just curious, what regions of china are we talking about? in the rural regions they relied on rationing (b/c before that, all they had was an agrarian life anyway, no stores going back to the dawn of time). the cities have always had stores. i mean, ive been interested in china for a long time, and every book ive read about the cultural revolution mentioned markets, shops, you name it, and that was during the peak of Mao's Cult. These were all firsthand accounts too. The CR was shitty, as is Maoism, but the only parts of China that underdeveloped were the rural parts, and theyre just now starting to improve for the first time since, well, the dawn of Chinese civilization.

im not gonna touch this religion thing. you bring up christianity, but when was China EVER christian? they banned it supposedly after the Taiping Rebellion in the early 1800s, but missionaries were able to make it back in once the Quing fell. Then came the Nationalists, they never did anything about it. Then came Mao, we know what happened there. You can thank him for the current repression.

China's a tough nut to crack. On one hand, Mao was a bastard. On another hand, their current success and position to possibly move into superpower status can be attributed to Xiaoping, a man who I see as an economic genius and a political tyrant. Socialist modernization has finally brought back at least some success to a country which used to be the center of civilization. do i like their tactics? id prefer that they have better labor practices and environmental controlls (then again, they seems to care more about emissions than we do!), and i despise them for continuing the dictatorship and repression of democracy. Basically, if theyd could give up the old authoritarian comm. gov. charade, have free elections, stay the course economically, improve work conditions, and balance out this trade/currency issue, they could be the next superpower.

oppressive tax burden? do we live in the same country/planet?

and LoneSnark, dont be silly, everyone knows only the British can fly!

did this guy just advocate mandatory, christian school prayer? i mean, im all for optional prayer in school to whatever god you worship, but come on, thats silly.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 5:47 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 5:42:47 PM

Quote :

"And, no I don't think that Christianity should be put on the same footing as every other religion in this country. Most people here are Christian"

point taken, it is the most common religion

Quote :

"nd many of us would like for our children to be taught a curriculum which reflect our own heritage as special."

and thats exactly why my parents took my to sunday school and made sure i did my devotionals, although i'm kind of scared by your use of "heritage"

Quote :

"We pay tons of money in this country for an education, that by it's silence on the issue of Christianity, ultimately argues that Chirstianity is not need to understand world events or the origin of life."

i think it actually argues that religion isnt something that should be taught in government schools
that seperation of church and state thing
but i dont think is completely left out like you think. in my public education there were often discussions on religion, and in world history the bible was used a lot. in third grade i learned about hanukkah and in elementary school i sang christmas and hanukkah songs in music class. in other classes i heard discussions on islam and in one civics class a mormon girl explained her relgion to me.

Quote :

"Parents not government should decide what is and is not taught in school. Now, are those topics controversial? Well duh. Does everybody believe what I do? Of course not, present company obvious counterexamples. My point is simply that if I as a Christian want my child to be taught an exclusively Christian education then I am not free to do so."

you can homeschool your children or get togethor with other parents and start a school.

Quote :

"Christianity is special in this country, we ought to be free to make it such in the schools. "

you don't want christianity to be free, you want it to be mandated. thats what we all have problems with. i know both woodfoot and i are christians and we want christianity to be free

Quote :

"Besides that, the only solution that would placate me would be to simply eradicate the public schools altogether. That was the essence of my original point, missed by most of you I guess. If we did not have public schools ( smaller government ) then we would not be at the moment debating on wether or not God should be allowed in education."

seriously? i dont even know how to respond to that

12/12/2005 5:51:05 PM

AMERICAN HERITAGE FIRST

HERITAGE NOT HATE

WHITE POW...err, nevermind

seriously, im christian, but i know that if they mandated it anywhere, it would be just as useless as spanish explorers converting native americans by reading them the bible in castillian.



[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 5:58 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 5:53:06 PM

sounds like.........fascism!

one extreme to the next is the way to go!

12/12/2005 6:20:04 PM

sounds like.........a double post!


[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 6:22 PM. Reason : !!!!!]

12/12/2005 6:22:11 PM

Quote :

"just curious, what regions of china are we talking about? in the rural regions they relied on rationing (b/c before that, all they had was an agrarian life anyway, no stores going back to the dawn of time). the cities have always had stores. i mean, ive been interested in china for a long time, and every book ive read about the cultural revolution mentioned markets, shops, you name it, and that was during the peak of Mao's Cult. These were all firsthand accounts too. The CR was shitty, as is Maoism, but the only parts of China that underdeveloped were the rural parts, and theyre just now starting to improve for the first time since, well, the dawn of Chinese civilization. "

Kwongtong province. (Cantonese spelling). I'm not suggesting the all of china was under a ration system (although I don't believe I'm wrong to suggest they have become more capitalist in general of late), all I can speak for is the part my wife's family is from. When my motherinlaw was pregnant with my wife's older sister(26yrs old now) she did not have enough food on her own ration. Fortunately, another family member was able to share her ration with my motherinlaw. Afterthat, they immigrated to Hong Kong and all the subsequent children were born under better nutritional circumstances.

Quote :

"im not gonna touch this religion thing. you bring up christianity, but when was China EVER christian? they banned it supposedly after the Taiping Rebellion in the early 1800s, but missionaries were able to make it back in once the Quing fell. Then came the Nationalists, they never did anything about it. Then came Mao, we know what happened there. You can thank him for the current repression."

I'm not suggesting China was a Christian nation, although there are many stories that seem to indicate that missionaries reached China in the first few centuries,... not the point. I was merely pointing to China as an example of a nearly secular country that had sucessfully implemented the seperation of church and state to it's logical end. I thought it might be enlightening to examine how Christians are treated in such a system.

Quote :

"China's a tough nut to crack. On one hand, Mao was a bastard. On another hand, their current success and position to possibly move into superpower status can be attributed to Xiaoping, a man who I see as an economic genius and a political tyrant. Socialist modernization has finally brought back at least some success to a country which used to be the center of civilization. do i like their tactics? id prefer that they have better labor practices and environmental controlls (then again, they seems to care more about emissions than we do!), and i despise them for continuing the dictatorship and repression of democracy. Basically, if theyd could give up the old authoritarian comm. gov. charade, have free elections, stay the course economically, improve work conditions, and balance out this trade/currency issue, they could be the next superpower. "

Generally I agree with you here, the free market will work most everywhere it's tried. Enviromentally, though I sincerely doubt you're right on that, I leave that argument to Lonesnark if it's worth having, the other messed up thing about China is that there is little regulation of food-products. Some really nasty stuff gets passed off as food... my wife was telling me about these eggs people were selling that were not eggs, rather some kind of plastic. Scams like that happen all the time, think twice before you buy food from China.

Quote :

"oppressive tax burden? do we live in the same country/planet?"

You don't think working 5-6 months of the year for the government is a bit much? Fine, but I'd like to keep more of my money. Well, I am speaking about the average condition of my life, not my current condition, I am but a lowly graduate student at the moment. As such I am not yet taxed to heavily.

12/12/2005 8:24:41 PM

Quote :

"Enviromentally, though I sincerely doubt you're right on that"

what part am i wrong on? it is a well-known fact that China has has trouble with hazardous waste. Just last month there was a story on a very dangerous secretion of chemicals into a river which flowed into Russia. Chinese factories are notoriously clumsy with such hazards. They have, however, shown interest at maintaining and possibly reducing emissions. i read all of this in the economist (this months issue is very good, btw, and you could learn alot about the chinese situation by reading it). way to try to pass the argument off to the guy whos notorious for arguing industry production over safety. this most recent accident shows that china's irresponsibility could have consequences which could harm their own water supply as well as that of other neighbors like russia. you talk about the dangers of hazardous foods, yet deny that hazardous waste is a problem (if thats what youre getting at with the afformentioned quote, im assuming that since you stoof up for ann "rape the earth" coulter in another thread).

and im making less than you right now and doing just fine on rent and food. we could afford to lessen taxes, yes. we can start by eliminating useless projects like "the bridge to nowhere" and SDI, not helpful programs like the EPA, FDA, etc.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 8:40 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 8:37:37 PM

yes

lets allow everyone to run off all willy nilly and teach their kids whatever they want, with not standards or even requirements (why keep paying for education departments if we don't have schools?)

yes, i enjoyed America being dominant in the world
but you're right, fuck all that, we needs us some religious (i mean Christian) freedom

you're exactly why I thank God we live in a country where you don't have religion in the public schools

as guth said, i appreciate the freedoms we have to worship and learn about our faith on our own terms

i'd hate to force my beliefs on anyone, and i'd hate to have someone elses beliefs forced on me or my children

but hey, i guess i'm just not a close-minded fool

12/12/2005 8:46:53 PM

btw mathman, are you a student at NCSU?

if so, stfu

i don't want to pay for a zealot like you to go to school

12/12/2005 8:48:12 PM

and to add to that


[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 8:54 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 8:54:41 PM

Quote :

"mathman, you're saying this like it's a good thing. You want CHRISTIAN prayer, the judeo-christian ten commandments, etc, correct? Would you be equally ok with the tenets of the satanist faith posted in schools and the supreme court? please think logically"

Yes, I want my child to be exposed to the tenets of the Christian faith.
Is this so shocking? I want my child to learn the truth in school, gee what a concept.
The very foundation of our system of government is inherently Judeo-Christian. Our rights are not given to us by the state, but rather endowed to us by The Creator. This is why our constitution goes to such great lengths to protect the autonomy of an individual. The langauge of the constitution, the letters between the framers of the constitution, and historical records back my claim. The authors of our constitution were by in large Christians, to suggest that God and Christian morality was not woven into the fabric of our country is nothing but historical revisionism. The issue was to make sure that another church-state was not created. Remember that it was the state not the church that corrupted the church in the first place. What the framers of the constitution were trying to insure is that they would be free to pursue Christian religion, without interference from the goverment. Don't believe me, did you know that there was a time in this country when scripture would be used to argue before congress? In short, no particular denomination could be elevated to operate as the government. So, no I would not be ok "with the the tenets of the satanist faith posted in schools and the supreme court?". Why, because they contradict the basis of our government, and they threaten the very foundation of what makes our soceity worthwhile. We have begun to deny the foundation of what has made this country great, it is truly sad that we have forgotten our true history in place of some secular cynicism.

Anyway, I reject the notion that all religions can be taught in an equitable fashion in public schools.
Bias is inevitable. That is why I advocate one of the following two options:

1. Christian education returning to the public schools
2. No public schools, so we avoid the whole debate and improve education to boot.

12/12/2005 8:57:12 PM

or

send your kid to a private school and avoid the war over you wanting to force this on everyone b/c you want it for yourself.



heres why i dont want more private schools: b/c eventually there will be one run by scientologists, and NOONE should be subjected to that.

V w0rd. im a deist. im tired of people thinking they were evangelicals, when that movement didnt exist till the 1800s.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 9:04 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 8:58:26 PM

hows this sound to you?

Quote :

"Yes, I want my child to be exposed to the tenets of the Muslim faith. Is this so shocking? I want my child to learn the truth in school, gee what a concept."

Quote :

"The authors of our constitution were by in large Christians, to suggest that God and Christian morality was not woven into the fabric of our country is nothing but historical revisionism."

um... no
they were diests
there is a very huge difference

i mean are you trying to say things that make you lose credibility?


[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 9:05 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 9:03:17 PM

Wasn't he the Vice-President at the time of the Boxer Rebellion?

12/12/2005 9:07:55 PM

Quote :

"you talk about the dangers of hazardous foods, yet deny that hazardous waste is a problem (if thats what youre getting at with the afformentioned quote, im assuming that since you stoof up for ann "rape the earth" coulter in another thread)."

didn't mean to say hazardous waste is not a problem. I never said the Coulter was correct about everything, obviously part of what she says is just for the shock value and mainly to make liberals angry. For me the question is just, why her, there are lots of people with equally inflamatory comments, whatever.

12/12/2005 9:09:42 PM

^^nope, he was still gov. of NY at the time, didnt get sworn in till 1901.

^yes, id venture to say i like savage even less.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 9:11 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 9:11:21 PM

Quote :

"Yes, I want my child to be exposed to the tenets of the Christian faith. "

SO TAKE THEM TO CHURCH AND GIVE THEM DEVOTIONALS

FUCKING HELL MAN

I'VE NEVER DONATED MONEY TO A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION

BUT YOUR DUMB ASS MAY INSPIRE ME TO SEND SOME MONEY TO THE ACLU

12/12/2005 9:16:50 PM

^^just checking

12/12/2005 9:17:54 PM

ive been ignored twice

12/12/2005 9:25:36 PM

because you keep your cool and don't use profanity

12/12/2005 9:30:06 PM

YOU HAVE TO TYPE LIKE THIS TO GET NOTICED

12/12/2005 9:35:24 PM

ok hows this,

THE FOUNDING FATHERS WEREN'T CHRISTIANS
DON'T FOOL YOURSELF SAYING YOU WANT FREEDOM, THATS NOT WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING. YOU WANT TO MANDATE CHRISTIANITY.

12/12/2005 9:37:22 PM

Guth, hold your horses, I'm gettin to you.

Quote :

"point taken, it is the most common religion... and thats exactly why my parents took my to sunday school and made sure i did my devotionals, although i'm kind of scared by your use of "heritage"... i think it actually argues that religion isnt something that should be taught in government schools that seperation of church and state thing but i dont think is completely left out like you think. in my public education there were often discussions on religion, and in world history the bible was used a lot. in third grade i learned about hanukkah and in elementary school i sang christmas and hanukkah songs in music class. in other classes i heard discussions on islam and in one civics class a mormon girl explained her relgion to me. you can homeschool your children or get togethor with other parents and start a school."

I'm glad your public school experience was not completely devoid of Christianity. But, I don't think that the current trend in this country is towards allowing teachers to openly teach about Christianity in the public schools.

Frankly, I think the seperation of church and state is an impossibility. It is just not possible, nature abhors a vacuum and you cannot just teach every subject from all viewpoints. Life is just to short. What happens then is that History, science, literature,... everything is taught in as much as is possible without reference to religion. The consequence of this is to endorse secularism, but I argue that no such demarcation can be made. History, without the instructive lense of the Christian worldview, is vain. Likewise in my view all subjects should be viewed in the purview and guidance of the Giver of all Wisdom. It is absurd to me to suggest that we can have an education that simulaneously treats the the oppinions of all world religions simultaneously. More often than not then the result is to endorse an education which is free from spiritual dicussion of "nonspiritual" subjects (modulo religion and math). I argue that this absense of the spiritual is itself the manifest endorsement of secularism in many of our public schools.

Now if you don't think that the goal of many educators is to eradicate the Christian worldview, then you might take a look at this

http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle.cfm?id=11298

Quote :

"you don't want christianity to be free, you want it to be mandated. thats what we all have problems with. i know both woodfoot and i are christians and we want christianity to be free"

I don't want Christianity mandated, people should be free to choose. I just don't think that saying you have to pay taxes to fund secular public schools is very "free" towards Christianity. Well, for that matter any organized religion. Pragmatically speaking, the solution is clear for now. I'll homeschool my kids no matter the cost, or if I can find a suitable Christian schoold I'll look into that. It's outrageous that I still have to pay the government to indoctrinate others in the secular worldview after I have made the beforementioned sacrifice.

12/12/2005 9:55:19 PM

how can you be free to chose if you are being taught it in schools

are you just posting one thing at a time and not thinking it through?



that link is hilarious
BJU has a textbook
ahahahaha
thats hilarious

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 10:07 PM. Reason : haha at bju]

12/12/2005 10:05:02 PM

so if a gov. does not promote your religion, you dont want to pay taxes. by not favoring any religion, this gov. is hostile towards your religion. thats like saying that since i dont have a favorite NFL team, I'm hostile towards the Dallas Cowboys.

wait, if the public schools are so horrible and hostile towards christianity, then why are you attending one?

Quote :

"The textbook they're not using, Physics for Christian Schools from Bob Jones University (BJU) Press, teaches all the same lessons, only more of them and in more detail."

im sorry, but i dont think anyone should be subjected to a textbook written by people who put at 10pm curfew on 20-something year olds and restrict their dating. yeah, THATS really free.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 10:15 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 10:13:16 PM

^thats the type of Christianity that I don't mind oppressing

12/12/2005 10:20:28 PM

YOU DO REALIZE YOU ARE LIKE A CHIRISTAN VERSION OF THOSE WHACK-JOB MUSLIMS THAT KEEP THE MIDDLE EAST A REGION THAT CANNOT ADVANCE, RIGHT, YOU REALIZE THIS DON'T YOU?

12/12/2005 10:21:58 PM

NO I DID NOT. BUT STFU BECAUSE IM TYPING IN CAPS AND I MUST BE RIGHT.

12/12/2005 10:26:16 PM

^^^^^I meant free to choose Christianity, I was not intending any inference to the schools, just to soceity at large. For example, I don't think citizenship should be predicated on confessing Christ.

On the other hand I don't think I should have to pay thousands of dollars to misinform my kid, or somebody elses kid.

Certainly some of them were diests but many more were Christians, and I doubt many of you feel as strongly about the postive role of Christianity in government as did some of those deists. For example,

http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=121

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 10:32 PM. Reason : ^^^^^]

12/12/2005 10:32:09 PM

um, what is your kid being misinformed of?

12/12/2005 10:33:39 PM

WELL I SHOULD HAVE TRIED THIS HOURS AGO

12/12/2005 10:34:35 PM

Quote :

"i don't want to pay for a zealot like you to go to school"

I'm honored that you consider me zealous. But don't worry, I work to stay here. No work, no school.

Quote :

"wait, if the public schools are so horrible and hostile towards christianity, then why are you attending one?"

I study math, if I studied something more subjective then I would be somewhere else.

Quote :

"um, what is your kid being misinformed of?"

American history, especially the testimonials of how God has blessed many Christians throughout our
history. Of course there's more, but I'l stop there for now.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 10:42 PM. Reason : I emphasize this is a hypothetical kid at the moment]

12/12/2005 10:41:21 PM

soooo....why do the testimonials of these people matter? does not being taught about them in the public schools harm anyone? i mean, what harm is done by sending your kid to a public school that does not advocate any religion, and then telling him this stuff at home?

i dont think telling someone "john adams really liked jesus" is going to improve anyone's education. this is why we have, you know, church.

not to mention what i see as the REAL benefit of the public schools: it forces you to interact with all kinds of people in all kinds of situations. news flash: not everyone believes what you believe, and they never are. your kid is going to have to get out on his own some day and live amongst people who dont like what you believe in or just dont care what you believe in. for your kid to be successful in ANY field, they will have to know how to interact with everyone, from outstanding christians to godless heathen riff-raff.

unless you send your kid to a school like BJU or force them to be a monk. and forcing religion down your kids throat and not letting them decide their course for education will only make them rebel. all my friends from private school ended up more fucked up than i did *shrug*.



[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 10:53 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 10:52:58 PM

man, its not a shock that you're a hypocrite

OPRESSIVE TAX BURDEN
(THAT I ATTEND)

ps, i didn't go to a public university

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 11:05 PM. Reason : Campbell what what]

12/12/2005 11:04:34 PM

I wouldn't force a kid to go to BJU, nothing wrong with it, I just think by college people should be free to make up there own minds because they ought to behave as adults.

As far as socialization goes, I'm not going to keep them from having friends, I just won't let them have bad friends. I hope you'll do the same, peer pressure is not usually a positive thing for kids. And I am by no means suggesting that I will isolate them from all influence of the outside world, I just will not let wrong philosophies go unadressed in as much as I can do that. Clearly, this is not something that can be realized entirely, rather I will attempt to explain as best I can what I believe and why I believe it, then allow them to extrapolate to issues as they confront them in life.

Hey, wait a minute, none of you are at all concerned about what is happening in California to Christian schools? Let me post the article here for the lazy among you:

Strange standards
EDUCATION: The University of California system is trying to force Christian schools to use the same textbooks that lower-scoring public-school students use. An association of Christian schools is fighting back | by Lynn Vincent

MURIETTA, Calif.— It's a mid-October test day in Hao Tiet's physics classroom at Calvary Chapel Christian School (CCCS) in Murietta. Ubiquitous southern California sunshine beams through the windows as his 12 students, most clad in board shorts and flip-flops, weigh in on whether they're ready.

"Let's do this," says one boy, whipping his bangs out of his eyes with an expert jerk of the chin.

"Let's not do this," says another boy in a brown surf-logo hoody. "Let's delay!"

Some students watch carefully as Mr. Tiet sketches dry-erase vectors on a whiteboard and calls out review questions on Newton's First Law of Motion. Others scour their textbook, Prentice Hall's Conceptual Physics (2002), willing last-minute scraps of data to cling to their brains.

Topics in the textbook they're using would give most people the willies: rotational mechanics, thermodynamics, special relativity, nuclear fission and fusion. The textbook they're not using, Physics for Christian Schools from Bob Jones University (BJU) Press, teaches all the same lessons, only more of them and in more detail. But CCCS no longer can teach physics using the BJU text. Nor can any Christian school in California if it wants to keep its students academically eligible for admission into the University of California system.

The university's Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools claims that private-school students who take physics courses based on the BJU text "may not be well prepared for success" at its schools. The same goes for courses and textbooks that approach four other disciplines—history, government, literature, and biology—from a Christian perspective.

Now, CCCS, the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI), and several parents are fighting back. The group in August filed suit alleging that the university's actions violate their 14th Amendment right to equal protection under the law, as well as First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, religion, and association.

The University of California (UC) on Oct. 28 filed a motion to dismiss the case, saying that "most of Plaintiff's federal constitutional claims fail as a matter of law."

What plaintiffs claim, specifically, is that the California state university system is mounting a campaign to "methodically and ominously" exclude courses with a Christian viewpoint from its "a-g requirements," a group of core studies high-school students must complete in order to gain admission. The university is unlawfully expanding its own authority, ACSI and CCCS claim, pressing "onward from deciding admissions guidelines to determining what viewpoints may and may not be taught in secondary school classrooms, which books may and may not be used, and what students with the same test scores are and are not eligible for admission."

As evidence, plaintiffs cite an incident in October 2004, when CCCS submitted for approval a course called "Christianity's Influence on American History." The course featured a widely used college history textbook, but added the content of a BJU text with a Christian viewpoint. Five days later, the University of California rejected the course. "'Christianity's Influence'" was "too narrow/too specialized," its form letter read, teaching a viewpoint "not consistent with empirical historical knowledge generally accepted in the collegiate community."

Meanwhile, the University of California has approved a long list of other specialized history courses, such as "Western Civilization: The Jewish Experience" and "American Popular Culture," as well as narrow courses—including "Feminist Issues Throughout U.S. History and Race" and "Class and Gender in Modern America"—whose content may be "accepted in the collegiate community" but scarcely anywhere else.

The university also nixed the proposed CCCS course "Christianity and Morality in American Literature," which used a textbook from A Beka, one of the two largest Christian publishers, along with BJU Press. The course outline adds a conservative Christian viewpoint to a lengthy selection of American lit standards, including Benet, Sandburg, Twain, Poe, Hawthorne, and Wilder, most of whom struggled with Christianity or rejected it outright. Still, the state school system said the course lacked "a non-biased approach," and "insufficient academic/theoretical content."

The university "routinely approves courses that add viewpoints such as a non-Christian religion, feminism, or a political viewpoint," said Robert H. Tyler, an attorney with Advocates for Faith & Freedom in Temecula, Calif., who is co-counsel for the plaintiffs. "But the university disapproves courses that add viewpoints based on conservative Christianity." The university told CCCS that if it removed scripture verses and theological prefaces opening each chapter of Physics for Christian Schools, the textbook would be acceptable.

Particularly ironic, said Wendell Bird, an Atlanta-based business attorney and co-counsel for ACSI, is the university's assertion that students taking rejected courses "may not be well prepared" for state university success. On the Stanford Achievement Test in spring 2005, students from ACSI-member schools outscored students from public and private schools by 18 to 26 percentile points, depending on grade and subject matter, according to Harcourt Assessment Services.

"Why is UC telling ACSI schools to do what public schools are doing when standardized testing data show better-educated students coming from ACSI?" Mr. Bird said.

In its motion to dismiss, the university says it is "not stopping Plaintiffs from teaching or studying anything. . . . [A]lthough the University does not accept every high school class as college preparatory, it also does not penalize students for taking additional classes that are not so accepted."

But Mr. Bird points out that with California's growing exclusion of Christian courses, ACSI students—and parents of state residents whose tax dollars support the university—face an extra burden when applying for admission. Students electing to take classes UC has rejected would either have to take extra, UC-approved courses, or be admitted to the university "by exception" to the school's standard policies.

After ACSI and Calvary Chapel Christian School filed suit in August, some mainstream media quickly painted the case as the Scopes trial revisited. CNN Headline News filled television screens nationwide Aug. 27 with a huge graphic: "Creationism Suit." That same day, David Rosenzweig of the Los Angeles Times cast the suit against the backdrop of the "mixing of science and religion," and wrote that "University of California admissions officials have been accused in a federal civil rights lawsuit of discriminating against high schools that teach creationism and other conservative Christian viewpoints."

"This is not a creationism case," said Mr. Bird. "This is a case about all major subject areas in high school, where the state of California has taken it upon itself to reject textbooks and courses because of Christian content." Mr. Bird noted that, to his knowledge, no other states practices similar censorship.

While the majority of school parents support the school's legal action, the case has caused some disruption. In the category of "minor annoyance," Superintendent Des Starr said he has received a smattering of postcards and e-mails from as far away as Kansas, accusing him of being backward and small-minded. Of more serious concern have been parents who, learning of UC's disapproval of proposed courses, worried about their children's university eligibility.

"They've said, 'Well what are we going to do now? What if we want our kids to go to UC schools?'" Mr. Starr said.

He has had to reassure parents that the school is not using the disapproved courses or textbooks, in order to ensure students remain fully eligible for admission. That hampers the school from fulfilling its mission, he said: not simply to teach academic subjects, but to teach a Christian worldview.

"We teach to the whole child, to that spirit that may be lying dormant within them," he said. "We want them to understand that Christ upholds the universe and we want that thinking to become second nature to them."

For the University of California, that may be precisely the problem. A hearing on the university's motion to dismiss is set for Dec. 12.

•
Copyright © 2005 WORLD Magazine
November 26, 2005, Vol. 20, No. 46

Say what you want about BJU, but that physics textbook is quite adequate. This is pure politics.

12/12/2005 11:14:48 PM

and speaking of eminent domain:

I'M NATIVE AMERICAN. GIVE ME BACK MY LAND YOU BASTARD. IM THE RIGHTFUL OWNER.

12/12/2005 11:25:09 PM

holy shit, this guy is either a Mormon, in Triangle Cult, or Grace Community Cult.

12/12/2005 11:27:09 PM

that article doesnt really have that much to do with what we are talking about
you can post it a few more times but its not going to change that

12/12/2005 11:27:43 PM

I'm (1/64)th american indian, I got dibs as well.

12/12/2005 11:28:04 PM

YOU DO REALIZE YOU ARE LIKE A CHIRISTAN VERSION OF THOSE WHACK-JOB MUSLIMS THAT KEEP THE MIDDLE EAST A REGION THAT CANNOT ADVANCE, RIGHT, YOU REALIZE THIS DON'T YOU?

12/12/2005 11:28:47 PM

if he did, i suspect he would exercise rational thought.

12/12/2005 11:29:32 PM

i'm so glad that the Christian founders of this nation (sure i'll give them to you, whatever) set this nation up free of gov't mandated/supported/run religion

so i have the choice to never sit in a pew next to you, or let my kids' beliefs be sculpted in your ideals

12/12/2005 11:32:38 PM

^^^^^No, it is precisely what I was talking about, the fact that the american education establishment is trending towards eradicating the Christian worldview in education. That article clearly indicates that there are very real threats to Christian religious freedom in this country. The schools in California are in effect making it illegal to teach a Christian world view in certian classes. If that is not pertinent to the discussion here then I give up.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 11:35 PM. Reason : ^^^^^]

12/12/2005 11:33:41 PM

^^^^the fuck you dont

im, like, 1/2. we fought your oppressive union army to keep our land and lost it. your oppressive gov. took my land, give it back.

and i wouldnt want my kid going within 10 feet of any BJU related stuff. im with UC on this, keep that inferior garbage out of the schools. its physics, not philosophy, dont go changing it.

V if you believe in righting the case of a gov. taking the private property of citizens, then you wouldnt say that. you lose.

[Edited on December 12, 2005 at 11:37 PM. Reason : .]

12/12/2005 11:34:30 PM

the other 63/64 of me says get over it you lost.

12/12/2005 11:36:25 PM

Those, folks, are the words of a good christian.

12/12/2005 11:38:28 PM

all that article shows is california trying to standardize a curriculum and prevent people from using a shitty book

12/12/2005 11:39:00 PM

hehe, triangle church

12/12/2005 11:40:02 PM

Quote :

"The schools in California are in effect making it illegal to teach a Christian world view in certian classes."

MORE LIKE

THE BILL OF RIGHTS

12/12/2005 11:40:07 PM

public schools here in nc had no problem sponsoring the reading of the koran

12/12/2005 11:41:59 PM