ACLU

[BVS]

Dude I have posted the curiculem of that class already which you have read.

That's not what I'm talking about. You cited some bias of allowing Muslims to pray or something.

 

[yolland]

Yes, and you did not post the curriculum, you linked to a story which (inaccurately) described it as involving prayers.

Simulating Communion is probably not the best analogy though, as Islam does not per se have "sacraments" in this manner.

 

[BVS]

They were forced to participate in an Islamic religious practice.

It's in a classroom, it's not a real relgious practice.

Even if it were just "education"; it is not the job of public schools to educate people about religions, except for maybe the vey basic of their beliefs.

And what do you think they were doing? Do you honestly think they when in depth with just a few days? And I do think that in days like this, just look at the lies spread about the Muslim religion in here, that the public schools are doing the children a service.

But it's not just education. If they were simple "educating", they would say "This is what Muslims believe", end of story. This project is endorsement. By forcing the students to participate in the religious practices, and by telling the students "You will be Muslims for the next 3 weeks", they are endorsing the religion of Islam as a "good" thing. Would they force the students to participate if they didn't think Islam is a "good" thing? Of course not.

Oh, please. You've never role played during your education? We dressed as Pilgrims and Native Americans when we learned about Thanksgiving, do you honestly think that was an endorsement of the brutality to which was placed on the Native Americans?

 

[BVS]

Simulating Communion is probably not the best analogy though, as Islam does not per se have "sacraments" in this manner.

True, but my whole point is that simulation is nothing but that, just simulation.

 

[Justin24]

So then you would have no objection if Christians did that? I bet the ACLU would.

 

[BVS]

So then you would have no objection if Christians did that? I bet the ACLU would.

If Christians did what?

Muslims didn't teach the class, the teacher did.

Would I have a problem with schools teaching Christianity in a historical context like this, no. My high school did.

But I've already stated all of this.

 

[80sU2isBest]

It's in a classroom, it's not a real relgious practice.

Why does it matter where it takes place? A communion can be held anywhere; doesn't make it not a communion.

You still didn't answer my question, BVS. Do you think it would be right to force a Muslim child to take communion, knowing full well that is a religious tradition that honors what Muslims consider a lie?

And what do you think they were doing? Do you honestly think they when in depth with just a few days?

It wasn't "just a few days". It was 3 weeks, which is plenty of time to go in depth. That's 15 hours.

And I do think that in days like this, just look at the lies spread about the Muslim religion in here, that the public schools are doing the children a service.

What lies? Even if someone were spreading lies about Islam, why is a public school, paid for by public tax dollars, the place to lay down what some teacher considers to be the truth about Islam?

Oh, please. You've never role played during your education? We dressed as Pilgrims and Native Americans when we learned about Thanksgiving, do you honestly think that was an endorsement of the brutality to which was placed on the Native Americans?

When you dressed as a Pilgrim, did your teacher say "now, pretend you are killing an American Indian? Of course not; what you were told was "sit down and have dinner with the American Indian". Something was being endorsed; it wasn't brutality - it was the peace that existed between Pilgrims and American Indians on Thanksgiving.

When these kids are forced to participate in religious practices, those religious practices are being endorsed (approved of) by the teacher, because like I said, she's not going to have them participate in something she does not approve of.

 

[A_Wanderer]

There is a Godless principle that describes not having a government body endorsing a religious viewpoints, it's a pity that it isn't defended and utilised uniformly.

look at the lies spread about the Muslim religion in here, that the public schools are doing the children a service.

Which lies would they be exactly?

 

[maycocksean]

I see a lot of what seems to be purposely ignoring good arguments on the "opposing side" going on here.

I think it's been made pretty clear from the curriculum itself that they are not making kids participate in religious practices such as prayers, religious ceremonies etc, yet many posters continue to ignore this. There's a lot of straw men being set up here, in my opinion.

I also think if we're being honest, 80s point is a good one. If this were a lesson on Christianity, I really do believe there would be a lot more hostile reaction to it by many on this board. I believe BVS even hinted at why that might be in saying that most people in America already have a "basic" knowledge of Christianity and thus such a class would be "unnecessary." I suspect many would feel that teaching a Christianity unit would be an attempt at sneaking in "conversion" into the classroom.

I feel that teaching about religion in public school is absolutely appropriate in a historical and cultural context (and I am a HUGE proponent of church and state seperation). There is a difference between teaching religion and teaching about religion. It should be done thoughtfully and carefully but it can be done.

 

[wthrwthoutyu]

Stepping quietly right back out of the topic...

because nobody is hearing anbody else in here.

Beating a whole lot of dead horses, guys. (And if they weren't dead before you started, they are by now.)

 

[Macfistowannabe]

After reading some of your posts about Muslims, I can think of quite a few posters who could have benefitted from a high school that taught like this.

I invite atheists, agnostics, and dietists of any kind to challenge the merits of Christianity. So given that principle, why the double standard on Islam? Is it a hate crime to shun the blind assumption that it is truly a religion of peace?

 

[Macfistowannabe]

It's in a classroom, it's not a real relgious practice.

It could also be considered a golden calf to those who consider their own faith sacred, whether or not it's theological or atheistic.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I invite atheists, agnostics, and dietists of any kind to challenge the merits of Christianity. So given that principle, why the double standard on Islam? Is it a hate crime to shun the blind assumption that it is truly a religion of peace?

It seems so, we should treat religions equally with no fear or favour.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

It seems so, we should treat religions equally with no fear or favour.

Yes, or, we can judge a religion by its fruit.

 

[80sU2isBest]

I see a lot of what seems to be purposely ignoring good arguments on the "opposing side" going on here.

I think it's been made pretty clear from the curriculum itself that they are not making kids participate in religious practices such as prayers, religious ceremonies etc, yet many posters continue to ignore this. There's a lot of straw men being set up here, in my opinion.

Let's get this point straight first: This is not just another assignment. The second paragraph begins "you and your classmates will become Muslims". That's how authentic the school wants it to be - so real that they want the students have the mindset of actually being Muslims, not treat it as just another assignment.

The very first sentence of the curriculum calls it a "simulation" of the "history and culture of Islam". Not the "culture of a middle eastern country that may happen to practice a certain religion called Islam", but the "culture of Islam" the religion itself. The phrase "simulation" is repeated in other places. That tells you right there that they will be participating in "unofficial" religious practices. Unofficial or official should make no difference. The school is forcing these students to participate in religious practices.

The students must not only learn the "Five Pillars Of Faith", but imitate a requirement of each pillar. This requires the following: (1) Making a banner with an Islamic confession of faith on it (2) Memorize five Islamic proverbs (3) Give up one hour of lunch. While this physically is not harmful, the fact that it is a mandatory religiously-inspired fasting goes against the "separation of church and school" principle.

They also encourage students to use the phrase "in sha Allah". Allah is a name that opnly Muslims use for God. Christian and Jews do not use the name "Allah" for God.

All of this equals endorsement of Islam. They aren't saying "Islam is better than the rest" but they are certainly giving their approval of Islam. That approval = endorsement.

For the life of me I do not understand how people who would normally support the "separation of church and school" aren't outraged that a religion is studied for 2 to 3 weeks in this manner.

 

[BVS]

Why does it matter where it takes place? A communion can be held anywhere; doesn't make it not a communion.

My point is, it's just a simulation nothing more, nothing less.

You still didn't answer my question, BVS. Do you think it would be right to force a Muslim child to take communion, knowing full well that is a religious tradition that honors what Muslims consider a lie?

They aren't taking communion.

It wasn't "just a few days". It was 3 weeks, which is plenty of time to go in depth. That's 15 hours.

15 hours is nothing, how long have you been studying the Bible?

What lies? Even if someone were spreading lies about Islam, why is a public school, paid for by public tax dollars, the place to lay down what some teacher considers to be the truth about Islam?

What lies? Just close your eyes and click on thread, bet you'll find at least one. It's not one one teacher considers to be the truth, I'm guessing you haven't actually read the curriculum yet.

When these kids are forced to participate in religious practices, those religious practices are being endorsed (approved of) by the teacher, because like I said, she's not going to have them participate in something she does not approve of.

THEY AREN'T PARTICIPATING IN RELIGIOUS PRACTICES. I'm not sure how many times you need to be told that.

 

[80sU2isBest]

My point is, it's just a simulation nothing more, nothing less.

Why should a student be forced to even "simulate' religious practices?

15 hours is nothing, how long have you been studying the Bible? ]

That's a ridiculous comparison. I am a Christian - of course I've read the Bible a lot more than 15 hours. But again, the question is this: should a student in a public school paid for by tax dollars be forced to study any religion for even an hour?

What lies? Just close your eyes and click on thread, bet you'll find at least one. It's not one one teacher considers to be the truth, I'm guessing you haven't actually read the curriculum yet.

I sure have. In fact, I quoted several passages a few posts back.

THEY AREN'T PARTICIPATING IN RELIGIOUS PRACTICES. I'm not sure how many times you need to be told that.

No? Then what exactly do you call being forced to participate in one of Islam's fasts? Whether it's for an hour or a day, it doesn't matter. That religious practice of fasting is a requirement for that curriculum.

And what about the banner that they are required to make with Allah's praises on it?

Look, people can't have it both ways. "No religion in public schools" means NO religion. If public schools can force kids to study Islam and even particpate in the religious practice of fasting, then every other religion on the face of the earth should be studied in public schools.

 

[BVS]

Why should a student be forced to even "simulate' religious practices?

Why should students be forced to do anything?

then every other religion on the face of the earth should be studied in public schools.

This I agree with...

And we don't know what these schools do, we just have one piece of curriculum.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Why should students be forced to do anything?

It is very very difficult for people to come even close to prospering in this life without a decent education in math, grammar, and history.

Can the same be said about studying Islam?

And we don't know what these schools do, we just have one piece of curriculum.

Actually, we can be pretty sure they don't have a curriculum in "Understanding Christianity". How can we be reasonably sure about that? Because it would be plastered all over the national news, and there would most definitely have been a topic about it here at FYM.

That aside, I'm not even sure why I am arguing with you about this. My argument is based on the idea of "public schools not teaching religion". You don't support that idea, so I can understand why you wouldn't have a problem with this curriculum.

 

[BVS]

Can the same be said about studying Islam?

Yes.

Actually, we can be pretty sure they don't have a curriculum in "Understanding Christianity". How can we be reasonably sure about that? Because it would be plastered all over the national news, and there would most definitely have been a topic about it here at FYM.

That aside, I'm not even sure why I am arguing with you about this. My argument is based on the idea of "public schools not teaching religion". You don't support that idea, so I can understand why you wouldn't have a problem with this curriculum.

I don't like functioning on assumptions.

Religion is part of history and is integral to society and cultures, and should be taught in the same context.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Yes.

Are you pulling my leg at this point? Do you really think that it is very very difficult for people to come even close to prospering in this life without studying Islam?

In what way does not studying Islam hinder someone's chances at prosperity?

don't like functioning on assumptions.

You didn't have any problem assuming that because I hadn't been taught about other religions in school, that I hadn't studied other religions at all.

Religion is part of history and is integral to society and cultures, and should be taught in the same context.

It's not possible to study every religion, is it? Then how do you pick and choose? How can we force the students to take a 15 hours course on Islam but say "Sorry, no can do on Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Christian Science, Scientology, Buddhism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Bahai, etc. etc? "

 

[BVS]

Are you pulling my leg at this point? Do you really think that it is very very difficult for people to come even close to prospering in this life without studying Islam?

In what way does not studying Islam hinder someone's chances at prosperity?

This planet would prosper if we were all a little more educated about each other's faiths and beliefs.

It's not possible to study every religion, is it? Then how do you pick and choose? How can we force the students to take a 15 hours course on Islam but say "Sorry, no can do on Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Christian Science, Scientology, Buddhism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Bahai, etc. etc? "

Part of our schooling is based on percentages, we don't teach underwater basket weaving because honestly how often would you ever really have to do so? Percentage wise what are your largest religions?

 

[80sU2isBest]

This planet would prosper if we were all a little more educated about each other's faiths and beliefs.

That is not what I asked, and that is not what you answered yes to.

Part of our schooling is based on percentages, we don't teach underwater basket weaving because honestly how often would you ever really have to do so? Percentage wise what are your largest religions?

Percentage wise I would say Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, and Judaism, but I'm not sure.

So, are you advocating teaching a 15 hour course on each of those, and forcing the students to make a banner in praise of each religion's God?

 

[BVS]

and that is not what you answered yes to.

Yes, it is.

Percentage wise I would say Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, and Judaism, but I'm not sure.

So, are you advocating teaching a 15 hour course on each of those, and forcing the students to make a banner in praise of each religion's God?

Honestly I think 15 hours is probably a little long, but yes an educational course on these would probably benefit us all.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Yes, it is.

How can you say that when the truth is written down in blue and light blue just a few posts up?

I did not ask "Would the planet propsper if we were all a little more educated about each other's faiths and belief?", so how could you have answered yes to a question I didn't ask?

What I said was this:

"It is very very difficult for people to come even close to prospering in this life without a decent education in math, grammar, and history.

Can the same be said about studying Islam?"

And that is what you answered "yes" to.

Honestly I think 15 hours is probably a little long, but yes an educational course on these would probably benefit us all.

And parents' wishes are thrown out the window?

 

[BVS]

What I said was this:

"It is very very difficult for people to come even close to prospering in this life without a decent education in math, grammar, and history.

Can the same be said about studying Islam?"

And that is what you answered "yes" to.

And I stand by what I said, I do believe this world will find it very difficult to prosper without this education. Hate is easy to breed in ignorance.

And parents' wishes are thrown out the window?

Any parent who wishes their child to go through life not knowing what their friends, neighbors, or people in other countries believe in aren't much of parents.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Any parent who wishes their child to go through life not knowing what their friends, neighbors, or people in other countries believe in aren't much of parents.

Why do you assume that a parent who doesn't want his kid to participate in simulations of Islamic religious practices is a parent wishes his child would go through life not knowing what their friends, neighbors, or people in other countries believe? Do you know the motivations of parents?

Good grief, for someone who doesn't like to "function on assumptions", you sure do make a lot of them.

 

[BVS]

Why do you assume that a parent who doesn't want his kid to participate in simulations of Islamic religious practices is a parent wishes his child would go through life not knowing what their friends, neighbors, or people in other countries believe? Do you know the motivations of parents?

Not an assumption, deductive reasoning.

Why don't you tell me the motivations of someone who would deny this. They going to teach the child themselves? That's a laugh.

 

[yolland]

The students must not only learn the "Five Pillars Of Faith", but imitate a requirement of each pillar. This requires the following: (1) Making a banner with an Islamic confession of faith on it (2) Memorize five Islamic proverbs (3) Give up one hour of lunch.

I agree that (3) was an eyebrow-raiser, as it goes beyond what a role-playing project would normally require. I think you are misrepresenting (1); the concept there is to make a "city banner" (in keeping with the "tribal caravan" theme), and the Bismillah (which is not a confession of faith--that would be the Shahadah, "there is no God but Allah..."), as well as the city name and "Arabesque designs" called for, are indeed historically likely components of such a banner. Concerning (2), and as I mentioned previously, those proverbs are Arab (and are identified as such), not "Islamic"; they are not religious in nature; one does mention "God" in an epithetical context, though in any case, that need not be among the five memorized.

They also encourage students to use the phrase "in sha Allah". Allah is a name that opnly Muslims use for God.

Again, this is just an epithet--"God willing"--and anyhow its use is not required. By this logic any utterance of the English word "God" in any curricular context should also be forbidden, which would make teaching many phases of history difficult. When we role-played a Puritan witch trial in my elementary school, we used the word "God" copiously; it would be hard to role-play a Puritan without doing so.

If this were a lesson on Christianity, I really do believe there would be a lot more hostile reaction to it by many on this board...I suspect many would feel that teaching a Christianity unit would be an attempt at sneaking in "conversion" into the classroom.

I feel that teaching about religion in public school is absolutely appropriate in a historical and cultural context (and I am a HUGE proponent of church and state seperation). There is a difference between teaching religion and teaching about religion. It should be done thoughtfully and carefully but it can be done.

I agree that it is appropriate in such a context, and I personally would have no intrinsic objection to a unit on Christianity that used a historical scenario analogous to this one. Admittedly it's difficult to envision precisely what an analogous scenario might look like for comparison's sake because, living inside the "Christian world" as we do, the historic and cultural stereotypes called to mind when contemplating "What does an archetypal Christian act like" are far more diverse, and these stereotypes' obfuscation by casual awareness of Christians as, e.g., one's less-than-archetypal next door neighbor, are far more extensive. As mentioned above, when I was in grade school (no longer remember which grade) we did a project that involved role-playing a Salem witch trial, in which I played a Puritan magistrate who quoted the Bible, made accusations that the "defendants" had made covenants with the Devil, etc. In my junior high school there was a role-playing project involving the recreation of life in a series of medieval European social environments, one of which was a monastery. (I got stuck with playing a scripturally illiterate peasant, so I'm afraid I don't recall the specifics of what playing a monk entailed.) And although I did not attend a public high school, I know many of them do have students read portions of the Bible, most typically the Genesis creation narrative, as literature in English classes.

I don't myself have any intrinsic objection to these sorts of activities, and I don't consider them to constitute "teaching religion" as you put it. As a parent I'm ultimately more interested in my children learning the theological and philosophical basics of other religions than the anthropological ones, but I have no fundamental issue with schools addressing the latter, as the project in question aims to, in my view. I don't know that I personally object to teaching the former at the high school level, either (not much point in attempting it before that), but I think actually that is more likely to run into crossing-the-line problems.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Not an assumption, deductive reasoning.

It's an assumption, because you know nothing about the reasoning of so many parents.

Why don't you tell me the motivations of someone who would deny this. They going to teach the child themselves? That's a laugh.

Whether the parent wants to teach a child about multiple religions or none at all, it is the parent's right, and the parent's responsibility. No one else should be able to make such a decison for the parent. Not you, not the school system.

If I were a parent, I would want to raise my child in the faith I follow, because I believe it is the one true faith. I do not want my child to simulate a religious practice of Islam. When the child gets to the age where he/she is mature enough to study and form his/her own opinions of other religions, I won't like it, but it's not my choice to make at that point. However, I will not allow the public school system and teachers, who may indeed have their own biases and agendas, to instruct my child in the religious practices of a religion that I consider a false religion. It is my right and responsibility as a parent. A school system has no right poking its nose into the religious upbringing of its students.

I'm curious about something. I am honestly not trying to be rude when I ask this question. Are you a supporter of socialism?