A Fulton County parent sent me this notice of a meeting today: the second annual Faith Summit “to forge partnerships between schools and the faith community. The free event is for leaders of local houses of worship to join school principals and district leaders in a collaborative discussion on practical ways to provide resources benefiting both schools and houses of worship.”
The parent was disturbed by that. It seems to be part of a larger trend to eliminate the line between public and private, between church and state. We can respect all religions, don’t you think, without bringing religious ideas into the public schools.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
We should also respect a lack of religion.
LikeLike
I am a religious person. I teach Sunday School, and I am in charge of education for the youth of my church–a small Episcopal Church. However, I have concerns with what is happening. In Arizona, private religious schools can receive up to $2,000 from a couple in tax credit. The Title I school where I retired from recently, could only receive $400 in tax credit from a couple. I receive a brochure every year telling how much tax credit the Episcopal Diocese receives for their schools. It is between $500,000 and a million every year. Plus the students have to pay tuition. It makes me angry, because I do not believe this is fair. Don’t tell me there is no disparity between rich and poor in education. My former students are lucky if they get to go downtown to the symphony or to a farm on the outskirts of town. These private school children go to Washington, D.C. or Catalina Island scuba diving. For years the private schools and the public schools existed well together. Now, there is so much disparity.
LikeLike
I work with a small alternative (public) high school in North Carolina. The school relies on area churches to help provide clothing, food and supplies for the many students who have few or no financial resources. They help with buses to bring parents to back-to-school nights. In a resource-poor area, the churches have an important role to play in stabilizing the communities in which their members live. There is no quid pro quo in terms of bringing their ideology into the building. The churches are important in the lives of our students. Given this, it would be foolish to say they have no role to play in supporting students’ success in public schools. They don’t preach in the building, but we need them to help the students as they do.
LikeLike
I agree. The churches will most likely be functioning as charities in this context.
LikeLike
Recognizing the importance of separating church and state,the St. Paul, MInnesota Council of Churches has responded to the St Paul district’s request for reading and math tutors. Tutors receive training which includes the idea that it is not ok to promote or discuss a religion to a tutee.
Students, parents and others report that the tutoring has been valuable.
LikeLike
As a life long educator and a strong believer in the separation of church and state, I have no problem with meetings between local churches and school principals. Churches in minority and in poor communities are often the center of social action and community fellowship. Schools in these communities need to work with churches to provide systemic supports for their shared families and children. Joseph Murphy in “Understanding and Closing Achievement Gaps” acknowledges that there is little research on the impact community has on school achievement, but he also notes that collectively external forces dwarf school contributions to achievement gaps. He also notes that because the family is often forced to address the harmful social and economic forces that touch children, educators must find ways to connect and work with families. If local churches provide a path to work together, we must walk it. Achievement for all children requires the respect and cooperation of all to combat the inequality of socioeconomic forces.
LikeLike
We shouldn’t bring sex, race or politics into schools either. No special programs for minorities, none for LGBT kids or women, and none that promote MLK DAY or President’s Day or any other political agenda including hiring teacher with union affiliations or contracted relationships. . Let’s here it for the classless society.
LikeLike
Another one of Diane’s knee jerk reactions to a worthwhile idea. Her notion is that none but the socialist religion of the state as the only giver of good things should be available to students in public schools.
LikeLike
Maybe we should do a merger with Iran?
LikeLike
This is a recurring issue that is happening all over this country. I’ve been reading about East Ramapo public schools in the news as of late, and it makes me very angry. I feel that tax payer dollars should not be used to fund any religious schools or entities. I happen to think houses of worship should also be taxed.
LikeLike
What then should be the status of religion under the Constitution? Is religion just another type of business that should be taxed? State or federal, or both? What if a congregation chose to meet in a private home? Should that house be double taxed? Why would the constitution ratifiers INSIST on including freedom of worship in the bill of rights, explicitly? That was the first business of the first congress, enacting the bill of rights and sending to the several states for ratification. It was on that condition alone that the states ratified the document of the constitutional convention. The multiplicity of actual faiths would seem to guarantee that no particular one dominated the state. Atheism too, is technically a faith, if we accept Hume, since it too is an opinion, not knowledge. Oughtn’t one opinion have a decent respect for another’s opinion? Where we do not absolutely KNOW something, must not we tolerate differing opinion? At present education is a function of each state, but the federal constitution does not guarantee education, only each state constitution. Each state can decide how much it wants to involve churches. Separation of church means ONLY that the federal government may not compel you to believe something or pay for a state supported church. Only state run schools need be free of religion. But state support for charter and private schools which teach secular subjects within a religious atmosphere would appear to be permitted, though it is debated and has not become settled law. Doesn’t free choice trump enforced materialism? Are Jews not to have Jewish schools? Muslims, Islamic schools? Catholics parochial school? Just because you hold a differing opinion? Unless you claim to be in possession of a truth so proven that everyone MUST accept it. Heck, we don’t even know what gravity IS, although it seems so far to be reliably described mathematically. I tend to be scientifically minded, but I don’t confuse mathematical modeling with knowledge of what, for instance, a hydrogen atom actually IS. I tend to see religion as mostly metaphor, but are people to be prevented from choosing to associate with other people who like the same metaphor? You seem to think your metaphor of state secular education is so much better than anyone else’s that all should adopt it. Isn’t freedom of religion guaranteed? Shouldn’t it be protected? Do you even realize that secularism is a metaphor too?
LikeLike
My metaphor of secular education? Really??? Of course I think my opinion is better, although I do listen to others opinions and try to keep an open mind. However, nothing you said has convinced me that your opinion made more sense than mine. Let’s not be ingenuous here, or argue about semantics please. As “separation of church and state,” becomes blurred, the antithesis of freedom of religion is what will likely come about. I am not against religion, I am not an Atheist. This is not a theocracy. I do not think government should fund religion, period. As for vouchers and charters, or privatization of public schools, I’m not a fan of that, as there is far too little transparency, oversight, and as a rule they are not better than public schools. The potential for abuse with charters and vouchers is too real.
LikeLike
Sometimes we do need to look at the semantics to see what needs clarification. I am claiming that “secular education” is not a literal denotative term but is metaphorical. It is a metaphor for “materialism” I would argue, not just “an absence of religion.” You should try to make the argument that it is strictly literal, and does not denote a “faith.” Religion is always a difficult issue because none of them, so far as I’m aware, include whole hearted embracing of other world views or metaphysics. I. e. I don’t know of any religion of which “tolerance” is a tenet or dogma. Krishnamurti has some nice sentences about the differing religions being different fingers of the same hand, but even he does not include strict materialism, for which I am claiming that “secular education” stands. From my point of view what people really mean when they argue for separation of church and state is marxist atheism, but you say that doesn’t apply to you, at least the second term. As long as schools both secular (i.e. socialist materialist) and religious are aligning their curricula with the CCSS, I don’t see much danger of tax money going to religiously sponsored schools which might have a class devoted to (their) religion. Kids ought to know what the official version of their family religious tradition is. I may, of course, be dead wrong on both matters, but we’re exploring opinion here to clarify positions as much as engaging in attempted persuasion. I’d be interested to hear you make the case that “secular education” is a literal, denotative phrase rather than the metaphor I claim it is.
LikeLike
I would be less offended by tax money going to religious schools if tax money actually came from religious entities. But it doesn’t. True separation of church and state would mean that churches would not escape taxes merely by claiming a religious exemption. Religious exemptions would not exist.
LikeLike
This is a new thought to me. Thank you. The religious exemption from tax on property is something that I have wondered about a little bit. I’ll have to think about it. I don’t know whether it has been tested in the Supreme Court, but I would assume so. I suppose you have seen the news that the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that the primary beneficiary of vouchers is not the school but the child, allowing vouchers to be spent at religion sponsored schools. I doubt you’ll see that on THIS blog.
LikeLike
They want the voucher for their religeous schools. Everyone is looking to bank up their bottom line. Religeons are really big business in many ways. I have seen cults with only 400 people have over 50 pieces of property in only one county. And they can do it without taxes. When I went to Catholic elementary school I think it was $30-50 for the whole family. My parents had 11 children and my mom did not work until the end. Now it is, from what I was just told about $500 each and up. Now it is big money. Most private schools in the U.S. are Catholic and they are losing students and having to close schools. There is a reason people are screaming vouchers and talking religeon. We are supposed to have separation of church and state to protect both.
LikeLike
Question, itis… Are you opposed to members of a church or synagogue or mosque tutoring students in a public school, so long as they avoid any discussion of religion? Are you opposed to members of a religious institution raising money for a local public school?
LikeLike
We should have comparative religion classes so that all can better understand where others are coming from and I think classes which explain all cultures not one religion or culture. After all the word faith in my unabridged dictionary means a belief in something without proof. Who knows who is right including athiests?
LikeLike
Joe Nathan, I’m not opposed to members of a church, synagogue or mosque tutoring students in a public school as long as they avoid discussion of religion, and that there is oversight to ensure that there is no discussion of religion or subjects that are not permitted by the public school system. I am not opposed to members of a religious institution raising money for a local public school. I think it’s wonderful for community, religious or not to volunteer and support public schools.
LikeLike
I do not think that public schools, however, should ever be involved in fundraising for religious institutions. What people do as individuals, of course, is their own affair.
LikeLike
I agree that public schools should not fundraise for religious institutions. Looks like we agree re the conditions for tutoring.
LikeLike