I have done this without endorsement dozens and dozens of times. I have reviewed the first three chapters of Genesis probably 20 times over the years, never once endorsing Judaism or Christianity as a faith. In the same way, I have reviewed (taught) from the Communist Manifesto without endorsing or promoting the ideas. Just because the former includes the character of a serpent does not mean that sharing the story is an endorsement of the sayings of the serpent.
The Oklahoma superintendent clearly wants to do as you say. I am making comments on how the law matters even beyond that kind of case. Teachers have had to make these kinds of decisions for decades regardless of what their superintendent has been saying.Do you really want to tell me that the real motive behind this isn’t to somehow get lessons in the public schoolthat endorse, support, or promote tenets of Christianity? Especially considering that lessons from other religions’ texts are not being required?
Yes. But I was trying to make a broader comment. The law is meant to protect the citizens from coercion toward a state religion, and this protection has been extended to students (no state-funded coercion at that level, either). Teachers, of course, are protected also (regardless of their personal faiths).
We both know the “religious right” tries like crazy to get Christianity in the public schools, but would protest like crazy if any other religion tried the same.
Bookmarks