Really, the question that should be asked is why Religion *cant* be taught in schools - not as dogma, but at least as philosophy and theology. The ignorance of some students in secularized schools to basic Christianity is sadly very real.
I have no problem with religion being taught in schools. I think it is very valuable and has much to offer to students. I think it should be in the context of philosophy, history, or civilization. Religion is a major and integral component of the history of most, if not all, civilizations. It is almost impossible to teach art or literature without studying the context and historical footings within which they were created.
But - as for introducing young people to Christianity, that is yours and my job - do you really want some gormless public school teacher telling children what they understand the Bible to say about marriage or adultery or whatever? I'm pretty sure that Jesus charged us personally with that responsibility. I don't think he meant for us to go hire some bureaucrats, however well-intentioned, to slide a pithy homily in between algebra and English and an epistle or two in after lunch.
"But - as for introducing young people to Christianity, that is yours and my job - do you really want some gormless public school teacher telling children what they understand the Bible to say about marriage or adultery or whatever? "
If I cant trust a teacher to talk to my children about marriage, WHY would I trust a teacher to teach them about other things? Why would any parent want their children subjected to a 'gormless public school teacher' at all???!?
"I'm pretty sure that Jesus charged us personally with that responsibility. I don't think he meant for us to go hire some bureaucrats,..."
If we shouldn't hire bureaucrats to teach character, why bother hiring bureaucrats to teach anything at all?
We might as well abolish public education if that is your view.
"I don't think he meant for us to go hire some bureaucrats, however well-intentioned, to slide a pithy homily in between algebra and English and an epistle or two in after lunch."
Oh, so Jesus is *against* Christian schooling now?!?
You object to nuns teaching, and to commited Christian teachers in private schools introducing Christian themes into the classroom? Jesus was againt non-parental evangelism, despite the Pentacost?!? Or are you saying Jesus only wanted home schooling? Fascinating what you learn on the web.
Let's get real: It's absurd to assert that Jesus wouldnt want to have taught the prayer that the gave to us, the Our Father. The objection that Christianity and Christian ethics cant or shouldnt be taught is contradicted by the direct experience of millions of chidlren well-educated in private Christian schools today, and millions more who did just fine in public schools at it prior to 1963.
Your objection certainly cannot be that Christianity can only be taught by parents - that is absurd and disproven by the existence of Christian schools and sunday sermons. It disproven also by my own experience, our children did quite fine in several years of Christian schooling and learnt many good moral lessons that we parent could NOT teach since we werent in the classroom; now the kids are at public school and we see the unfortunate difference already - lower standards, slackening of discipline, and lack of moral and religious instruction in school except for 'multicultural' mumbo-jumbo.
I find it hilarious and obtuse for those against 'religion' in the classroom to insist that it is impossible to instruct kids in such a way. Religion is in the classrooms of America today: In the public schools it's just the religion of environmentalism, the religion of multiculturalism and the religion of 'tolerance and the primary virtue'. That's the moral instruction our kids our getting at our 'exemplary' elementary school.
THUS ... The only reasonable objection to introducing religion into the classroom again, as it was in America from the 1800s to 1963 is that somehow it might introduce dogma to an unwilling audience. This is the only reasoned objection, sometimes wrongly fortified by misinterpreting the Constitution to demand classroom secularism (aka ACLU view). I agree with this objection. It would be wrong to force a Jewish kid to sit through Christian instruction,
just as it is wrong to force kids to sit through harangues on environmentalism when parents object (oops, that happens now).
Hence my comment about the absolute necessity for SCHOOL CHOICE. That is the ONLY way to both satisfy the demands and needs of *both* the Christian community and the secularists without forcing one viewpoint or the other to the 'back of the bus'.