Welcome to Gaia! ::

Well, my question is why is it too far?

What place do Bibles and other religious materials have in a classroom, unless it is a class teaching religion and culture specifically? Having a classroom led prayer or sermon doesn't make much sense to me. That's reserved for mass, isn't it?

The "under God" in the pledge (not anthem) was actually added after it had already been in circulation, done by the Eisenhower administration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance#Addition_of_the_words_.22under_God.22

Lastly, how is it time-consuming? I fail to see the logic of how not teaching something takes up more time than teaching something. The status quo is that a fair number of religious beliefs are already being taught in schools, and Christianity gets its fair share in world and European history classes across the country. From what I gather, you seem to want more Christianity to be taught? Or that the other religious beliefs should be removed? Both seem like giving Christianity an unfair allotment of school time, whether or not they make up the majority of the school. If someone wants to learn more about a specific religion, they should talk to their preacher, parents (if they are of that faith), or find some other way to research. Public schools especially should not be aligning with any particular religion, in respect to the separation of Church and State outlined in the US Constitution.

The fact that the government can't set up its own church or tell churches what to do is exactly what separation of church and state is; by teaching only Christianity in public schools, that's an endorsement of one religion, which is the same as setting up a State-aligned church.

Also, that's why the Feds can't simply justify the passing of laws "because the Bible says so," as that would be another example of endorsing a particular religion.

Teaching Biblical texts is totally fine, but just whether or not it's fair to teach Christianity as the ONLY or the MAIN religion is the issue.

I think that you are right! I mean, at my school we didn't do any of that stuff, but I think it is important to experiance all religions, and I am sorry that some of the kids at my school didn't get to have that opportunity.

I think that we shouldn't teach religion at all in schools. Let the children either grow up learning a religion from their parents or leave them to make their own choice before they become young adults.

They should celebrate all holidays and all religions. I live in the U.S. and at my school the only thing that they teach is evelution which really ticks me off because i'm a christian and all. Schools should celebrate all holidays, it shows the different beleifs of different people.

A topic like this requires thought on my behalf because I am a Christian. However, my church doesn't celebrate Christmas as a religous holiday; more an excuse to get and give presents. I would say that the majority of the school should choose what to do, which does work to a point, but then I imagined what it would be like if I was in a country that didn't follow Christianity. Thus I feel that it should be up to the student to decide whether or not to participate, and if there's a religous holiday someone of another faith has to observe then let them. There would still be problems in that though. Children who choose not to participate may be shunned by the others or ridiculed. Something similar happened when I was in elementary school; there was a kid who was an athiest then and he was always teased. I can easily imagine something like that happening in my hypothetical situation and I wouldn't want that to happen.

As far as what religion is taught in the class room I'd say a variety would be best. In a situation like that they should be treated equality becauses if they're not then if someone did come to believe in Christianity then it really wouldn't be because they've come to feel that it's the truest of religions. Having people say why they believe what they believe would be very obvious to me-teachers included, but as before they couldn't impose beliefs on others. More like "this is what I believe, I don't agree with your beliefs, but they are yours. If you ever wish to talk about religion then by all means lets get started." or say how their religion helps them in different situations when a door is open.

Christainty was a... minor influence this pass school year for me in World Cultures. Why? The guy thought that we've learned enough about the "eon of Christanity" and we should learn religions we didn't know. The thing I was mad about was that we didn't learn much about Shintoism.

Religion, religion... man how I hate it so. It always brings up such ugly controversy. I suppose I'm a protestant Christian, though a non-practicing one. I never go to church. I've never read the bible. And I can assure you, if schools made it mandatory to learn about a certain religion in school, I'd riot (not that a graduate like me ever has to worry about that, but...).

The main thing, though, is this: you mustn't exclude minority religions from something just because they're indeed the minority. For that one person in here who disagreed with the separation of church and state, let me just say that in this case, the state would overpower church: "Majority rules, BUT the minority has rights." The rights of the minorities would make what's happening today: what conservatives call "the bane of America." I never knew that the freedom of religion was "destroying" America. What an interesting psyche these conservatives have, no?

In my opinion, schools should accommodate for either ALL religious needs or NONE AT ALL. If there are Christians, let there be a Christmas pageant. Be there Jews, give them Chanukah activities. And so on and so forth with each religion. Down to the last student if you have to. And if you ain't willing to do that, then there shouldn't be s**t. I'm not saying that other students should be forced to learn about another's religion. But there should at LEAST be accommodations for the minorities.

On a sidenote about the whole evolution vs. creationism thing... well, evolution really has more of a "right" to be taught in a science class. Although this 'theory' is stated to be not proven entirely true, evolution has much more evidence to support its scientific relevance than there is, ever has been, or ever will be for creationism. Bottom line is, evolution should be taught in science class. If you want to learn creationism, go to your damn church for crying out loud... for that is the only place it should ever be taught, and never in schools.