Wasn't aware of this before but read an article today about a new law in TX regarding...?

Question

... "religious antidiscrimination". The law basically "requires all Texas school districts to adopt policies creating limited public forums for student speakers at certain school events." (citation: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5168258.html). Here's the actual law as enrolled: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/HB03678F.htm

Don't expect anyone to read everything but sources are sources. What do you all think of this?

Answer 1

It covers ground already stated in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It is an attempt to put creationism on an equal footing with evolution in the classroom by allowing the exposition of the creationist viewpoint in lieu of real science without correction or repudiation.

As far as the poster who "knows" one of the authors, his real intent has been evident for years. According to Steven D. Schafersman, Ph.D., President, Texas Citizens for Science:

"Representatives Charlie Howard and Warren Chisum have been trying for years to undermine instruction about evolutionary science in high school biology classes, as well as promote an atmosphere that favors their own brand of fundamentalist Protestant Christianity. HB 3678 was written to accomplish both of these, although it purports to be a bill to protect the right of voluntary student religious expression, a right that already exists and is protected by the U.S. Constitution. HB 3678 is a sham bill that does not accomplish what it claims. Rather, it is a radical attempt to force all students and teachers to listen to religious expressions by some student evangelists who want to use public school classrooms to promote their personal religious beliefs.

"The bill is written to appear to be neutral and lawful, but First Amendment Constitutional law already protects legitimate student expressions of religion. The purpose of this bill is to allow students to aggressively state their beliefs about creationism in science and Protestant Christianity in history, health, and other classrooms without fear of contradiction by teachers. The bill states, "Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Students shall neither be penalized nor rewarded on account of religious content." Thus, a biology teacher may not penalize a student for giving answers on biology homework, classwork, and exams that invoke non-scientific creationist explanations of natural phenomena. Students may hold such pseudoscientific beliefs, learned in their churches and Sunday schools, but it is a perversion of science and education to permit such expressions in a science class without contradiction by a science teacher.

"If this bill passes, half of the students in Texas public schools will be instructed and encouraged by their Sunday school leaders and ministers to state creationist and Biblical literalist beliefs in their public schools, thus permitting proselytizing and expressions of pseudoscience in public schools. The majority of students--Protestant Christians--will engage in this practice, while minority faiths and secular students will be intimidated to keep quiet for fear of reprisal or public condemnation. In addition, minority faith students will be obligated to listen to these expressions against their desire or will, since the statute would explicitly protect that expression in forums in which they are a captive audience."

The bill does much more than allow religious statements in graduation addresses, as our not-so-upfront reporter would have you believe. Quoting from the bill:

"Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Students shall neither be penalized nor rewarded on account of religious content. Such home and classroom work shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school."

Does anyone really believe that the "relevance" clause will be enforced versus the "shall neither be penalized" clause when creationist evangelists start preaching in a biology class?

Texas remains in the forefront of backwardness.

Answer 2

Here's the meat of the act:

"(1) provide the forum in a manner that does not
discriminate against a student's voluntary expression of a
religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject;
(2) provide a method, based on neutral criteria, for
the selection of student speakers at school events and graduation ceremonies; "

I would say this is already what the US Constitution required, so this act seems a bit superfluous.

Answer 3

Fantastic! More free speech is always good. This will protect everyone from Christians to Muslims to Jews to pagans to atheists to Pastafarians to discuss their beliefs in public forums and to organize groups voluntarily without fear of (official) reprisal.

And as for the people who think that Christian Evangelicals will use this in order to preach in biology class - why not? We had even a debate in our public school about creationism versus evolution, and we didn't get to choose our sides. I have always been an adherent to evolution and I was chosen to argue the Creationist side of the matter. But we were also taught evolution in the classroom as part of the scientific curriculum.

If only more classrooms would welcome debate and discourse, instead of emptyheaded teaching to the TAKS.

It is up to the teachers to make decisions on their classroom management. Having a student repeatedly stand up to preach in biology would not be relevant and asking the student to wait for when there is more time for discussion would hold up in court.

People of course are going to use it to their ends, but remember that the answer to free speech you don't like is MORE FREE SPEECH.

Answer 4

I happen to know the state rep who authored the bill. Its intent is to protect the right of students to make statements of faith in certain forums such as graduation speeches. It isn't intended to allow evangelizing in the classroom.

It was prompted by a student getting sued because she said, " I thank God" in her graduation speech.

Remember the Constitution prohibits the federal government from establishing a religion, and from preventing the free practice thereof. Keeping religion out of the schools is a violation of the Constitution.

Answer 5

Being a Texan, I celebrate the decision. I looked at the link to the actual law and am pleased both with the wording, and particularly with the number of positive votes. Faith is a very big part of a lot of Texan's lives, allowing them to express it...Excuse me, I just remembered we're guaranteed freedom of speech... acknowledging their constitutional right to express their religious belief in schools is a step forward.

Answer 6

Boy, things are differnt down in TX, eh?
There should be no religion in public schools, ever, for any reason. If TX allows it, I hope they get sued terribly. But it probably won't happen. Look at GW

Answer 7

If it's happening in Texas, I probably don't like it.