Darrel Scott Testimony Judiciary Committee

AK, from your post:
"I can't really label my spiritual beliefs, because nothing quite fits. The closest description I can give is that I am an "eclectic pagan."


Based on your TBR signature, I surmised just that, but didn't want to assume it. Glad to know you have a sweet christian sister...she is a blessing to you I am sure.

 

Do you have a point? Or are you just here to repost dogmatic blogfare? or do you actually want to discuss religious issues.

Your blogger doesnt even make any sense. Being religious and being a proponent of the separation between church and state are not mutually exclusive. Jefferson was an avid Deist and a proponent of the separation for historical reasons.

The "point" of that piece is absolutely ridiculous, and I'll leave it at that in respect for hasbeen.

 

Personally, I'm starting to get really tired of all the complaining about removing religious symbols and organized religious activities from public schools. I agree 100% with AK -- those screaming loudest are trying desperately to blame the government for not fulfilling what is truly the parents' responsibility. Parents teaching their children religion is a Biblical mandate, BTW.

I, for one, would not want my child to be taught government-approved morals and ethics in school. I'd rather they stick to teaching math, english, history, and the like.

 

I plan on teaching my kids everything under the morality umbrella, and dont want schools, public or private, messing with them.

That is a job for the parents.

 

"those screaming loudest are trying desperately to blame the government for not fulfilling what is truly the parents' responsibility. Parents teaching their children religion is a Biblical mandate, BTW.

I, for one, would not want my child to be taught government-approved morals and ethics in school. I'd rather they stick to teaching math, english, history, and the like.[/quote]

Hasbeen,
No one is saying the govt. should teach morals and ethics, but that is exactly what they are doing in public schools ..they have a different name for it, of course..it starts young as 4th grade...values clarification is one description used here.

I certainly agree that a parent is charged with" bringing up a child in the way that he should go", but when you are not fortunate enough to afford private schooling for your children, our public school system undermines the christian principles that are taught in the home.

You don't have any children, and work for the State of CA school system, so I don't think yours is an unbiased opinion. But I am sure there are 1 or 2 other christians on this board who have tried to rear their children in the public school system ...it is a head banging experience.

And as you have stated, you are not the final word in this forum.

 

I also get tired of the religious right screaming about how this country has all of the sudden fallen into a state of Godlessness, crime, and corruption because some circuit court made Home Depot start saying "Holiday Trees" and the Alabama State Supreme Court removed a monument to the Ten Commandments. This country has not been a utopia of virtue and morality these past 200 years. Society was just better at hiding it until recently.

 

Thank you.

Edit: This thread is a lot more about politics than religion.

 

I have no doubt.

You're correct in saying that no one has expressed a desire for government to take over teaching morals and ethics. However, my perception is that people are in an uproar because Christianity is no longer being given preferential status in the public sector. Maybe it's not so much a question of teaching Christian morals in schools -- maybe it's a question of the public sector trying to serve a diverse public as best it can in the most generic (and liberal) way possible, which may or may not fall in line with the local majority.

Sure it does. The school systems' priorities are very different than those of a parent. So is their purpose. There will be conflict. IMHO, that reality places an even higher priority on parents to teach their children right from wrong, and how to properly consider and debate contrasting messages and values they hear outside the home.

If you're inferring that I'm somehow advocating the very real indoctrination that is happening in schools all over the country, let me put your fears to rest. I am not. I work at a college -- one of the most concentrated environments of liberalism and political correctness found in a state that prides itself politically for being decidedly left of center, both politically and ideologically.

Again, I don't doubt it. But my opinion is that parents still shouldn't be expecting public schools to be cooperating with them. If they do, great. But ultimately it's still on the parents to teach their kids a value system. And the reality is, as long as kids are interacting with the outside world, they're going to hear and see and experience beliefs, morals, and ethics that are contrary to what they've been taught at home. It doesn't matter if they're being influenced by their teachers, their friends, or the media. The end result is the same.

Of course not. I'm just expressing my opinions and perceptions here.

 

Mr. Scott intertwined the two when he testified before Congress.

 

You mean you’re not?

In a way, yes; but I think it’s pertinent to both, & hasn’t strayed from the premise of the opening post.
OK, fair warning to the easily bored: I’m gonna run off at the mouth--or keyboard--here:

I would disagree that such legislation constitutes any sort of “dogma.” The schools are not meant to honor God--they are meant to educate children with the goal that they will become productive citizens. Individuals may honor God all they wish, in school or out. It is not the lack of prayer or reverence for God in the schools that causes our problems. It’s the failure of parents to instill moral values in their children. Religion is NOT a prerequisite for having strong moral values, nor to becoming a productive citizen.
As for the court cases cited:

Everson v. Board of Education (1947): The First Amendment requires neutrality towards religion and erects a “high and impregnable...wall of separation between church and state.”
Yes, the government SHOULD be neutral toward religion--all religion. Faith is a personal matter. I don’t want my government supporting or giving favorable treatment to one, nor promoting disrespect or violating the rights of another.

Engel v. Vitale (1962): Public school teachers are prohibited from opening class with non-sectarian prayers.
Prayers are prayers. Non-sectarian has nothing to do with it. Some people are atheists who don‘t believe in praying to anything, & they have a perfect right to be.

Abington School District v. Schempp (1963): A state cannot require recital of the Lord’s Prayer and reading of Scripture in public school classrooms even when students have the opportunity to opt out of such recitals.
I remember the Jewish kids in school who got to “opt out” of Christian observances like Christmas parties. They were seen by other students as “weird” & were socially scorned. One Christian church I belonged to did not believe in celebrating birthdays or holidays of any kind, & I kept my daughter out of any events related to those, both at school & elsewhere. It was a horribly painful experience for her, & I deeply regret it. Social life for kids in school is hard enough without adding fuel to the fire.
And I re-iterate: that's not the school's job.

Epperson v. Arkansas (1968): A state cannot prohibit teaching of evolution in public schools without violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Evolution is a scientific subject, & an understanding of the theory is important to understanding the world we live in--whether you agree that it is accurate or not. I personally think the theory has holes in it, but I wouldn’t be able to come to that conclusion if I hadn’t actually studied it. To eliminate its teaching based on someone’s religious beliefs would do a serious injustice to students. Parents are perfectly capable of pointing out the flaws in the theory to their kids if they disagree; & I’d advise that they use more than a religious point of view to do that. Like knowing enough about it to argue the scientific weaknesses.

Wallace v. Jaffree (1985): It is unconstitutional for a state to pass a law allowing voluntary silence or prayer at the beginning of public school classes. “Voluntary silence?” Wouldn’t everyone have to participate in order for it to be silent? Again, a law ALLOWING voluntary prayer isn’t needed. It’s already allowed, all day every day, as long as it doesn‘t interrupt the classes that are the school‘s purpose.

Edwards v. Aguillard (1987): A state requirement that schools give “balanced treatment” to both the theory of evolution and creation science violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
“Creation science” is not science. Science is based on the “scientific method,” which involves stating a theory & testing it to see if the evidence supports it. Creation “science” starts with an assumption & sets out to support that assumption. It doesn’t belong in public schools. Again, those who agree with it are free to pass it on to their children at home or with the support of a church.

Allegheny v. ACLU (1989): Government sponsored nativity scenes violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and must be removed.
Do we want government-sponsored Wiccan displays at Halloween? The same principle applies to both. Private businesses & individuals & churches, again, are not affected by this ruling.

Lee v. Weisman (1992): Non-sectarian prayers delivered by ministers or rabbis at public high school graduations violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
See comment above about “non-sectarian” prayers.

I disagree. Witness all the cries of, “This nation was founded on faith in God & we’ve strayed from that & are being punished for it; so we need to get back to honoring God as a nation.”

What does my TBR signature have to do with my spiritual beliefs? That’s quite a stretch. Off topic, but for anyone who’s interested in my current choice of signatures, the 1st is a quote of a post that I found hilarious; & the 2nd reflects my agreement with an author that sex should be enjoyed with great enthusiasm. Neither is a spiritual statement.
Don’t think I mentioned my sister in this thread, but yes, she & many other family members & friends are great blessings to me.

I heartily agree. I wouldn’t want my kids getting the “official” version of paganism any more than I’d want them getting the “official” version of Christianity.
I also agree with HB that the schools are not any more responsible for undermining the principles parents teach than other social & cultural factors. Parents are supposed to make sure their influence is stronger--that's their job as parents.