Pennsylvania bowed to pressure from religious schools that are beneficiaries of public funding via tax credit programs and removed language from the state law that bars discrimination.
Should private schools that benefit from Pennsylvania’s tax credit programs adhere to the rules of the public system?
That debate often revolves around school accountability because the state does not require private schools to administer and publish the results of standardized tests.
But the question has also cropped up in recent weeks around an entirely different issue — employee discrimination.
In May, Governor Tom Wolf’s administration removed nondiscrimination language from guidelines governing private schools that receive money through state tax credits.
The removal came soon after a coalition of private schools and lawmakers complained the language violated state law, prompting administration officials to acknowledge that the clause was inserted by accident.
The eliminated language would have barred private schools that benefit from the Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) and the Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit (OSTC) from discriminating against their employees on the basis of “gender, creed, color, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.”
The inclusion of “sexual orientation, gender identity or expression” irked several religiously-affiliated private schools around the state. One school, Dayspring Christian Academy in Lancaster County, called the language a “direct violation of our Christian conscience,” and encouraged parents to contact their legislators.
This skirmish highlights, for some, a lack of state oversight for religious and private schools that benefit from state policy. With some lawmakers pushing to create new avenues for private schools to receive state funds, that tension will likely grow.
Religious schools receiving public money through these programs will not be required to report standardized test scores and will be permitted to discriminate against students and staff on grounds that would not be permissible in public schools.
This is a terrible precedent. Where public money goes, so must public laws and accountability. Why should the public subsidize discrimination?
This will likely be a template for DeVos’s voucher plans at the federal level.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
In other words, give us your money but don’t make us follow the rules applicable to public schools; we are special and you taxpayers should just shut up. And you can take Article III, Sections 15 and 29 of the PA constitution and shove ’em.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So SICK!
LikeLike
Religious schools invariably discriminate. There should be no public money for them to begin with. They twist the 1st amendment beyond belief.
LikeLike
Would you include this prohibition at the university/college level as well? People attend Georgetown (Jesuit), Brigham Young (Mormon), Southern Methodist, the Islamic University of Minnesota, etc. using Basic Grants, ROTC Scholarships, and GI Bill money.
These religious schools would lose most of their students, if the students lost their federal/state public money.
LikeLike
Charles,
Do you think our tax dollars should pay for schools that teach Biblical “science”? Or schools that teach children lies about people different from themselves?
LikeLike
Your question is somewhat “loaded”. Currently our tax dollars are going to students, who choose to attend institutions which teach all sorts of religious doctrines, some of which are at variance with established scientific truths. Public tax money, is paying for individuals to attend religious seminaries, to be trained as clergy, who will then go into churches and teach all sorts of bizarre things. (See Witters v. Washington Dept of services for the blind).
The Holy Bible does not teach any type of science. I have been reading the Holy Bible for over half a century, and I have never found any science in its pages. Therefore, your question has no currency and is meaningless.
Currently, families are receiving vouchers and subsidy payments to attend all types of schools, including religious schools. Students even attend institutions operated by the Islamic religion, which are teaching the students that Mohammed (PBUH) is a prophet of God, and his sayings, contained in the Hadiths are absolute truth. Among these, are that the function of a woman is bear sons, and that a man has the right to chastise his wives (up to four). The next Islamic terrorist is probably being trained at an American university, subsidized with our tax dollars.
Non-public schools, including schools operated by religious organizations are generally free to teach whatever they wish. If parents wanted their children to receive the state curriculum, they would enroll their children at state-operated public schools. The Mormon church has taught that people of color were cursed with the mark of Cain, and were therefore inferior to the Caucasian race.
It seems to me, that requiring non-public schools to teach the state curriculum, defeats the entire purpose of choosing to opt-out of the public schools.
To your point: I do think that parents should have the option of removing their children from schools, which parents believe are not meeting the educational needs of their children. And for any reason, including religious reasons.
LikeLike
Charles,
There are large numbers of religious school that receive public funding to teach Biblical science and Biblical history. The earth is 6,000 years old. Dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time. God’s hand is seen in human events. They also teach hatred for Jews and Muslims and gays and Catholics. But you are okay with that.
LikeLike
The SCOTUS has differentiated between K-12 schools, on the one hand, and colleges/universities, on the other.
LikeLike
@Diane:
Do not jump to an incorrect conclusion. I am not exactly thrilled with students being taught that humans lived on the earth alongside dinosaurs. I find such ideas preposterous. Parents are making the conscious decision to enroll their children in institutions that teach these bizarre concepts. Some fundamentalist sects teach “hatred” of Jews, Catholics, gays, blacks, etc. And they do it in the name of Jesus. Institutions which teach these concepts have students enrolled who are receiving financial assistance from the taxpayers.
The right to choose, includes the right to choose incorrectly. Freedom has consequences.
@Edd: I do not get your meaning. The SCOTUS ruled in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), that parents could enroll their children in religiously-operated (k-12) schools, and redeem their vouchers at these schools.
Students attend religious universities with public tax dollars, and students attend religious K-12 schools with public tax dollars, as well.
What is the “differentiation” you refer to. Can you cite a specific case?
LikeLike
Brigham Young University doesn’t take federal dollars. The LDS Church (what we prefer to be called. Not Mormon) knows that tangling with federal dollars ends up with regulations, so they don’t take the money. For that same reason, the LDS Church doesn’t have official K12 private schools.
LikeLike
@TOW: Brigham Young University accepts students who are receiving BEOG/Pell Grants/GI Bill/ROTC scholarships. These are “vouchers” awarded to students to attend the university of their choice. True, BYU does not directly receive cash payments from the US Treasury.
The point I am making, is that school choice at the university/college level, permits students to receive public tax money, and attend a religiously-operated university of their choice.
School choice at the K-12 level permits students/families to receive public tax money, and attend a school operated by a religious enterprise.
With the recent Trinity Lutheran School v. Pauley ruling, the SCOTUS has permitted public tax money to go directly to a religiously-operated school.
I will give you even money, that soon, public tax money will be flowing to more religiously-operated schools at all levels.
LikeLike
Charles,
The Supreme Court has never issued a decision supporting tuition for K-12 religious schools.
LikeLike
Please see:
http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1882/Constitutional-Requirements-Governing-American-Education.html
From the article:
Q . Until spring 2002 one huge unknown factor in the debate over using public funds to support private, parochial schools was whether such use of public funds violates the First Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits government from unduly supporting religion or favoring one religion over another. In June 2002 the Supreme Court held in the case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris that the use of public funds to pay for religious school tuition is constitutional. Under this program, the State of Ohio provides vouchers to some 4,000 students from low-income families. The vouchers can be used to pay tuition at participating private schools, including religiously affiliated schools.
Read more: Constitutional Requirements Governing American Education – Federal Constitutional Requirements, State Constitutional Issues, Conclusion – School, Districts, Schools, and Court – StateUniversity.com http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1882/Constitutional-Requirements-Governing-American-Education.html#ixzz5I7fZO4nz
END Q
Am I the only person here, who reads Supreme Court decisions?
LikeLike
The SCOTUS was wrong in Zelman and reversed a bunch of rulings from Lemon in 1971 through others up to 2002.
LikeLike
@Edd: Why was the Supreme Court wrong in the Zelman decision?
Public tax dollars flow in torrents to food banks run by religious organizations and homeless shelters, and battered women’s shelters, etc. No one objects to this. Public dollars flow to students enrolled at institutions of higher learning, which are operated by religious organizations. The Supreme Court even ruled (unanimously) that tax dollars can be used to train an individual for the clergy (Witters v. Washington Department of the Blind).
There is no constitutional issue, when it comes to public tax dollars paying for safety equipment at religious schools. Public money pays for books, transportation, tuition at religious schools all over this land.
LikeLike
Can you explain why religious school tuition is not permitted in New York if the issue is settled?
LikeLike
I was not aware of the situation in New York. Parents are redeeming vouchers at religiously operated schools in many other states. I would like to know more about school choice in New York.
LikeLike
There are many states without vouchers, not just New York.
LikeLike
Here is the explanation you asked for:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-yorks-bid-to-control-religious-schools-1516320189
LikeLike
The following website is dedicated to taking legal action on behalf of school choice, the elimination of Blaine Amendments in 37 states, and more. Click your state on the interactive map to read the laws in your state that favor (or restrict) the use of public funds for religious education. http://ij.org/issues/school-choice/
Devos wants to assign Blaine Amendments “to the ash heap of history.” These laws prohibit the use of public funds for religious education. Devos has said of Blaine amendments: “This ‘last acceptable prejudice’ should be stamped out once and for all.“ http://wfis.org/devos-sets-her-sights-on-blaine-amendments/
I think it important to recognize that one of the criticism of public schools is that fail to inculcate the “right” values and develop character. I think this criticism explains why, for example, Dr. Angela Duckworth’s Character lab will be delivering lessons on her preferred character traits, along side of the no-nonsense tricks of Doug Lemov to TFAs enrolled in the Relay Graduate School of Education. The aim is to elicit and enforce strict compliance in the behavior of all students, according to rules issued by the teacher and codified in the rule books for charter schools. The indoctrination process is overplayed with character education “lite.”
Why do I say lite?
The Character Strengths marketed by Dr. Angela Duckworth are zest, grit, optimism, self-control, gratitude, social intelligence, and curiosity.
The list excludes truth-telling and kindness. They are disappeared.
LikeLike
DeVos, Trump, Pence and their allies are out of sync with most Americans on this. In 2,8 state referenda from coast to coast from 1966 to 2014 milliions of voters have rejected all plans to divert public funds to private schools by an average of 2 to 1, including 3 times in DeVos’s Michigan (1970, 1978, 2000). _- Edd Doerr
LikeLike
We do not live in a direct democracy. Thank God we don’t. The framers of the constitution deliberately left any possibility of referendum out of the federal constitution. Referenda are “mob rule”. With a referendum, 51% of the people can legally urinate in the oatmeal of the other 49%.
I like to consider the case in Little Rock, Ark in 1957. Only white people could vote. If there had been a referendum on school integration, it would have failed. But, the Supreme Court ruled in 1954, that public schools must integrate. So President Eisenhower sent in federal troops, and 9 black children went through the schoolhouse door, and attended classes at Central High School As I stated, the majority of the citizens of Little Rock were opposed to this. A referendum would have failed to pass, even if black people could vote in it. (Blacks did not have the franchise in Arkansas in 1957).
Our government is a system of majority rule, but minorities still have rights. The majority of this nation is opposed to same-sex marriage. A referendum would certainly stop it.
Referenda concerning school choice/vouchers have failed to garner majority support in the past. There is a referendum occurring in Arizona this November on the expansion of ESAs to virtually every family in the state. It may pass.
LikeLike
A democracy rests on the consent of the governed. The governed have said whenever asked that they do not want their taxes used to indoctrinate children into religion and do not want to pay for schools that teach racism, sexism, Islamaphobia, anti-Semitism, and hatred of others.
LikeLike
Charles, the United States is a Constitutional Republic. The people vote for their representatives and when those representatives are elected they all take oaths to obey and defend that Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.
Thinking of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and what it means, how many times has Donald Trump attacked the media and/or called them fake news?
Every eligible voter that votes reveal what the majority thinks by the choices they make.
Trump lost the popular vote by almost 3 million but he’s still president.
In a representative democracy, people vote for representatives who then enact policy initiatives. In a direct democracy, people decide on policies without any intermediary.
I understand Switzerland is a direct democracy but even that isn’t accurate. The pure form of direct democracy exists only in the Swiss cantons of Appenzell Innerrhoden and Glarus.[14] The Swiss Confederation is a semi-direct democracy (representative democracy with strong instruments of direct democracy).[14]
The U.S. however, is the only representative democracy that elects its president through an Electoral College and not the popular vote. No wonder we ended up with Donald Trump in the White House.
LikeLike
White citizens in Little Rock in 1957 did not want their children going to public schools with black children. Should the majority rule in a case like this. Today in 2018, the majority in this country does not want same-sex marriage. Should the government follow what the majority wants?
LikeLike
Charles,
There is no groundswell Against same-sex marriage. Sorry.
LikeLike
According to this ABC poll, the majority of Americans oppose same-sex marriage:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90248&page=1
There are some polls, which indicate otherwise. No point in arguing which poll is right. We can agree that there is no major push for a constitutional amendment on same-sex marriage.
The point I am making, is that the Supreme Court ruled for this in Obergefell v. Hodges (2017), and now it is the law of the land, whether the majority of the nation supports it or not.
Our government has legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The power is split, and there is a system of checks and balances.
The majority of white, slave-owners in the South in 1861 were opposed to emancipation.
The majority of this nation was opposed to civil rights for blacks, opposed to school integration, opposed to many different things, and now they are the law of the land.
Fortunately, the framers of the constitution set up a diffuse government to serve as a buffer against the whims of the mob. We have the three branches of government, and we do not have a referendum branch.
LikeLike
No need for a constitutional amendment on same-sex marriages. There was already a Supreme Court decision approving it. No Constitutional amendment needed.
LikeLike
Another example of the deliberate subversion of legislated laws, state constitutions, and the US constitution.
LikeLike
@Lloyd: Why is that? The Supreme Court ruled that the (Missouri) Blaine amendment violated the first and fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution, by denying the children in the religious school the free exercise of religion, and by denying the equal protection guaranteed by the 14th amendment.
LikeLike
Sorry, Charles, the baby Blaine Amendments are in full force in many states.
You and Betsy DeVos are very unhappy about it.
Tough.
LikeLike
Charles, that is off topic.
LikeLike
That never stops Charles. I just deleted about 10 of his tweets that repeated again and again his love and zeal for unlimited choice, choice, choice.
LikeLike
I have a twitter account, but I have not sent out a tweet for some months. Maybe someone is “spoofing” my account. Thanks for the heads-up.
LikeLike
Charles simply squeals with delight at the thought that US taxpayers can be forced by government to support Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, Lutheran, evangelical, Scientology, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Gulen, and other sectarian schools that separate our kids along religious, ideological, ethnic and other lines. Just like Trump, Pence and DeVos. — Edd Doerr
LikeLike
@Edd: what do you feel about US taxpayers subsidizing students who attend Catholic University of America, Islamic University of Minnesota, Southern Methodist University, Ohio Wesleyan University, etc.?
Students attend many fine colleges/universities with public taxpayer money. No one objects.
When the exact same thing occurs at the K-12 level, some people object.
Why the double standard?
Is not this subsidy of higher education at religious universities, the exact same fractionalization and separation, of which you oppose so vehemently?
LikeLike
No, Charles. Religious institutions of higher education have received government subsidies for decades. K-12 schools have never received direct government subsidies.
LikeLike
Charles, I’m going to reverse your flawed logic and present another option that is just as logical as yours but is fairer to everyone that wants an education.
Since K-12 (REAL) democratic public schools are all free for every child in the United States up to the age of 18, then a college education should be free for everyone past the age of 18, and all colleges should be democratic institutions with elected boards overseeing them just like that K-12 public schools.
To make that happen, the U.S. must nationalize all the colleges in the private sector including non-profits and turn them into tuition-free, democratic public colleges so all the schools in the US are free to everyone and managed by elected school boards that are all transparent just like those (REAL) K-12 democratic public schools.
LikeLike
Q Religious institutions of higher education have received government subsidies for decades. K-12 schools have never received direct government subsidies. END Q
You are mistaken. The state of Pennsylvania (and many other states) have provided direct subsidies to religiously-operated K-12 schools for many years. The payments have gone to meet the costs for textbooks, transportation, administrative costs, services mandated by the state, and other permitted costs.
The Supreme court settled the constitutional issue, in the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman (1973) see
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1972/71-1470
Currently, the state of New York provides direct subsidies to religiously-operated private schools. These payments are minimal,
Q (New York private school) Students are entitled to about $100 a year in loaned textbooks as well as library and computer materials. Private schools receive the equivalent of a few hundred dollars a student as reimbursement for providing certain mandated services. END Q
LikeLike
Non-tuition expenses like textbooks for religious schools have been approved for many years.
Tuition has not been. That’s why many states, including New York, DO NOT PAY TUITION FOR RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS WITH PUBLIC FUNDS. Can you read, Charles? I am deleting all future comments you make about vouchers because you have said the same thing hundreds of times.
LikeLike
Q This will likely be a template for DeVos’s voucher plans at the federal level. END Q
Do you have any specific information that the SecEd has any concrete plans to push for vouchers at the federal level? Other than the proposal to extend some limited choice to military families, I have seen no federal push for vouchers. This administration is well into its second year, and if there is a movement for vouchers at the federal level , I have not seen it.
LikeLike
Yes. The words that come out of her mouth.
LikeLike
Charles, like DeVos/Trump/Pence/et al, thinks it is OK for government to compel all taxpayers to support sectarian religious indoctrination institutions that divide students along religious, ideological, ethnic, clqss, and other lines. He thumbs his nose at the wisdom of Jefferson and Madison and the vast numbers of voters who have rejected vouchers and tax credits in 28 state referenda from coast to coast by 2 to 1.
LikeLike
@Edd: I support the Supreme Court’s ruling, that parents can redeem their school voucher at the school of their choice, including religiously-operated schools. If the result is that children are educated according to the wishes of their parents, then I have absolutely no problem with this.
The government does not have “dibs” on children’s minds. The Supreme Court ruled, unanimously, in 1925 in the case of Pierce v. Society of Sisters. see
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/268us510
From the decision Q The unanimous Court held that “the fundamental liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only.” END Q
Are you advocating “standardization”?
LikeLike
As usual, Charles thinks it is just fne for government t frce all taxpayers to support sectarian indoctrination. Please, Charles, read Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments.
LikeLike
Parents have the right to remove their children from publicly-operated schools, and control their children’s education. The Supreme Court ruled for this unanimously, in the case of Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), see
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-110
LikeLike
Did Yoder (1972) also rule that the rest of us had to pay for the choice parents make when they pull their children out of public schools to home teach them or move them to religious and/or for-profit, private sector schools?
Nowhere in that ruling does it say that public dollars must be used to support that choice. In fact, that ruling only allowed Amish parents to pull their children out of school early for established religious reasons that were centuries old.
LikeLike
Kentucky BOE just gave approval to implement biblical literacy standards.
LikeLike
Are you saying that this is a good thing, or a bad thing? The Supreme Court ruled in Abingdon v. Schempp (1963), that public schools could teach the Holy Bible, as literature, just like any other book. Same applies to the Holy Qu”Ran and other religious texts.
I would like to see more comparative religion taught at the middle-school, high-school level. A citizen in a diverse nation, like ours, should have a basic grounding in the theologies of all of the world’s great religions.
LikeLike
Charles wants mre comparative religion taught in public schools. As a former teacher I know that there is not enough time in the school day fr that and also that there is no aagreement n exactly what should be taught.
LikeLike
Charles, stop Googling Supreme Court opinions and get on with your day.
LikeLike
He is cheating his boss. He doesn’t work. He posts comments.
LikeLike
By the way, I noticed that my response to Ch@rles went into moderation. That led me to wonder if the reason that the words “Ch@rles Barron” put my comments into moderation was entirely about the “Ch@rles” and not at all about the “Barron.”
LikeLike
Cheating his boss — maybe that explains why he’s had so many jobs in so many countries and states, and most of those jobs lasted a year or less.
LikeLike
Academician Stephen Prothero has advocated Religious Literacy being taught in public schools for many years. See
http://stephenprothero.com/books/religious-literacy/
I believe that publicly-operated schools could offer such instruction, and there should be time found for such an important concept. Since our nation has such a rainbow of faith traditions, it falls upon us to learn more about the religious traditions of our fellow Americans. And we should have an understanding of Islam, religion of 20% of this planet.
“We must learn to live together as brothers, or we will surely perish as fools” – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
(I work the 3-11 shift on an unclassified military telecommunications project. I use my home computers for debates of this nature). (I also do international contract work, often in military combat zones, the work generally lasts 3-6 months, depending on the nature of the work ,and the needs of the client. I going to wrap up this project soon ,and go over to a new project at the National Weather Service. It will last 11 months or less).
LikeLike
Charles does not seem to grasp that professional,educators have found that there is so much disagreement about HOW and WHAT to teach about religion in public schools that they have just given up. As a former social studies teacher I fully grasp the problem.– Edd Doerr
LikeLike
I was not aware that there was any serious problem with deciding the specifics of teaching comparative religions in public schools. I defer to your experience. I was not aware that public school administrators/teachers have “given up”.
The Supreme Court set down some guidelines in Abingdon v. Schempp (1963). Public schools can teach the Holy Bible as literature, just like any other religious text. I admit the guidelines are sketchy, and the decision in half a century old.
Nevertheless, I do believe that American school children should have a basic grounding in the religions of the world. Our society is pluralistic, and there are a whole “rainbow” of different faiths, and citizens have to live and work with people from different religions. There are Muslims and Hindus on my street, a mosque just down the road, and a Buddhist pagoda two miles away.
America’s schools are failing to teach comparative religion, and it is sad.
@Edd: What would you like to see taught? I am sure you have some ideas. I have spent many years in Islamic nations, and I am fascinated by the faith. I believe that all Americans should have a basic grounding in Islam, the religion of 1/5 of this planet. The Christian faith is so intertwined with Western Civilization, that one cannot be studied without the other. The Latter-Day Saints played a pivotal role in settling the American West, that a study of our history demands a basic understanding of their faith.
LikeLike
Charles,
As usual, you don’t know what you are talking about.
Every World History course teaches comparative world religions.
LikeLike
I have corresponded with Stephen Prothero, and read his book. I find his conclusions to be valid. Here is a quote:
q Do you get tongue-tied when asked to name the Twelve Apostles? Do you think Adam’s wife was Joan of Arc? If so, join the crowd. The United States is one of the most religious places on earth, but it is also a nation of religious illiterates. Many Protestants can’t name the four Gospels, many Catholics can’t name the seven sacraments, and many Jews can’t name the first five books of the Bible. And yet politicians and pundits continue to root public policy arguments in religious rhetoric whose meanings are missed, or misinterpreted, by the vast majority of American citizens. This is in my view a major problem in contemporary civic life. “Religious Literacy,” which will be published by HarperSanFrancisco on March 1, 2007, explores this problem, pinpointing key moments in U.S. history that spawned our current epidemic of religious illiteracy and offering practical solutions to remedy this problem, including mandatory religion courses in the public schools. The book also includes a Dictionary of Religious Literacy with key terms, beliefs, characters, and stories that every American needs to know in order to make sense of religiously inflected debates: from abortion and gay marriage to Islamic terrorism and the war in Iraq. END Q
He is quite correct, when he states, that ours is a nation of religious illiterates. Our public schools are NOT doing an adequate job in teaching religious literacy and comparative religions.
Edd Doerr (a school teacher) says Q As a former teacher I know that there is not enough time in the school day fr that and also that there is no aagreement n exactly what should be taught. END Q
Public schools cannot even agree on what is to be taught, and there is not enough time in the school day for such instruction.
Are you saying that Edd is wrong?
Public school proponents almost universally agree, that public schools provide more than just education and facts. Public schools provide “socialization” and “citizenship”. by mixing races and (economic) classes, and children of different religious faith traditions.
I think that it is the grandmother of all ironies, that public schools, which purport to teach citizenship skills, cannot agree on what to teach their students about one of the most fundamental aspects of American citizenship. How to understand the different religions of all of our citizens.
Currently, very few public schools in the USA have courses in Bible literature. And even fewer teach Islamic literacy. How many public schools in the USA, offer a course in Koranic literature? Or the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH)? Or the four fundamental truths of Buddhism?
Academician Prothero advocates mandatory religion classes in the public schools.
I believe that we can all agree, that the current World History classes are just not cutting it.
LikeLike
I don’t agree. Let families teach their religious views, not public schools. And no public dollars for religious indoctrination in any school.
LikeLike
Q Let families teach their religious views, not public schools. And no public dollars for religious indoctrination in any school. END Q
Diane, I think you are missing the point. Dr. Prothero, and other advocates of religious instruction, are not pushing for religious indoctrination. He is calling for religion classes. Religion can be studied like any other subject. The Holy Bible can be studied as literature. The Holy Qu’Ran is one of the finest examples of early Arabic prose, available. I prefer the translation by N.J. Dawood. The Upanishads and the Bhagavad-Gita are beautiful Sanskrit poetry, and one of the oldest religious texts available. (The Juan Mascaro translations are the best).
J. Robert Oppenheimer was a student of the Vedas. When he saw the first atomic bomb explosion, he thought of the scripture. “I am become death, the shatterer of worlds”.
Dr. Prothero is advocating the study of religions as academic exercise. An educated person should have a basic grounding in all of the world’s great religions. In a pluralistic society, citizens need to understand the faith traditions of their fellow citizens, if we have any hope of ever living in peace. And as world citizens, we should understand the faith traditions of our international neighbors.
In 2001, after the terrorist attacks, people were beating up and harassing Sikhs. Anyone with a beard and turban, was a muslim, and all muslims were terrorists. In Philadelphia (and other places) people desecrated mosques with pig’s blood.
Our own American history is steeped in the understanding of religion. Our own first amendment guarantees freedom of religion. In 1838, the governor of Missouri ordered the extermination of the Mormons. see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Executive_Order_44
Religious bigotry is no stranger to our land. When the waves of Catholic immigrants started arriving in the USA, politicians played on the paranoia of people who had no understanding of the Roman Catholic faith.
Dr. Prothero is right. We are a nation of religious illiterates.
LikeLike
I have reviewed every world history textbook. All teach world religions. There is not enough time in the day for everyone’s favorite idea, especially since federally mandated testing vale’s only reading and math.
LikeLike
I believe you are still missing the point. Certainly, most history books teach some of basics of some religions. When a person studies ancient Egyptian history, the person will get an introduction to the deities: Thoth, Anubis,etc. A study of ancient Greece, may include a brief introduction to Greek myths.
But Dr. Prothero is right, that American schools are not teaching the specifics and theology of religions with any measure of detail. You can complete K-12, and never study the New Testament as literature. Virtually no school in this nation, teaches the theology of Islam, and the beautiful Arabic prose of the Holy Qu”Ran.
You cannot blame this lack of religious literacy, on federally-mandated testing. That is a cop-out.
LikeLike
Charles, I so wish you knew what you are talking about. I have worked on curriculum and textbooks. Everyone thinks more should be taught about what they care most about. There is not time to teach everything, so the texts mention everything and the kids remember very little. Why don’t you find a hobby and don’t comment on subjects where your knowledge is one inch deep.
LikeLike
Diane, leaving comments here and probably on other sites that disagree with him is his (Charles) hobby.
LikeLike
Q There is not time to teach everything, so the texts mention everything and the kids remember very little. END Q
Are you suggesting that the public schools are not teaching children properly? Would alternate non-public schools teach more effectively?
The public schools here in Fairfax, and across Virginia shut down for the summer recess on 15 June . The schools will remain empty, until classes resume 28 August. (Fairfax has to get a waiver every year, to open before labor day)
Most people do not know the reason why public schools close in the summer. It is so that children can help on the farm, and schools did not have air-conditioning in the 19th century.
Other than that, there is no reason for public schools to be shut down for the summer.
If US public schools adopted a calendar like most other industrialized nations, and classes were held year-round, with shorter breaks, there would be more time, to teach the required material. Testing scores would obviously improve. Maybe then, there would be time to teach more material.
LikeLike
No, Charles, nonpublic schools—vouchers and Charters—have been tried for 25 years and found to be inferior to public schools. Evidence: check out Detroit, Milwaukee, and DC.
LikeLike
The Quakers, one of the more open minded religious groups, founded Pennsylvania. One of the reasons my ancestors settled there is that they were persecuted for their religion and Pennsylvania offered the promise of religious freedom. Quakers believe in the equality of all people and were active in operating the Underground Railroad. It is ironic that Pennsylvania should turn a blind eye to discrimination. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/18/quaker-meeting-for-worship_n_5500022.html
LikeLike
On the one hand, if everyone – Commies, Christians and Muslims – pay the taxes, then what is wrong about distributing these taxes to all kinds of schools whatever they teach?
On the other hand, if you say that there is “correct” way of teaching because it is science, don’t you impose your own… um… curriculum and deprive um… local communities from deciding what to teach? What if they don’t want to teach science?
This is the point I have been making: either (1) the government gives the money and the government sets curriculum, or (2) the government gives money to everyone, or (3) we simply stop paying taxes and fund our local sheriffs, local schools, local militia, basically Balkanizing the country.
LikeLike
First of all, it is more than obvious that we can’t afford to support more than one system of schools. Second of all, if a school is going to take public money, then it needs to be bound by the same rules and regulations to which traditional public schools are bound.
” either (1) the government gives the money and the government sets curriculum, …”
Huh? I pay my taxes and vote, including for members of the school board. They oversee the professionals involved in the day to day operation of the schools and rely on the professional staff to make professional decisions. You make it sound like a really ham-fisted operation where a bunch of “gubmint” officials proclaim how schools will operate and what they will teach. I know school boards have made some really stupid decisions, but, in general, local concerns are best handled at the local level. Naturally, there may also be oversight at the county and/or state level as well, but the further the government function is from the local classroom the less able they are or should be able to mandate how it is run. In a broad sense, yes, government is tasked with serving the common good. Religious schools, charters and private schools do not have to serve everyone nor are they held to the same level of scrutiny; therefore, as you say, they should not receive public money.
LikeLike
Q First of all, it is more than obvious that we can’t afford to support more than one system of schools ENDQ
Why do you say this? Our nation has a “mix” of public, private, parochial, and military education at the university level. We support a multitude of higher educational systems.
If we can support multiple higher education systems, why can we not afford to support multiple educational systems at the K-12 level?
Explain the difference to me, I do not see it.
LikeLike
No, Charles, wrong again. The government subsidizes a small part of the tuition org students at private and public institutions in higher education. It does not pay the full cost, and it does not pay K-12 tuition. .
LikeLike
Poor Charles is not very up on the economics of education. First of all, there are great differences between K-12 and higher ed. Poorer students are being priced out of hugher ed. As for K-12, it has long been underfunded — since 2008 35 states have cut per student spending by an average 7%; teachers are paid only about 60% of what similarly educated professionals earn; the average K-12w teacher spends nearly $500 per year to help poorer kids. Poor Charles seems unaware that 85-90% of K_12 schools are pervasively religious indoctrination institutions that fragment the student population along religious, ideological, class, ethnic and other lines and reduces educational efficiency costwise. Charles also sees no reason why all taxpayers should not be forced by government to subsidize sectarian indoctrination. — Edd Doerr
LikeLike
Wallowing in his ignorance, BackAgain seems unaware that our 13,500 local school districts are responsible to local voters; that his plan would utterly fragment our school population along religious, ideological, political, ethnic, class and other lines while driving up education costs; that American voters in 28 state referenda from coast to coast have rejected his nonsensical view by 2 to 1; that his plan would devastate the religious liberty of all taxpayers.
LikeLike
@Edd: Why do you contend that permitting parents to select the schooling of their children at a religiously-operated school, and then permitting the parents to recoup a portion of the costs, that would have been spent at a public institution (in the form of a voucher), would devastate the religious liberty of all taxpayers?
It seems to me, that permitting, and then subsidizing the costs of attendance at a religiously-operated school, is strengthening the religious liberty of all taxpayers. When you subsidize something, be it education or the production of agricultural commodities, you get more of it.
I like to make this analogy: If a Baptist gets federal food-stamps (SNAP), and then redeems the food stamps at a food pantry run by Catholic charities, and buys kosher food, whose religion is getting established?
LikeLike
Poor Charles needs to read Madison’s 1785 Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments and Jefferson’s Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom. I am pleased to stand with James and Tom while Charles thumbs his nose at them. — Edd Doerr
LikeLike
@Edd: Does your opposition to school choice/vouchers extend to non-religious schools, as well. There are many fine privately-operated schools in the USA, that are totally sectarian. There are military preparatory schools. And about 1 million families in the USA home-school their children.
If more children left their publicly-operated schools, and attended private, non-sectarian schools and were home-schooled would you object to that as well?
LikeLike
I object to public funding of private schools.
LikeLike
I oppose tax support even secular private schools, as they tend to spend 2 or 3 times as much per kid as public schools and are hughly selective. — Edd Doerr
LikeLike
I’d love to hear a tarmac question for the president:
Should Muslim schools receive federal funding or allow parents to use federal vouchers to attend?
Or for Devos:
Should a school’s LGBTQ Club sponsor be paid extra duty pay with tax dollars?
(note – bible study and student GOP and Dem clubs do have paid sponsors)
LikeLiked by 1 person
North Carolina’s voucher plan’s largest recipient of public funds is the Greensboro Islamic Academy.
LikeLike
Islam is the third largest religion in the USA, and growing fast. What is wrong about families attending this Madras, being the third largest recipient group in the state of North Carolina? Families attending Roman Catholic schools, and Buddhist schools, and Fundamentalist Protestant schools also receive public funds, to enable them to exercise their free choice to send their children to the schools of their choice. Is this a problem for you?
LikeLike
Charles thinks that “Islam is the third largest religion in the USA, and growing fast.”
You must be an avid fan of FOX fake, often misleading, manipulative news that leaves out the details that disarm a statement like that.
According to fact gathering Pew Forum.org, if you count all the many different Christian sects in the U.S. as one, that adds up to 70.6 percent of the population. That’s more than 229.9 million Americans.
Non-Christian Faiths add up to 5.9 percent.
Jews come in at 1.9 percent.
Muslims at 0.9 percent
Buddhists Hindus at 0.7 percent each.
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/
“Muslim Americans are a diverse and growing population, currently estimated at 3.45 million people of all ages, including 2.15 million adults (see below for an explanation of this estimate). The U.S. Muslim community is made up heavily of immigrants and the children of immigrants from around the world. On average, Muslim Americans are considerably younger than the overall U.S. population.”
http://www.pewforum.org/2017/07/26/demographic-portrait-of-muslim-americans/
The total US population is currently 325.7 million.
In 1950, the Muslim population was 0.13 percent
In 1970, twenty years later, that population increased to 0.49 percent
In 1980, it reached 1.3 percent.
In 1990, 1.57 percent
in 2000, 1.74 percent
Click to access 26-D435.pdf
In 2017, the estimate was 3.45 million Muslims of all ages live in the US, but … but … that’s 1.05 percent of the population. What happened to the rest of them?
Charles, have you ever considered actually fact checking these allegations and exaggerations you hear from FOX news — Hannity I suspect or someone like him?
I don’t mean going to fact-checking sites since you have probably been programmed to think they are all fake news and belong to fire-breathing, lying progressives that do not control the Democratic Party at this time even though 90-percent of the media is owned by six huge corporations and all their CEOs are old, conservative white men that are paid outrages sums of money.
I mean actually checking the actual facts from fact gathering sources?
LikeLike
All right, I concede that Islam is not the third largest religion in the USA. But, it is growing fast. Mosques are popping up all over this land of ours. I say good! We have a splendid tradition of freedom of religion, and no established religion. There is a mosque in my neighborhood, and a Buddhist temple just down the street.
Muslims are setting up madrasses at a fast clip. Islam has a strong tradition of education.
“The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘Seeking knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim.’”
As school choice grows, you can be assured that muslims will be choosing Islamic education for their children, and seeking public funds to assist in the cost.
LikeLike
You like that, right? And you adore Yeshivas that don’t teach English or secular subjects like math and science.
LikeLike
I like the fact that our nation has constitutionally protected freedom of religion, and a prohibition against an established state religion. I like that just fine. The fact that new immigrants are setting up their own houses of worship, and also religiously-based institutions of learning, is a fine thing, and I like that too.
When Christian Europeans were praying to the bones of their saints for cures, people in Islamic nations were performing cataract surgery. The Roman Catholic church forbade autopsies, so the only accurate drawings of the human anatomy were in Islamic textbooks. Islam pioneered chemotherapy, dentistry, anatomy, biology, algebra, military tactics, and a whole host of scientific areas, while Christian Europe was in the dark ages. When the Christian knights captured the library at the Islamic university in Toledo, Spain, there were twice as many books in that one library, as in all of Christian Europe.
We should welcome our new Muslim immigrants, we will never repay the debt that our civilization owes to theirs.
And I do support Jewish education, as well.
LikeLike
I am all in favor of religious freedom, Charles, like you.
I oppose state sponsorship of religion, unlike you.
If the members of a religious are unwilling to pay for its children’s religious schooling, why should the state pay?
If they don’t care enough, why does it become the burden of taxpayers to subsidize others’ religions?
LikeLike
Charles wanders off topic.
LikeLike
Q If the members of a religious are unwilling to pay for its children’s religious schooling, why should the state pay?
If they don’t care enough, why does it become the burden of taxpayers to subsidize others’ religions?
END Q
Your question is a little skewed. When a religious enterprise sets up an educational institution, regardless of the grade level(s), of course financing is required. The institution may operate on donations, grants, and/or some measure of public financing, or tuition payments from the children’s parents, or combination of these.
Since all state’s constitutions mandate that children be provided with a “free” education, religious enterprises may elect to tap into the public money that a state will spend on education. This may be through vouchers, or direct subsidy payments (like the Trinity Lutheran School in Missouri). Money is “fungible”, so that when a religious school receives funding for playground equipment or textbooks, the institution can adjust their tuition costs, accordingly.
Your second question is precluded by the “establishment clause” of the first amendment. No religion can elect to receive public tax money for religious purposes, nor to establish a state-funded religion. It is never the burden of taxpayers to subsidize anyone’s religion (US Constitution, Amendment 1).
LikeLike
The more Charles writes the more confused and contradictory he gets. This discussion is a huge waste of time.
LikeLike
Charles never learns anything from anyone.
LikeLike
Please see
Q I like the fact that our nation has constitutionally protected freedom of religion, and a prohibition against an established state religion. I like that just fine. END Q
If you think that I do not support the first amendment’s prohibition against establishing religion, you are mistaken. I have said repeatedly, that I support this prohibition.
I am NOT in favor of any state religion, nor am I in favor of and state subsidies to any religion, of any kind. No public tax money to religion, Never.
I do support providing public money to religious enterprises, to operate activities like food pantries, homeless shelters, drug-rehabilitation centers, and other such humanitarian enterprises. NGOs (including religious organizations) generally can operate such enterprises, with lower overhead, and more efficiency than government operations. More people get helped, and at a lower cost. Who could be opposed to that?
NGOs often utilize volunteer staff ,and receive partial funding from philanthropists, and smaller donations, etc.
LikeLike