Close Topic Options

Declaration Of Indepence Prohibited In School - Page 2

Where did these good, strong morals and values come from? I believe the basis for all ethics, integrity, morals, etc., come from the basic religious beliefs that our ancestors taught their families.

True, although there were plenty of other issues... Freedom, itself, perhaps, more than just freedom of religion.

This merely reflects how far away we, as a people, have fallen from the teachings of our religious ancestors. Religion is timeless; the era in which we live has no bearing whatsoever on matters that are eternal.

I think you misunderstood me. The government *can't* protect against that circumstance; what they are saying is that the nation will not stand in the face of Godlessness.

If the "powers that be" can eliminate religion in the early years of our kids, then it will be easier to institute Godless laws in the future. Eliminating teaching about the Constitution is just one part of it.

Edited: FarSeer on 13th Dec, 2004 - 1:25am

School Prohibited Indepence Declaration

But what about people who have never known a religion? Let's say for instance that a child gets lost in the woods and grows up with no human or religious influence; and for humor's sake, let's just name this poor kid Tarzan. Who is to say that when Tarzan grows up he is devoid of all sense of good morals? A majority of people do develop morals based on religion, but this majority is, by no means, anywhere close to the entire human population. Many people, myself included, have set our moral standards on a belief in man and common sense, not a God and system of faith.

Or perhaps the founding fathers were just a bunch of smugglers and power-hungry upperclassmen. But then again, anything's possible. The Red Socks finally won the World Series, didn't they?

Again, I'm afraid I have to disagree. I may be misinterpreting this here, but it seems as if your statement is that religion is not adaptable and subject to change. Why can't the teachings remain the same, but the manner in which they are approached and dealt with in society evolve with society itself? Just because people thousands of years ago used to sacrifice sheep to appease dieties doesn't mean we have to do so today; in fact, we don't.

Nope, no misunderstanding. What I meant was I didn't see why there was a division of church and state if the founding fathers argued that a Godless government (created by Godless people) would collapse. Why go through the trouble of driving around an area in the middle of an ebola epidemic, only to inject yourself in the arm with an ebola-filled serum when you get home? There is no logic in that choice of action.

If religous parents spend time with their children, teaching them their beliefs and what is important to them, then why should the government matter? The same goes for Godless parents who leave their children to make their own decisions about religion while impressing upon them the importance of good morals. Unless people leave the government to rear their children, there is no sane reason to worry that the "powers that be" will be affected for the worse. The government is not out to harm people; its there to be the framework upon which the everyday man and woman is able to function. The "powers that be" do what is best for the country as a whole. And by removing religion from the public school system, there is a line that one must be careful not to cross. Going back to my original argument, the Constitution is a vital part of US history; anything that is such a large part of a nation's past, whether religion is involved or not, should not be excluded from a classroom. It makes no sense to censor such things.

Declaration Of Indepence Prohibited In School History & Civil Business Politics

Wow. I think it's safe to say that this thread definately went where I had not intended it to.

Page 2 School Prohibited Indepence Declaration

Or perhaps they were patriots, willing to risk everything for an independent way of life. ...And each and every one of them lost everything they had -- their wealth, their families, and their lives -- to the cause of freedom. But that's another topic.

That's not what I said. The teachings do remain the same (or, in a perfect world, they should), and it's the living of them that adapts to current society. It doesn't matter what era we live in, the teachings are eternal. But that's *another* topic.

~~
Rache, I really don't want to argue about religion. We're coming from two opposing poles here, religious and non-religious, while we both solidly agree on the main point. The Constitution absolutely *should* be taught in schools. How can any sane, sensible teacher hope to teach about American Government without that framework?? Whether it comes from religion or not, it's the basis for our current government and societal framework.

School Prohibited Indepence Declaration

Wow, I can't believe I missed this topic.

Here's what I think - the teacher did not deserve to be banned simply because of giving the child a copy of the declaration. If he would have said "The founders were christian, therefore it is the true way", yes he would have deserved the manner. The article was a bit vague, though.

It said he showed the students documents, and I am wondering - did he just show it? "Hey, look what I have here!" Maybe they learned something that relates? But the article said he showed them more than one such historical documents, and he must have attached some message.

If not, banning him is like banning a teacher giving a child a document of Darwin's theory.

Declaration Of Indepence Prohibited In School

Interesting link of thought by this school board. So they should not show anything that has a religious context. History at this school should be quiet easy, since it would only begin around 1960 for part of the world.

I have another thought.

Perhaps this school district should give back the money that they take from the federal government, since it has "In God We Trust" on it. The US was founded by people that were, in part, escaping England and other lands for religious freedom. I really cant understand why anyone would get uptight about these references. If you dont believe in God, then why would you care? Although less over the years, the US is still a very religious country (large variety of religions and always has been). I have always looked at these references to God by our "founding fathers" as more of a reference to religious freedom and the freedom to not be religous.

Just a thought,

Vincenzo

Declaration Indepence Prohibited School - Page 2

Like has already been said, perhaps we aren't getting the entire story. However, if we are, then an injustice truly has been served...to the teacher and to the students. If the Declaration of Independence was given out simply as a part of a history lesson on the US history and was banned because it refers to God, that is simply a case of the people in charge going to far to one side of an issue. No big surprise; it is how things usually work. We get upset about an issue, push hard to get it changed, and in that process often end up too far on the other side of the issue.

Now, the fact is this country was founded by religious men in a time period when very few people didn't believe in God. So, if you don't believe in God, you can still teach your children that it is an archaic belief system that people used to have centuries ago but that no longer applies today. If that is what you believe, fine, but it will not change the fact that God is referred to in historic documents.

However from what I read in the article, I wonder if there isn't more to the story:

It sounds like maybe this teacher was doing a little more than teaching US History. I don't think it is o.k. in a public school to stress the fact that the founders of our country were religious. I think it is fine to teach the document, but to let it be a proselytizing tool would be wrong under current law.

It says he didn't want to [I]hide the fact that our founders were religious, that is fine, but I don't think it should be stressed either.

I am deeply religious and I believe that this country will fail without God as it's guiding influence, but I also believe if I take a position teaching in a public school I must abide by the laws that dictate what I can teach. If I want to teach with more of a focus on God, I might want to consider teaching in a private, religious school.

I want to close by, again stating, that if the teacher was truly just innocently teaching on the Declaration of Independence then this ruling was wrong. However, if we believe a law is wrong, we must work within the law to change it, not simply ignore it, in my opinion.

Edited: tenaheff on 14th Jan, 2005 - 11:42am