Home   >   Blogs   >   Atheist Wants Creationist Teacher Fired

Atheist Wants Creationist Teacher Fired

A Chicago-area atheist is on a crusade to have a high school science teacher fired for teaching creationism in his classroom.

“It has nothing to be dissatisfied,” atheist activist Rob Sherman told the Chicago Tribune. “I’m protecting conquered territory and assisting parents who want the teacher fired by articulating their concerns.”

Listen to this report from Fox News Radio’s Todd Starnes:

Audio clip:

The teacher is identified as Beau Schaefer. He confirmed to district officials that he was teaching creationist beliefs at the high school. Creationism is the belief that God created the heavens and the Earth.

“Steps have been taken to ensure that this teacher will no longer use creationism as part of his classroom instruction,” school district spokesperson Mary Todoric told the Tribune. “Furthermore, the district has taken appropriate steps to ensure that all science teachers are not referencing or teaching creationism.”

But that’s not good enough for Sherman. He said he represents a group of parents who are upset that their children were exposed to the idea that God created mankind.

“What I’m trying to do is remind the board with my presence that creationism in the classroom is undesirable and according to the Supreme Court it is illegal,” he told the newspaper.

He plans on attending a school board meeting tonight in an attempt to get the teacher fired. However, school officials said they would not allow anyone attending the meeting to discuss the science curriculum or the teacher.

Related Posts

25 Comments

  1. interpol

    March 22, 2011 at 9:22 am

    How dare you teach our children the truth!

  2. interpol

    March 22, 2011 at 9:27 am

    How dare you teach our children the truth!

  3. Dennis

    March 22, 2011 at 9:30 am

    You have got to be kidding me this idoit who claims to be an atheist needs to worry about other things than a science teacher teaching creationism. How on earth can you not believe in creationism? Why on earth would you NOT want to believe in creationism? It is obvious that we have a creator and to say that there is not one makes you an IDIOT!!!!

    • Gerald

      March 28, 2011 at 1:31 am

      Go to Westboro baptist do you? Did you read your comment, you actually admitted you believe in a super hero magic man in the sky that can create a whole universe by itself………..

      • Emily

        August 19, 2011 at 3:40 pm

        Your hateful comments show that you would fit in much better at Westboro. I'm sorry that you believe in some totally unprovable theory about the origins of our world and that you feel your beliefs are so vastly superior to those of others that people with different beliefs should be ridiculed. But I'm even more sorry that you think you are clever with your ignorant childish remarks that we all have to suffer through.

  4. setrett

    March 22, 2011 at 10:12 am

    This guy shouldn't be fired. That's going too far. The proper thing to do is teach evolution in science class and creationism in religion class. Children will still be exposed to both ideas (and without having to "teach the controversy") and it will stop liberals from going crazy and overreacting like what's happening here.

    • Max

      July 8, 2011 at 10:08 am

      That would work as long as both classes, evolution in science class, and creationism in religion class. I see a problem with your excellent idea… in our anti-Christian atmosphere, a class on religion would never be permitted in government schools.

  5. Mitch

    March 23, 2011 at 10:24 am

    It is time to turn the tables on Sherman. Go after him, take his livelihood, destroy his marriage and do whatever it takes to ruin him .

  6. amy_e

    March 31, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    Religion has no place in a science classroom. If a teacher wanted to teach the hindu creation story what would people say then? It's only the Christian bullies who want to impose their beliefs.

    • Mary De Voe

      May 7, 2011 at 3:29 pm

      Jesus Christ is a Person, the second Person of the Blessed Trinity. God calls us His children and "lesser gods" . Sovereign personhood, the image of God in each and every human being gives us a dignity above any animal. The atheist still must prove from WHOM his existence comes.

  7. D.D.

    May 4, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    Be careful who you try to destroy and whose career you're trying to end Rob Sherman. What goes around comes around…….religious and non-religious people know that!!!!!!!

  8. ExiledAlaskan

    May 7, 2011 at 10:07 am

    Can we fire the Science teachers that are teaching unproven theories as fact to our children, Evolution and Global Warming are both UNPROVEN theories yet are being taught as FACT to the kids, so science has gone from a standard to a lie and blessed by school boards across the country, and if you disagree with them you are branded a ignorant hick who is out to destroy science. Well just like the Westboro people are not practicing a real religion they are not practicing real science and need to be removed.

  9. Mary De Voe

    May 7, 2011 at 3:17 pm

    Our Declaration of Independence is on the side of the Creationist teacher simply because one of our founding principles: "We hold these truth to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and enowed by our Creator with unalienable civil rights and among these rights are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…" "and trusting in Divine Providence we pledge our lives and our honor…" Any one who repudiates our founding principles for which our patriots sacrificed their lives twelve years before our US Constitution was written repudiates their citizenship and have no legal standing in a court of law by their own choosing. One cannot reject citizenship in America and then demand hearing in a court of law.

  10. Mary De Voe

    May 7, 2011 at 3:18 pm

    Abortionists too, reject the Declaration of Independence and our founding principles and demand a standing in a court of law, as real citizens. It cannot happen any more than Stalin or Hitler can demand standing in an American court of law. Let them go to the country where they can establish their kind of law without civil rights, for this is what the atheist really wants: to tyrannize the civil rights of a free people, a free people, who own all public schools and places in joint and common tenancy. Every public place without the mention of God is a tribute to atheism and an establishment of atheism under the penumbra of freedom of religion. Establishment of atheism is not permitted by our First Amendment.
    Jesus Christ is a sovereign Person, Son of the Supreme Sovereign Being, Who brings every human being into existence. The Person of Jesus Christ is forbidden in the public square, The Person of God is not allowed in the public forum. FREEDOM

  11. Jon

    June 3, 2011 at 3:29 pm

    Ok so it says that the parents felt that: "He said he represents a group of parents who are upset that their children were exposed to the idea that God created mankind."

    There is no reason they shoud be upset, because it doesnt matter aparently when christians are exposed to atheist beliefs and teachings.

  12. Sean

    June 16, 2011 at 4:44 am

    Evolution is a science? Last time I checked evolution was a theory. You can not prove that the world came into being from nothing. You can however look around and see that there is something that made this world. It didn't make itself… What we need to be worrying about, is getting evolution out of the classrooms. In a "science" class they need to be teaching things that can be observed,hypothesis made, review and record results… You can't obviously do this with evolution. Evolution is a "religion" also….

  13. Max

    July 8, 2011 at 11:37 am

    Teaching (indoctrination in this case) evolution should not be done in Science classes. It is as non-provable as creationism. If parents want a class in fables or origin, they should place it in a philosophy or other venue.

    At the same time, teaching an essentially religious (it takes belief) subject like evolution, takes away from very important provable science instruction. Observable science is of major importance in today's world, and the time needed to teach it should not be co-opted by anyone's beliefs.

  14. Chris

    August 3, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    When our kids are children, we tell them the story of a frog turning into a prince, and we call it a fairly tale. When they get older, we tell them a story of a frog turning into a prince and we call it science. NO WONDER OUR SOCIETY IS SCREWED UP.

    • B.R.

      March 6, 2012 at 9:30 pm

      "When they get older, we tell them a story of a frog turning into a prince and we call it science."

      Tell you what; take a biology class, pass with a "B" or higher, and then tell us about your personal opinions. Evolution is the adaptations of organisms to their environment over time, and the emergence of new species from natural or sexual selection. "Frogs" and "princes" have nothing to do with it. If you want to see real fairy tales, read the bible; you'll find a guy killing off entire armies with a fragile donkey jawbone and another guy making the sun magically stay still in the sky for a day.

  15. Science Teacher

    August 5, 2011 at 7:16 pm

    A theory in science refers to a hypothesis that has been strongly supported by multiple observations and/or numerous experiments. Examples of theories in science include the heliocentric theory (Earth revolving around sun, not vice versa), the germ theory (germs, and not evil spirits or miasma, cause disease), and atomic theory (all matter made up of atoms, which have protons, neutrons, and electrons). The fact that so many of the posters here are misusing the term "theory" indicates that they have no idea of what they're speaking with regard to science in general and are utterly clueless about evolution in specific.

    • Mitch

      August 19, 2011 at 11:17 am

      So using your definition then the theory of evolution is still unsupported by multiple observations and/or numberous experiments. There have no new species evolving from another lower species, there have been no observations of new species evolving from anywhere. There have been no repeatable experiments that show where our planet, sun, solar system came from.

      Creation theory doesn't have that proof either but at least they admit that they are a religion where as the evovlutionist refuses to.

      • B.R.

        March 6, 2012 at 9:26 pm

        "So using your definition then the theory of evolution is still unsupported by multiple observations and/or numberous experiments."

        Before you say something like that, you should research your opinions.
        http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

        You should also look up Richard Lenski and his experiment with E. Coli.

        "There have no new species evolving from another lower species, there have been no observations of new species evolving from anywhere."
        http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/03/10…

        "There have been no repeatable experiments that show where our planet, sun, solar system came from."

        But we can observe background radiation, and use logic to theorize instead of referencing a five thousand year-old creation myth as the absolute truth.

        "Creation theory doesn't have that proof either but at least they admit that they are a religion where as the evovlutionist refuses to."

        You are clearly ignorant and have no idea what you're talking about. If evolution is a "religion", then how do you explain the fossil record and micro evolution observed in the lab? How do you explain transitional fossils and vestigal forms?

  16. brsipaq

    February 20, 2012 at 2:41 pm

    According to science, you can't create something from nothing! So someone creates a 'Theory' called the Big Bang for the sole purpose of making up an alternate approach to how we came into existence.

    You note the irony? That this theory violates scientific laws.

  17. Jon

    June 3, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    Check your sources and research before saying that there is no "real" science to back it up, there is plenty!

  18. Erica

    June 15, 2011 at 1:55 pm

    I'm not a Mormon, but I don't see any reason why the Mormon story shouldn't be discussed in history class. Or any religious history for that matter. I don't care what people believe, but religion plays a huge role in MANY people's lives. A basic understanding of each set of beliefs is important for understanding people.

    Same goes for creationism and evolution. Both stories should be presented to allow students to make their own decisions or take their questions home to talk to their parents. It's not fair to exclude one or the other, especially since we don't have a definitive answer about evolution.