Republican Senator Dave Schultheis of Colorado Springs recently tried to pass SB 089 but was shot down during deliberation. The bill was meant to create an official religious bill of rights in regards to public schools in Colorado.
The bill, as originally written, granted the follow religious rights to students (paraphrased here):
- Express their beliefs at school
- Participate in religious ceremonies at school outside of classroom time
- Give a greeting card or other item with a religious theme
- Sing religious songs as part of school-sponsored programs
- Use a religious greeting
- Wear religious garb
- Express belief or select religious materials in response to a school assignment
- Recite religious material during a speech
The bill also grants the following rights to teachers and employees:
- Teach a religious topic for historical or literary purposes (including history of holidays)
- Display religious items relating to a topic being discussed in class
- Allow students to exchange greeting cards with religious themes
- Participate in a non-school sponsored religious activity
- Answer a student’s question about a religious topic
- Not be required to teach something that violates their religious belief
- Wear religious jewelry
- Use a religious greeting as part of a religious holiday
Currently, questions about religious rights have to be turned over to the Colorado Attorney General and those answers are publicly displayed in the schools. While most pagans (most non-Christians, in fact) seem to be celebrating, I’m stuck scratching my head and feeling a bit disappointed. This bill had a lot of potential to both open up interfaith dialogue and completely screw over minority religions.
I’ll grant that religious worship has no place in public schools (unless it’s done voluntarily, outside of classroom hours). But entirely too often students don’t get the chance to learn about other religions either from a teacher or from fellow students. We’ve entered a period of time where many people don’t feel comfortable discussing their religion in public schools and that detracts from a person’s individuality. Many pagans understand the stress that comes from living “in the broom closet” and the refusal to open up religious dialogues in public schools adds to that kind of struggle.
I’m not as naïve as I sound here: I understand that this opens up way too many doors for proselytizing, and I certainly don’t want to see that happen. And I think there’s a fundamental flaw with a teacher refusing to teach something against their religion (if you don’t believe in evolution, maybe you shouldn’t be a science teacher…), and another flaw in letting a student refuse to take a class because it conflicts with their religious belief. Maybe it’s the druid in me talking, but knowledge is an awe-some thing and you don’t have to believe in something to learn about it.
Ideally, what I’d like to see is an introductory course on the world’s religions taught as mandatorily as algebra. I’d like to see students capable of carrying on a discussion about religion and being encouraged to learn from each other. And that’s just not possible if we refuse to allow religion into public schools. America might not have a state religion, but that doesn’t mean we’re a secular society. Hiding from the problems is only a temporary solution, and one that won’t last longer. Perhaps this bill isn’t the best way to go about opening up that dialogue, but it has to open up somewhere.
Just one of the many topics already being strongly ignored in high school Civics classes, not that there are any signs that people have learned a single thing in them.
There are times when I think that some state might really want to try something like Heinlein’s “History and Moral Philosophy” classes from the book _Starship_Troopers_. Mandatory in all grades, discussions held at age-appropriate levels for each class.
Just one place to try this our for a decade or so, and see what difference it makes in the kind of people who they graduate, if any.
Some of the things in this bill I agree with strongly; others I disagree with even more strongly. I am not, as a whole, unhappy this bill got shot down, though I could leave most of the items on the bill with some revisions and caveats. Though there are some fantastically liberal places in Colorado and though there are pagan groups, Colorado is also the bastion of religious right extremists, and they would use this bill as written to their advantage. Here is a “Bill of Rights” I would feel comfortable with:
Students can:
1. Express their beliefs at school, in an appropriate venue. In other words, they shouldn’t be talking about Jesus during math, and though they may say that evolution goes against their religious beliefs, it is not the time or place to turn the class into a debate of evolution vs. their religious belief.
2. Participate in religious ceremonies at school outside of classroom time, provided the religious ceremonies are student-initiated and sponsored.
3. Give a greeting card with a religious theme, understanding that they may also get greeting cards with religious themes other than their religion, and with the caveat that said cards may not be used for proselytizing. Also, they shall not continue to give religious greeting cards to any student who has expressed a desire not to receive cards with such a message.
4. Sing religious songs as part of school-sponsored programs, if it is appropriate to the theme of the program, and if others not of that religion are not coerced into singing it.
5. Use a religious greeting, with the same caveats as #3.
6. Wear religious garb
7. Express belief or select religious materials in response to a school assignment, if those beliefs and materials are appropriate to and within the scope of the assignment.
8. Recite religious material during a speech, if and only if is is appropriate to the subject of the speech and if the person is speaking as an individual and not as an agent of the school. See also the caveats for #3.
Teachers and employees can:
1. Teach a religious topic for historical or literary purposes (including history of holidays), as long as the teaching method is objective and not proselytizing, and remains teaching about how the religion is pertinent to the topic and not teaching the religion itself, and as long as the teaching is not restricted to one religion or one sect withing that religion. If a holiday has multi-religious roots,those roots must be taught without prejudice and from an objective standpoint. If religious holidays shall be taught, they shall be all the holidays that the current student body celebrates, not just those of the majority religion(s). If this cannot be done, holidays shall not be taught.
2. Display religious items relating to a topic being discussed in class, with the same caveats as #1.
3. Allow students to exchange greeting cards with religious themes, as long as they adhere to the caveats stated in the student section. Also, they shall make certain that students are not harassed if they do not want these cards due to their religious themes.
4. Participate in a non-school sponsored religious activity, off school property and not on school time. If the school requires a teacher or employee to be present or sponsor student-initiated activities, religious or otherwise, then they may be present, but should not be an active participant. They shall treat the students’ religion neutrally and objectively, whether they agree or disagree with the students’ religious beliefs.
5. Answer a student’s question about a religious topic if it is pertinent to the lessons in #1.
7. Wear religious jewelry
8. Use a religious greeting as part of a religious holiday to other faculty and employees. Students should not be greeted with religious greetings unless it is a one-on-one situation, and in keeping with the student’s, not the teacher’s, religious beliefs. Off school property and not on school time, the teacher or employee is free to use religious greetings as any other person.
I don’t think that most people would be able to adhere to the bill as I propose, unfortunately.
I like a lot of the caveats that you propose here, Pam, though I agree it’s unlikely that anyone would be able to adhere to them all, and I also agree with other commenters that, sadly, this is really just a sly attempt to get more wiggle room for proselytizing in schools.
My concern is for the integrity and quality of the education being provided, really. I trust an educated person who has learned to think for her- or himself to come to their own conclusions (politically and/or religiously) as they mature and learn to live in the world with others. But I worry about allowing students to substitute unexamined religious/political/philosophical doctrines and assumptions inherited from adults for their own careful, rigorous academic writing and analysis, or turning the school itself into a place where such assumptions are handed down unquestioned by teachers, in an official or unofficial capacity. When I used to tutor college students in writing, it was amazing to me how often someone would mistake a Biblical quote for a cogent argument…
I do think religion has a place in public life (if not in institutional politics), but sometimes I worry that people don’t even understand their own religions well enough to think critically and carefully about them, let alone give such thought to others’.
I’d vote for yours too. In addition to possibly helping create a less charged or loaded atmosphere where belief is just another thing about a person instead of something that has to be fought over or gingerly tip-toed around, it would also eliminate situations like my Jr. High had.
We had a large group of parents and people in the community stage a protest/petition signing across the street from the school over the addition of a 9th grade Spanish class. The main reason given for wanting the class removed was because the curriculum included some history and culture of Spain, and they believed that their children were being indoctrinated into Catholicism. The school board pretty much ignored it for quite awhile until the police cited them for blocking traffic.
That was quite a while ago, but similar freaky stuff still crops up here and there.
As far as I know, students are already allowed to wear religious garb, religious jewelry, to greet each other on holidays, etc. Nobody is forbidding students to say Merry Christmas and forcing them to substitute Happy Holidays. That is not a true problem that requires legislation.
This is a dishonest (and multi-state) attempt to allow teachers to introduce Creationism in science (and yeah, if you are that religious, you shouldn’t be teaching it) and to actively promote what amounts to Christianity at holiday times. Schultheis is not interested in anyone else’s religion, and neither are the people who promote this.
I agree, there should be world religions taught as literature or social studies, but I already see that in many, many schools. School budgets being what they are, I doubt they are a priority, though.
Restating things people already have the right to do, and sneaking in some “reasonable sounding” additional items is slippery slope legislation and will result in more, not less, peer pressure to conform to a Christian majority.
(on a side note, i think as long as there is a majority of christianity in the u.s., there will be no move to make this a secular society the way france is, where they have “freedom from religion” as the norm.)
There is a great documentary on how this very kind of push for Creationism and its newer form Intelligent Design (and make no mistake, it is) has been dealt with in the past, and continues to be a battle field. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html
QFT.
This was nothing but a typical Dominionist “Stealth” attack. Usually when they try to push Christian Supremacist stuff in under the radar, it’s in a bill titled something to do with “Religious Freedom” or “Anti-Discrimination,” when the goal is actually NEITHER.
Agreed. Although I’d love it if it meant religious pluralism and talking openly about a variety of beliefs, this is neither the intent nor will it be the result.
Agreed, any attempted legislation written like that ought to contain the term religious pluralism to make sure it isn’t being used to serve the needs of one religion only, and the dominant one at that.
“As far as I know, students are already allowed to wear religious garb, religious jewelry, to greet each other on holidays, etc.”
That’s not exactly true. Children in school have far fewer constitutional protections than do adults outside the prison system or military. Many schools do restrict clothing, jewelry, and religious speech (written and spoken) for both teachers and students. It’s (probably) not legal for them to do so, but they do it anyway.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sch_clot3.htm
“America might not have a state religion, but that doesn’t mean we’re a secular society.”
But we do have (or are supposed to have) a secular state, and public schools — being tax-supported and run by elected school boards — are an arm of the state and should comport themselves accordingly.
I’m not unhappy that this bill died. Much of it is already protected activity, some of it shouldn’t be, and the fuzzy cases are not well served by a rigid legislative fiat. If people are unhappy with the current scheme of reference to the Atty General they should sue the state with a claim that the set-up infringes on their constitutional rights.
I agree with Jamie that this smells like a Creationist nose under the tent.
“But we do have (or are supposed to have) a secular state, and public schools — being tax-supported and run by elected school boards — are an arm of the state and should comport themselves accordingly.”
All Hail!
As a teacher my goal (job/career?) is to educate students in the relm of history/social studies. Sometimes religion is part of that, but not in the way that this law would protect. This is the relm of family and parents, not teachers and schools.
I’ve been in classes where students cannot locate Italy on a world map (or recognise that a map of europe is turned sideways! I wish I was exaggerating), much less hold a serious debate on the doctrinal strenghts/weakness of any religion. Our education system is failing because teachers are already expected to teach values to our kids (sharing, respect, and tolerance) at the expence of academic content. Can our schools do more for our students? hell yeah we can; but we, as educators, need support from parents and familys.
When I re-read this comment it sounds like I’m ranting, maybe I am, but it seems to me that schools are expected to do more to our students than educate them in accademics.
Paul, I think you are right and I fault the entire system and the way it is built for that. It is designed to take children out of their homes, away from their families, from a very early age, for a major portion of the day, for a majority of the week, for most months of the year, for many years in a child’s life, to prepare them for a life as a worker in our industrial global economy. They are taught to obey authority, respond to auditory cues like bells, eat on command, perceive themselves as organised as per performance ability and judge each other based on such, arrive punctually and follow directions given without question, awarded when they do and punished when they don’t. This is how our schools were designed to function when they were created and instituted in the Industrial Revolution. They were expected to acquire certain behavioral skills, nominal academic skills and a degree of physical skills while being conditioned to a workplace environment in which they would be expected to perform much as they did at school. The ethics of the day were those of the hard-working Protestant; stoic, tough, diligent, responsible, reliable, with a strong work ethic. The problem we have been facing now is two-fold; for one, we have learned that educating youth factory-style doesn’t help them best grow as critically-thinking, compassionate, connected people because the system doesn’t expect them to think for themselves, pay attention to peers outside of competition, or allow them real connections to others in the larger community by their being sequestered away in one place all together all day; and, our social and work society has changed dramatically in some ways since the days of the Industrial Revolution, and different sets of academic and social skills are needed in today’s economy and global climate, which the old system doesn’t adequately address. The failings we see are not the fault of the teachers, they are as much stuck by the system as the students are. Some teachers manage to shine despite the system, as do some students, especially those who have mastered the game of it all, but largely the system in place is outdated and outmoded. Families need more time together, and need a society which is family-centered rather than business centered, but since that doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon, we need schools and learning opportunities of a varied nature so families and students can select from a variety of options those which world best for them, and give a greater emphasis to out-of-the-box thinking and critical thinking, as it is innovative ideas and creative solutions to our problems we need now, because trying to create solutions from the same box which created the problems will leave us in much the same place we are now. We also need a greater emphasis on cooperative skills, as more people from various walks of life will need to come together for problem-solving and creating new technologies or lifeways for humanity. Until these bottom-up changes happen, schools will continue to fight the same problems they face today.
Well said, Èirinn.
Most of these rights already exist–though the protections are greater for students than for teachers. Jamie is correct: this is largely camouflage for a few items that sound reasonable on the surface, but are not… That teachers “Not be required to teach something that violates their religious belief” for instance, would open the doors to health teachers who refuse to discuss birth control, or biology teachers who refuse to teach evolution. Clearly, that’s not what we want to see happen.
Students can already assemble for religious activities outside of class time (as long as this is organized by students, not staff); teachers can already teach about the historical or literary aspects of a religion (and many statewide curriculum frameworks encourage it), and so on.
I wouldn’t like to see that change–but this bill sounds like it’s really an attempt to change a few other things, that actually provide meaningful protections for minority religions and secular approaches to secular subjects.
Personally, I think the First Amendment grants all the “right rights”, by itself.
But you have a great point. Unfortunately, students must wait for “mature” college professionals to teach world religions and philosophy.
I think the difference is this: a 22yr old college student will debate back at a professor going to far. We can’t expect all 5th graders to stand up to preaching.
I think I read somewhere that until the age of 7 or 8, kids can’t even tell the difference between learning material and a 30 second commercial.
Everything they hear from a teacher is taken as “gospel”, pun intended. So no, I don’t want my kindergarden teacher telling my little boy that babies come from “Jesus”, because she interpretted the question as a “religious” one.
This. I believe students should be taught comparative religions at the secondary level, but there’s no way I want somebody ELSE teaching my kids about religion when they’re still in primary school. That’s MY job.
“Our* job, *exactly.* Well said.
Question: by secondary level you mean 6th or 7th grade through hish school graduation, right?
hish = high
By high school, most students are able to look at other people’s perspectives objectively, as “things other people believe,” rather than as “things I’m supposed to believe because the teacher talks about them.” More importantly, if teenagers are exposed to the idea that others believe differently, they will be better able to cope with the diversity of religious and political viewpoints they will encounter in college and in the working world.
I was seriously sheltered as a child. Until the 10th grade, I had never knowingly encountered a non-Christian and did not believe there were any members of any other religions in America. I knew about Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam, but to me they were things people on the other side of the world believed in and had nothing to do with my life.
For my last 3 years of high school, I was transferred from homogeneous, religious private schools to a magnet school with students of a variety of religions, ethnic backgrounds, and sexual orientations. I was so totally disoriented by the change that I became a highly antagonistic fundie-type for the rest of high school, deliberately isolating myself in order to protect my fragile world view. It was only in college that I was able to sort things out and develop into a somewhat sane adult.
There are other children out there who have never knowingly meet a Pagan, who don’t realize that Muslims really don’t hate America, who don’t notice that there are Buddhists, atheists, and Sikhs living right down the street. Introducing them gradually to the diversity of our nation will help them develop tolerance and caring for all Americans, gradually, without having to go through the severe culture shock I did.
Hear hear! Aside from the issue of some evangelical taking advantage of a smaller child’s level of discernment, it’s just plain unfair to put a little kid in a position of being at spiritual odds with his parents, unless there’s something really screwy going on. And that’s a job for a neutral secular entity like DSS or a professional child advocate, not a teacher.
“I think the difference is this: a 22yr old college student will debate back at a professor going to far. We can’t expect all 5th graders to stand up to preaching.”
Zactly – and unless it’s a very progressive school, any kid who does is going to get disciplined for “being disrespectful” or ‘being disruptive” even if the kid is right. His parents may intervene, but most of the time a principal or school board is going to back the teacher, especially if said teacher has tenure.
Most of the stuff on the list would already seem to be protected under religious freedom granted by the 1st Amendment. The rest of the list isn’t necessarily bad in and of itself, but for what it will allow to occur. In a country where Christianity is the majority religion, do you really think Pagan students will give a fair chance to exercise any of those special rights?
For instance, “Teach a religious topic for historical or literary purposes (including history of holidays).” Are they really going to be honest about the actual history of a religious holiday? Like the fact that Christmas may be about the birth of Christ to Christians, but 99% of the traditions and trappings associated with it came from pre-Christian religious traditions? And offer full disclosure that Christianity didn’t become the majority faith because it won some popularity contest?
IMO this is about little more than being able to get Intelligent Design into science classes, allow Christian students and/or teachers to proselytize without restriction and push a little revisionist Christian history into schools as well. We know how it goes by now… anything like this that manages to happen in individual school districts quickly goes away the moment a non-majority faith tries to take advantage of it. LOL
I agree that this bill was written from a specifically Christian point of view to promote expressly Christian-based teachings and to inculcate our schools with a Christian-based culture, and that it is in no way intended to be utilized by the Muslim community, for example, or by any polytheist family, student, teacher, or community, and you can be sure those who wrote and pushed such legislation would be in an outraged uproar should anyone else besides themselves attempt to do so.
The teaching of world religions in schools is an interesting idea, but I am concerned as to how well it is ever carried out. All public school learning in our country comes from textbooks written from an American-centric point of view which does not really do the best job of representing other cultures or religions which they describe as per their own cultural conception, rather than allowing those religions or cultures to be presented on their own terms. We may have such classes but I would hesitate to say that they offer an accurate picture more often than not. Universities might fare better, as they are more willing to explore other cultures and religions by going to other religio-cultural literary sources and references, but the point of view of the one leading the discussion can never be left unquestioned as long as the teacher comes from outside the religion or culture being studied.
“The teaching of world religions in schools is an interesting idea, but I am concerned as to how well it is ever carried out.”
There was a “world religions” class elective taught in my public high school, which I took my senior year, and surprisingly it was very well taught (and not from a textbook). The class mostly consisted of students alternating weeks to independently research and provide group presentations on various religions: I got to choose and participate in a group presentation in Wicca/Paganism (along with a girl who was openly Wiccan at the time), as well as one on Sufism/Islamic mysticism. It was one of my absolute favorite courses of my senior year and ultimately led me to earn a degree in comparative religious studies in college.
Granted, my high school (though in a conservative area in south-central Pennsylvania) was decidedly preppy and certainly the exception rather than the rule. Still–it can be done!
There is hope… if only a little.
Ali, bravo to your class, so glad to hear it was a positive experience for you and your classmates! I recall a portion of a class taught to world religions, also without a textbook, but from the teacher’s own point of view, to which he allowed no others. Later in college I took an Ancient History class, not quite the same as world religions, although they did come up, and sadly the professor was not interested in different points of view, and few in the class were interested in discussion, anyway. I am happy to hear this has been better presented elsewhere. By far, the best experience I had was in a high school class experience which combined history and English into large Hyde-Park style debates and discussions where we could bring up and hash out our points of view, and as current events also often came up, religion was fair play. Everyone’s point of view was expressed and shared when desired, and respect in doing so was enforced at all times.
Let’s also remember that infamous group in Texas who still gets to determine the majority of textbooks for all of our public schools. That would be a great place to start making some changes.
We didn’t have a world religions class back when I was in high school. My first such class was in college but it was well taught and fascinating. I do think they should start in public school though. Unfortunately, you know how the religious right will react to any such proposal.
Coolbeads – wonder if we can bottle that for mass consumption? ;0)
On a completely different note, this bill also points to the expectations we place on the teachers to not only provide an education but to also take on a parental role towards the children in their classrooms. What an ethical can of worms for a teacher to take on in addition to their already ample responsibilities! This is just my opinion, but for me, I think that religious teaching is in the realm of parenting. When we try to turn teachers into parental figures as well as educators, we split the focus of the role of the educator, blurring the line between teaching and parenting in a potentially dysfunctional way. Personally, I’m not a fan of institutionalizing the parental role of introducing children to religious thought, as we run the risk of parents and children having less religious agency within their household.
Cedar, I agree with you. Religious instruction per family tradition is best done in a household setting, and learning about other religious traditions is perhaps best done by exploring those as a family, whether by studying literary sources or visiting places of worship and attending public services and cultural events. As a homeschooling parent, I agree that much learning, especially of a cultural nature, is best pursued with the family.
As Èirinn pointed out in an earlier post, part of this problem (teachers as parental substitutes) is built into the system; you take children out of their homes for almost the entire day, 5 days a week. Most parents cannot afford to homeschool/have a full-time parent at home – and that speaks to wages v. cost of living and housing costs – which is another enitre can of worms.
Nothing in this country is family-friendly, despite all the hype about children.
As far as I can tell this law is mean to protect “religion in school” from a non-academic perspective.
As a high school history teacher I leave my own religious beliefs out of ANY lesson (I even wear my Hammer out of view when I wear it at all), and religion is only disscussed if it pertains to the lesson (I.E “The Monkey Trial, “The Crusades”, a lesson on greek gods/goddess’, ect). I do not think that anyone has a problem with relgion in schools under these pretexts.
The only reason you would need a religious bill of rights would be to protect the freedom of religion for non-academic purposes. Aside from student-run clubs/support groups, the potential to abuse this protection is too great, and even then it could get dicey; students proselytizing during lunch or some such thing. In my opinion, religion, for non-academic puropses, should just be left out of schools.
Well put, Paul. What fascinates me is that the same crowd that was for this bill is probably claiming that granting the gay/lesbian community the right to get married is “special rights.” As you point out, there should really be no need for non-academic religion in schools. I have a little boy in kindergarten right now and the Christian influences he gets just being there (without it coming from the teacher) is difficult enough to deal with.
Isn’t it frustrating? I would like to see more efforts from the larger pagan community for daycare, education, etc – I’m sure we’ll get there eventually, but it would be nice to see it sooner than later.