What historical problems are you referring to?
This is interesting since my Daughters were taught Key components of the Islamic Faith as well as Buddhism and others. Yet they were never instructed on the bible in school. Because apparently teaching western components of the bible is bad but it is ok to discuss Islam and Buddhism.
The basic tenants are key to historical references.
There is nothing in the US Constitution that forbids the promoting of Christianity in school. The Lemon ruling was a violation of the 1st A in that it abridged the free exercise clause. Lemon apparently never read or understood the foundation of the 1st A, if he did he would have known it intended a strict prohibition on the central governments creation of a state religion as well as a prohibition on the central government restricting, in any way, shape or form, free exercise of religion.
Nobody elected the aclu to anything.
Would you be OK with public schools promoting Islam, or Hindu? Or Satanism?
There is a reason for the wall of separation.
Intertwining government and religion, screws them both up.
Unless you are a fan of countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran, where there is no wall of separation.
How many bother with Shakespeare after high school or college?
I got the book thrown at me for falling asleep during “The Taming of the Shrew” in high school English class.
A Bible as Literature or even Comparative Religion elective would have been far more interesting & information to learn during class time.
Promoting Christianity in school IS establishing a religion. It doesn’t establish a “this is the church you have to go to” religion, but it does establish a “this is the religion that will be promoted” religion. i.e. it puts Christianity above other religions. Those who know this history of the 1st ammendment know that one of its purposes was to avoid a situation like the Church of England where there is an Official Sect that is given preferential treatement.
Teaching what various faiths have to teach?
Yes, especially as it can relate to current issues & events. For instance how many know that the Rig Vedas teach Hell for whoever harms the baby of a pregnant woman, yet more abortion of baby girls in particular take place in Hindu majority provinces in India than in the one Muslim majority one?
I have no problem with a comparative religion class that teaches about the various religions, and their effects on human history. History would be incomplete if the influence of religion was not discussed.
I was responding to the claim:
“There is nothing in the US Constitution that forbids the promoting of Christianity in school.”
I believe the 1st does forbid the promotion of any religion in public schools.
As does many SCOTUS decisions.
Thank you ACLU.
Shakespeare was an important historical figure in literature. That’s typically the only place you learn about him, and it’s not so much that you spend a lot of time learning about him in school, but rather that modern day society was a whole was so greatly influenced by his genre (the stage) that he’s sort of captured a place in history without even being a huge focus in school. I mean, in my AP English class we studied Shakespeare, but we also studied Mary Shelley, Mark Twain, The Bible (specifically the story of Job), etc. etc. etc. And my literature/English classes were the only places we talked about Shakespeare, other than maybe a brief mention in World History.
People follow religion after they have graduated because of deeply held family and personal beliefs, and school should have nothing to do with that.
Well…don’t we typically look down upon nations that force “spirit” down peoples’ throats? That’s part of why the US was specifically founded with religious freedom, often interpreted as “separation of church and state”, bearing such importance, as that was the reason we sought to form a new nation in the first place.
Or more correctly, we don’t want to look for answers because the results may not coincide with my personally held or religious beliefs.
From what I can find online, there are roughly 100,000 schools in America. By comparison, there are roughly 300,000 churches in America (though the numbers may vary depending on the source).
The church has no business dealing with “the spirit” in matters of religion. The big problem is deciding WHICH religion will be taught or focused on-or will it cover multiple religions-and what will be covered-and WHO will teach this class?
I simply don’t think religion has a place being taught in schools.
Now I have no problem with this like See You at the Pole, prayers before football games, religious clubs, etc. Those can exist without the school/government forcing anyone to participate.
Generally, world religions ARE taught historically, and that’s caused some problems in my home state of TN. Some parents have LOST THEIR MINDS when they found out their students were learning about Islam, and DEMANDED to know why they weren’t being taught about Christianity. What those parents don’t get is that their students ARE taught about Christianity as well-they’re both in the school curriculum, available for all to see.
I simply don’t find it possible for a public school to strike a balance of fairness to teach religion. Private school and church are the places to go for that, and it should remain that way (IMO).
Shakespeare bored me out of my mind. I learned just enough to pass the tests.
That’s a terrible argument.
That would be up to the community, as it once was before Lemon.
No it is not. The 1st A was not an impediment to the states, it only impacted the central government. Also, a community or state promoting Christianity or any other religion does not = establishment. When promoting Christianity you would have to be more exacting, Baptist, Methodist, Catholic so on, so forth. But even then, States are free to establish a state religion if they choose.
Wait, you think the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to states?
Wait, are you serious?
I’d say that instruction into a religion is the purview of family and clergy and congregation, not public schools.
Of course he is.
Keep in mind, he is also very anti Islam, basically saying it is a way to recruit terrorist, as it really is not a religion, but more of a radical ideology.
So, it would be interesting if a state wanted to establish Islam, if he would support that.
Going to Mass every Sunday as a kid bored me out of my mind.
I listed the Philly Nativist Riots as an example.