The Republican War on Public Schools (vouchers, religion, graft, testing, etc.)

[tusks_n_raider]

Alabama bill seeks to mandate daily Pledge of Allegiance and prayer in public schools

A new bill introduced in the Alabama Legislature seeks to amend the state constitution to mandate that public K-12 schools conduct the Pledge of Allegiance

abc3340.com

Alabama bill seeks to mandate daily Pledge of Allegiance and prayer in public schools

A new bill introduced in the Alabama Legislature seeks to amend the state constitution to mandate that public K-12 schools conduct the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer reflecting Judeo-Christian values at the start of each school day.

The proposed amendment, introduced by a group of representatives, would require local boards of education to adopt policies enforcing this practice. The bill also outlines consequences for noncompliance, allowing violations to be reported to the State Superintendent of Education.

The amendment aims to ensure that each school day begins with the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer, which the bill describes as "representative of the Judeo-Christian values upon which the United States was founded."

LOL

Well just ignore that many of the founding fathers were Deists and though many were exposed to various off shoots of Christianity were not in fact Judeo Christians.

Not to mention their strong belief in a separation of church and state.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Alabama bill seeks to mandate daily Pledge of Allegiance and prayer in public schools

A new bill introduced in the Alabama Legislature seeks to amend the state constitution to mandate that public K-12 schools conduct the Pledge of Allegiance

abc3340.com

Alabama bill seeks to mandate daily Pledge of Allegiance and prayer in public schools

A new bill introduced in the Alabama Legislature seeks to amend the state constitution to mandate that public K-12 schools conduct the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer reflecting Judeo-Christian values at the start of each school day.

The proposed amendment, introduced by a group of representatives, would require local boards of education to adopt policies enforcing this practice. The bill also outlines consequences for noncompliance, allowing violations to be reported to the State Superintendent of Education.

The amendment aims to ensure that each school day begins with the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer, which the bill describes as "representative of the Judeo-Christian values upon which the United States was founded."

I'd prefer the focus be on improving the quality of education, but I guess state-enforced faux patriotism and faith is just as good.

 

[Huckleberry]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1900329652540837975

Idaho teacher ordered to remove signs saying "Everyone Is Welcome Here!"

School district lawyer said because the hands pictured were different skin tones, "not everyone would agree they are welcome."

Adding, "In today’s political environment, it's considered a personal opinion ."

The West Ada School Board voted that her signs violate the policy requiring "classroom content to be neutral."

Sarah Imana has taught world civilization to 6th graders at Lewis and Clark Middle School for 4 years without having any parent complain about her signs.

She is currently fighting the school district—refusing to take down her welcome signs.

"I would literally take a bullet for my kids," she said.

 

[jthomas666]

Ask anyone not a gold member of this echo chamber if that wasn’t the case. I had a screenshot a few months ago, but knew this would be the answer. It’s always “projection” with you guys.

translation: "Ask anyone who agrees with me"

The fact that there are zero consistent Conservative/Republican posters on this side should tell you all you need to know.

It tells us that conservatives can't handle the truth?

 

[Huckleberry]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1900297687133573166

Texas State Representative Stan Gerdes:

Our Texas classrooms should be places of learning, not distractions. That’s why I’ve filed HB 4814, the FURRIES Act (Forbidding Unlawful Representation of Roleplaying in Educational Spaces) to ensure that public schools are not accommodating or allowing disruptive "furry" roleplaying behaviors.

No distractions. No theatrics. Just education. While school mascots, theater performances, and dress-up days remain part of school spirit, this bill ensures that students and teachers can focus on academics—not on bizarre and unhealthy disruptions. Texas schools are for educating kids, not indulging in radical trends.

Let's keep the focus where it belongs—on preparing students for success in life.



Is there anything Republicans won't lie about (and their base won't believe)?

 

[Tidewater]

LOL

Well just ignore that many of the founding fathers were Deists and though many were exposed to various off shoots of Christianity were not in fact Judeo Christians.

Not to mention their strong belief in a separation of church and state.

As with any debate, you have to define your terms. Which "offshoot of Christianity were not in fact Judeo-Christian?"

John Adams famously wrote in 1798, that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

The Founders did not have a "strong belief in the separation of church and state." Jefferson in one private letter used the phrase. The Founders (defined at either the members of the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 or the members of the state ratification conventions which gave the Constitution "all the meaning it possesses," in the words of James Madison) could not agree which Christian denomination would be the established religion of the United States at the Federal level. People from the Founding era said of Quakers that "they pray for their neighbors on Sunday and on their neighbors the other days of the week."

Many of the states, however, did have established religions (defined as state funded religion which state taxes paid for the salaries of the pastor and the upkeep of the church). Connecticut and Massachusetts established the Congregational Church as the established religion of those states. North and South Carolina established the Church of England. The Constitution of North Carolina to this very day, says "any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God" shall be disqualified for public office (Art. VI, Sect. 8). Virginia in 1786 disestablished the Church of England because there were so many Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists in the state that it struck Jefferson as unfair to tax those Virginians to pay for a the promulgation of views with which they disagreed. Disestablishment did not banish religious practices from the public square (the General Assembly to this day opens with a nondenominational prayer), it just no longer forced the people to pay for a religion they did not support.

 

[81usaf92]

As with any debate, you have to define your terms. Which "offshoot of Christianity were not in fact Judeo-Christian?"

John Adams famously wrote in 1798, that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

The Founders did not have a "strong belief in the separation of church and state." Jeffersion in one private letter used the phrase. The Founders (defined at either the members of the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 or the members of the state ratification conventions which gave the Constitution "all the meaning it possesses," (in the words of James Madison) could not agree which Christian denomination would be the established religion of the United States at the Federal level. People from the Founding era said of Quakers that "they pray for their neighbors on Sunday and on their neighbors the other days of the week."

Many of the states, however, did have established religions (defined as state funded religion which state taxes paid for the salaries of the pastor and the upkeep of the church). Connecticut and Massachusetts established the Congregational Church as the established religion of those states. North and South Carolina established the Church of England. The Constitution of North Carolina to this very day, says "any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God" shall be disqualified for public office (Art. VI, Sect. 8). Virginia in 1786 disestablished the Church of England because there were so many Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists in the state that it struck Jefferson as unfair to tax those Virginians to pay for a the promulgation of views with which they disagreed. Disestablishment did not banish religious practices from the public square (the General Assembly to this day opens with a nondenominational prayer), it just no longer forced the people to a religion they did not support.

I’ve always felt that the history of the United States is like a history of two different countries much like the Roman Republic and Roman Empire are. So much myth and fantasy is put into how great the previous version of the country that you can’t convince people of the obvious cracks in the system that made the second version necessary to begin with.

I really think once you get to the Progressive Era (probably even before that somewhere in the Reconstruction and Gilded Age) that you really don’t have the country that Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe built. You really start to see the emergence of the United States as a global power in which a lot of our domestic and foreign policies are done in a way to compete globally.

I think all this constant “well the forefathers believed…” is almost the same as a Roman citizen in the time of Vespasian saying “well Fabian believed a dictator was only temporary”. The biggest difference in the two is that the forefathers of the United States wrote a binding document that could be changed to suit the needs of each following generation.

 

[Tidewater]

I’ve always felt that the history of the United States is like a history of two different countries much like the Roman Republic and Roman Empire are. So much myth and fantasy is put into how great the previous version of the country that you can’t convince people of the obvious cracks in the system that made the second version necessary to begin with.

I really think once you get to the Progressive Era (probably even before that somewhere in the Reconstruction and Gilded Age) that you really don’t have the country that Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe built. You really start to see the emergence of the United States as a global power in which a lot of our domestic and foreign policies are done in a way to compete globally.

I think all this constant “well the forefathers believed…” is almost the same as a Roman citizen in the time of Vespasian saying “well Fabian believed a dictator was only temporary”. The biggest difference in the two is that the forefathers of the United States wrote a binding document that could be changed to suit the needs of each following generation.

I agree. The interesting thing is that people still refer to the Founders, even today. Having the Founders' stamp of approval seems to be important.
I would place the point of transition on 15 April 1861. Or maybe 9 April 1865. Or the period between the two.

The Romans, however, loved to tell stories about how Romulus and Remus thought, or the first seven kings of Rome, or how early Romans would deliberately sacrifice themselves in war (Marcus Atilius Regulus would follow their example even to a gruesome death), or the secessions of the plebs, Virginius vs. the Tarquins, etc. What is interesting to me is not whether the stories were true or not, but that later Romans told themselves the stories for inspiration.

 

[Huckleberry]

How Oklahoma’s Superintendent Set Off a Holy War in Classrooms

Teachers, parents and pastors are mounting a mass resistance against Ryan Walters’ mandate to put Bibles in schools.

hechingerreport.org

How Oklahoma’s superintendent set off a holy war in classrooms
Even for the devout, Ryan Walters’ mandate requiring that public school students learn from the Bible goes too far

 

[Bamabuzzard]

How Oklahoma’s Superintendent Set Off a Holy War in Classrooms

Teachers, parents and pastors are mounting a mass resistance against Ryan Walters’ mandate to put Bibles in schools.

hechingerreport.org

How Oklahoma’s superintendent set off a holy war in classrooms
Even for the devout, Ryan Walters’ mandate requiring that public school students learn from the Bible goes too far

Yep, if someone wants the Bible specifically taught to their kid then send them to a Christian private school. Personally and as a Christian, I do not want a teacher at any school (public or private) teaching my kids the Bible unless I know them on a very personal level.

But as it pertains to a public, taxpayer-funded school, I don't want any religion being taught in the classroom. If people want their kids to know about religions, teach them at home or wait 'til college and have them register for religious studies.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Yep, if someone wants the Bible specifically taught to their kid then send them to a Christian private school. Personally and as a Christian, I do not want a teacher at any school (public or private) teaching my kids the Bible unless I know them on a very personal level.

But as it pertains to a public, taxpayer-funded school, I don't want any religion being taught in the classroom. If people want their kids to know about religions, teach them at home or wait 'til college and have them register for religious studies.

As a new Christian myself, I can categorically state that I do not want any unauthorized person leading my kids (or hopefully some day grandkids) in prayer, particularly if I don't know what their beliefs are. The church is a highly fractured body and while I do bemoan this plight, there nevertheless exists some very keen differences among the denominations, some of which I do not want my young adult kids exposed to. Legislation like the above is only going to open a pandora's box.

 

[mdb-tpet]

As a new Christian myself, I can categorically state that I do not want any unauthorized person leading my kids (or hopefully some day grandkids) in prayer, particularly if I don't know what their beliefs are. The church is a highly fractured body and while I do bemoan this plight, there nevertheless exists some very keen differences among the denominations, some of which I do not want my young adult kids exposed to. Legislation like the above is only going to open a pandora's box.

Oklahoma is just going to create the next generation of mostly atheist adults. For one, in the USA we have thousands of different interpretations of, and over 900 hundred of different translations of the Bible. What makes the Oklahoma government think they will even remotely get the a reasonable outcome in education by forcing religion and religious study on the next generation? But, I guess if we're losing the math, science, reading, writing, history battle to the rest of the world we can at least win the most pious 12 year old award, right?

 

[81usaf92]

As a new Christian myself, I can categorically state that I do not want any unauthorized person leading my kids (or hopefully some day grandkids) in prayer, particularly if I don't know what their beliefs are. The church is a highly fractured body and while I do bemoan this plight, there nevertheless exists some very keen differences among the denominations, some of which I do not want my young adult kids exposed to. Legislation like the above is only going to open a pandora's box.

TBH Pandora’s box was already opened with the LGBT question in the classroom. The constant insistence of teaching sex ed in schools and the constant push for gender identity in kids has kinda drawn this overreaction by the right.

The truth is that neither side ever wants to see a classroom because of what they know is there but both sides constantly want to pass legislation and control what is in a classroom.

 

[JDCrimson]

They are trying to argue the substance of why religion shouldn't be taught in the schools to an opposing group who doesn't care the substance of the why.

I would comeback with "You generally think anything the government touches is inherently defective thereafter. You generally think that our education system, schools, and teachers are failing our students. It's well documented that our national math scores lag other developed nations. Yet you think this same system the one you are in charge of, the football coach teaching history, the science teacher hooking up with students after school, is qualified to teach the Bible in the correct way in the classroom? This is just one more thing that I have to unteach at home as a parent. Comeback to me with a credible plan that includes age appropriate instruction, from age appropriate translations, taught by certified instructors then I will consider supporting the exposure to religion in the school curriculum. Until then we are just swapping a different bunch of clowns to ride in the clown car...

 

[Huckleberry]

TBH Pandora’s box was already opened with the LGBT question in the classroom. The constant insistence of teaching sex ed in schools and the constant push for gender identity in kids has kinda drawn this overreaction by the right.

The truth is that neither side ever wants to see a classroom because of what they know is there but both sides constantly want to pass legislation and control what is in a classroom.

The LGBT question in the classroom has never extended beyond tolerance and acceptance. If someone is against that, they should spend some time examining and correcting their bigotry. Furthermore, there is no "constant push for gender identity" in the classroom. That's a right-wing boogeyman that has never existed.

And teaching age-appropriate sex education is something that should be part of the curriculum. I've taught it. If parents don't like it, they can always opt out.

 

[crimsonaudio]

The LGBT question in the classroom has never extended beyond tolerance and acceptance. If someone is against that, they should spend some time examining and correcting their bigotry. Furthermore, there is no "constant push for gender identity" in the classroom. That's a right-wing boogeyman that has never existed.

And teaching age-appropriate sex education is something that should be part of the curriculum. I've taught it. If parents don't like it, they can always opt out.

Uses of phrases such as "has never extended", "there is no", and "never existed" leave me doubting your assertion - there's literally no way you could make these statements with certainty.

 

[Huckleberry]

Uses of phrases such as "has never extended", "there is no", and "never existed" leave me doubting your assertion - there's literally no way you could make these statements with certainty.

While I'd rather believe that my intent is clear, please allow me to clarify so that there's no misunderstanding.

For the great majority of the educator community, the LGBT question in the classroom has never extended beyond tolerance and acceptance. If someone is against that, they should spend some time examining and correcting their bigotry. Furthermore, there is no "constant push for gender identity" in the classroom. That's a right-wing boogeyman that has never existed on any meaningful scale.

I hope that makes my position a bit clearer.

 

[cbi1972]

No one expects to change each other’s minds amongst the veteran posters on this board.

Since Trump I have noticed a dramatic shift in who I agree with. My priorities have changed some, and I am willing to compromise on some things I may have once been more idealistic about, while at the same time I hold more firmly to things I truly regard as critical when others seem to have lost their way

 

[crimsonaudio]

While I'd rather believe that my intent is clear, please allow me to clarify so that there's no misunderstanding.

For the great majority of the educator community, the LGBT question in the classroom has never extended beyond tolerance and acceptance. If someone is against that, they should spend some time examining and correcting their bigotry. Furthermore, there is no "constant push for gender identity" in the classroom. That's a right-wing boogeyman that has never existed on any meaningful scale.

I hope that makes my position a bit clearer.

That's fair.

I do believe a lot of the push back has been due to a few examples of teachers who probably shouldn't be teachers in the first place. I know quite a few teachers and literally all of them only want what is best for the kids, nothing else, and I believe you're the same.

That said, there have been examples, albeit few, of teachers who are why (I believe) there has been a push for this anti-alphabet movement.

 

[JDCrimson]

I don't know anything about teaching as a profession. So I ask, is there an established ethics for teachers like there is for lawyers, accountants, doctors, etc?

I think a lot of the issues we are dealing with are ethical issues and could be handled if conservative or liberal bent teachers acted ethically toward the student and parent.