Missing some points

There were significant errors of fact in your article, "Waldorf opponents lose in court decision."

First, your article incorrectly said that Judge Damrell ruled that the lawsuit "will not go before a jury." There was no ruling in this regard. On Monday, Judge Damrell, in fact, conducted a "bench" trial (without a jury) and in this trial, People for Legal and Non Sectarian Schools (PLANS) lost their lawsuit against the two public school districts as your headline correctly stated.

Secondly, your article incorrectly repeated PLANS' primary untruthful assertion, namely that anthroposophy is a religion. This was the key threshhold issue in the lawsuit and PLANS failed to present even one acceptable piece of evidence or one witness - the PLANS assertertion was totally discredited in court. But PLANS would like The Union readers to believe otherwise. To paraphrase the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals from a similar situation: "Absent feathers, webbed feet, a bill, and a quack, this bird just ain't a duck!" PLANS can repetitiously call anthroposophy a religion, but that does not make it so.

Anthroposophy is a method of spiritual inquiry, it is a support to an individual's religious strivings. Society members are from all religious faiths - Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, even non-believers.

Third, your article attributed "tenents in Waldorf instruction" to the Anthroposophical Society. This is another piece of misinformation and a complete falsehood. The Society offers no "tenents", suggests no practices or procedures to Waldorf-method public schools or independent Waldorf schools.

Jean W. Yeager

Administrative Director, The Anthroposophical Society in America