Ashley's+Blog

The following was originally published February 16, 2009 at http://readingfreebyash.blogspot.com/2009/02/teaching-religion-in-public-schools.html **Breaking Boundaries**

With educational technologies on the rise, cultures colliding, and rules to social acceptability ever changing, it is no wonder people are starting to question how much longer the separation of church and state will hold up. So what is the answer? In 2007, The United States made an act to reassure that the boundaries would not be broken, however, children will begin to be educated in a less watered-down way and will be allowed to receive full education regardless of religious-based content.

In 2007, the United States Department of Education endorsed a grant of just less than $1 million to a “teaching religion in public school seminar” that was held in Stockon, California. “The purpose of this seminar was to argue that religion can and should be taught in public school and to explain the methods for doing so.” Throughout public schooling, subjects such as civics, history, and geography have been isolated and compacted to these glossed over subjects that exclude the major parts that involve religion. This seminar was meant to instruct the difference on teaching religion and the importance of teaching about religion. The overall subject of the seminar was that teachers and curriculum is supposed to be “designed to mold the attitudes and values of the child about religion...”

The seminar also instructed “master teachers” on the supposed correct way to teach religion. It is not something that is expected to be easy to teach or easily accepted, so key speakers were used to guide teachers in public schools. Unlike Milford School District, the seminar held by the United States Department of Education wants to allow free speech, even in the form of religion. It is not promoting religious education to be taught as a primary subject, but rather how religion has affected other subjects. Without teaching about religion in history class, students do not know about religious persecutions or how Christianity affected most of European societies and geographies. Without teaching about religion in civics class, students do not know how the Church basically ran most of government throughout history. The difference in this sentence structure, however, is that we are teaching about religion, but we are not teaching religion to our students.

Milford tried to restrict Good News Club’s freedom of speech based on their viewpoints. On the grounds that the club was religious in nature, Milford Central School forbade them to hold their club. With the $1 million grant, the Dept. of Education has just counteracted Milford’s negative viewpoints and allowed discussion of religion to be apart of the essential curriculum for a well-rounded education on their school grounds. I would like to hear what Milford Central Schools would have to say on this topic. Sources: http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2007/nov07/public-school.html http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-2036.ZS.html