"religious right's" latest attempts to take over public schools

The Religious Right's New Tactics for Invading Public Schools

By Rob Boston, Church and State

Posted on October 4, 2007, Printed on October 4, 2007

http://www.alternet.org/story/64211/

In mid-August, Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed something called the

"Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act" into law. Although the

new law has an innocuous-sounding title, it's really a ticking time-

bomb, opponents say.

The law requires every public school in the state to adopt a policy

guaranteeing students' right to religious expression. It mandates that

schools create "limited public forums" for religious and other types

of speech. A student could, for example, read the morning

announcements over a loudspeaker and then lapse into a prayer or mini-

sermon.

Many people think the law is yet another effort to get around the

Supreme Court's rulings on separation of church and state in public

schools -- and they're expecting a torrent of litigation to result.

"This law is fundamentally at odds with the principle of religious

freedom," said Kathy Miller, president of the Texas Freedom Network,

an Austin-based group that opposes the machinations of the Religious

Right. "It will force public school students to participate in public

events that promote religious views -- through prayer or even

proselytizing -- that they and their families may not share or may

even find deeply offensive. So rather than protecting religious

freedom, this law represents a grave threat to it.

"Rather than providing schools with training and appropriate

guidelines for protecting First Amendment freedoms," Miller said,

"legislators decided to play politics with our children's faith. So

now they have recklessly put local schools and their taxpayers at risk

of expensive lawsuits."

The law is of dubious constitutionality, and some school officials in

the state are exasperated. Charles Perkins, Abilene Independent School

District's assistant superintendent, told the Abilene Reporter-News,

"I really do feel like the state law has been very confusing. It's

opened some doors that no one thought to go through."

Perkins added, "Really and truly, we're just trying to have school,

and I think this is a complicating factor."

The Texas law, which was drafted and promoted by a Religious Right

group called the Liberty Legal Institute, is yet another salvo in a

long-running battle in America over the proper place of religion in

public schools.

The Supreme Court ruled 45 years ago that public schools may not

sponsor prayer, Bible reading and other forms of religious worship.

Rulings since then have generally extended that principle, while

protecting truly voluntary religious activity in the schools.

But some people have never made their peace with the school prayer

rulings. After the decisions were handed down in 1962 and '63,

numerous constitutional amendments were introduced in Congress to

"restore" prayer to schools. They have been a permanent fixture on the

political scene since then, although none has passed.

Frustrated, Religious Right advocates are adopting new strategies to

bring state-sanctioned fundamentalist outreach into the schools. The

Texas law, critics say, is merely a new twist on an old fight.

It's not the only one. As another school year got under way last

month, public schools around the nation found themselves under siege

by groups obsessed with using the schools as instruments of

evangelism.

The Texas law reflects the Religious Right's latest ploy: drafting

students as evangelists to preach to a captive audience of their

peers. The groups hope that the courts will consider the prayers and

sermons offered during the "limited public forum" as a form of free

speech that is, technically, not sponsored by the school.

One of the drafters of the law, a Houston attorney named Kelly J.

Coghlan, urges students to lead their peers in prayer before the

beginning of the school day as well as before football games,

graduation ceremonies and other school events.

"For many years, students have been reluctant to stand up and express

their faith in public schools for fear of being disciplined," Coghlan

writes on his Web site. "Students should no longer have such fear.

Schools are not religion-free zones; school officials are not prayer

police; and students of faith are not enemies of the state. The new

law makes this clear."

Coghlan fails to point out that his gambit is legally suspect. After

the high court's school prayer rulings were handed down, some school

districts tried to save school prayer by shifting the practice from

school officials to student volunteers. One New Jersey school district

even convened a daily five-minute assembly during which a student read

the daily chaplain's prayer from the Congressional Record. Courts saw

through these ruses and struck them down.

Nevertheless, some students seem eager to take matters into their own

hands. Graduation ceremonies are sometimes marked by speakers who veer

off into fundamentalist tangents. ABC News reported that in Duval

County, Fla., earlier this year, valedictorian Shannon Spaulding of

Wolfson High School "quoted the Bible and spoke about Jesus Christ,

suggesting that those who didn't believe would go to hell."

Spaulding told the crowd, "I want to tell you that Jesus Christ can

give you eternal life in heaven. If we die with that sin on our souls,

we will immediately be pulled down to hell to pay the eternal price

for our sins ourselves."

Some attendees were predictably displeased with the sermon, and school

officials apologized.

In Monument, Colo., a disgruntled valedictorian who misled school

officials about the content of her speech is going to court. Erica

Corder was one of several speakers during graduation ceremonies at

Lewis-Palmer High School in May 2006. Students were required to clear

their speeches with the principal first. Corder did so, but then added

sermonizing later.

"We are all capable of standing firm and expressing our own beliefs,

which is why I need to tell you about someone who loves you more than

you could ever imagine," Corder said. "He died for you on a cross over

2,000 years ago, yet was resurrected and is living today in heaven.

His name is Jesus Christ. If you don't already know him personally, I

encourage you to find out more about the sacrifice he made for you so

that you now have the opportunity to live in eternity with him."

School officials threatened to withhold Corder's diploma until she

apologized. She is now in court, arguing that school officials

violated her rights.

Other issues public schools face include:

Creationism/Intelligent Design

The courtroom defeat of "intelligent design" (ID) in Dover, Pa., two

years ago left creationists reeling -- but not for long. To no one's

surprise, groups that promote elevating theology over science have re-

tooled for the umpteenth time and are again shopping their wares to

the public schools.

The Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that promotes

ID, has just published Explore Evolution, a textbook it is promoting

to biology teachers nationwide. Despite its title, the book does not

so much explore evolution as try to debunk it, relying, critics say,

on the same old pseudo-scientific arguments that are stock in trade

among the creationists.

Opponents of evolution have tried these tactics before. After the

Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana law mandating "balanced

treatment" between evolution and creationism, creationists began

advocating the instruction of "evidence against evolution." This was

simply young-Earth creationism with a new name.

The Discovery Institute's tactics are more sophisticated. The group

does not endorse young-Earth creationism, for example. But critics say

the organization's new book is yet another attempt to slip ID, a

religiously grounded concept, into the schools.

"Explore Evolution is a real piece of work," Joshua Rosenau, public

information project director for the National Center for Science

Education (NCSE), said. "Everything from the author list to the

content reveals the book's deep links with earlier generations of

creationism, however hard they try to obscure that heritage."

The NCSE, based in Oakland, Calif., defends the teaching of evolution

in public schools, and Rosenau recently reviewed for the group. He

added, "Like previous creationist works, it attacks evolution with

misrepresentations and misunderstandings, but where previous

generations of textbooks claimed this as evidence of divine

intervention, Explore Evolution leaves that leap to students and

teachers. Needless to say, we have yet to identify any criticisms of

evolution in the book which do not have a long history in the

creationist literature."

Advocates of sound science education are also watching Texas warily.

Gov. Perry has appointed Don McLeroy, a dentist from Bryan, as head of

the State Board of Education. McLeroy, who was first elected to the

board in 1998, has regularly voted to water down instruction about

evolution.

The Texas Freedom Network noted that McLeroy promoted ID during a 2005

speech delivered to his fundamentalist church. According to a report

on the blog of The Texas Observer, McLeroy told the congregation that

intelligent design is a "big tent" that represents religious

conservatives' best shot at undermining evolution.

"Why is Intelligent Design the big tent?" asked McLeroy. "Because

we're all lined up against the fact that naturalism, that nature is

all there is. Whether you're a progressive creationist, recent

creationist, young Earth, old Earth, it's all in the tent of

Intelligent Design."

Pointing out that as chairman, McLeroy will oversee the first overhaul

of Texas' science curriculum standards since 2003, the Observer

remarked, "Get ready to redo the Scopes Trial, folks."

Teaching 'About' The Bible

Across the country, public schools are being pressured to adopt

classes that teach "about" the Bible. Three states -- Texas, Georgia

and South Carolina -- have adopted legislation authorizing such

classes. Other states are considering similar laws.

The concept sounds non-controversial on its face. The Supreme Court,

in fact, has stated that objective classes about religion do not

violate the First Amendment.

The problem comes with implementation. There is a dearth of material

available, and what is out there tends to skew toward conservative,

evangelical interpretations of the Bible.

A curriculum created by the Bible Literacy Project (BLP), for example,

is being heavily promoted as a middle-of-the-road approach that is

appropriate for use in public schools. But Americans United has

pointed out that the BLP's textbook, The Bible and Its Influence, hews

to a generally evangelical interpretation, contains errors and has

recently undergone several changes at the behest of fundamentalist

critics. Other analysts have scored the book for failing to include

serious biblical scholarship.

The BLP is run by a wealthy Religious Right activist named Charles

Stetson, a graduate of Charles W. Colson's Wilberforce Centurion

training program. Colson, who embraced evangelical Christianity while

serving time in prison for Watergate-era offenses, has become

increasingly strident and theocratic in his outlook.

Unfortunately, the main alternative to the BLP's curriculum is even

worse. Curriculum materials produced by the North Carolina-based

National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (NCBCPS)

overtly reflect fundamentalist views. Portions of the group's

curriculum have already been declared unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, education officials nationwide are being pressured to

introduce Bible classes. Earlier this year, Americans United wrote to

officials with the South Carolina Department of Education, which,

under a new state law, has been charged with adopting academic

standards and appropriate instructional materials for two optional

courses on the Bible: History and Literature of the Old Testament and

History and Literature of the New Testament.

In a letter to State Superintendent of Education Jim Rex and other

officials, Americans United advised South Carolina educators to follow

specific steps to assure that the classes remain focused on objective

education, not religious indoctrination. To survive a legal challenge,

the courses must present the Bible in a secular, objective and

academic manner, AU asserted. AU also said the classes must expose

students to critical perspectives on the Bible and a diversity of

biblical interpretations; refrain from portraying the Bible as

literal, religious truth; and not present a particular sectarian point

of view. Several court cases are cited to back up these assertions.

A district in Dorchester County is apparently the first to approve a

Bible class under the new law. The instructor, Laura Knotts, has

promised to focus on the Bible's influence on culture, art and

literature, but some parents in the community charge that Knotts lacks

the academic qualifications to teach the class. Knotts has said she

will use the BLP's textbook but add in material from the National

Council.

Some members of the community are concerned. On an Internet bulletin

board that is used by some church-state activists in the area, one

woman charged that at a candidates' forum earlier this year, some

candidates who now sit on the board advocated teaching creationism

alongside of or in place of evolution.

"The rush, the secrecy, and the prior comments give me the feeling an

agenda is being pushed instead of real interest in our children's

education," she wrote. "Is that what we should expect for the future?"

On Sept. 7, AU attorneys wrote to officials at the Dorchester schools,

urging them to drop the class as it is currently constituted. The

lawyers pointed out that use of the NCBCPS's materials is especially

problematic, as the group's mission is clearly evangelistic.

Based on what has happened elsewhere, critics of these classes have

good cause to be concerned. In Texas, for example, courses that

purport to teach "about" the Bible have been popular in several

districts. But a study last year by the Texas Freedom Network found

that most of the courses came up short.

Mark Chancey, a biblical scholar at Southern Methodist University who

authored the study, found that many "teach about the Bible" courses

fail to meet minimal academic standards and that many teachers are not

qualified.

Chancey found that many districts present the Protestant version of

the Bible as true and make other sectarian assumptions. The Bible, he

said, is often presented as literal truth and the stories in it as

factual. Judaism is portrayed with a Christian bias, sometimes as a

faith that was "completed" by Christianity. Other courses have been

used to prop up creationism and bogus "Christian nation" historical

views.

Many districts in Texas rely on the NCBCPS's flawed curriculum. That

may soon change. In May, eight parents challenged the use of the

National Council's material in Odessa. The Moreno v. Ector County

Independent School District lawsuit alleges that the National

Council's curriculum is designed to promote fundamentalist

Christianity, not objective instruction about religion.

Religion-Themed Charter/Public Schools

Recently, disputes erupted in New York and Florida over publicly

funded schools that have been accused of having a religious focus.

In Florida, controversy erupted over a decision to open Ben Gamla

Charter School in Hollywood. Charter schools are publicly funded but

are free of some of the regulations imposed on other public schools.

They are often run by community groups, non-profits or business

leaders. Despite the looser regulations, charters must still abide by

constitutional requirements.

The spat in New York centers on the Khalil Gibran International

Academy in Brooklyn, part of a group of small public schools in the

city that focuses on foreign languages. Critics allege the school,

which offers an Arabic language course, will promote fundamentalist

Islam, but they have provided no evidence to back up the claim.

Neither the New York nor the Florida cases involved a school with a

fundamentalist Christian approach, but Religious Right groups are

certain to adopt the tactic if it survives constitutional scrutiny.

Americans United is monitoring both situations.

On Aug. 7, AU lawyers sent a letter to officials with the Broward

County Public Schools, expressing concern about Ben Gamla's

curriculum. The school's backers have proposed using a Hebrew-language

textbook that contains religious content. AU urged officials to

withdraw the book.

"Federal courts across the country have also made clear that the

prohibition against public-school religious instruction extends to the

use of teaching materials that present the Bible or religious doctrine

as truth, or that otherwise endorse religious views," AU's letter

asserted.

The Associated Press reported last month that officials in Broward

County will "create training programs for teachers and board members

to ensure the separation of church and state" and that "lesson plans

will be submitted monthly for district review."

The situation in New York is murkier, as no proof has been offered

that the Khalil Gibran International Academy is teaching religion. It

is run in conjunction with the Arab American Family Support Center, an

organization the New York City Department of Education refers to as a

"secular social service agency." Its backers insist the school will

focus on the Arab language, but not Islam. The school's Muslim

principal was recently replaced with a Jewish principal.

"Religion plays absolutely no part in the school," an education

official in New York City vowed. "This is a public school; it wouldn't

play a part in any of our schools."

In Washington, D.C., Americans United has also been responding to

complaints of inappropriate religious activity at a public charter

school. Parents have complained that the headmaster of Washington

Latin School, T. Robinson Ahlstrom, leads students in prayer during

daily assemblies.

The school is currently housed at Christ Church, and the meetings are

held in the sanctuary, which is festooned with religious iconography.

Americans United attorneys have written to Ahlstrom and charter school

officials in Washington, telling them to immediately cease the school-

sponsored religious activities.

Right on the heels of that controversy, the Catholic Archdiocese of

Washington, D.C., announced it would seek to convert eight inner-city

parochial schools into public charters. Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl

said the church can no longer afford to keep the schools open and

insisted that as charters, the institutions will be secular.

The Washington Post reported that "the schools would still have strong

values, but the schools' names would change and specific religious

references would be stripped from the curriculum."

Arne Duncan, head of the Chicago public school system, told The Post

such conversions are possible. That city, he said, has two charters

that spun off from a Catholic school.

"There are some church-state issues," Duncan said. "But if you're

really trying to innovate and think outside the box, they are

absolutely surmountable."

Rob Boston is the associate editor for Church and State magazine.