From dunderheads we have this statement Judge Dorothy Nelson said that many aspects of the instruction were cultural and historical. "Doesn't this seem more like a secular experience than a religious experience?" she asked. "Are you saying our children should not be taught the history of all the religions of the world?
Children can be taught comparitive religions by the use of textbooks, and other teaching materials. But once you require students to role play and to adopt and/or mimic any religious practice you have crossed the line. The school in essence was asking the students to become Muslim , since one of the defining elements of any religion is its practices. If the school made someone dress like a priest and distribute " communion" it would be commiting the same error.
The constitution is clear that Gov't shall not establish a religion. There is no clause that allows a religion to be established for a minimum period of time. I would argue that the school did indeed endorse and allow the establishment of Islam in the school.
This here is the perfect example of the difference between freedom of religion and forcing people to practice it. The being obviously the latter.
When was the last time, in this country, where someone in public school was forced to pray and worship as Christians do?
The same goes for the teaching of evolution. Don't like it? Too bad. If you don't pander to the school's dogmatic policies, then you get bad grades. Kids everyday are being forced in public schools to set their beliefs (whatever religion they may hold) aside.
The thing is that parents have lost their control and rights to the government officials.
I think we should give them swords and demonstrate head removal techniques as an intro to Islam.