Intolerance in education...

[Elfie]

So why not remove the scripture?

I know... because the textbooks have a religious agenda that has NOTHING to do with the subject matter.

The school is a private school that wishes to teach a Christian world view along with the appropriate core curriculums. They are well within their constitutional rights to do so under the 1st Amendment. The school does have a religious agenda many private schools do and there is nothing wrong with that.

[Elfie]

look it up yourself!   Matter of fact, maybe you could research the history of conservatism and liberalism in education and see what you find.  Let me know.

 

One other person claimed that as well, even gave bogus information to back it up. You make the claim and don't even attempt to back it up.

Which institutions provide the best education is a matter that is highly subjective. I would not consider a liberal education a *good* education simply because I am not a liberal. All of this really doesn't apply to this thread though, so I won't comment further.

[Elfie]

It's like beating my head against a brick wall, it just feels good when I stop. 

[Vulcan]

Why do they HAVE to remove the scripture?  How exactly are those scripture PREVENTING a student from learning what they need to learn?

I take it you are from New Zealand?

It's a 1st Amendment issue here!  We consider it a FREEDOM that MUST not be messed with !

Is that something you don't have in New Zealand?  A 1st Amendment?

So are you arguing about something you do not understand?

Even I understand it has nothing to do with the 1st amendment. Though I agree that the exam entry level does seem high (top 2-3%) there may be reasons for this. If the school wishes to teach from christian texts nobody is stopping them, they are merely stating that they'd like students to enter into university with a minimal standard of background preparation. The books this school uses do not meet that criteria.

All the school has to do is use the approved course material (something which I understand most schools in the USA have no issue with), they are still free to preach their religion in the school and this will have no bearing on the A-G requirements.

The reason other religion have not been targeted (at a guess) is most likely because those other religions are quite happy using the recommended course material and aren't insecure and arrogant enough to have to mention their deity ever other page.

[AKIron]

Why do they HAVE to remove the scripture?  How exactly are those scripture PREVENTING a student from learning what they need to learn?

I take it you are from New Zealand?

It's a 1st Amendment issue here!  We consider it a FREEDOM that MUST not be messed with !

Is that something you don't have in New Zealand?  A 1st Amendment?

So are you arguing about something you do not understand?

MT lives in Idaho but he only came recently from Kalifornia so we have to excuse him.

[lasersailor184]

Even I understand it has nothing to do with the 1st amendment. Though I agree that the exam entry level does seem high (top 2-3%) there may be reasons for this. If the school wishes to teach from christian texts nobody is stopping them, they are merely stating that they'd like students to enter into university with a minimal standard of background preparation. The books this school uses do not meet that criteria.

All the school has to do is use the approved course material (something which I understand most schools in the USA have no issue with), they are still free to preach their religion in the school and this will have no bearing on the A-G requirements.

The reason other religion have not been targeted (at a guess) is most likely because those other religions are quite happy using the recommended course material and aren't insecure and arrogant enough to have to mention their deity ever other page.

When the school itself says that if the bible verse was removed at the beginning of each chapter it would be acceptable, this leads us to conclude that the material IS NOT tainted with a religious agenda. 

Now, if a private school wants to let it anyone who they want, they can.  It is their school, they can do it how they please.


But a Public University shouldn't bias against these students when the material itself is in tact.  Not to mention the past and clearly established anti christian tinge of this PUBLIC university.

Public is the key word here.  If they want to take their university private, then they can.  However they will suffer the loss of possibly hundreds of millions of dollars of public funding (lotta ofs).

What we see here is a group of fascists who want to instill their agenda (OK) on our dime (not OK).

[Elfie]

The books this school uses do not meet that criteria.

The only textbook that is actually mentioned is the physics textbook.

Burt Carney, an executive with the Association of Christian Schools International, said he's met with officials for the university system, and was told that there was no problem with the actual facts in a BJU physics textbook that was disallowed.

In fact, an ACSI report said, UC officials confirmed "that if the Scripture verses that begin each chapter were removed the textbook would likely be approved …"

No one is mentioning their deity every other page, unless the chapters in physics textbooks are only 2 pages long.

If the school wishes to teach from christian texts nobody is stopping them, they are merely stating that they'd like students to enter into university with a minimal standard of background preparation.

Get this, apparently other private schools not in Kalifornia are using the same textbooks and those kids are not being denied admission.

This is very much a 1st Amendment issue for all religiously operated private schools.

[Elfie]

MT lives in Idaho but he only came recently from Kalifornia so we have to excuse him.

 

[Elfie]

When the school itself says that if the bible verse was removed at the beginning of each chapter, this leads us to conclude that the material IS NOT tainted with a religious agenda.

The school itself admits that very thing.

Burt Carney, an executive with the Association of Christian Schools International, said he's met with officials for the university system, and was told that there was no problem with the actual facts in a BJU physics textbook that was disallowed.

In fact, an ACSI report said, UC officials confirmed "that if the Scripture verses that begin each chapter were removed the textbook would likely be approved …"

[Vulcan]

When the school itself says that if the bible verse was removed at the beginning of each chapter it would be acceptable, this leads us to conclude that the material IS NOT tainted with a religious agenda.

Agreed, but what I am reading says it is more than that, if you have links to where this is reported I'd like to read up. I'd also like to know the context of the verses, for example a verse relating to creation of the earth at the beginning of a geography text sends an interesting message, likewise a verse about adam and eve at the beginning of an evolution/biology text could viewed negatively.

[bustr]

Gents if you read the judges decision in the first hearing he has given the california high school grounds to sue for the complaint that out of state students are accepted while having used the same text books that the instate students are being disallowed admission over.

This leads to the question of UC dictating the content and cource work of classes and text books to instate private christian schools pre higher education K-12. The instate christian high school could not graduate students by california state law who were not fufilling california board of education requirements.

 This has the facial apperance of stealth christian descrimination by UC when it's the california board of educations provence to certifie the high school in question ciriculum by law. UC is telling them that the state of california's standards in the case of this high school level christian oriented education is invalide due only to it being "theologicly christian" oriented and narrow of scope opposed to secular christianity taught as religious philosophy or liturature. UC has no lawfull authority to set standards for K-12 primary education.

But then this being california and christian hostile, the board of education probably looked the other way while "praying" UC could force the curriculum change by denighed applicant attrition.

[Leslie]

One of the objectionable parts according to UC was a philosophical preamble in one of the textbooks which stated...and I paraphrase, and no this isn't what it said verbatim, but what I believe it meant:   

"whatever findings science has theories about, we as Christians believe in creation by God.  We should always remember this and place God above any scientific theory which is contradictory with God's word (in the search for truth.)"

UC is upset because of a philosophical preamble which is religious in nature, UC claiming this one preface makes invalid the rest of the textbook.  They are saying the science is bad, just because of that.

If some of the textbooks began each chapter with some scripture written there, is that any different than having a poem, or famous quote?  Seems like all it does is try to focus on Christianity, but how does that change the science?  People are free to have inspiration.  Many great scientists were Christians and actually did serious scientific research.

People are free to think what they want and it's not the business of a university to dictate that.  E=Mc2 is pretty much agreed upon universally.  The idea God created the universe and all in it is not universally agreed upon by scientists, but many do.  It is valid for a Christian school to acknowledge what they believe in and what gives inspiration. 

This looks to me like UC is exercising thought police tactics.  If you deny someone entrance because they are a Christian and believe in creation, who have the audacity to preamble their textbooks with this belief,  then that sure looks to me like suppression of religion by the state...unconstitutional.



Les

[Elfie]

Agreed, but what I am reading says it is more than that, if you have links to where this is reported I'd like to read up. I'd also like to know the context of the verses, for example a verse relating to creation of the earth at the beginning of a geography text sends an interesting message, likewise a verse about adam and eve at the beginning of an evolution/biology text could viewed negatively.

I quoted directly from the original article.

[Vulcan]

This looks to me like UC is exercising thought police tactics.  If you deny someone entrance because they are a Christian and believe in creation, who have the audacity to preamble their textbooks with this belief,  then that sure looks to me like suppression of religion by the state...unconstitutional.

Don't you think it ironic that people who send the children to a school to be indoctrinated in a religion talk about 'thought police'.

From where I sit, prefacing the literature with something that effectively says 'we're teaching this because we have too but we don't believe it to be true' is - I dunno... out there with the creationist lunies.

But yeah I agree the university is making a mountain out of a molehill, however it may be a case of them drawing a line in the sand. If it starts with the textbooks prefaced with disclaimers like that then where will it end?

[Elfie]

Don't you think it ironic that people who send the children to a school to be indoctrinated in a religion talk about 'thought police'.

How do we know Leslie sends his children to a private religious school? I don't believe he has stated either way. Looks like you are jumping to conclusions.