"A child's learning is the function more of the characteristics of his classmates than those of the teacher." James Coleman, 1972
Showing posts with label church-state issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label church-state issues. Show all posts

Friday, June 24, 2022

Maine Neutralizes Theocratic SCOTUS Decision on Schools

When the six-member American Taliban majority on the U. S. Supreme Court decided that Maine's state assistance to private schools (due to many students not having public schools available in rural areas) must include aid to religious private schools as well, many defenders of the separation of church and state were alarmed.  

As alarming as the 6-3 decision was, Maine anticipated a path around the ruling by preemptively passing a law that denies state assistance to any private school that discriminates against LGBTQ students--which, in essence, eliminate the hateful Christian madrassas that would otherwise use taxpayer funds to instill the same hate into children. Genius. 

Details from the NY Times:

. . . . Anticipating this week’s decision, Maine lawmakers enacted a crucial amendment to the state’s anti-discrimination law last year in order to counteract the expected ruling. The revised law forbids discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, and it applies to every private school that chooses to accept public funds, without regard to religious affiliation.

The impact was immediate: The two religious schools at issue in the Carson case, Bangor Christian Schools and Temple Academy, said that they would decline state funds if, as Maine’s new law requires, accepting such funds would require them to change how they operate or alter their “admissions standards” to admit L.G.B.T.Q. students.

The legislative fix crafted by Maine lawmakers offers a model for lawmakers elsewhere who are alarmed by the court’s aggressive swing to the right. Maine’s example shows that those on the losing end of a case can often outmaneuver the court and avoid the consequences of a ruling. . . .

Monday, July 21, 2014

Arizona Charter, Heritage Academy, Teaching the Benefits of Slavery for African Americans

From Atlanta Black Star:
A charter school in Arizona has come under fire after it was revealed the school is using controversial books that suggest slavery was actually beneficial for African-Americans.

Despite the backlash, the school’s principal is defending the use of the texts in the classroom, claiming that the school is not purposefully trying to change the students’ religious and political views.

The school decided to make The 5,000 Year Leap and The Making of America required reading for senior students at Mesa-based Heritage Academy.

Cleon Skousen, a conservative author who has been known for his controversial faith-based political theories, wrote both books.  Now one nonprofit organization wants the texts to be taken out of the curriculum.

The Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed a complaint to the state’s school board claiming that the academy should not be teaching “sexist, racist and anti-Semitic messages” to its students.

A law professor at the University of Baltimore, Garrett Epps, appeared surprised by the schools decision to use the books as he found Skousen’s accounts to be not only be racist, but also inaccurate.

“Skousen’s account of the growth and meaning of the Constitution is quite inaccurate,” he told The Arizona Republic in an email interview.

“Parts of his major textbook, The Making of America, present a systematically racist view of the Civil War,” Epps added. “A long description of slavery in the book claims that the state (of slavery) was beneficial to African-Americans and that Southern racism was caused by the ‘intrusion’ of Northern abolitionists and advocates of equality for the freed slaves.”

Not only does Epps believe the content of the controversial books is exposing students to “religious indoctrination,” but he is also concerned whether the students would be prepared for future learning.

According to Epps, “Any student taught from these materials in a public institution is being subjected to religious indoctrination” and “is also being crippled educationally and will be ill-prepared to take part in any serious program of instruction of American government and law.”

Earl Taylor, the school’s founder and principal, insists that using the texts is in the students’ best interest.

“Our purpose is not to convert students to different religious views,” Taylor told The Arizona Republic. “It is to show them that religion influenced what the founders did.”

Saturday, December 31, 2011

Religious Indoctination Provides Break from Test Prep: "It's a great day in South Carolina."

Story below the video from NYTimes.  More details on rally in video are provided here by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.




JEFFERSON, S.C. — It has been nearly 50 years since the Supreme Court ruled that officially sponsored prayer in public schools violated the separation of church and state.

But in some corners of the country, especially in the rural South, open prayer and Christian symbols have never really disappeared from schools, with what legal advocates call brazen violations of the law coming to light many times each year.

But in some corners of the country, especially in the rural South, open prayer and Christian symbols have never really disappeared from schools, with what legal advocates call brazen violations of the law coming to light many times each year.

At a school assembly here in South Carolina on Sept. 1, a preacher described how Christ saved him from drugs, telling his rapt audience that “a relationship with Jesus is what you need more than anything else.” A rapper shouted the Lord’s praise to a light show and most of the audience stepped forward to pledge themselves to Christ while a few remained, uncomfortable, in their seats.

Such overt evangelizing would not be unusual at a prayer rally, but this was a daytime celebration in a public school gymnasium, arranged by the principal for sixth, seventh and eighth graders.

When the rapper posted a video on YouTube, announcing that “324 kids at this school have made a decision for Jesus Christ,” he drew unwelcome public and legal scrutiny to the event. It was the kind of religious advocacy that is increasingly coming to light, legal experts say, as school populations become more diverse and as the objection of non-Christians — or, in this case, the rejoicing of evangelists — is broadcast on the Internet.

In landmark decisions in 1962 and 1963, the Supreme Court barred official promotion of religion in schools. That principle has remained solid, if pilloried by conservatives who blame it for what they see as the nation’s moral and social decline. At the same time, the courts and Congress have also reinforced the rights of students to pray on their own and to form after-school religious clubs.

But battles over the place of religion in schools continue. This month, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit demanding that the Chesterfield County, S.C., school district end what the suit describes as the continuing promotion of religion in several of its schools, including the middle school that held the prayer rally. The A.C.L.U. brought the suit on behalf of a seventh grader who said he was subjected to unwanted proselytizing and has been harassed for his avowals of atheism.

Among other recent examples:

¶ At Pace High School near Pensacola, Fla., teachers cited the Bible as fact in class and one teacher preached to students with a bullhorn as they arrived at school. In litigation that ended in July, the Santa Rosa County district agreed to stop promotion of religion but said that teachers could pray in private settings and could use expressions like “God bless you.”

¶ In Sumner County, Tenn., teachers led students in prayer and Bible study, and allowed Gideons International to distribute Bibles during school hours. Officials agreed this month to end the practices.

¶ In Baltimore, under threat of a lawsuit last spring, district officials stopped a school principal from holding prayer services to help students prepare for a standardized test.

“We continue to see, on a regular basis across the country, public school officials who include prayer in school events, try to convert students and engage in other promotion of religion,” said Heather Weaver, a lawyer with the A.C.L.U.’s program on religious freedom.

“In recent years, public school officials have engaged in these activities even more aggressively,” Ms. Weaver added.
Christian legal advocates counter that such plain violations are far less common than the opposite problem:

overzealous officials trying to cleanse the schools of religion, punishing students for protected speech like personal prayer or handing out devotional messages to their friends.

“The free-speech rights of students and teachers are under an all-out assault,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Institute, a Christian legal group in Plano, Tex. He described one continuing legal case in which “children had pencils ripped out of their hands” because they carried a Christian message and students were “banned from writing Merry Christmas to the soldiers.”

Despite such disputes, legal religious expression is more present in schools now than it has been for decades, said Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center in Washington who advises school districts and helped develop teacher guidelines that are consistent with the law. It has been firmly established, he said, that students may pray if it is not disruptive, and can share their faith with other students. Teachers may pray with other teachers outside of class, though not in front of students during school hours.

But gray areas persist and dozens of bitter disputes erupt every year over the propriety of student prayers at graduations and football games (usually ruled illegal if given over a loudspeaker to a captive audience) or whether children can hand out written prayers at a Christmas party (permissible in theory, some experts say, but courts have allowed school officials to make judgments based on the circumstances).

Watchdog groups like the A.C.L.U., Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Freedom From Religion Foundation say that in the last few years, they have learned more often about what they call blatant violations like the South Carolina rally. It is unclear, they say, whether the number of such events is growing, or whether they are now more likely to come to light. But still, these advocates say, even when clear violations occur, concerned families are often reluctant to bring legal challenges because they fear social hostility.

The September prayer rally at New Heights Middle School in Jefferson had deep support in the community. With a population of 47,000, Chesterfield County supports at least 200 Christian churches, according to Paul Wood Jr., pastor of the First United Methodist Church in Cheraw, S.C.

“There’s not a lot of religious diversity here, so it becomes hard for people to believe that everybody isn’t a Christian,” said Mr. Wood, who was perhaps the only pastor in the county to publicly question the rally.

The students were addressed by Christian Chapman of Charlotte, N.C., who describes himself as a “traveling evangelist” and often speaks at schools, he said in an interview.

“I definitely think that we should try to get our relationship with Christ back into the schools,” said Mr. Chapman, 43. “Jesus represents everything we want our students to live by.”

For non-Christians to hear this message, he said, is no worse than Bible believers being forced to hear about evolution every day.

On the videotape about the rally, Mr. Chapman quotes the school principal, Larry Stinson, as saying, “I want these kids to know that eternal life is real, and I don’t care what happens to me, they’re going to hear it today.”

Mr. Stinson declined to comment, while a district spokesman, Ken Buck, said that the district was studying the lawsuit and would not intentionally violate the Constitution.

According to the suit, the rally during school hours was far from an isolated event. Mr. Stinson routinely opens school programs with prayer, it alleges, and has often invited Christian speakers. A large poster of the Ten Commandments hangs on a hallway wall, a picture of Jesus hangs in the lobby, and a cross and two Bibles are on a table in the main office.

The principal’s supporters noted that students were given the option of skipping the rally.

According to Jonathan Anderson, who is a plaintiff in the suit along with his seventh-grade son, the boy was told that to avoid the assembly he had to report to the suspension room, which the boy interpreted as a punishment.

In any case, said Ms. Weaver, the A.C.L.U. lawyer, “the law is clear that a school cannot hold a worship rally, irrespective of whether it is optional.”

Mr. Stinson, in an e-mail exchange with a local pastor who expressed support, wrote, “Please pray for the dark forces out there who would seek to do harm in this situation.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: December 27, 2011
An earlier version of this article misspelled the surname of Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Institute.

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Bachmann in Overdrive to End Separation of Church and State

From the Minnesota Independent:
By ANDY BIRKEY 9/30/09 3:43 PM

Rep. Michele Bachmann will be headlining a fundraiser in November for controversial ministry You Can Run But You Cannot Hide (YCRBYCH).

Based in Annandale, Minn., the group has made a name for itself as an anti-drug Christian punk rock band that organizes motivational student assemblies to bring Christ to public schools. But over the last several years, parents and school administrators have complained that the ministry misrepresents itself, claiming that the group is not transparent about its Christian mission. And since schools pay using public funds, some are concerned that the group is violating the constitutional principle of the separation of church and state.

Bachmann will be the keynote speaker at a fundraiser for the group on Nov. 12 at a Bloomington hotel. Bachmann’s office did not return a request seeking comment about the event.

It won’t be Bachmann’s first time at a YCRBYCH fundraiser. At a Minneapolis hotel in October 2006, she offered a powerful prayer for the ministry and praised the group’s work of sharing the gospel in public schools.

“Lord, I thank you for what you have done at this ministry… how you are going to advance them from 260 schools a year, Lord, to 2,600 schools a year,” she said. “Lord, we ask thy faith that you would expand this ministry beyond anything the originators of this ministry could begin to think or imagine. Lord, the day is at hand! We are in the last days! The day is at hand, Lord, when your return will become nigh. Pour a double blessing, Lord, a triple blessing on this ministry.”

In an April 2009 broadcast on Christian radio station KKMS, the group acknowledged that it is going into public schools to evangelize.

“We are doing assemblies here, folks, just so you understand, we do public high school assemblies,” said one of the group’s members. “We are speaking to kids in our schools about the constitution, suicide prevention and our own testimony of how Christ turned our lives around in public schools so we can get the light into kids hands in public schools.”

Complaints around the Midwest

In school districts around the Midwest, school administrators have taken heat for inviting the ministry into schools.

In 2003, the group came to a Benton, Wis., high school. “They had a captive audience for their message, and that wasn’t right,” Benton Principal Gary Neis told the Dubuque Telegraph Herald. He was reportedly so upset that the ministry strayed from its anti-drug message that he held another assembly to apologize to the students.

“They talked about influencing and brainwashing people. Be wise to the fact that is what they were doing. They were using the same tactics,” Neis told the students at the assembly. Neis said he contacted other schools in the area and found that they had no idea that YCRBYCH was a Christian ministry.

In 2005, at a Eureka Springs, Ark., high school, students walked out of the assembly; afterward, the principal took heat from parents. According to the local paper, The Lovely Citizen, Eureka Springs superintendent Reck Wallis, said, “I take responsibility. We had no idea about their religious, right-wing message. They misrepresented their program. We want [Eureka Springs schools] to be open and all inclusive. … They won’t be back.”

At Pequot Lakes High School in central Minnesota in 2007, the group stirred controversy when students reportedly ran out of the assembly crying after the group showed graphic images of abortion and told the students that God wanted women to be subservient to men. John McDonald, Pequot Lakes High School Principal, told WCCO, “We were expecting something a bit different,” he said. “The thing we apologized to students for is the program wasn’t to the expectation that we thought it would be.” . . . .

Friday, January 23, 2009

Two More Reasons I'm a Card-carrying Member of the ACLU

One:

CHICAGO (AP) — A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the state law requiring a moment of silence in public schools across Illinois is unconstitutional, saying it crosses the line separating church and state.

“The statute is a subtle effort to force students at impressionable ages to contemplate religion,” the judge, Robert W. Gettleman, said in his ruling. . . .

. . . . The “teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their ‘reflection,’ ” Judge Gettleman ruled.

“The plain language of the statute, therefore, suggests an intent to force the introduction of the concept of prayer into the schools,” he ruled. . . .

Two:

The Minnesota chapter of the ACLU has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against an Inver Grove Heights-based charter school for using taxpayer money to promote religion.

"Minnesotans are not interested in having their tax dollars go to fund sectarian schools," the ACLU's Chuck Samuelson said. "The money's going to the mosque. It's all the same thing, the school is the mosque which is the property owner," Samuelson said.

Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy is the first entity named in the suit. A communications firm hired by the school responded to the suit in a statement. "We are surprised by today's actions. . . . .

. . . . The ACLU alleges teachers illegally lead prayers; the school has said students lead any prayers. The school has also said some kids stay after school to attend a Muslim studies class which parents pay for.

The ACLU says the school endorses religious practices by using state funded buses for the kids, after they've attended those religious-based classes.

"The real client in this case is the first amendment," Samuelson said. He also says the school is set to receive $3.8 million in state funding for this current school year.

"We are also suing the Department of Education for failure to supervise," Samuelson added.



Tuesday, June 03, 2008

The Bush Brothers' Remaining Florida Battle: Publicly Funded Church Schools

From Americans United:

Jeb Bush And His Cronies Have Provoked A Church-State Showdown In Florida With National Ramifications

By Joseph L. Conn

Dade County, Fla., is home to almost 200 religious schools.

According to the Florida Department of Education’s data from the 2006-2007 school year, an array of denominations and faith perspectives is represented. Forty-five schools are affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, but many other spiritual traditions answered the state roll call.

All Angels Academy is Episcopalian, Christ Fellowship Academy is Baptist, Clara Mohammed School of Miami is Islamic, Greater Miami Hebrew Academy is Jewish, World Mission of Jesus Christ Christian is non-denominational, New Testament Church of Transfiguration School is Pentecostal and Glory of God Christian School is affiliated with the Assemblies of God.

Some are well-established and fully accredited with a qualified teaching staff and a tradition of educational excellence. Others are small, poorly equipped and devoted to religious indoctrination, not academic accomplishment.

If former Gov. Jeb Bush and his allies have their way, however, all of these schools – and private academies like them around the state – will soon be eligible for massive new streams of public funding, courtesy of the state’s taxpayers.

Bush has engineered onto the November ballot two initiatives that would eliminate the state constitution’s strict church-state separation provisions, mandate funding of religion and water down language requiring a quality public school system.

For advocates of church-state separation and strong public schools, it’s a political showdown with breath-taking possible consequences.

How did the Sunshine State find itself in this predicament? It’s the culmination of a convoluted plot.

In 1999, Bush pushed through the legislature an “Opportunity Scholarship Program” that gave students in “failing” public schools state funding for tuition at religious and other private academies. Americans United for Separation of Church and State and allied groups immediately challenged the voucher scheme in state court.

After years of legal wrangling, the Florida Supreme Court finally struck down the program in January 2006. The 5-2 court majority said vouchers violated a provision of the state constitution requiring a uniform system of free public schools.

Bush, an ardent advocate of “faith-based” solutions to public problems, was livid and vowed to press for a constitutional amendment. But he found more difficulty in the state legislature than expected. In May 2006, the proposed constitutional amendment fell short by one vote in the Republican-controlled Senate, despite a lot of hardball political pressure from the governor and his allies.

Bush then reached for Plan B. He left office in January 2007, but he and his top advisers crafted a back-door maneuver to revise the state constitution and advance vouchers. They decide to stack the state’s Taxation and Budget Reform Commission.

The Commission, a 25-member panel created only once every 20 years, is supposed to study the state’s tax code, revenue needs and expenditures and find ways to address financial problems. It has the power, by a two-thirds vote, to place initiatives directly on the ballot, bypassing the legislature and other governmental checks and balances.

Commission members are appointed by the governor, the Senate president and the House speaker. (Four members serve ex officio and have no voting rights on the body.)

To achieve his goals, Bush arranged with Gov. Charlie Crist to appoint Greg Turbeville, a former Bush policy director, and other voucher advocates to the Commission. House Speaker Marco Rubio (R-Miami/Dade) helped the scheme along by appointing Bush education adviser Patricia Levesque and other voucher fans.

Levesque was controversial as Bush’s education adviser. She is a graduate of Bob Jones University, the arch-fundamentalist South Carolina school notorious for its racial and religious intolerance. Today, she serves as executive director of Bush’s pro-voucher Foundation for Florida’s Future as well as his Foundation for Excellence in Education.

News media soon alerted the public to the Bush plot. Tallahassee Bureau Chief S.V. Date of the Palm Beach Post obtained Levesque’s e-mails under the open records law. They solicited assistance from the wealthy organizations that supported the Bush voucher program as she worked to craft the constitutional amendments.

“I’m still trying to figure out the right language,” Levesque said.

Some Commission members were upset that the Bush agents were diverting attention to his pet project instead of dealing with the state’s serious financial problems.

“I don’t think it’s our job to be getting into fights with the courts,” said Les Miller, a former Democratic senator from Tampa. “The Supreme Court has spoken, and they have said it is unconstitutional.”

Even some voucher boosters on the Commission were appalled. Former Senate President John McKay, who successfully pushed through a voucher program for disabled students that is still on the books, told the newspaper, “I think I’d be very cautious about it getting outside taxes and budget issues.”

But the Bush cronies forged ahead. In April, the Commission voted to place two initiatives on the November ballot.

Amendment 7 would strike current constitutional language that forbids the use of any public funds “directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.” In place of those words, Article I, Section 3 would assert, “An individual or entity may not be barred from participating in any public program because of religion.”

Amendment 9 would eviscerate the constitution’s strong language requiring, as a “paramount duty of the state,” the provision of a “uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools.” The amendment revises Article IX, Section 1 to state that “this duty shall be fulfilled, at a minimum and not exclusively” through public schools.

To make matters worse, the Bush forces combined the attack on public schools with a measure requiring that at least 65 percent of public school funds be spent on classroom activities. Voucher boosters think the spending measure will be popular with parents and could help win public approval for the funding diversion to private schools.

Analysts said the two amendments combined would eliminate any state constitutional barriers to tax aid for religious schools and other ministries of all sorts, and some experts thought the vague wording might even require public funding of “faith-based” social services, even if they evangelize and discriminate in hiring.

Opponents on the Commission were outraged.

According to the Tampa Tribune, House Minority Leader Dan Gelber said, “I think this is as wrong-headed a proposal as this Commission could come up with.”

Gelber argued that it not only allowed vouchers, but also required them. Other critics said the plan would cost the state $2 billion in additional revenues.

Many of the state’s leading newspapers deplored the Commission’s actions. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel said the ballot proposals “seem more about pushing warmed-over ideology than implementing meaningful fiscal reform.” The Palm Beach Post said the Commission “chose politics over public responsibility” in signing off on “Jeb Bush’s anti-public education agenda.”

The St. Petersburg Times warned that the ballot amendments “will make Florida a national battleground” and “the campaign will be ugly, costly, divisive – and just the kind of politics that Bush relished.”

The Times added, “The way the Commission put the items on the ballot hints at the deceptions that lie ahead. Neither question mentions the word ‘voucher.’… Call this Bush’s post-gubernatorial ‘devious plan.’”

Miami Herald columnist Carl Hiaasen opined, “If the measure passes, Florida would be the first state in the country to formally trash the concept that the roles of church and government should be separate.”

The Bradenton Herald was even more critical.

“Though voucher proponents cast their zeal in the shining light of a better education for all students,” the newspaper said, “this is just a way for rich people to subsidize their children’s private schooling. Would right-wing Republicans ever push for vouchers if they truly benefited the poor? No. This is a cynical attempt to undermine public education and further divide the classes.”

To become part of the state constitution, the amendments must be approved by 60 percent of the voters in November. The school initiatives will be on the ballot with seven other referenda, including one that would ban same-sex marriage.

The drive to win public approval of the pro-voucher amendments has powerful backers. Bush’s wealthy political allies are certain to contribute generously to the effort.

After the Commission vote, Bush stepped out of the shadows and into the limelight to praise the action.

“Thanks to the good work of the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission,” Bush said, “Florida voters, not activist jurists, will ultimately decide the best way to provide a quality education for all of our students.”

In addition, religious school advocates and Religious Right forces will rally to the cause.

John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council (and Religious Right leader James Dobson’s top agent in the state), told OneNewsNow he welcomes the constitutional change.

“If this measure passes, it would become a permanent part of Florida’s constitution,” said Stemberger, “and it would enable the legislature to pass voucher legislation without being struck down by the courts.”

Mike McCarron, executive director of the Florida Catholic Conference, urged the Commission to delete the church-state separation language in the state constitution, saying it “does not reflect the pluralistic values of Floridians, and is instead reflective of the discriminatory and prejudicial fears of years gone by.”

McCarron and other opponents of church-state separation say the language in the Florida constitution is anti-Catholic and was put there to block public funding of Catholic schools.

Such provisions barring aid to religion appear in as many as three-fourths of the state constitutions; they are often referred to as “Blaine amendments.” In some states, the provisions were added after Sen. James G. Blaine attempted unsuccessfully to add a similar amendment to the U.S. Constitution in the 1870s.

Scholars say part of the motivation for state no-aid provisions was sometimes anti-Catholic, but they note that many states had the restrictions in place long before the Blaine controversy. In addition, they say, forbidding taxpayer support of religion is a fundamental principle of American life, dating back to the enactment of the First Amendment.

The Florida no-aid provision was adopted by a constitutional convention in 1885. No records of the convention exist to give the intent of the framers, so there is no evidence that anti-Catholicism was involved. The language may simply be an extension of the 1868 constitution’s requirement that money from the state School Fund be used exclusively for “the support and maintenance of common [public] schools.”

Church-state separationists say state provisions like Florida’s are critically important now that the Supreme Court is taking a less rigorous approach to religion funding. On the other hand, advocates of taxpayer aid to religious schools and other “faith-based” ministries desperately want to see the provisions removed. In a recent speech, President George W. Bush (Jeb’s brother) urged states to delete the provisions from their constitutions. (See “A New Low At The White House Summit,” page 11.)

If Florida adopts the Bush brothers’ approach, major political campaigns to do the same in other states are certain.

If the state provisions are removed, critics expect an avalanche of funding proposals that will benefit religious schools and other ministries, and state regulation is likely to be weak or non-existent.

That’s been the case in Florida. In 2003, Sami Al-Arian, a founder of Tampa’s Islamic Academy of Florida, was indicted on charges that he was the North American leader of the Palestinian Jihad, a terrorist group. Yet, according to the Palm Beach Post, more than 50 percent of the school’s revenue came from a state-subsidized scholarship-funding organization. (Al-Arian pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy and has served nearly five years in prison.)

In 2004, the newspaper reported that 55 percent of Bush’s “Opportunity Scholarships” were going to private schools with no accreditation.

David Ray, director of the Association of Christian Schools, told the Post, “You have some non-educators out there starting schools because they see a pot of gold.”

Still, Bush bitterly fought demands for accountability. His spokesperson said only parents with vouchers should be involved in the decision about which schools to select.

The Bush constitutional revisions are so sweeping that a wide variety of religious ministries will be eligible for state aid, not just religious schools.

Miami Herald columnist Hiaasen said adoption of the amendments would send a message, “Translation: Rush out and start your own church as soon as possible, because deals are waiting in Tallahassee.”

Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told The Washington Times that supporters of religious liberty and public education will wage a “massive education campaign” to alert Florida voters to the devastating impact of the initiatives.

“It’s going to be a formidable battle,” he said.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Will Charter Schools Help to End Church-State Separation?

As fundmentalist theocrats challenge the Constitutional protections of the Establishment Clause at every turn, Catholics, Jews, and Muslims must ask themselves whose interests are served when they, themselves, begin to accept public money to run religious schools, or a watered-down version of religious schools? The theocrats, mostly Protestant and in the majority, express no such reservation because their greater calling by God or Pat Robertson (or some other crackpot who has been washed in the blood of the Lamb) offers them impunity from legal obligations or Constitutional niceties. See George Bush.

Is it really a good trade-off for ecumenicalists to accept a few public dollars for the possibility of fueling the full-scale production of an Armageddon-laced religious cocktail that school children will be forced to drink every day? Or should they join with those who wish to keep religion out of Government, as the Founders intended?

Here is a very thoughtful take on the charter school temptation by Daniel Trieman:

Florida’s Ben Gamla Charter School is more than just a place of learning. It represents a radical new vision for the future of Jewish education in America.

The Ben Gamla school, which opened this summer, is the country’s first publicly funded, Hebrew-themed charter school. Its founder, former Democratic congressman Peter Deutsch, has said he wants to open 100 such schools across the country. Already, the idea of publicly funded, Jewish-themed charter schools has sparked the interest of mega-philanthropist Michael Steinhardt, a major force in Jewish education.

Critics have raised two main concerns about the Ben Gamla school: First, they say it undermines the wall of separation between church and state (although school officials maintain their curriculum is not religious). Second, critics argue that the school poses a competitive threat to private Jewish day schools. These are valid concerns. There is, however, a larger problem, namely that the Ben Gamla model represents a profound betrayal of American Jewish liberalism.

At the core of American liberalism is the idea that government should actively promote the common good. This presupposes a common American identity, one that binds our diverse society into a single nation — e pluribus unum. Public schools have been a cornerstone of this idea, building a common civic identity and offering educational opportunity to all.

American Jews have remained remarkably loyal to this vision. That’s why our community has fought efforts by conservatives to divert public funds to private schools. It’s why many Jews have taken the lead in opposing those on the multiculturalist left who reject the idea of a common American heritage that should be taught to children of varied backgrounds.

And why shouldn’t we defend this vision? After all, it has served us well. For Jews, public education provided a route to upward mobility. Public schools not only helped Jews enter the mainstream, they also helped craft an American civic culture that includes us.

Today, however, the challenge facing American Jews is no longer how to integrate into the mainstream. Instead, we struggle with the question of how to preserve our distinct heritage amid the assimilatory currents of American life.

Many communal leaders have concluded that the solution is for more Jewish kids to enroll in private Jewish day schools. They can point to survey data suggesting that day school graduates are more likely than their peers to have strong Jewish identities, affiliate with synagogues and marry other Jews.

The allure of Jewish day schools presents a difficult choice. Day school education has its benefits in terms of strengthening Jewish identity. But opting for Jewish schools also involves turning inward, away from a full embrace of the larger American scene — and away from the public education system that has served us so well. Something valuable is gained, but something is also lost.

No one can blame parents who — faced with this dilemma — choose to enroll their children in Jewish schools (after all, many non-Jews have long made similar choices). At present though, relatively few non-Orthodox children attend Jewish schools full-time, in part because tuition can be prohibitively expensive. That’s why Ben Gamla’s charter school model is so tempting. It offers many of the benefits of a Jewish day school (minus the religious component, of course) but with the taxpayer footing the bill.

It’s one thing, however, to opt out of the public school system; it’s another thing to cash out. It’s one thing to privilege your group’s private interests; it’s another to demand that government privilege those interests, as well.

True, this is not only a Jewish issue. The charter school movement has opened the door to public funding of particularist agendas; there are, in various places around the country, schools that are dedicated to promoting Greek, African-American and even Muslim culture. Thankfully, these remain the exception rather than the rule.

But what if government-funded charter schools devoted to reinforcing the pride — and prejudices — of particular ethnic groups became the norm? It’s difficult to see how this would lead to a more cohesive, tolerant America. And that’s why it’s hard to imagine this model would ultimately be good for America’s Jews.

Daniel Treiman is the Web editor of the Forward.