|
They are wrong be about it being unconstitutional
to teach religion because the Supreme Court-including its most liberal and separationist
justices –have said so repeatedly beginning no later than Schempp. It is
also impossible to teach many subjects well without an understanding of
religion-i.e. current events and history. The failure of history texts to
grapple with religion in the 70’s and 80’s –documented inter
alia by an important study conducted by People for the American Way or Americans
United-I have forgotten which for the moment-- led to widespread disenchantment
with public education in some elements of the population. The silence was
interpreted –not always incorrectly-as a conclusion that religion was not
very important as a social force or that it is always socially retrogressive. Cutting
out evangelical Christianity from the abolitionist movement or ignoring
the Christian roots of Martin Luther King’ s leadership role in the civil
rights struggle says something about a texts’ view of the importance of
religion. Much the same can be said for Bible as
literature courses or comparative religion courses. These can surely be taught
reasonably objectively if one tries and they cover a subject matter that is
culturally important. Such courses cannot be Sunday school classes in
public school garb, but it is not hard to meet that standard. It is unfortunate
that Mr. Williams course of conduct suggests otherwise and that he finds
defenders but the fundamental point remains true. Marc Stern From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Newsom Michael Could you explain why liberals are wrong? -----Original Message----- . Liberals are sometimes
suspicious of efforts to teach about religion in the public schools. They are
wrong to think that such teaching is unconstitutional or unwise.: |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
