Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: betty boop
"I hate to say it, but it seems clear enough that there are at least a few people at FR who would like to give a monopoly to the "evo" side of the debate, at least as far as educating (indoctrinating) our children is concerned. I wonder how these people square that imperative with the First Amendment...." -BB-


So Betty, -- you reject the conclusion below?


--- "the Louisiana Family Forum, a Christian lobbying group" ---
---- "said the state should force publishers to offer alternatives, correct mistakes in textbooks and fill in gaps in science teachings. "We are talking about major falsehoods that should be addressed"


-- To me, it is fairly obvious that Christian groups are the ones trying to 'indoctrinate kids into religion'.
And, --- that the state is simply obliged to 'make no law respecting' any establishments of religions.


3,493 posted on 01/07/2003 12:42:37 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3483 | View Replies ]


To: tpaine
....the Louisiana Family Forum, a Christian lobbying group ... said the state should force publishers to offer alternatives, correct mistakes in textbooks and fill in gaps in science teachings. "We are talking about major falsehoods that should be addressed...."

-- To me, it is fairly obvious that Christian groups are the ones trying to 'indoctrinate kids into religion'. And, --- that the state is simply obliged to 'make no law respecting' any establishments of religions.

Hi tpaine! WRT to Louisiana Family Forum: I dislike the word "force." Other than that, I think LFF is simply exercising its First Amendment rights; i.e., to peaceably assemble for the purpose of petitioning the government to rectify a grievance. The grievance is that the government is in violation of its First Amendment responsibility to uphold the second phrase of the "religion clause": the LFF wishes to recall the government to its constitutional obligations. (These are all state matters anyway, it seems to me; so we really need to look at state constitutions to see what is permissible within a given jurisdiction.)

The religion clause has two parts -- the first one says that the government may not "establish" any particular religious sect as a national religion; the second part bars the government from "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (i.e., the free exercise of religion).

What are we really talking about here? IMHO, no one is seeking to "establish religion" here. What is at stake is the ending of a certain monopoly in educational instruction of the life sciences in the public schools.

Personally, I have no objection to the theory of evolution being taught in the public schools. I strongly doubt LFF is trying to censor it, they are just looking for "equal time" in what amounts to a key cultural as well as scientific debate.

However, I would like to see other theories that man has evolved dealing with issues of origins taught right along side of it (e.g., ID, Punk-Eek, even Genesis as a "baseline theory" if you will). Present all relevant information fairly, in a balanced way, and you will simply be carrying out the mandate of excellence in education.

People who have an opportunity to work through a wide variety of materials, and drawing their own conclusions therefrom -- this is the only way I know of to really and truly "learn" anything -- are getting "educated," not "indoctrinated."

3,506 posted on 01/07/2003 1:35:48 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3493 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson