Religious curricula being used/offered in a public school?

[albeto.]

I just think it is ridiculous the way people are trying to take Christianity out of school. Especially since this country was founded on christian principles

 

By law, there has never been a religion that has enjoyed the legal privilege of being supported by the government. Ever. This is part of the Constitution, and goes back to the very beginning. Those religious practices that have been enjoyed (like prayer in school), were never appropriate legally. It was a habit in many places, but not protected by law. What you are seeing is not people taking Christianity out of schools, it's keeping religion out of schools. All religion. Your religion, the Muslim religion, the Pagan religion, the Voodoo religion, the Pastafarian religion, the Copymeism religion, and thousands of others. One day Christians will be the minority population in the United States. That day may come in our children's lifetime (some of us may even see it). And still the government will not endorse any religion, even if it is the most popular one. Perhaps you can see how this policy will eventually protect your children and grandchildren's freedom to worship as they desire. 

 

The idea that this country was founded on Christian principles has been long abandoned for many solid reasons. Whoever is encouraging you to believe this is sadly out of date. I can understand your desire to see your religion preserved and respected, but hanging onto baseless, embarrassing arguments like this won't help to this end. 

[elegantlion]

 the Pastafarian religion

 

Although I've heard the Flying Spaghetti monster has been seen on Spaghetti Tuesdays every once in a while. 

 

 

I'm also confused. Does the payment for the use of the materials go to the state or a private association? That would be my next question. Who pays to house the materials even if their not on school property? 

[Flowing Brook]

By law, there has never been a religion that has enjoyed the legal privilege of being supported by the government. Ever. This is part of the Constitution, and goes back to the very beginning. Those religious practices that have been enjoyed (like prayer in school), were never appropriate legally. It was a habit in many places, but not protected by law. What you are seeing is not people taking Christianity out of schools, it's keeping religion out of schools. All religion. Your religion, the Muslim religion, the Pagan religion, the Voodoo religion, the Pastafarian religion, the Copymeism religion, and thousands of others. One day Christians will be the minority population in the United States. That day may come in our children's lifetime (some of us may even see it). And still the government will not endorse any religion, even if it is the most popular one. Perhaps you can see how this policy will eventually protect your children and grandchildren's freedom to worship as they desire. 

 

The idea that this country was founded on Christian principles has been long abandoned for many solid reasons. Whoever is encouraging you to believe this is sadly out of date. I can understand your desire to see your religion preserved and respected, but hanging onto baseless, embarrassing arguments like this won't help to this end. 

 

All but two of the founding fathers were professing born again Christians. 

[albeto.]

All but two of the founding fathers were professing born again Christians. 

 

Irrelevant.

 

They were all white. Doesn't make the USA a White Nation.

 

See my point?

[*Lulu*]

I just think it is ridiculous the way people are trying to take Christianity out of school. Especially since this country was founded on christian principles

I am a Christian. Raised in a Christian* home, in the south, in the 80's/early 90's. Can I tell you how many times I heard the warning cry of "removing Christianity from our schools"?

 

We can no more remove Christianity from our schools than we can remove Buddhism, Hinduism, or any other religion.

 

People in this country have freedom of religion. As long as my personal expression of my faith does not impede another's right to express their faith or violate a law, I'm good. (Simplistic, I know, but hang with me a moment.) It is incumbent on all of us, regardless of our faith affiliation, to protect each other's religious freedoms. THAT is the principle this country was founded on. That means the state cannot be in the business of endorsing one faith over another, not in the laws, not in the public spaces, and not in the schools.

 

Not endorsing is not the same as removing. It doesn't whip people up into the same level of frenzy as those who benefit from ranks of the riled and religious like to see.....but that is sort of the point. Pay attention to who yells the loudest about issues of religion in school and what they have to gain from it. After a while you start to see it is not as black and white as some would like to portray it.

 

*let's be clear, it was dysfunctional as hell, but that was more about the people I am related to than their religious beliefs.

[MysteryJen]

I don't know who pays to house the materials. That might be part of the program fee, I have no idea.  Also, I think that the curricula in these lending libraries vary widely from program to program as they are mostly donated materials.

 

I don't know that the mere presence of religious curricula presumes a pressure to promote or use.

 

Albeto, Pastafarian...hilarious.

[Guest inoubliable]

KK, has your friend decided whether or not she's going to pursue this? If she does, I hope she's able to do it privately, so she doesn't have any problems with the teachers or other parents.

 

I haven't heard anything back from the OP today, so I'm not sure. I hope she's able to make a move that makes her comfortable and doesn't cost her any friends. :(

 

I just think it is ridiculous the way people are trying to take Christianity out of school. Especially since this country was founded on christian principles

 

LOLwut?

[justasque]

I'm also confused. Does the payment for the use of the materials go to the state or a private association? That would be my next question. Who pays to house the materials even if their not on school property? 

 

 

I assumed that the fee was a deposit to ensure the materials would be returned.  In my school district, when homebound (public) students or home educated (not public) students borrow materials like math textbooks, the parent has to write a check for the value of the textbook.  The school then hangs on to the check until the book is returned.  (Some of the books are very expensive - I've spent $120+ per for high school texts in the past - so as a taxpayer I can see how this protects the district.)  Of course, trying to cash a months-old check is not a great idea; a system where the school actually cashes the check is more reliable.

 

So it sounds like this library isn't just a cardboard box of hand-me-downs free for the taking, it's a selection of books that the school has reviewed and approved, and is actively trying to retain ownership of.

[Flowing Brook]

Irrelevant.

 

They were all white. Doesn't make the USA a White Nation.

 

See my point?

 

How is it irrelevant? People came to this nation because they wanted religious freedom.  They wanted a place where they could worship God freely.  The reason they put the separation of church and state was because when the government turned against God they did not want them to be able to dictate how and when and if they worshiped God.  England at the time was not allowing people to worship as they saw fit.

[Guest inoubliable]

KK,

I agree that a publicly funded school should not be offering religious curricula. However, the lending library is not part of the regular school library. Homeschoolers, even if in enrichment programs, are not public schooled students. So if the school wants to hold curricula for their enrichment program as a service (most are donated, I am sure), I am not sure that they have any problems here. If they then wish to make that available to their own regular students with a fee, I am not sure that there is a problem there either.

 

Annoying maybe, but I am not sure they are breaking any laws.

 

I think this may be where the OP needed some clarification. Are students in this program public school students? Is the charter school/enrichment program operated the same way as a public school? And then from there, what is the legality of offering these types of curricula. 

 

It seems to be a very grey area. 

[Guest inoubliable]

 

 

I'm also confused. Does the payment for the use of the materials go to the state or a private association? That would be my next question. Who pays to house the materials even if their not on school property? 

 

I'm not sure, but it sounded like the payment is held by the charter school. I'm *guessing* that makes it a state association. I've not heard back from the OP, though, so I could be off. I don't know where the materials are being housed. It sounded like a teacher is in charge of the library, gives access, takes note of what is borrowed, collects payment, etc. So I'm assuming it's in a part of the building where classes are held.

[MysteryJen]

I assumed that the fee was a deposit to ensure the materials would be returned.  In my school district, when homebound (public) students or home educated (not public) students borrow materials like math textbooks, the parent has to write a check for the value of the textbook.  The school then hangs on to the check until the book is returned.  (Some of the books are very expensive - I've spent $120+ per for high school texts in the past - so as a taxpayer I can see how this protects the district.)  Of course, trying to cash a months-old check is not a great idea; a system where the school actually cashes the check is more reliable.

 

So it sounds like this library isn't just a cardboard box of hand-me-downs free for the taking, it's a selection of books that the school has reviewed and approved, and is actively trying to retain ownership of.

 This is not my understanding.  Most of the people I know in these programs borrow from the libraries and don't pay extra to do so.  They have all kinds of stuff and usually a much greater variety than is available from the district. Often, the district texts aren't available.

 

To be fair, most people check stuff out to look first, then they buy for themselves.

[Guest inoubliable]

I don't know who pays to house the materials. That might be part of the program fee, I have no idea.  Also, I think that the curricula in these lending libraries vary widely from program to program as they are mostly donated materials.

 

I don't know that the mere presence of religious curricula presumes a pressure to promote or use.

 

Albeto, Pastafarian...hilarious.

 

Perhaps not the mere presence. OP said that the teacher in charge told her that these materials were reviewed and approved by herself and the principal because they aligned with the school's values and principals. That's a big no-no, I'm thinking. 

 

R'amen.

[Flowing Brook]

I am a Christian. Raised in a Christian* home, in the south, in the 80's/early 90's. Can I tell you how many times I heard the warning cry of "removing Christianity from our schools"?

 

We can no more remove Christianity from our schools than we can remove Buddhism, Hinduism, or any other religion.

 

People in this country have freedom of religion. As long as my personal expression of my faith does not impede another's right to express their faith or violate a law, I'm good. (Simplistic, I know, but hang with me a moment.) It is incumbent on all of us, regardless of our faith affiliation, to protect each other's religious freedoms. THAT is the principle this country was founded on. That means the state cannot be in the business of endorsing one faith over another, not in the laws, not in the public spaces, and not in the schools.

 

Not endorsing is not the same as removing. It doesn't whip people up into the same level of frenzy as those who benefit from ranks of the riled and religious like to see.....but that is sort of the point. Pay attention to who yells the loudest about issues of religion in school and what they have to gain from it. After a while you start to see it is not as black and white as some would like to portray it.

 

*let's be clear, it was dysfunctional as hell, but that was more about the people I am related to than their religious beliefs.

 

Yeah but when a youth pastor is fired from public school because he answered the question of a student that approached him. Then it seems like they are trying to remove Christianity from school.

Also why in some schools is it ok to teach about being a Muslim and not a christian?

 

Although let me add I get and agree with what you are saying. It seems as though people are trying to stop students from being a christian in school.  For example a student getting in trouble for reading the Bible on their lunch break. 

 

[Guest inoubliable]

 This is not my understanding.  Most of the people I know in these programs borrow from the libraries and don't pay extra to do so.  They have all kinds of stuff and usually a much greater variety than is available from the district. Often, the district texts aren't available.

 

To be fair, most people check stuff out to look first, then they buy for themselves.

 

OP said that in this particular program the people ARE paying a refundable fee to borrow the materials. 

[justasque]

All but two of the founding fathers were professing born again Christians. 

 

 

Nonetheless, perhaps because of their familiarity with various groups throughout history who had been persecuted for their beliefs, the founding fathers saw fit to put the First Amendment into the Constitution.  

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

 

As the country has grown, we have realized that having, say, a local government school teaching a particular set of religious beliefs is, in effect, establishing a state-endorsed religion, which is unconstitutional.

 

Parents are free to put their children into a wide variety of faith-based educational settings.  Those who wish to have their children in a faith-based educational environment should generally expect to fund it themselves, or with the help of churches and faith-based and other private organizations.  As many here on this board do, whether through homeschooling, Catholic school, Christian co-ops, etc. etc.

 

[justasque]

 This is not my understanding.  Most of the people I know in these programs borrow from the libraries and don't pay extra to do so.  They have all kinds of stuff and usually a much greater variety than is available from the district. Often, the district texts aren't available.

 

To be fair, most people check stuff out to look first, then they buy for themselves.

 

 

The OP said, "These materials are not in the school library.  It is a new collection of materials that parents can check out for the year by paying a refundable fee." 

 

She also said, "She asked the teacher if the books were bought with public funds or donated and the teacher responded that the materials were mostly donated and that they go through a rigorous review to make sure that all materials align with their core values and principals."

 

[Guest inoubliable]

Yeah but when a youth pastor is fired from public school because he answered the question of a student that approached him. Link? Source? Then it seems like they are trying to remove Christianity from school.

Also why in some schools is it ok to teach about being a Muslim and not a christian? It isn't. That's also illegal. What IS legal is teaching about religions in certain contexts, not promoting any single religion. I suspect you already do understand this.

 

Although let me add I get and agree with what you are saying. It seems as though people are trying to stop students from being a christian in school.  No one is doing that. That's impossible. If you're Xtian, you're Xtian no matter if you're in your bedroom, on the bus, sitting on the toilet, hanging out at a cafe, enjoying a film at the theater, or soaring on an airplane. I think you already understand this, too. For example a student getting in trouble for reading the Bible on their lunch break. Students cannot get in trouble for this. 

 

 

edited: typo

[*Lulu*]

Yeah but when a youth pastor is fired from public school because he answered the question of a student that approached him. Then it seems like they are trying to remove Christianity from school.

Also why in some schools is it ok to teach about being a Muslim and not a christian?

 

Although let me add I get and agree with what you are saying. It seems as though people are trying to stop students from being a christian in school. For example a student getting in trouble for reading the Bible on their lunch break.

 

I have yet to read about a situation where someone was practicing their personal faith, in compliance with school rules, and the injunction/discipline of the school administration was upheld.

 

I'm not saying it never happens, but I don't think it is the epidemic some religious figures want to portray it as.

[Flowing Brook]

 

Yeah but when a youth pastor is fired from public school because he answered the question of a student that approached him. Link? Source? Then it seems like they are trying to remove Christianity from school.

Also why in some schools is it ok to teach about being a Muslim and not a christian? It isn't. That's also illegal. What IS illegal is teaching about religions in certain contexts, not promoting any single religion. I suspect you already do understand this.

 

Although let me add I get and agree with what you are saying. It seems as though people are trying to stop students from being a christian in school.  No one is doing that. That's impossible. If you're Xtian, you're Xtian no matter if you're in your bedroom, on the bus, sitting on the toilet, hanging out at a cafe, enjoying a film at the theater, or soaring on an airplane. I think you already understand this, too. For example a student getting in trouble for reading the Bible on their lunch break. Students cannot get in trouble for this. 

 

 

ok here they are

 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2011/03/31/boy-suspended-for-bringing-bible-to-school-files-suit/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/02/AR2006100201238.html

 

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/teacher-fired-for-giving-student-bible.html

 

If you want more links I can provide more.

 

[Guest inoubliable]

Give me a chance to find them. I have seen news articles on every scenario I mentioned

 

 

Oookay. 

You understand the point I was making, though, right? About what's legal and what's not? 

[MysteryJen]

I must go finish my word count for NaNoWriMo, so I have to go.

 

Enrichment program students here in CO are home school students, not public school or charter school students. 

So there are two student populations here. And both have access to the curricula, except that it is not housed in the school library. Both groups pay a refundable fee for access.

 

I highly doubt there was any real review going on, teachers are busy enough with their own classes to get worked up about home school stuff. And, since I believe that the lending library was originally for the homeschoolers (just an assumption), I think that they just saw popular home school curricula and put it the library for them.

 

The public schools/state here have no control or say over home schooling curriculum. They offer the enrichment programs as a money maker/enticement for homeschoolers. It is a "service."

 

 

[justasque]

Yeah but when a youth pastor is fired from public school because he answered the question of a student that approached him. Then it seems like they are trying to remove Christianity from school.

Also why in some schools is it ok to teach about being a Muslim and not a christian?

 

Although let me add I get and agree with what you are saying. It seems as though people are trying to stop students from being a christian in school.  For example a student getting in trouble for reading the Bible on their lunch break. 

 

 

Rules in public school should apply equally to Christian and Muslim beliefs, as per the law and the Constitution.  Students in public schools should be allowed to read a Bible during lunch if they are allowed to read books in general during lunch, as per the federal Dept of Ed guidelines.  

 

Sometimes when you hear a headline about a school behaving inappropriately, it's important to understand that if the school is on the wrong side of the law, they usually get smacked down, though the smacking doesn't always make the news.

[albeto.]

How is it irrelevant? People came to this nation because they wanted religious freedom.  They wanted a place where they could worship God freely.

It's irrelevant because their personal views were just that - personal, not incorporated into public policy. The Constitution was written specifically as a secular document. That is to say, there is no endorsement of religion. 

 

The reason they put the separation of church and state was because when the government turned against God they did not want them to be able to dictate how and when and if they worshiped God.  England at the time was not allowing people to worship as they saw fit.

 

You and I can speculate why they wrote what they wrote, but the fact is the government of the United States is legally a secular government and always has been. No one  religion is to have a place of privilege in the government. Any arguments that are being presented to you to the contrary reflect a lack of easily obtained information. 

[zoobie]

How is it irrelevant? People came to this nation because they wanted religious freedom. They wanted a place where they could worship God freely. The reason they put the separation of church and state was because when the government turned against God they did not want them to be able to dictate how and when and if they worshiped God. England at the time was not allowing people to worship as they saw fit.

They wanted people to be able to worship--or NOT--freely. They did not want government telling people how or what to worship. They did not want government sanctioned religion (Church of England, head of state was head of church). They didn't want the uncertainty. One monarch, Protestants are under fire. The next, Catholics. And back again. If the government, through public schools, sanctions, endorses, or teaches religion, it takes your freedom away. We can't agree on Common Core standards for math. Do you really want government standards for religion?

[Flowing Brook]

They wanted people to be able to worship--or NOT--freely. They did not want government telling people how or what to worship. They did not want government sanctioned religion (Church of England, head of state was head of church). They didn't want the uncertainty. One monarch, Protestants are under fire. The next, Catholics. And back again. If the government, through public schools, sanctions, endorses, or teaches religion, it takes your freedom away. We can't agree on Common Core standards for math. Do you really want government standards for religion?

 

My point in that post and others is that the founding fathers were Christians. They wrote the constitution on Biblical principles.  They believed the Bible they wanted the freedom to worship God the way they wanted.  The whole reason they did not mandate Christianity is because they knew if they could mandate Christianity the time would come when government would change and would be able to mandate other religions they did not endorse. So rather than run that risk they made the rules the way they did.

[zoobie]

Yeah but when a youth pastor is fired from public school because he answered the question of a student that approached him. Then it seems like they are trying to remove Christianity from school.

Also why in some schools is it ok to teach about being a Muslim and not a christian?

 

Although let me add I get and agree with what you are saying. It seems as though people are trying to stop students from being a christian in school. For example a student getting in trouble for reading the Bible on their lunch break.

 

You mean this guy? http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/nyregion/18kearny.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

They also can't have intercourse with their students even if they're of age. Teachers are in a position of power and are held to different standards when they are in front of a classroom.

[Guest inoubliable]

My point in that post and others is that the founding fathers were Christians. Still not relevant. They wrote the constitution on Biblical principles.  No, they didn't. There's not one mention of any Biblical or Xtian principles in the document. They believed the Bible they wanted the freedom to worship God the way they wanted.  Which our government guarantees, no one has disputed that. The whole reason they did not mandate Christianity is because they knew if they could mandate Christianity the time would come when government would change and would be able to mandate other religions they did not endorse. So rather than run that risk they made the rules the way they did. Where did you get that from?

 

Actually, this is probably better suited for another thread entirely. 

[albeto.]

My point in that post and others is that the founding fathers were Christians.

They were also white, but the US is not a White Nation.

They were also men, but the US is not a Masculine Nation.

Many were also Freemasons, but the US is not a Freemason Nation.

The idea (unsupported, btw, and based on rumors and bad history) that they were Christian is an irrelevant variable. Unless the Constitution is written to reflect the Christian religion (it is not), it doesn't matter if any of them were Christians.

 

They wrote the constitution on Biblical principles.

There is no credible source for this claim. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Constitution that reflects governing on Christian principles.

 

They believed the Bible they wanted the freedom to worship God the way they wanted.  The whole reason they did not mandate Christianity is because they knew if they could mandate Christianity the time would come when government would change and would be able to mandate other religions they did not endorse. So rather than run that risk they made the rules the way they did.

Even if this were true, it doesn't really matter does it? There is nothing in the Constitution that reflects promoting the Christian religion in public policy. Nothing. Therefore, public policy should not reflect the Christian religion. Period. Because of this, public schools today do not have the privilege of endorsing the Christian religion by using faith-based curricula to educate students, as this charter school seems to be doing.

[albeto.]

Thankfully, I come from a land settled by convicts and failed English gentlemen, so we don't have to argue about our Founding Fathers. Thieves and Vagabonds all....

 

Every great story starts with a thief stealing a loaf of bread: Les Misérables, Aladdin, Australia.

[zoobie]

My point in that post and others is that the founding fathers were Christians. They wrote the constitution on Biblical principles. They believed the Bible they wanted the freedom to worship God the way they wanted. The whole reason they did not mandate Christianity is because they knew if they could mandate Christianity the time would come when government would change and would be able to mandate other religions they did not endorse. So rather than run that risk they made the rules the way they did.

No. No, that's not what they did nor why. Read the Federalist Papers.

 

There is no "Christianity" universal religion, and there certainly was not then. Given the historical context, I would say there was a greater gulf then between Catholics, Anglicans, Puritans, Lutherans... Now they're all generally considered to be "Christians," but then, it was dangerous to be something other than exactly what the ruling power was. You could be killed for the nuances. The founding fathers did not want the government in the business of religion. Period.

[elegantlion]

Actually, this is probably better suited for another thread entirely. 

 

I absolutely agree puddles argument should be a separate thread. Please if you, puddles, want to continue to debate how awful the separation of church and state is, make another thread 

 

As a christian, I am very much interested in this the original topic of this thread. There has been numerous discussions here on the nuanced meanings of calling someone who receives public funds a homeschooler. While not exactly the case, this question could have implications on how "charter funds" can/should be implemented through homeschooling. Are the individual groups allowed to stock materials (donated or otherwise) as they see fit or do they have to follow the separation rules in place for public schools? 

 

Please don't derail this important discussion into something that is more likely to get it closed or deleted. This conversation is about adherence to laws that currently exist, not whether anyone finds the laws a threat to their faith. 

[Mergath]

My point in that post and others is that the founding fathers were Christians. They wrote the constitution on Biblical principles.  They believed the Bible they wanted the freedom to worship God the way they wanted.  The whole reason they did not mandate Christianity is because they knew if they could mandate Christianity the time would come when government would change and would be able to mandate other religions they did not endorse. So rather than run that risk they made the rules the way they did.

 

Have you actually read the Constitution?  Show me one place where the Constitution mentions Jesus.  Or Satan.  Or heaven, or hell, or the trinity, or the bible, or any of the tenets of the Christian faith.  One single thing that makes it explicitly Christian.  Because your assumptions about the FFs are not proof.

 

A generic reference to God does not make this a Christian nation.  I could just as easily say that referencing God makes this a Jewish nation.  Or a Hindu nation.  Or a Pagan nation.  Christians do not get to claim a monopoly on the word "God," nor the idea.

[Mergath]

 

Please don't derail this important discussion into something that is more likely to get it closed or deleted. This conversation is about adherence to laws that currently exist, not whether anyone finds the laws a threat to their faith. 

 

:leaving:

 

I'm done now, I swear. ;)

[WishboneDawn]

Dp

[WishboneDawn]

Tp

[WishboneDawn]

Qp

[WishboneDawn]

Really? How do they manage to do the OT while avoiding that? Or, is it more avoided for other subject areas that aren't actually about the Bible's narrative?

 

Honestly the Bible is a book that explores the themes of life and death. You can't really get into that theme if you have to avoid all the stories that involve life/conception/sex, and also all those that involve death/killing/violence. I think skipping them would render the OT incomprehensible... And really, pretty short.

I agree with you about the but the Christian curriculum I've seen seems to sanitize or simply leave out much of the violent/sexual stuff. Sort of like those illustrated children's bibles I used to read in doctor's offices as a kid.

 

I was not defending "biblical" programs or decrying the sex and violence in the OT.

[WishboneDawn]

Biblical homeschooling endorses the bible, which contains (and endorses) sex and violence. A public school endorsing biblical material is endorsing the bible. That's not allowed in our secular nation.

I get it.:)

 

I wasn't making any point in support of the bigger issue, just being rather anal about the small point that just because a program is Christian or "Biblical" (a term I hate because it pretends certainty and agreement where none exists) doesn't mean it has the sex and violence the Bible does. It was a very narrow point and nothing more should be read into it.

[Guest inoubliable]

Update from the OP: 
 

My apologies for the confusion, I am not the most eloquent writer and perhaps I was not clear.  Yes, we are homeschoolers and my children attend a once a week enrichment program for homeschoolers.  This program is run by a large public charter school.  The homeschooling program is housed in the same building as the full time elementary school.  The charter school receives state funding for each child in the homeschooling enrichment program.  

 

No one has to use the curriculum in the lending library.  It is available for homeschoolers that attend this program to borrow for the year by paying a refundable fee.  

 

I fully support the free exchange of ideas, free speech, and the freedom to participate in the religion of your choosing.  The problem with this particular situation is the school has stated that these materials are aligned with the school's "core values" and principles.  It has been encouraged that all parents review the list of materials for use in emails, the school newsletters, and on the website.  The religious materials make up about half of the lending library and represent one faction of Christianity.  I am very uncomfortable with any publicly funded school advocating the use of any religious teaching materials and that is what this feels like.

 

Additionally, two similar programs in the area have lending libraries that do not contain religious material.  This shows that you can have a lending library for homeschoolers without housing religious materials.  One of the schools' list is quite extensive with many programs I have seen recommended here at WTM.  

 

It is not the school's place to advocate for any religion.  Doing so can make the environment feel hostile to those of other belief systems wheneveryone regardless of skin color, religion, or gender should be welcome.

 

Thank you for all of the thoughtful replies.  Many of them allowed me to think about this issue from other angles and consider things I hadn't thought of.  It is unfortunate that there is a fear of being made a pariah if my family speaks up about this issue but if I don't speak up about something that I feel is fundamentally wrong because of fear then what does that make me?

[Catwoman]

Update from the OP:

It is unfortunate that there is a fear of being made a pariah if my family speaks up about this issue but if I don't speak up about something that I feel is fundamentally wrong because of fear then what does that make me?

To the OP :

 

I don't think it's worth it.

 

Unless you have solid documentation which clearly states that the practice is illegal, I don't think you should pursue this. If you can't get some sort of state or district official to take action, I think you're wasting your time by complaining to someone like the school principal or a teacher. They'll view you as an anti-Christian troublemaker, and that could prove very uncomfortable and difficult for you and your children.

 

FWIW, I agree with you that the materials shouldn't be in a public school. I just don't want you to take the chance of being ostracized by a lot of people unless you are sure you have all of your ducks in a row, and feel certain that you'll get the results you want.

 

You've got to live in that town. Before you go to battle over this, please take some time to seriously think it over, because I'm concerned about you ending up enemies with the people at the school, as well as the other parents, and it could all come back to bite your kids, too. Obviously, I'm not going to tell you not to do it if you truly feel very strongly about it, but I hope you will wait until you've calmed down and don't have a strong emotional reaction before you decide what to do. Ultimately, this is about some books in a lending library in a program that you only attend once a week. Is it really worth the potentially considerable time and effort that it will take to fight this?

 

Sorry you feel so conflicted. I completely understand why you would feel that way. :grouphug:

 

 

 

To KK:

 

It was very kind of you to start this thread for your friend. I can understand why she would want to maintain her anonymity, and it's nice that you were able to help her do that. :)

[bolt.]

It might "make you" someone wise, avoiding unnessisary confrontation, if the costs look likely to outweigh the benefits.

 

Or it might "make you" someone cowardly, placing your personal comfort above your convictions.

 

Only you know the answer to that.

[albeto.]

Why can't people just MYOB???? If I saw a book by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens at my charter's lending library I wouldn't go about filing a religious discrimination lawsuit. I'd simply roll my eyes and leave it on the shelf. Don't like it? Don't use it!

 

Because when people mind their own business, angry mob mentality dictates public policy:

 

Before you go to battle over this, please take some time to seriously think it over, because I'm concerned about you ending up enemies with the people at the school, as well as the other parents, and it could all come back to bite your kids, too. 

[MysteryJen]

Update from the OP: 

 

My apologies for the confusion, I am not the most eloquent writer and perhaps I was not clear.  Yes, we are homeschoolers and my children attend a once a week enrichment program for homeschoolers.  This program is run by a large public charter school.  The homeschooling program is housed in the same building as the full time elementary school.  The charter school receives state funding for each child in the homeschooling enrichment program.  

 

No one has to use the curriculum in the lending library.  It is available for homeschoolers that attend this program to borrow for the year by paying a refundable fee.  

 

I fully support the free exchange of ideas, free speech, and the freedom to participate in the religion of your choosing.  The problem with this particular situation is the school has stated that these materials are aligned with the school's "core values" and principles.  It has been encouraged that all parents review the list of materials for use in emails, the school newsletters, and on the website.  The religious materials make up about half of the lending library and represent one faction of Christianity.  I am very uncomfortable with any publicly funded school advocating the use of any religious teaching materials and that is what this feels like.

 

Additionally, two similar programs in the area have lending libraries that do not contain religious material.  This shows that you can have a lending library for homeschoolers without housing religious materials.  One of the schools' list is quite extensive with many programs I have seen recommended here at WTM.  

 

It is not the school's place to advocate for any religion.  Doing so can make the environment feel hostile to those of other belief systems wheneveryone regardless of skin color, religion, or gender should be welcome.

 

Thank you for all of the thoughtful replies.  Many of them allowed me to think about this issue from other angles and consider things I hadn't thought of.  It is unfortunate that there is a fear of being made a pariah if my family speaks up about this issue but if I don't speak up about something that I feel is fundamentally wrong because of fear then what does that make me?

Thanks so much for clarifying. I will admit that I think it is okay for some religious materials to be included in the lending library, merely because the state does not have any control over curriculum choices for homeschoolers. And should not make decisions for them.

But with your other info about the charter/newletter/website, then absolutely you should complain. That is not acceptable from a public charter.

At all.

[Crimson Wife]

Because when people mind their own business, angry mob mentality dictates public policy:

"Angry mob mentality"???? Seriously??????

 

This is not some backward Third World country where religious fundamentalists will engage in deadly riots over stupid political cartoons.

 

Nobody is going to riot in Colorado because some overly P.C. busybody got her knickers in a twist over a few donated Christian homeschool books and whined about it rather than simply ignoring them.

[mytwomonkeys]

I'm not trying to be snarky here, but why do people type "xian" instead of Christian? :confused:

 

"Christian" isn't really that long a word, and Xian is a province in China.

 

Again, not trying to be snarky. I'm really wondering.

You made me laugh! :)

[Mergath]

"Angry mob mentality"???? Seriously??????

 

This is not some backward Third World country where religious fundamentalists will engage in deadly riots over stupid political cartoons.

 

Nobody is going to riot in Colorado because some overly P.C. busybody got her knickers in a twist over a few donated Christian homeschool books and whined about it rather than simply ignoring them.

 

:001_rolleyes:   Classy.

[albeto.]

"Angry mob mentality"???? Seriously??????

 

This is not some backward Third World country where religious fundamentalists will engage in deadly riots over stupid political cartoons.

 

Nobody is going to riot in Colorado because some overly P.C. busybody got her knickers in a twist over a few donated Christian homeschool books and whined about it rather than simply ignoring them.

 

Yes, "angry mob mentality." The same kind of angry mob mentality that tweeted hate-filled messages and threats to Jessica Ahlquist (including a state representative who called her an "evil little thing" during a public radio interview), to radio personalities (with more than a million listeners around the world) like Bryan Fischer who argue that "Islam is clearly the religion that Satan is promoting" to usher in the "end times." Cat's warning sounded sincere, and thoughtful. People who anger Christians in the United States may, and often do face ostracization, and threats to person and property (just ask the LGBTQ community). 

[kitten18]

Thanks so much for clarifying. I will admit that I think it is okay for some religious materials to be included in the lending library, merely because the state does not have any control over curriculum choices for homeschoolers. And should not make decisions for them.

But with your other info about the charter/newletter/website, then absolutely you should complain. That is not acceptable from a public charter.

At all.

I agree.

[Mergath]

Yes, "angry mob mentality." The same kind of angry mob mentality that tweeted hate-filled messages and threats to Jessica Ahlquist (including a state representative who called her an "evil little thing" during a public radio interview), to radio personalities (with more than a million listeners around the world) like Bryan Fischer who argue that "Islam is clearly the religion that Satan is promoting" to usher in the "end times." Cat's warning sounded sincere, and thoughtful. People who anger Christians in the United States may face ostracization, and threats to person and property (just ask the LGBTQ community). 

 

:iagree:   I have a pentacle (it's small and silver, similar to the Jesus fish some people have) and a Pagan bumper sticker on my car.  It's been vandalized in my driveway three times (and stolen once, but I'm pretty sure that was unrelated).  I'm guessing it's not because people dislike Fords.