| How Judges Rip Up
Faith by Jen Shroder
6/9/04 Repost or quote at will
The LAW1
guarantees the right of every person to freely choose his own course
in religious teaching, free of any compulsion from the state [public
schools]. Therefore, HOW is the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals allowing
such practices as requiring students to pretend they are
witches and sorcerers, create poetic chants5, pretend they "become
Muslim", memorize and recite prayers of worship to Allah6, fast for
Ramadan and strive to reach Mecca in games?
The Courts have
developed a "test" which can be used to allow practices of religion if
practices are found to have a "secular purpose."2
So let's look at this "secular purpose."
Secular purpose: California’s unrevised State Standards3
assert:
"The skills involved in critical thinking enable students to
question the validity and meaning of what they read, hear, think, and
believe. Critical thinking requires a questioning mind and a skeptical
withholding of assent about the truth of a statement until it can be
critically evaluated. While such skills are developed through everyday
living as well as by schooling, the history–social science classroom
is an especially appropriate setting for developing such skills."
The "history-social science classroom" includes to a great extent,
religion. Under these "critical thinking" guidelines, to teach
religion as secular, or "neutral" – without belief or disbelief,
cannot be taught with "critical thinking" for it denies it’s own
definition of "secular" if applied to religious beliefs. Secular "critical
thinking" directs an impressionable child to judge based on secular
reasoning. Secular reasoning is devoid of faith, it is atheistic by
nature impeded by "critical thinking" when approaching religion.
Justice demands religion cannot be measured by man’s objective
(atheist) reasoning as it is a matter of faith. Therefore, objective
secular standards cannot be the guide to "teach" religious
beliefs without
prejudice, to do so completely destroys a child’s right to religious freedom.
The Courts have followed this tactic and have ruled "practicing
religion" is to be determined by a "reasonable observer." Reasonable
by whose standards? A secular humanist's? This line of thinking is in
direct opposition of the right of every person to freely choose his
own course1, not the
Court's idea of a secular "reasonable observer" or a trumped up
humanist
civil rights
"denomination" parading around as religious, currently a
successful ploy of humanists. 4
“History-Social Science Framework for
California Public Schools:” (pg 24)
“This
framework proposes that critical thinking skills be included at
every grade level.
Students should learn to detect bias in print and visual media; to
recognize illogical thinking; to guard against propaganda; to avoid
stereotyping of group members; to reach conclusions based on solid
evidence; and to think critically, creatively, and rationally. These
skills are to be taught within the context of a curriculum that
offers numerous opportunities to explore examples of sound reasoning
and examples of the opposite.
The
“sound reasoning” as determined by public school officials favoring
secular humanism, proved to denigrate Christianity! The Framework states:
 |
“To
detect bias in print” |
The
Houghton Mifflin textbook7 is loaded with previously undetected bias.
Obviously public school is incapable of discernment.
|
“To
recognize illogical thinking” |
As
determined by who? Teachers insist Islam cannot be taught without
induction practices, yet teach American history stripped of it’s
Christian foundation? Public school can’t recognize its own
“illogical thinking.”
|
“To
reach conclusions based on solid evidence” |
This
is the opener to attack faith. (We walk by faith not by sight).
|
“To
guard against propaganda” |
Houghton Mifflin’s textbooks should be used in courses as examples of
propaganda, not history.
|
“To
think critically, creatively, and rationally.” |
Our children already do that.
Children are able to make up their own minds if you give them FACTS
and not public school programming. “Critical thinking” only gives
teachers and textbooks the opportunity to lead them in whatever
direction their ideology and secular philosophy dictates.
Christians walk by faith not by sight. To place all of the above
under "secular" (devoid of faith) reasoning is a blatant assault on
religion through an atheist lens.
Parents are now forced to teach their children to apply these
"critical thinking" skills to anything that teachers "teach" them.
Teachers have regretfully lost respect as students are on guard not to
accept much of what they teach, putting children in the middle of a
battle where everyone loses.
The word “teach” means to sway a child to conform to a teacher's
way of thinking, therefore teachers need to be limited to FACTS. The
entity of “public school” revoltingly has deemed itself to be a god,
equipped to program our children how to think.
This “wolf in critical thinking” has been
ravaging our children for years. The outcry over the editing of our
Pledge of Allegiance proved some of us still remember what our nation
was founded on, but if we continue to teach our children untruths and
“critical thinking,” what made this country great will be gone. As
the atheist in our local paper stated about omission of God from the
pledge,
“America isn’t ready for it yet. We tried too much too quickly.”
Atheists working against America and what she
stands for have been slowly and methodically dismantling our precious
heritage and openly admit their agenda. Will we continue to
allow others to “get us ready for it?”
****
Jen Shroder is founder of BlessedCause.org
She has appeared on Fox News and is quoted in numerous articles
including Associated Press, USA Today, WND, and Village Voice. She has
just completed a semester of paralegal training (4.0 GPA) and is
preparing to file a lawsuit pro per (on her own) over the loss of her
children's religious freedom.
1. Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203
2. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602. "Secular purpose"
is one of three points in a "test."
3.Calif. State Standards 2002 before revision
http://www.blessedcause.org/CriticalWolf.htm
4. Clinton's 35 "religious" groups scrutinized
http://www.blessedcause.org/proof/Clinton's%2035%20religious%20groups.htm
5. Brown v. Woodland School Dist., 27 F.3d 1373;
6. Eklund v. Byron School Dist., large PDF at
http://www.blessedcause.org/protest/Islam%20Ruling%2012-05-03.pdf
7. Houghton Mifflin Textbook Exposed
http://www.blessedcause.org/proof/Hard%20Proof%20Index.htm
BACK TO BLESSEDCAUSE
HOME |
