home

Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools

By TChris, Section Court Decisions
Posted on Fri May 06, 2005 at 02:58:45 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

This is an activist judge.

A federal judge on Thursday blocked a county school system from instituting a health curriculum that includes discussions of homosexuality.

U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams in Maryland evidently believes that teaching tolerance of homosexuality advances governmental support of religions that accept (or at least tolerate) homosexuality over religions that condemn it. But sexuality is not an intrinsically religious issue. Religious organizations take competing positions concerning sexual practices and education about sexuality in general, but religious organizations take any number of competing positions about all sorts of things. By Judge Williams' logic -- and maybe this is where it's leading -- a school could not teach evolution because it would be advancing a particular viewpoint to the detriment of a competing religious (albeit unscientific) viewpoint. Nor could it teach any fact of history (like the probable age of the planet) that is contradicted by a religious belief.

Tolerance (like intolerance) might be held as a religious value, but teaching tolerance neither advances religion nor intertwines government with a particular faith. Teaching tolerance of others, like teaching respect for the law, has social value independent of and apart from any corresponding religious value. Telling a school that it can't teach the societal benefit of mutual respect is a stunning display of judicial activism.

The lawsuit itself is a thinly disguised attempt to enshrine religious intolerance in a school curriculum:

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday by Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, a county group composed mostly of parents, and the Virginia-based Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays. "I don't think it is right that we have 13-year-olds learning to think whether they are gay or straight," said Laura Quigley, who has three children in the school system. "We just need to let them be kids."

Erik Stanley, an attorney for the two groups that filed suit, said the curriculum implies that homosexuality is a biological trait, not a lifestyle choice.

Nothing prevents parents from imparting different views at home if they prefer to adhere to their own opinions about "lifestyle choices." Schools should provide students with the best information that science and reason can provide, not the view preferred by a particular religion. Judges should be able to see through lawsuits that try to force public schools to indoctrinate students with religious education.

< Microsoft About Face: Will Support Gay Rights Bill | Tip Thanks >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools | 17 comments (17 topical)
    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#6)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:57:35 PM EST
    “But sexuality is not an intrinsically religious issue.” And I suppose neither or the origins of man. “Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools” Activism is in the eye of the beholder; i.e. it is your moral duty, rather than imposition, if they are your beliefs.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#7)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:57:39 PM EST
    pigwiggle, I like you call name! "it is your moral duty, rather than imposition, if they are your beliefs." Sorry, your incorrect, this is new to american politics. It has been traditional in thid country to keep one Religous beliefs Private. We do not make laws in the name of "OUR" God.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#1)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:48 PM EST
    "U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams in Maryland evidently believes that teaching tolerance of homosexuality advances governmental support of religions that accept (or at least tolerate) homosexuality over religions that condemn it. "
    Yes, of course he does. That's long been the strategy of anti-evolutionists, anti-abortionists, and anti-homosexualists. They're adamant that there can be no religiously neutral position. Any belief that doesn't support their own narrow position is viewed as a competing and hostile viewpoint. There's no middle ground for these people.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    Welcome to Kansas.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    My understanding from the story is that the curriculum includes comparisons of various religious groups' treatment of gays. While I think sexuality is obviously an important aspect of health class, and I think we ought to always go with the viewpoint that makes kids comfortable with themselves, this religious commentary is a problem. Whoever designed the curriculum was asking for this lawsuit. This, of course, is based on the judge's view that
    the curriculum juxtaposes faiths such as Quakers that support full rights for gays and lesbians with groups such as Baptists, who are painted as "intolerant and Biblically misguided."
    If that's not true, then the curriculum should be fine.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#4)
    by Mreddieb on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    It is interesting how understanding and discussing Homosexuality is a religious act. Is discussing Antisemitisim now injecting the jewish religion into our school sytsem? This judge is part of the Fundies insane and desperate attempt at finding some way to subvert every aspect of our coulture to their narrow view of the universe.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    Why tolerate "sinners" at all? Just all of us commit mass suicide. Let he who is without fault...

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#8)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    “It has been traditional in thid country to keep one Religous beliefs Private.” My point is that folks scream when their neighbors want their particular belief system taught in school but see no problem imposing their own. I think the scientific method is very useful, vastly more useful than faith based belief systems. Imposing this, I suppose under the excuse that the SM reflect some fundamental truth, isn’t different than religious minded folks imposing their brand of fundamental truth. This is likely the largest problem I have with public schooling. Folks who cannot afford to pay for schooling twice (through taxes and then a private school) often have a specific agenda forced onto their children, day after day, K-12.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    If the lesson plan said homosexuality is wrong based on religious teachings, I am sure you would all stand up in favor of it. As for myself, I think schools are for teaching, not indoctrination. I may be wrong, but is this the same district that would not allow parents access to the lesson plans. I wonder why.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#10)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    Ed, What??? First, no I WOULDN'T, and I doubt any other genuine liberal would, be in favor of a curriculum that "said homosexuality is wrong based on religious teachings." Second, I doubt you've spent a second genuinely considering the difference between what you praise as "teaching" and what you deride as "indoctrination". The only subject that could be "taught" in a way you literally approve of is math. Every other subject, including science, would be indoctrinating according to you, I assume, since their subject matter is always a matter of opinion. Even science, where nothing is proved, but only remains not proven false.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    The only subject that could be "taught" in a way you literally approve of is math.
    There's more than a little indoctrination in mathematics. The solution is to teach science in science classes, art in art classes and religion in comparative religion classes. The fact that creation myths aren't literally true, or scientifically valid, doesn't make them meaningless. Of course, the real problem is the failure to teach science and the scientific method in schools. Too many people just don't know what science is and so believe that science and religion stand on equal terms. Education in America.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    Pigw: "Imposing this, I suppose under the excuse that the SM reflect some fundamental truth, isn’t different than religious minded folks imposing their brand of fundamental truth." What a lie. The scientific method is not a system of beliefs in the first place, unless you mean hypothesis, which is DEFINITELY not a belief. Religious 'minded' people? We're talking about judges, not just 'people.' Imposing any kind of fundamentalist belief (it is NOT truth) is exactly that -- the imposition of belief. That's illegal and unconstitutional in our public school system. As for 'science in science classes,' the sun doesn't circle the earth no matter WHICH class that is taught in. The idea tha science has to be segregated into science class is outright ridiculous. No longer use the Internet -- it's not in the Old Black Book, pigwiggle. And no cellphones for you, Monkey Boy. Or cars, video, electricity, plastics, bedsprings, and lose the polyester suits. Your God didn't make them grow on trees, so they're out. There is nothing more ILLEGITIMATE than medievalism in a modern high-tech culture.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#13)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:49 PM EST
    we are witnessing the end of "the Enlightenment"

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#14)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:50 PM EST
    allen writes "Too many people just don't know what science is and so believe that science and religion stand on equal terms." Michael Crichton makes these comments re what science is.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:50 PM EST
    Why does Michael Crichton's opinion matter? He's just another example of an American education. His comments about SETI, and specifically the Drake equation, are nothing short of bizarre.
    Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science.
    SETI is unquestionably a religion.
    I'm no fan of SETI, having my own peculiar opinion on the Fermi paradox, but I can tell the difference between SETI and religion. And I do know what the Drake equation means. The SETI-curious (those wanting a real understanding and not Michael Crichton's ignorance) might try: If the Universe Is Teeming with Aliens... Where Is Everybody? Fifty Solutions to Fermi's Paradox and the Problem of Extraterrestrial Life by Stephen Webb Michael Crichton and Judge Alexander Williams might have a lot in common.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#16)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:50 PM EST
    Allen - If you know all these things then you are truly a brillant man. Perhaps you will share with us just two bits of information needed to complete the Drake equation. The number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy. The number of planets per star capable of supporting life. Of course, you can't. You don't know these facts, so you can't complete the equation and you can't come to a scientific conclusion. Your conclusion is based on faith and untested observation. Just as doctors once bled patients. Just as doctors denied that germs existedd. Just as criminals had the wrong number of bumps on their heads. Just as ... a hundred other things. So don't try to sell me faith as science. My BS filter is too keen for that.

    Re: Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 12:58:51 PM EST
    Perhaps you will share with us just two bits of information needed to complete the Drake equation.
    There is nothing in the Drake equation that requires faith. All the "variables" are in principle measurable - and that's the key concept. The fact that we can't obtain values for all of them today does not make the equation meaningless. More to the point, the Drake equation says that we can determine the number of intelligent civilizations not simply by counting them, but by determining other factors that may (or may not) be easier than a direct count. That is the meaning of the Drake equation. Back in the first half of the 20th century quantum theory predicted quantum teleportation. But quantum physicists had no means to produce this. Einstein, calling quantum teleportation "spooky action at a distance", believed that quantum theory must be fundamentally wrong. Near the end of the 20th century quantum physicists produced teleportation in the lab. The fact that scientists couldn't test an equation when it was first developed didn't make the equation a matter of "faith". In time we will be able to determine reasonably accurate values for the variables of the Drake equation - as the recent discoveries of extra-solar planets should make clear.
    Just as doctors once bled patients. Just as doctors denied that germs existedd.
    It's ironic that you should pick doctors as examples. I just purchased two books on treating mental illness with nutritional supplements - a speculative area in psychiatry. Both books were written by doctors. One provides a scientific justification for his approach, including references to clinical studies. The other doesn't, relying instead on anecdotes to justify his approach. An M.D. degree is no guarantee of any real understanding of science.
    So don't try to sell me faith as science. My BS filter is too keen for that.
    Your BS filter is filtering out valid science. I'll concede that SETI activities are on the edges of science. They may or may not, depending on your opinion on their chances of success, be a waste of money, but they are valid science. I'd bet that you were educated in America, where science is taught as a mystical discipline that only its priests, men with PhDs and lab coats, can really understand. However you came about your ignorance, it's clear you don't know what science is - just as Michael Crichton doesn't understand the difference between science and religion and Judge Alexander Williams doesn't understand the difference between sexuality and religion.

    Activist Judge Imposes Religion on Schools | 17 comments (17 topical)