, old-fashioned "Blue Dog," Scoop Jackson Give-'em-hell-Harry-Truman Democrat, I renounced my membership and left the Democratic Party.

How could anyone be a part of the Socialist, stretch American neck to be slaughtered by our enemies, seditious party is beyond me.

Let us pause to note if Senator Clinton is elected the first woman President, she would be the first woman to become President after her husband had sex with an intern in the oval office, was impeached, convicted of perjury and fined in federal court for his crime!

Sen. Clinton is not the first to get where she is by marrying money or power. Those who come to mind such as Nancy Pelosi, Ariannia Huffington and Hanoi John Kerry. It has nothing to do with their being women. It has to do with their cheap paths to power. Kevin Federline isn't taken seriously either.

It is easy to imagine Americans going for Margaret Thatcher or Condolizza Rice. The only thing Hillary has in common with Rice or Thatcher is the lack of a Y chromosome. I believe the "Iron Lady" (Thatcher) and I use that term as a compliment would rage war with the ruthless zeal our enemies deserve.

Since the gentlemen from Nevada, New York and Vermont, Senators Reid, Leahey and Schumer, just to name a few, have officially been fitted for their TuTus. The American Civil War is in full swing as quoted by the former New York Times Washington Bureau Chief William Safire, "We are way past partisan politics now and engaged in a genuine American Civil War."

To which I will once again echo the words of Sen. John McCain (R - AZ) "We cannot allow the most sensitive among us to dictate our survival."

The Constitution is clear: one President who is Commander-in-Chief. Not 535 Congressmen and Senators. The Capitol Hill Gang voted for this war. If they want to end it, stop playing games - use the power of the purse.

Steve Coltin