![[Spencer Daily Reporter nameplate]](http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (17)
Share link
Facebook
Twitter
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Reddit
Google
 |
| To read the Spencer school district's full six-page draft religious liberty policy, copy and paste this link into your browser window: http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/story/1568979.html Or click on the link at the bottom of the story. |
Spencer Superintendent Greg Ebeling admits that portions of the district's second "religious liberty" draft policy have been taken from other sources and sample policies. The second draft's author also acknowledges it still needs some wordsmithing, which is currently occurring as feedback is being received from various groups throughout the community.
As it's currently written, the six-page policy has an introductory section which states the district recognizes individuals' inalienable rights embodied in the First Amendment to the Constitution. The policy's introduction goes on to acknowledge that public schools may neither instill nor inhibit religion, but that the northwest Iowa district will uphold the First Amendment by "protecting the liberty rights of students of all faiths and no faith."
The draft policy then offers a definition for "religion."
In a statement of purpose for the policy, Ebeling wrote, "The Spencer school district policy is to comply with existing state and federal law regarding religion and religious expression in public schools. Specifically to: 1) allow students and employees to engage in expression of personal religious views or beliefs within the parameters of current law, and 2) maintain the school's official neutrality regarding sectarian religious issues. The district will neither advance nor inhibit religion."
The proposed religious liberty policy's stated purpose goes on to say, "The district endorses teaching about religion where the curriculum indicates it is appropriate and when the classroom atmosphere encourages both teacher and students to be responsible and to respect the rights of each person. Such teaching must foster knowledge about religion, not indoctrination into religion; it should be academic, not devotional or testimonial; it should promote awareness of religion, not sponsor its practice; it should inform students about diversity of religious views rather than impose one particular view; and it should promote understanding of different religious views as well as respect for the rights of persons who hold such views."
Next, student expression of personal religious beliefs or views, graduation exercises, baccalaureate services, distribution of religious materials on school grounds, employee and volunteer worker expression of personal religious beliefs are listed and/or defined in the policy's "religious expression" section.
As the draft's "teacher training and curriculum" section lays out that "the proper role for instruction about religion in the public school is in its educational value and not in religious observance or celebration," curriculum is defined as: "Teachers shall prepare and teach lessons throughout the year and throughout the curriculum that:
* Approach religion as academic, not devotional.
* Strive for student awareness of religions, not acceptance of religions.
* Study about religion, but do not practice religion in the classroom.
* Expose students to diversity of religious views, not impose any particular view.
* Educate about a variety of religions, not promote or denigrate religion.
* Inform students about various beliefs, not conform students to any particular belief.
* Demonstrate the impact of economic, social, political and cultural effects of religion throughout history.
* Are age appropriate.
"Over time, the district curriculum committee may create additional courses or special units of instruction within the curriculum that promote the study of various religions and beliefs throughout the world."
The "religious holidays" section of the policy addresses areas including: In the classroom, holiday programs, religious depictions, religious symbols, religious music and parents' right to excuse students for religious reasons.
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
This is just a time bomb waiting to explode. With the state of discourse and civility in the nation today, this will only create division, suspicion, distrust, anger, etc. among and btwn students, students & teacher/preacher, students & their family, teacher/preacher & student families, etc.
Here's what will happen. This 'class' will be inacted. Over time, the christian religion discussion will occupy 90-95% of the 'class'. At that time, someone will sue the school and the school will drop the class rather than amend the content.
Want your kid to learn religion? Do it your self, send them to a religious school or bible study. When churches, of all religions, start paying taxes then maybe we can discuss using tax money to teach religions. This isn't about education at all, it's about pushing an agenda. Those supporting this would very likely be the first to elect cutting a class they deem 'liberal'.
And speaking of cutting, with budgets the way they are, why is there money for this? I think it should be on a list of ALL options on how to spend the money this would require so it can be considered along with other items (classes, supplies, resources, tools, etc) as to which is most worthy of this expense. But that won't happen.
Also, I take exception to this statement "protecting the liberty rights of students of all faiths and no faith.". Who's to say that not believing in a religion means a person has 'no faith'? I have faith in science, nature, etc.
One more thing. Is there a sublimal message being sent with the christian cross at the top of the world in the graphic?
I BELIEVE RELIGION HAS ABSOLUTLY NO PLACE IN THE SCHOOL ROON, PERSONAL RELIGION SHOULD BE PRACTICED, OBSERVED,AND TAUGHT IN THE HOME/CHURCH.
THE STATE/DISTRICT HAS NO RIGHT NOR REASON TO EXPOSE MY (ANY) CHILD TO ANY SPIRITUAL BELIEFS. AS FOR THE CROSS AT THE TOP OF THE WORLD? WHY IS THE STAR OF DAVID ON IT'S RIGHT? MY RABBI MIGHT TAKE OFFENCE TO THAT, PROBABLY NOT.
I have become concerned with the increasing number of articles in this paper that highlight people touting their Christian beliefs, practices, etc. Now to read that the Spencer school district is contemplating adding a course on religious studies makes me wonder what in the world is happening in northwest Iowa, a place I have been proud to call home even though I now live elsewhere.
Why would the Spencer school system want to invite the potential lawsuits that will happen with this being introduced in the school. It will be a matter of time before they get themselves in big trouble. Just leave the religion to the religious and keep the school out of it. The school has enough budget problems without this!
If I have the choice to take a religion class at a public college, why would my kids not have the choice to take a relious studies class in a public high school? It's our responsibility to educate our kids and prepare them for college by teaching them about cultures and religions of the world, not to indoctrinate them. I can't believe how this issue has been blown out of proportion.....In the end, the school will cave and our students will lose the opportunity to learn about a subject that impacts nearly everyone.
Personally, I think it's a good idea to teach children about other cultures and religions as long as it's done objectively. But I might be biased, as I have my BA in religious studies from ISU. Northwest Iowa is still fairly monolithic, but the world is getting smaller all the time and we need educated people to handle international business, politics, and military affairs.
Shameless plug for the old Alma mater: http://www.philrs.iastate.edu/
Amusing that most people on here are missing the entire point of the religion studies. The purpose of the course is to inform the students of different religions around the world - not to preach or recruit. They are not saying, "Here are your choices of worship. Pick one." So many complain that Spencer/ NW Iowa is a culturally stagnant area. Here is an opportunity to teach our young people - the next leaders of our communities - about different cultures around the world and I'm surprised at how much negativity it is getting. I think it's important for people to understand how religions other than their own work. Are parents afraid that their children are going to be enticed to join religions other than what they've been raised in? If your child is truly a believer and faithful in your family's religion of choice this will probably not happen but it will give them insight to others beliefs and worship practices and an understanding of why others do what they do. Are parents who have not raised their children with any type of religious teaching afraid their children might take to practicing one? Really, would that be all that bad?? I'm not a religious expert by any means but I think most religions have a common underlying message of be kind to your fellow man. So, in that case, I think we could all use a little religion.
Separation of church and state is still necessary as it was in Jefferson's day. Public schools should remain free of any religion in their curriculum -- elective classes included.
First of all, as long as there are lawyers on this earth no entity can protect itself from lawsuit no matter what policies are written or not written. Second of all, the separation of church & state merely states that no government can institute a church. I would like to ask those against this policy...where would you stand if a Muslim were to enroll and wanted to be assured of practicing his/her prayer times during school? Where would you stand should an openly gay student wanted to start a group for gay students? My guess is that you would all be in favor of those students being accomodated and if they were not you would be the first ones on the phone to the ACLU. Lighten up, the school as not said that they are definitely beginning a religious studies class and if they did it would be an elective -- student choice -- no different than art class, industrial arts, pre-engineering, etc. The policy merely enforces and puts into writing the rights that students are already guaranteed...the right to individually pray, read their own religion's "book" or devotional during free time or discuss with others faith in an open and friendly manner without fear of persecution or discipline.
Leah....Nice catch on the separation of church and state quip! It is amazing how many people did not pay attention in history class! Hey didn't they discuss religions in other countries back in history class? I seem to remember that even though it was awhile back for me. LOL
Leah you are wrong. There is a difference between a Religious course as an elective and an art class as an elective. One uses tax dollars to promote religion (NOT OK) and other uses tax dollars to teach art (is OK). Yes, gay students should be able to form a club; just as religious students are allowed to form a club at school. You were correct about one thing - the rights of students (and staff) already exist. So then why is a policy needed to say that school officials must follow the law?
Aren't schools about education? A class about religion including the non-religion of Atheism is simply to educate students about all religions. After reading the policy I simply liked that it puts into plain writing the rights that students already have and it helps to draw guidelines for teachers as well. What are you afraid of? If your student doesn't like it, don't take the class. Why is it ok to teach my child that we evolved from amoeba when I don't agree with that? It's to show all sides and let students make up their own minds.
Evolution is science. Science is not decided by popular opinion, it is decided by evidence. The evidence in favor of evolution is overwhelming and in some cases even greater than the evidence for other science topics that are not as "controversial". Schools teach was is accepted as accurate, not what is popular.
If we should "show all sides and let students make up their own minds", then any group can generate false controversy (as creationists and IDers have) and expect the schools to teach nonsense as science (or nonsense as history etc.)
Here's where this will get the school http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/17/flor...
j123456, that is one heck of a story, and no matter where you stand on this subject, this action could happen to ANY facalty member!
iowaskeptic, evolution is a science of observation. There is a great deal of evidence that evolution occurs on a microscale, but it's a stretch to say there is overwhelming evidence that humans evolved from single-celled organisms. Even among the scientists in the field there is disagreement. Knowing that, it is incorrect to teach that evolution is the only explanation for the origin of all species.