My viewpoint on religion in schools (Read Thread Disclaimer)

[LSU2001]

I am a public high school science teacher and in my classes I only "Teach" the ideas of abiotic synthesis, evolution, big bang, etc. However I am very careful to instill in the students the meanings behind the words Scientific Fact, Scientific Law, and Scientific Theory. I usually lead a discussion that eventually evolves into a thoughtful critique of all competing ideas. I never try to tell the students what they must think or believe but I do tell them what material they are required to learn and master. One of my assignments during this section of the course is to have each student write a personal definition of the word TRUTH. I use a class period to debate the various definitions and guide the students to see what truth really is. They usually come to the conclusion on their own that TRUTH is really our current understanding of the way something is and that TRUTH can change as more understanding develops. I have found that leading the students to discovering their own beliefs using logic and reasoning is much more effective than telling them what they must believe. I further believe that organized religion of any sort has no place in the classroom. We have organized religious groups that come on campus to conduct programs and such and they do seem to serve a purpose. I have no problems with these types of programs but a classroom teacher is not qualified nor exempt from prejudice to the extent necessary to "teach religion" in a public classroom. In my opinion the state should not encroach upon religion nor should religion encroach upon the state.

Just My 2 cents,

TIm

[Terrell]

I will disagree with the separation of church and state. That is NOT in the Constitution. Instead, what we have is that no law may be passed restricting religion. IMO, prohibiting prayer and religion in the public schools violates this first amendment protection

The relevent amendments are the 1st and 14th.

The first says

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The relevent part of the 14th says:

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

For the full text of the 14 th Amendment:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/

The first amendment clearly prohibits passing laws that establish religion as well as laws that restrict religion. Those apply to everyone, the 14th amendment says that the states cannot deny a right granted by the federal government. One must also remember that your right to practice your religion end when they step on the right of anyone else to practice their religion. This means you cannot use your own physical force, or the mechanisms of government to enforce that everyone learn, follow, or practice your religion.

[DoctorHurricane2003]

Thank you lsu, I believe what you are doing is great and very important to the students you teach. It is of utmost importance to instill into the students the exact differences between Fact, Law, and Theory.

And I also agree with Terrell. The following is an extreme example, but it you can have analogies with other instances to it: Suppose someone is a member of religion x and their holy book demands that they paint a portrait of satan on a large mural and make animal sacrifices to it. Suppose this person was one of your child's teachers. Do you think this should be taught in school? Do you think this person is eligible to be leading your child in school prayer in the morning? If this person did lead your child in school prayer in the morning, would he/she be infringing on the right of your child to practice whatever religion he/she wants?

Insightful rhetorical questions.

[HurryKane]

Tim and DoctorHurricane2003, you've put into words what I've never been able to say. Thank you for doing so, and quite eloquently, I might add.

[MGC]

I consider myself fairly consertive. I don't believe religion should be taught in public school. I attended Catholic school in New Orleans and religion classes were part of the curriculum. Since it was not a public school I don't have a problem with religion in that context. I do have a problem with religion being taught at the public school level. It would be impossible to accomadate everyone. And say for a second the Christian classes are full and they want to stick little Johnney in saw the Muslin class. I'm sure that would go over well. What would happen if your child's religion was excluded. What about the Satanist? It would be impossible to implement and would be too controversial and cost too much because off all the lawsuits.......MGC

[Derek Ortt]

where does it say that what I proposed is forcing anyone to learn religion? All I advocate is mandatory learning about religion as it is very important to udnerstanding the world and the current conflicts. Young people today have ZERO clue regarding the reasons for the religious conflicts and an understanding of their causes is the first step to ending them

The right to be free of religion ends where my right to practice it begins. An ELECTIVE class does not in any way infringe upon your rights to not be a part because enrollement in the class is VOLUNTARY

[DoctorHurricane2003]

But see, that coursework is what is (supposed to be anyway) taught in Western Heritage courses. I know I got that subject matter in five different courses, most of which were required. That is really what those courses are for since religion influenced a great amount of Western Heritage. Specific courses for religious conflicts are not necessary.

[wxcrazytwo]

You are equating Grad School to High School?

No, not even close. Even more so it should not be taught in HS.

[Terrell]

where does it say that what I proposed is forcing anyone to learn religion? All I advocate is mandatory learning about religion as it is very important to udnerstanding the world and the current conflicts. Young people today have ZERO clue regarding the reasons for the religious conflicts and an understanding of their causes is the first step to ending them

Mandatory learning about religion is exactly the problem here. When something is mandatory, by definition people are forced to comply with it.

Dictonary.com's relevent definition of mandatory:
man·da·to·ry ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mnd-tôr, -tr)
adj.
Required or commanded by authority; obligatory: Attendance at the meeting is mandatory.

Link for the other definitions.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Mandatory

The right to be free of religion ends where my right to practice it begins. An ELECTIVE class does not in any way infringe upon your rights to not be a part because enrollement in the class is VOLUNTARY

That works both ways, your right to practice your religion also ends where my right to be free of your religion begins, to argue otherwise is to say that your rights as a religious person trump the rights of anyone who believes differently or not at all.

As to an elective, it does violate the rights of those who believe differently if it's in the public schools. It does so because the tax dollars of all law abiding Americans pay for that religion to be taught, even those who don't suscribe to that religion are being forced to finance it.

[DoctorHurricane2003]

wxcrazy, you aren't making any sense to me. I'm going to ask you to clarify your reasoning to me....just being nice. You said that sometimes electives are mandatory because that's the only one there, and you brought up your Grad School as an example. Grad School, in this sense, is much different than high school as I do have to admit it is like comparing apples and oranges. Now if your high school was like that, I could see your point.

Terrell...a good way to solve that is during the next regularly scheduled election, if a school board is asked to add an optional elective such as that, there could be a referendum on the ballot for it. In terms of school funding, in FL for example, property taxes from across the state and other moneys are gathered in Tallahassee and redistributed to the county school districts based on population. The school district gets to decide what to do with this money, and if the residents of the said school district approve of their money going toward an elective religious class, that in my opinion, is perfectly acceptable, especially since your taxpayer money is just going to fund what can basically be termed a philosophy class.

[Dr. Jonah Rainwater]

Comparative Religion is a class I would love to take and is really an important subject for everybody to take.

Unfortunately, I don't think there are enough unbiased teachers in this country to ever do it at the high school level.

[wxcrazytwo]

wxcrazy, you aren't making any sense to me. I'm going to ask you to clarify your reasoning to me....just being nice. You said that sometimes electives are mandatory because that's the only one there, and you brought up your Grad School as an example. Grad School, in this sense, is much different than high school as I do have to admit it is like comparing apples and oranges. Now if your high school was like that, I could see your point.

Terrell...a good way to solve that is during the next regularly scheduled election, if a school board is asked to add an optional elective such as that, there could be a referendum on the ballot for it. In terms of school funding, in FL for example, property taxes from across the state and other moneys are gathered in Tallahassee and redistributed to the county school districts based on population. The school district gets to decide what to do with this money, and if the residents of the said school district approve of their money going toward an elective religious class, that in my opinion, is perfectly acceptable, especially since your taxpayer money is just going to fund what can basically be termed a philosophy class.

I never said it was mandatory. In college and I think you know what I am talking about, there electives that you don't want to take, but because of financial aid reasons you have to take it because it is all there is. In High School I have no clue about electives, as it has been awhile.

YOU RIGHT DOCTOR, I AM MAKING NO SENSE AS IT IS MIDNIGHT. GOODNIGHT MY FRIEND AND I AM GUESSING WE WILL TALK TOMORROW.

[DoctorHurricane2003]

In college and I think you know what I am talking about, there electives that you don't want to take, but because of financial aid reasons you have to take it because it is all there is. In High School I have no clue about electives, as it has been awhile.

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about there. lol There are TONS of electives to choose from, whether I was at PJC or PSU...one doesn't cost more than the other unless you are talking about those classes that go to France, kayaking and sailing off of Cape Romaine or in the Chesapeake (those are real ones I saw here)

Hope you got some good rest!