James Corbett's Anti-Establishment Comment

An Anti-Establishment Comment
A federal judge finds Capo Valley High teacher James Corbett violated student Chad Farnan’s rights by talking smack about creationism

Sometimes karma is a bitch. And it seems karma came back and bit Capistrano Valley High School history teacher James Corbett in the butt late last week, when a federal judge found that Corbett had violated a student’s First Amendment rights—with a single statement Corbett made in his classroom about one of his former colleagues.

Chad Farnan, a sophomore in Corbett’s Advanced Placement European History class, sued Corbett in late 2007 for allegedly insulting Christians and Christianity during class time (see “Class Warfare,” April 9, 2008). Snippets of the hours of tape Farnan secretly recorded in Corbett’s class and submitted with his lawsuit were leaked to the media, and both student and teacher made instant, national headlines. Corbett received death threats; Farnan created a website and chatted on national TV with Bill O’Reilly; ex-students from Corbett’s class (Christian and non-Christian alike) protested the lawsuit at the school, created a Facebook fan site and sent hundreds of letters of support (including one from a former student who was Sarah Palin’s press secretary).

Last week, after more than a year of failed mediation meetings and delayed rulings, with the case on the verge of going to trial, the suit came to a close with federal district court Judge James Selna’s summary judgment. Headlines instantly cast Corbett as “guilty” of “insulting Christians.” But although the judge ruled against Corbett for one comment, he ruled that Corbett had not violated the constitution with the more than 20 other statements submitted for scrutiny in the case.

In an exclusive interview with the Weekly, Corbett says he felt “beaten up” after the ruling was issued on Friday. “I expected to win. I expected the whole case would be thrown out,” he says. But after rereading it and thinking about it, he says he’s come to different conclusions with regard to the judgments in his favor. “I think it’s a victory for the right of teachers to provoke students into thinking,” he says. “The judge was quite perspicacious in recognizing that I’m really, in general, not hostile to anyone’s religious point of view.”

The statement Selna found to have violated the Establishment Clause for expressing a “disapproval” of religion wasn’t the now-famous “Jesus glasses” statement. Selna tossed that quote out, stating in his ruling that once the quote was placed in context, “One cannot say that Corbett’s primary purpose here was to criticize Christianity or religion.”

The troublesome quote had to do with John Peloza, a biology teacher who openly taught creationism at Capistrano Valley High and who sued the district in 1991, alleging he was being forced to teach “the religion” of evolution. Corbett was also named in that suit (he was the adviser to the student newspaper then). The suit was dismissed and called “frivolous” by a U.S. district judge, who agreed with the district’s position that Peloza improperly violated state-mandated science curricula by teaching creationism.

In class, Corbett recounted what he said to an attorney years ago: “I said I would be willing to sign a release, freeing the district from any obligation to defend me, but that I would not allow John Peloza to propagandize kids with this superstitious, religious nonsense,” he says. That statement was recorded by Farnan and submitted with his suit. “The court cannot discern a legitimate secular purpose in this statement, even when considered in context,” Selna writes. Thus, the statement constitutes “improper disapproval of religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.”

The Farnans’ lawyer, Jennifer Monk, says that the single ruling against Corbett is enough for them to consider the suit victorious. “The judge determined that Corbett violated the Establishment Clause,” she says. “That’s all we need, whether it was one statement or a lot of statements.” Chad Farnan did not respond to the Weekly’s requests for comment.

Monk says the Farnans are seeking nominal fees, an injunction preventing Corbett from “teaching this way in the future,” and training for—and monitoring of—the teacher. “This isn’t about Dr. Corbett’s ability to teach; it’s about his disapproval of religion in the classroom,” she says.

Corbett says he hopes to appeal the decision. What worries him, he says, is the federal precedent the ruling against him has set. “You’d almost have to survey the class to find out what their beliefs are so you wouldn’t insult anyone,” he says. “We have kids who are Wiccan. We have every religion in the world, and atheists and agnostics. The decision puts teachers in a position of not knowing what they can and can’t say.”

daltan@ocweekly.com

Portions of this story appeared previously on the Weekly’s Navel Gazing blog.

 

 
  • Shawn 05/13/2009 12:17:00 PM

    I've read the comments on this article and could say a great many things in response to the articles, but I won't. I was a student at Capistrano Valley for High School for all 4 years of high school, and had Dr. Corbett for only one high school. Suffice it to say that of all the names and events I remember from those glorious years (sometimes not so glorious), I only remember 3 teacher's names, one of which was Dr. Corbett's. I remember their names for one reason and one reason only: they got you to think. In all the mindless blabber that is taught in public schools today, these three men were able to realize the real purpose for education, which is to not only teach a curriculum required by some beaurocrat in some office somewhere, but also to give your students the gift of independent thought. Now I rarely agreed with Dr. Corbett, but i always appreciated his ability to take those precious moments of class time and use them to get you to stop and ponder the important things in life. Anybody who knows teanagers knows you HAVE to be edgy in modern society to keep their attention and get through to them. I support Dr. Corbett!!!

  • CHS 05/12/2009 11:37:00 PM

    This case shows the problem with teaching a college-level course (AP European History) in a high school, especially when the students can include a sophomore like Chad was at the time. European history - like the the history of any region, culture, etc. - can include some pretty grim stuff. Christianity and especially the Roman Catholic Church deserve criticism. Unfortunately, your typical 15-year-old cannot separate the "wheat" (valid teaching) from the "chaff" (teacher mouthing off) and embrace the wheat and just ignore the chaff. Poor Chad simply wasn't mature enough to know that teacher was trying to stimulate the students' minds with some shocking statements. I'll look forward to having Chad in class at Cal State Fullerton in a few years. Perhaps he will sue me, too, after I criticize a Republican or something awful like that. P.S. I am a Christian and I disagree with Corbett's statements. However, a secular court is not the proper forum for "judging" him.

  • Andrea 05/12/2009 5:42:00 AM

    �NEWSFLASH: Orange County is home to multiple religions.� BREAKING: Teachers whose salaries, benefits and pensions are paid by taxpayers are not paid to inculcate students with their worldviews. Mr. Corbett�s lesson plans should not include his personal beliefs about politics and religion. (His rant about murder, rape and church attendance in the South was particularly offensive not least because he offered false data. Unless he thinks Michigan and Minnesota are in the South. I suppose facts are too heavy to lift, stubborn little things that they are, when one has it one his mind to offer fallacious arguments.) Anyway, of course, Mr. Corbett should not have to conduct surveys to ascertain his students' religious beliefs so as to not offend anyone, but he ought to refrain from editorializing about a particular belief system, especially when much of what he has to say is how stupid its adherents are. Really, his teaching talents are as suspect as that spaghetti monster of his if he cannot get through a lecture about feudal society without pontificating on the utter lameness of people who pray. I think it is perfectly fine for Corbett and a legion of Corbetts to challenge their students to think about what they believe and why they believe it. But that is not what he was doing. And what he was doing was not what he gets paid � with taxpayer dollars � to do.

  • Andrea 05/12/2009 4:45:00 AM

    Setting aside the evolution vs. creationism debate, a teacher who tells his class �When you pray for divine intervention, you're hoping that the spaghetti monster will help you get what you want� is not fit for the classroom. How does he know that? He cannot possibly prove that. So why does he make such a claim in a discussion that is supposed to be tempered with logic and reason? And what does that have to do with European History? Could it be that he is less interested in a discussion that challenges presuppositions with logic and reason, then he is with making snide remarks at the expense of those whose beliefs he does not share? Yes, yes it could. At a time when real teachers are losing their jobs because of the state-wide budget crisis, it is a shame that this imposter still has his. I cannot but think that if he had directed his remarks at Islam, he would be sitting somewhere playing solitaire while his case was under review. Funny how people are so selective about tolerance and understanding in this multi-cultural society of ours. Also, it must be said that the man has a weird fixation on pasta. What is with all the spaghetti monsters? Some childhood trauma involving starch?

  • CDub 05/12/2009 3:48:00 AM

    As an atheist, I was not expecting to say this, but, I think the judge was absolutely right. That one specific comment, calling creationism "superstitious, religious nonsense" was not appropriate to say in a public high school. Meaning, a government-funded, taxpayer-supported, public school. The first amendment means the school (and its agents, such as its teachers) should not be supporting one religion over all others, but it also means it should not be supporting "no religion" over all religions, too. As for the comments about how it means you don't know what you can say unless you know what religion everyone in your class is, well, here's a tip - if what you can or cannot say depends on your audience, by definition you shouldn't say it!

  • hoosh 05/11/2009 6:55:00 AM

    Right, let's completely lambast a Judge who has more legal knowledge than everyone who bothers to comment on this page, including myself. If you actually read the court papers, you would realize how pathetic Chad Farnan is. Tailoring your recordings in the hopes that the legal proceedings take Dr. Corbett's sayings out of context is juvenile, and belongs on sugar-coated legal shows like Law and Order. Judge Selna understood that Corbett did not attack a religion, and as he is no omniscient being, he can not teach with the hopes of not offending religions in the world. NEWSFLASH: Orange County is home to multiple religions. The selection of posts on this story, including the tone of this editorial, represent the closed-minded nature of those who cower in the face of critical comments made in the name of the Christian church. Dr. Corbett is a smart intellectual who should not be subservient to the pitchforks and torches of psychotic religious zealots.

  • wgnac1961 05/10/2009 5:21:00 AM

    Corbett, you are unfit to teach.

  • tony 05/09/2009 8:45:00 PM

    how is this not a hate crime? it would certainly be so if corbett had insulted any other religion in the same way. where's the legions of aclu lawyers when you need them? oh, thats right, theyre hanging out with amnesty international to make sure that terrorists are set free.

  • Len Lemmer 05/09/2009 6:55:00 PM

    I find Corbett's comments in a classroom beyond belief. Do teachers have the right to indoctrinate their students with this liberal anti-Christian ideology? I would be as concerned if Corbett was a conservative, and his rant was pro-Christian conservative. I believe, however, that Corbett would not support my right to my conservative rant. My problem, is more with Judge Selna, than with Corbett. All of Corbett's statements were offensive, not just one. If I can use my conservative pro-Christian anology again, I am certain that Judge Selna, would have ruled any reference to Christianity as violations of the First Amendment. If true, any anti-Christianity remarks fall into the same class of statements. This whole situation, is a poor example of what the parents at Capistrano Valley allow in their classrooms. Teacher Corbett is a disgrace. Unfortunately, so is Judge Selna.

 

Most Popular Stories

Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy