Since I have already argued quite a bit on this topic on this thread and the Libertarian thread, I hope I will be pardoned for posting a summary of previously made points:
The question is, where is the line to be drawn? I do not think that the display of the Ten Commandments, despite the religious references, is the right place. Should students not read the Iliad because it invokes the Muse, and has various scenes with an array of gods in it? If the Ten Commandments are presented as an important element of tradition, without proselytizing, I see no offense...
Many practices were allowed until recently. You are treating as clear violations of the Constitution, rulings that are novel and subject to dispute. Anyway, I would object to the quote as a banner, but not as part of a display about the varied currents in our culture. But
let me ask you something: Do you think that it would be wrong to post the Declaration of Independence, even though it makes reference to the "laws of Nature and of Nature's God"? Just because of a specifically religious reference, is the posting of the Ten Commandments proselytizing? If it is not, it is not "establishment", and therefore is not banned behavior...
My premise is that most such disputes have little to do with "establishment", but with offense to sensibilities, and that when it is merely a matter of preferences, in most instances the will of the majority prevails...
As I said to Barb, I personally have no objection to deleting the specific religious reference, I just don't think that it is necessary. Anyway, one posts something like the Ten Commandments not merely as a list of admonitions, but because of the cultural power of
the document. It elicits a certain respect from many students, and helps to reinforce conscientiousness...
The Constitutional doctrine is against "establishment". I do not think that such minor expressions constitute establishment. The tax dollar argument is silly, since no one approves of everything done with tax dollars (if you ask, maybe you can get your penny
rebate). I am arguing that it does not amount to promoting religion, so why promote atheism? The Kama Sutra is about sex, so it is irrelevant...As I said, one invokes things that mean something within the pre- existing cultural framework, like the Ten Commandments or the Declaration of Independence. If, say, the Analects of Confucius has much cultural resonance in a given school district, then by all means, post something from it...
The Bible can be read as a cultural document rather than a sacred text, and many people who do not believe in it do so. In that respect, it is like the Iliad. However, it is has played a more important role in our society, and in that respect is more relevant than the Iliad. Agnostic and atheistic views are not excluded from schools, since they can often be found in literature (e.g., Thomas Hardy)and are often part of the discussion in other areas, such
as Social Studies....
You think it is promotion, I think it is taking advantage of something that has a pre- existing meaning to most pupils, and that it is relevant for anyone interested in our culture to know about. If I thought that it really was promotion, I would agree with you. Since I do not, I would tell you what I would tell a group of parents who got on my back because I assigned "Jude the Obscure" (presumably to precocious seniors), which is that they are not empowered to determine the specific content of my teaching...
Sometimes it is most practical to accommodate the majority, but I already said that if there is a significant minority presence within a school, it ought to be acknowledged...When I was in elementary school, I used to be enlisted to explain certain Jewish holidays to
various classes, and a couple of Jewish songs would be incorporated into the Winter Program, and that was satisfactory...
|
