Teacher didn’t show class Trump’s inauguration speech because it might be full of “profanity” and discrimination

I think it’s great when elementary schools show students nationally televised political events. It helps them get engaged with how our country works at an early age. But one fourth grade teacher in Williamston, Michigan decided that Donald Trump’s inauguration might be like watching an R-rated movie and he didn’t allow his students to listen to the speech.

Parents were sent an e-mail by Explorer Elementary School teacher Brett Meteyer explaining why he would allow his class to watch the inauguration but not the address because he anticipates the president will use bad language.

Here’s what he wrote:

Dear Parents,

Because I am concerned about my students and your children being exposed to language and behavior that is not in concert with the most conservative social and family values, I have decided to show the inauguration of Donald Trump this Friday, but will not view Mr. Trump’s inauguration speech. Because every peaceful transition of power is a historic moment, I put in a request to the Trump team to preview this speech, but I have not heard back from them.

I showed the speeches of President Obama and Bush in 2009 and 2005, respectively, but I am anxious about showing Mr. Trump’s inaugural address, given his past inflammatory and degrading comments about minorities, women, and the disabled. I am also uneasy about Mr. Trump’s casual use of profanity, so I sought an assurance that as their teacher, I would not be exposing children to language that would not appear in G- or PG-rated movies.

I do not know if Mr. Trump’s speech is something that would be provided to the press or concerned citizens beforehand, but these plans may change if I hear back from them.

Hopefully,

Brett Meteyer

Watchdog.org was sent a copy of the e-mail by conservative radio host Steve Gruber whose children are in the same school district as this teacher.

“As the son of a fifth-grade teacher, it infuriates me when those in charge of our kids are trying to train them instead of teaching them,” Gruber said. “I found the letter to be outrageous.”

“What kind of message does this send to kids? ‘This president is a bad guy, and kids should not watch him’? This is a piece of history, and the kids should be allowed to watch.”

Gruber took it upon himself to contact the teacher to find out more about his reasoning, but Meteyer only said, “I don’t need to justify what I did to you.”

“I feel good about what I’ve done,” the teacher added. According to Gruber, the teacher is standing by his letter.

World history and economics teacher at Saginaw High School and adjunct professor at Northwood University John Mulloy easily notice the letter’s anti-Trump bias, and that’s where he took issue as an educator:

“Our job as teachers is to teach diversity of thought vs. what we believe in. I don’t believe that I am in the business of teaching students my political bias.

“In the same situation, I would get parental permission. The reason why is that we are so polarized & people are so strongly either pro or anti-Trump. If his motivations for sending out the letter are true then it is a sad state of affairs that we censor our own president.”

In situations like this, teachers should supply the information in an unbiased manner and let parents guide their children to conclusions about politics.  This teacher sent the wrong message: the man on the screen is bad and doesn’t deserve our respect to listen to what he has to say. And that’s not Meteyer’s decision to make.