Skip to comments.Sisters High School biology teacher fired [Nazi/Planned Parenthood Powerpoint Made Public]
Posted on 03/24/2007 10:44:48 PM PDT by Diago
Mar 23,2007 00:00 by Alisha Wilson
Board member releases teachers powerpoint presentation; says it was a calculated decision on his part to bend young minds
Kris Helphinstine, a part-time biology teacher at Sisters High School was fired by the school board Monday night for deviating from the curriculum on the theory of evolution after only eight days on the job, four of which were spent teaching his own theories of evolution through a PowerPoint presentation that referenced Nazi Germany and Planned Parenthood.
When asked why Helphinstine was dismissed, school board chairman Mike Gould said, He lacked judgment in departing from the district science curriculum in a very controversial subject area and this departure occurred without any consultation or without an appropriate supervisor. This is a sensitive area. When teachers teach in certain areas, they have to teach it straight down the line.
He taught that evolution doesnt exist, said seven-year board member Glen Lasken. Of course we want our students to think, but this went beyond that. He spent four days dismantling the theory of evolution for these kids. He was terminated for a gross error in judgment, without checking with the superintendent or principal. This was an extreme error in judgment.
In a phone interview, 27-year old Helphinstine said that his whole purpose was to promote critical thinking. Eugenics, the self directed evolution of mankind is an interesting subject. Every teacher brings in supplemental material. What is standard curriculum? asked Helphinstine who has a masters degree in science from Oregon State University.
The PowerPoint presentation included photos of dead bodies taken during the Holocaust and referenced a 1941 article printed in The Journal of American Psychiatric Association calling for the killing of mentally retarded children, referred to as natures mistakes.
He was trying to make the point that not only is evolution wrong; he suggested that evolution is used for bad purposes. Evolution was used as an experimental basis in Nazi Germany. He said the founding fathers of Planned Parenthood are Nazis. His PowerPoint presentation of the Holocaust is pretty revolting stuff. What is most discouraging is that he says he was trying to encourage critical thinking. This was a calculated decision on his part to bend young minds, says Lasken.
Board members met with Helphinstine in private for approximately 90 minutes before a public meeting on the matter, though the teacher did not stay for the public forum.
Mr. Helphinstine was dismissed for failing to teach science in a freshman biology class. He didnt expressly teach Creationism but provided significant messages from advocacy groups in his presentation. The materials he submitted were not age appropriate, said board member Jeff Smith.
(Both links will open in a new browser window.)
This should be fun.
LOL. Okay. Let me read it.
Anyone have the straight PPT file? Having problems with this powerpoint/web link. Whether one agrees with the teacher's approach or not, he seems to have prepared some compelling material.
I never taught creationism, he said. I know what it is, and I went out of my way not to teach it.
...so trashing the president and claiming that the US is a state that spreads racism and violence is covered under "free speech", but challenging the orgins of Planned Parenthood crosses the line. Gotcha...
Opening it in Mozilla didn't work for me, but Internet Explorer did.
He is right, what is different between Hitler killing off all the mentally ill and aborting babies that may have Down's syndrome? And that's without even challenging Darwin's theory.
You believe this belongs in a high school biology class?
Bend & Sisters are in Oregon
**Bend & Sisters are in Oregon**
Your are so right. We do have some conservatives here.
She should have been fired for presenting Nazi stuff. Goes without saying
ping for later reading
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
No, that stuff is actually under "required curriculum."
Absolutely. Are we suppose to ignore history or pretend it didn't happen because it's ugly??? High school is absolutely the right time to teach it when you consider that in the latest census the data shows that only 1 in 4 Americans have a BA. The biggest complaint we have about the left is how ill informed they are.
If by asking that question you mean to say that you don't believe that it should, I don't even know where to begin with that comment. What part do you object to? The pictures? How else are we to educate each and every person alive how horrible the Holocaust was? Are we to just say it was bad and then leave it alone?
Joseph Goebbels said getting people to carry out the executions of women and children was easy, all that was needed was to take one step at a time and man could be made to believe and do anything. He said they could have never got a soldier to step forward and kill a harmless child, but if you told him to brake a window he would do it, then if you told him to brake two windows he would do it, then if you told him to brake all the windows and then set the house on fire and then 2 houses and then 3 he would do each task because the next wasn't much worse than the last.
So which direction do you want our children to walk? If we don't show them the pictures, what is next? Not telling them it happened? How many steps away will we be when it happens again?
If it's not the pictures, but the subject, why should we not present all sides to students? You don't have to believe in God to be a moralist. The moral question must be presented to people who could be faced with this decision sometime in their life, they shouldn't walk into any situation blind to all the possibilities. Would you let someone walk out into the street after telling them that if there are no cars coming from the right they will be safe but not warn them that there may be cars coming from the left too?
The left claims that people should be free to make their own choices, but if the choices aren't all presented then there really is no freedom of choice. They teach Darwin's theory without teaching about Darwin, people should know that the man whose theory challenges the existence of God cursed God and blamed him for the death of his daughter. The fact that Darwin was biased is important to know and because of that fact his conclusions should be challenged. But schools don't teach that, they present Darwin's theory as fact.
Teacher fired for telling high school students the truth about eugenics. These are facts that the radical left tries (usually with great success) to keep hidden.
Ummm, yeah! It's without even challenging Newton, or Einstein as well. Dude, put down your hash pipe. Take a blow.
**Bend & Sisters are in Oregon**
"Your are so right. We do have some conservatives here."
The reason I posted that was that some items get posted which don't include locations.
Yes, I know that both Oregon & Washington have large numbers of conservatives.
Several years ago there was a tax measure on the ballot in WA. The measure failed in every county except King (Seattle). The measure passed statewide because of the heavy King vote.
Not necessarily--it definitely wasn't supportive of Nazism.
Can you even at least present an argument or are you only skilled at making insults and accusations of drug use?
Big BUMP to that.
Enough with the petty smoking insults.
The guy was apparently fired (at least in part) because he held anti-Macroevolutionary views--and showed them. txroadkill simply showed how some of what was presented didn't directly challenge Macroevolution.
But you said it yourself, "that's without even challenging Darwin's theory." Logically, this places Darwin's theory in the same category as any number of propositions, insofar as it remains unchallenged by the imputations which you ascribe to the powerpoint.
So it seems I am the one waiting for an argument that DOES challenge Darwin's theory.
BTW, the hash pipe I refer to is metaphorical.
But isn't eugenics microevolutionary? I believe the distinction is made only for the purpose of admitting that "microevolution" does take place. Then if eugenicists want to practice artificial microevolution, how is this it that this is an outrage against anti-Macroevolutionary views?
I've been through the presentations and I don't understand how any of this was inappropriate for high school freshman.
Word to the not so wise. When in hostile territory, like academia, don't start sending up flares.
Teaching the truth about Darwinism, eugenics, and the Nazi connection is NOT politcially correct, and offends the religious zealots in the evol camp who like to think they are smarter, better and "more evolved" than everyone else.
I was posting on these issues here years ago, and the howls of outrage that emanated from evolution's
"true believers" were matched only by those who believe in man-made caused global warming, another generation's descent into "junk science madness."
I will repost some of this material and watch the howls of protest come from the evolutionary left here.
Necrophilia sure belongs in a biology class, because this involves judging genes a posteriory, but so conveniently after they've been destroyed, in typical progressist/Nazi manner.
"In the early history of the race, so-called "natural law" reigned undisturbed. Under its pitiless and unsympathetic iron rule, only the strongest, most courageous could live and become progenitors of the race. The weak died early or were killed. Today, however, civilization has brought sympathy, pity, tenderness and other lofty and worthy sentiments, which interfere with the law of natural selection. We are now in a state where our charities, our compensation acts, our pensions, hospitals, and even our drainage and sanitary equipment all tend to keep alive the sickly and the weak, who are allowed to propagate and in turn produce a race of degenerates."
"They [secular humanists] have reduced Man to even less than his natural finiteness by seeing him only as a complex arrangement of molecules, made complex by blind chance. Instead of seeing him as something great who is significant even in his sinning, they see Man in his essence only as an intrinsically competitive animal, that has no other basic operating principle than natural selection brought about by the strongest, the fittest, ending on top. And they see Man as acting in this way both individually and collectively as society."
Evolution provides a rational, scientific basis for genocide that makes effette intellectuals feel better about themselves after a hard day's barbarity. Picture Ghengis Khan in a white lab coat and horn-rimmed glasses.
People who defend evolution are ultimately defending the likes of Margaret Sanger and Peter Singer. After all, it's much easier for some of our evolutionist friends here to provide intellectual affirmation to butchers than it is to do the dirty work themselves.
6 Posted on 04/02/2000 20:53:45 PDT by Stingray
More quotes that link Darwinist thought to Nazi execution (in Hitler's and Sanger's own words, no less) in a later post.
At that age they're supposed to be putting condoms on bananas.
They actually had a person from Planned Parenthood come give a sex education class at my daughter's school. I was the only parent who would not sign a permission form. The principal called me and tried to talk me into to signing it, so my daughter wouldn't feel ostrasized by my actions. My daughter didn't want to go and I didn't want her to go. I told the principle what my daughter told me, "We have already had a discussion on the matter and she didn't need anymore instruction."
It turns out that yes they had a banana demonstration and each of the girls had to in turn show that they learned how to do it correctly on their own banana. For weeks after the girls had to listen to banana jokes from the boys. Other girls told my daughter that they wish their parents had made them have to go sit in the principal's office instead of going to the class.
A little snip from NuggetNews.com, from a link Diago posted in an earlier thread on this:
One parent, John Rahm, said his daughter reported that only "one day of 10" was devoted to the study of evolution, with the rest devoted to "Intelligent Design" materials.
"The test as well was 90-plus percent ID material," Rahm said.
When asked by The Nugget if he believes the Bible is the final authority when determining scientific fact, Helphinstine said that assumptions have been made about him that are not accurate. However, he acknowledged that he was not responding directly to the question.
Is this what so-called conservatives are pushing for? Science teachers that use a holy book, a religious book, for the final determining of what is and is not valid scientific evidence or facts. But..but..but I thought creationists were not anti-science??
One thing that everyone is glossing over here, is that the childrens' parents complained. Just as parents complain when some Health teacher demonstrates putting condoms on fruit. They do not want their children taught sexual stuff at school.
Yet in this case, some posters here think that their wish to shove ID and creationism into the classroom supercedes the parents' right to object to their kids being taught bad (junk)science. And objecting to what should be a science class turned into a bizarre presentation about Nazism and Planned Parenthood.
No, just less nutty and far, far less paranoid. Seriously, what is it with some (not all) of you creationists? (or for those that like to use weasel tactics, IDists)
Over on another thread about this, some lady that praised this teacher is hawking her newsletter (just send 2 dollars to the address)for info on the Tri-Lateral Commission the Foreign Relations Committee and Builderbirgers and how they're some "shadow government" putting the pieces in place and controlling the puppets towards The New World Order.
There is another creationist dude on here that thinks the "globalists" and the ETs; aliens that have made contact, little green or grey men, have some sort of secret cabal and are planning on doing something with a hologram or holograph projector to try and induce a crisis of faith and drive people apart from Christ. I kid you not.
I was posting on these issues here years ago, and the howls of outrage that emanated from evolution's "true believers"........ I will repost some of this material and watch the howls of protest come from the evolutionary left here.
I doubt those were howls of outrage. At any rate, I can guarantee that the howls you will hear on this thread are howls of laughter at such ignorance and strawman bufoonery.
Ooops. Not PC. Off with his head.
Sanger and Singer can go to hell for all I care. People here are not so much defending evolution, as they are objecting to religious dogma, myth and crank wackiness, being presented as scientific theories. You can expect the same reaction if the ID nuts ever decide to start teaching that the earth is the center of the universe or that it is only 6-10,000 years old. Or that angels--oops! I mean Invisible Agents of an Intelligent Designer, hold airplanes aloft and make them fly.
After all, it's much easier for some of our evolutionist friends here to provide intellectual affirmation to butchers than it is to do the dirty work themselves.
It's much easier for Creationists and ID dupes to try their darnedest to link a scientific theory that their interpretation of the Bible clashes with, to atrocities like the Holocaust, or outright lie and call people that are not anti-science, leftist liberals...than it is for them to do some actual research and tests and produce some papers or fossil predictions, DNA marker predictions, ANYTHING, that points to Intelligent Design being a workable theory.
Instead all they produce is whiny press release after press release and hold conference after conference.
Good for you and especially for your daughter!!
He brings up a lot of good points, and I like his opinions but it's probably not a good idea to have this guy teach high school. We can't have it both ways.
College, on the other hand...
I believe that Evolutionism is junk science. I object to you robbing me and my compatriots of $7,000 per-child, per-year in Tax Dollars to force my kid to learn Evolutionist Junk pseudo-Science.
Total Privatization of all schooling is the only moral choice.