> I guess the whole point of the " is to realize that those
> who cried from
> the rooftops "separation of church and state" (i.e. ACLU,
> and many
> humanists who brought lawsuits (stone v. gram)) when
> religious symbols or
> references were present in the classroom have now in turn
> had their
> religious humanism established and propogated. This is why
> the American
> humaist association voted to repeal their 501c3 religious
> tax exempt
> status. This is why Paul Kurtz wrote Eupraxophy. This is
> why the AHA is
> put in a quandry. If american public schools by law are
> supposed to be
> religion free, then why is the secular version of humanism
> so blatently
> present?
The short answer is that the secular version of humanism is
also the "lowest common denominator" form of theistic
humanism, as long as there is no specific denial of the
existence of deities, and no specific denial of deities as a
possible source of ethical systems.
Let me expand this idea a little.
Proposition 1. - Schools feel compelled to teach some form
of ethical system to students, perhaps for no better reason
than to promote their concept of "good" behaviour in the
classroom and elsewhere in the school. No doubt, some
teachers have noticed that some children are not learning
ethics anywhere else.
Proposition 2. - The school's intention in teaching ethics
is to improve children's behaviour toward other people and
property, regardless of any individual child's alliegence to
any particular deity.
Proposition 3. - If a school with a culturally and
socio-economically diverse student body - just about all
public schools these days - is to teach an ethical system to
their students, then it should do this in a way that is
minimally offensive to students and their parents.
On that basis, is there any incentive for such a school
teach a specifically Christian ethical system? No, because
some Muslim children and their parents would be offended.
So, can such a school teach a specifically Muslim ethical
system? No, because some Christian children and their
parents would be offended. Can this school teach a
specifically atheistic ethical system? No, because some
Christian and Muslim children and their parents would be
offended.
So, what DO they teach? They teach a ethical system that
concentrates on people, not deities (or even the absence of
deities). They teach an ethical system that is
uncontroversial in what it *affirms* regarding correct
attitudes and behaviour towards other people and their
property. Let's face it - they teach a "dumbed down" ethical
system that probably inspires no one and challenges no one!
Intrinsic to this, they teach an ethical system that doesn't
refer back to a supreme being for its ultimate authority.
(As I understand it, your First Amendment allows state
schools to ignore the issue of a supreme being, but not to
give preference to God over Allah, or vice versa.) And I
understand why many people who strongly believe in a supreme
being as the source of ethics would find this offensive. On
the other hand, let me ask you to consider the following:
If a child of Christian (or atheist) parents was taught that
Allah, via the Koran, is the ultimate source of all ethics,
would the parents and/or the child find this more or less
offensive than if the ultimate source of all ethics was left
open in the classroom?
Conversely, if a child of Islamic (or atheist) parents was
taught that God, via the Bible, is the ultimate source of
all ethics, would the parents and/or the child find this
more or less offensive than if the ultimate source of all
ethics was left open in the classroom?
Further, if a child of Christian or Islamic parents was
taught that there is NO ultimate source of all ethics, would
the parents and/or the child find this more or less
offensive than if the ultimate source of all ethics was left
open in the classroom?
Another point I wish to make is that every religion has its
humanist teachings, i.e. those teachings that define the
"best" way of relating to humans.
I don't see how you can claim that, just because a school
curriculum doesn't positively affirm your chosen deity to
the exclusion of all others, that your deity is thereby
denied. Ignored, yes - but not denied.
> This whole issue of humanism being watered down in the
> schools is
> utterly false as a matter of factual information.
Are you claiming that the humanism presented in schools is
specifically atheistic, rather than just non-theocentric? Or
do you consider anything not specifically theocentric to be
atheistic by definition?
> So then I ask the question,"What can the theistic sunday
> schools do to compete with public education?" I submitt to
> you ladies and gents, not a damn thing.
Perhaps, in their own interests, theistic Sunday schools
might try to complement public education, rather than
compete with it?
> Good or Bad?--I don't know.
I do. GOOD! :-) By the way, I wouldn't blame your First
Amendment for this state of affairs. Australia has no
mandated separation of church and state, and public schools
in Australia are at least as secularly humanist as those in
the USA.
> P.S.
> (someone previously tried to tell me that the 501c3 is
> for not-for-profit organizations. This is all well and
> good but the AHA considers themselves to be a religious
> organization. )
Perhaps they take a broader view of "religious" that that
offered by the dictionaries with which I am familiar
(Websters and the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, to name
just two.)
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> Education is the most powerful ally of Humanism, and every
> American public school is a school of Humanism. What can
> the theistic Sunday Schools, meeting for an hour once a
> week,and teaching only a fraction of the children do to
> stem the tide of a five-day program of Humanistic
> teaching?
> Charles
> Francis Potter
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
--RegardsDerek
-----------------------------------------------------| Derek McLarnen | dmclarne@pcug.org.au || Melba ACT | derek.mclarnen@telstra.com.au || Australia | | -----------------------------------------------------