First amendment, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The fourteenth ammendment makes this apply to all levels of government, and since public schools are a government institution it applies to them as well. The first part means that the school cannot endorse any religion, and the second part means that they cannot stop students from praying or getting together and studying religious texts as long as it does not take time away from class. Teaching religion in school would inevitably endorse certain religions, since it is impossible to teach all of them, so religion is left out. Many schools do have an optional world religion class where the "big five" (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism) are discussed, but that course is required by law to be an elective...
2007-05-10 04:56:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Shinkirou Hasukage 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
If it is a secular classroom, religious education has no place in it.
If religion wishes to be taught in the classroom it must be taught with the same rigour as other subjects and that means equally stated opposing views. (Equal views that meet the same evidentiary standards.)
Do you really want atheists and Pagans and Satanists to have fair time with your religion in the classroom?
As a parent, I'm capable of teaching my son religion. I don't see why my son should have to suffer in a class day that ALREADY doesn't have enough time for real learning, like science labs, just because some other parents are too lazy to teach their kids religion.
And if it's not YOUR kids you want religion taught to, you need to sit down and mind your own damn business about other people's kids.
2007-05-10 04:55:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by LabGrrl 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It depends if it is being preached like in Sunday school, or taught like theology. The teacher could start to preach a certain religion, and that could be bad, especially to younger kids who think it's as well founded as geography. It should be like a college theology class, multiple religions that is, to older students who can think for themselves. The teacher should also be able to teach without preaching. This is the only way it should be done.
2007-05-10 07:38:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by YouCannotKnowUnlessUAsk 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because in most public schools, not everyone in a classroom is the same religion. However, I do believe it should be available as an optional class.
2007-05-10 04:50:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Maverick 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
You said "thought" but I think you meant "taught". I believe religion should be taught from an objective standpoint. If we do not teach religion in our schools, people will instead learn it from crooks and scam artists who are after their money.
2007-05-10 04:54:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because the schools need to focus on teaching people like yourself to spell. Or maybe you actually meant "thought"? Yes, religion is a "thought".
2007-05-10 04:55:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I don't see why it shouldn't. If a student is willing to learn about Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Scientology then good for them
You do have a bit of a rough spot between church and state though. So college is a good option.
2007-05-10 04:49:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Southpaw 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because the US doctrine clearly states that there shall be clear & concise separation between church & state. (With exception for those who attend Catholic schools.)
2007-05-10 04:50:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by scrambled_egg81 4
·
3⤊
0⤋