-- 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."
Yes, BB, but little school children? Even their teachers are mostly incompetent to do what you suggest. The people most able to weigh the evidence and sift through competing explanations are those who have already learned the basic material and are now advancing the state of their science. I'm talking about research PhD types, who have the intellect and the educational background to do what you suggest. I fear that if you toss all that stuff at kids in school they'll come away totally confused.
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.
3493 -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.
In context, they are clearly trying to force the state to present a religious POV in public schools.
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.)
States must abide by the bill of rights, - see the Supremacy Clause, Art VI.
The religion clause has two parts -- the first one says that the government may not "establish" any particular religious sect as a national religion;
Not at all. - It says "make no law respecting an establishment of religion". Religious dogma, books, etc, are all among the 'establishments of religion', as the word was used in those days. It was used as an all encompassing term. - The USSC agrees.
the second part bars the government from "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (i.e., the free exercise of religion).
Exactly. -- In the private sector, free exercise could not be prohibited, -- but the government at all levels was so prohibited.
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.
Equal time for religious theory in public schoools would promote instruction in 'an establishment of religion', -- religious thought & principles.
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.
As noted elsewhere, I could see these types of theories taught at higher levels, collage prep, etc, - but in grade schools? - No.
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."
Public schools should not, and need not, be involved in any sort of 'indoctrination'. If we must have such schools, they must be kept non-sectarian.
Interesting, BB. One of the deplorable trends in education is the popular notion that there is no right or wrong, only differences of opinion. Fortunately, science education, despite attacks from multiple fronts, is still about a monopoly of truth. And so it is that the best, most scientific theories are still presented as frameworks for the facts. Facts alone don't form themselves into stories. Presenting students with reems of numbers, which is what most of these facts are, would not serve anybody's interest.
The Flute Playing Locust, the Scietologists, the Moslem version of Gilgamesh (as opposed to the Creationist version of Gilgamesh), the Yoruba version, the story of Quetzalcoatl (with particular attention to Tlaloc), etc. Okay for a history course but only wasting time for science.