What banning this book says about the future of our society

yellow-star-of-david

Guest Blog from Joel J. Miller

A California charter school has decided to pull Corrie Ten Boom’s Holocaust memoir, The Hiding Place, from its library because the content was deemed too religious. Where to begin? It’s impossible to separate remembrance of the Holocaust from matters of faith; only a modern educator would try.

According to the report of a parent at the school, library staff were told to “remove Christian books, books by Christian authors, and books from Christian publishers.”

When the Pacific Justice Institute, a Christian legal defense group, sent a cease-and-desist notice, the school superintendent responded, “We . . . do not allow sectarian materials on our state-authorized lending shelves.”

So what’s the big deal? [READ MORE...]

Do Students Make the Connection?

Students today love to read books and watch their movie adaptations about dystopian societies -- where oppressive, dehumanizing governments create the opposite of utopia in a misguided attempt to eradicate war, misery, conflict, and pain. While books like The Giver, Divergent, and The Hunger Games are all the rage with teens these days, I wonder if they realize the similarities between the fiction they read and some disturbing aspects of American society today. Many elementary and junior high teachers assign The Giver for their students to read. Over the years, I've received calls and emails from parents concerned about this reading assignment because of its descriptions of euthanasia and sexual awakening in the main character. The book made the American Library Association's list of most challenged or banned books between 2000 and 2009.

I like the book's conservative message against the dehumanizing dangers of government. But I think the book is not well served by having students read it when they are not emotionally or intellectually ready to appreciate the theological, moral, and social issues it raises.

The Giver recently hit movie theaters (starring Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep). Written in 1993 by Lois Lowry, the story is set in a society in which pain and suffering have been eliminated, but at the cost of eliminating choices and strong emotions. "Sameness" is a social virtue. Jonas, the main character, is a 12-year-old boy chosen to become the Receiver of Memory. This person keeps all the memories before there was Sameness. The Receiver of Memory can help the society's leaders -- the Elders -- if they need to access his memories of struggle and pain. But, in the process of receiving memories from the Giver of Memories, Jonas begins to realize a darker side to the "perfect society." He sees that suffering is eliminated by euthanizing "unfit" infants and senior citizens (euphemistically referred to as sending them to "Elsewhere"). The plot revolves around a horrified Jonas setting out to make things right.

When teachers use The Giver with students who are too young, they do a disservice to the book's powerful examination of moral issues. For example, they read about a gruesome scene of a baby being euthanized by the state. Are teachers willing to help their students make the connection that they are actually living in a society that values the killing of innocent children because it supposedly serves the greater good of personal autonomy and alleviating potential social burdens?

Through dystopian stories like The Giver young people also read and watch how freedom of conscience is subordinated to group-think. But, do they realize that they are witnessing this very thing happening in America today when it comes to the suppression of religious freedom in the name of group-think about same sex marriage? For example, wedding photographer Elaine Huguenin declined the job of photographing a same-sex wedding because she believed that using her creative talents to memorialize the ceremony would be an act of endorsement and would, therefore, violate her religious conscience. In the dystopian world advanced by the New Mexico Supreme Court, Justice Richard Bosson declared that religious people should be “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.” He went on to write that being forced to aid a ceremony that Elaine's religion says is against God's moral law "is the price of citizenship." The Elders in The Giver would wholeheartedly agree.

In another example of dystopia today, the California State University system Chancellor, Charles Reed, recently declared that the 23 universities in the Cal State system will no longer recognize student religious clubs if they require their leaders to adhere to the club's religion. In the twisted logic of the Chancellor, discrimination against religious students is necessary in order to prevent religious students from discriminating against others even if it means religious clubs will be led by people who don't believe in that religion! So, in the dystopian world of California universities, atheists can now lead Christian clubs and Muslims can lead Jewish clubs. Apparently, the potential pain of discrimination is just too great and must be prevented by Mr. Reed. Again, the Elders in The Giver would wholeheartedly agree.

If teachers are not willing to draw parallels between the society described in The Giver and disturbing trends in American society today, then the book is reduced from being thought-provoking education to being merely titillating entertainment.

"Bless You" banned from classroom

Kendra Turner, a high school senior in Dyer County, TN, received an in-school suspension for saying "Bless you" after a classmate sitting next to her sneezed. On Monday, August 18, she wrote on her facebook page, "Today my teacher sent me to the office because someone sneezed and I said bless you. She said we do not do Godly speaking in my class. I stood up for my belief and said I have a constitutional right to speak about my God!! So if any other teacher wants to get on to me for sticking up for my religion then go right ahead because in the end I will win because I'm doing what God wants me to do!!!"

List of banned words and phrases

I would imagine that just about everyone in the civilized world would agree that the teacher overreacted when she disciplined Kendra for saying "Bless you." However, it is not as though the teacher responded without thinking or reprimanded Kendra because she was speaking when the class was supposed to be silent. "Bless you" is apparently an officially banned phrase in her class. Another student took a photo of the words the teacher forbids students to use in class.

THE BIGGER ISSUE

The real issue illustrated by this ridiculous incident involves the overall climate of censorship that now pervades too many public schools. Many teachers operate under the false assumptions that their classrooms must be "religion-free zones." Not only do they think they cannot talk about religion, they erroneously think they cannot allow their students to talk about it either.

The issue isn't about changing a law -- students already have freedom of speech to express their faith (or as this teacher apparently calls it "Godly speaking"). The real issue is changing the overall climate of schools regarding religion so students and teachers exercise their religious and academic freedom.

A SOLUTION 

That's where Gateways to Better Education can help. Our professional development seminar for public school educators explains the religious freedoms that the law already allows. Our seminar also shows educators how to create a faith-friendly environment in their schools and what the research says about how it will improve academic achievement. We also show educators how to lawfully teach about the influence of the Bible and Christianity as they relate to history, culture, and values. Educators don't just need to be informed about the law, they need to change the way they address religion -- and specifically Christianity.

CLICK HEREto see the cities where we are conducting our seminars this fall.

To bring our seminar "Faith, Freedom & Public Schools" to your community, CLICK HERE.

Teacher Complains to Parents about Son's Bible Reading

Today, Fox News reporter Todd Starnes reported on a case of blatant religious discrimination in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. A fifth-grade teacher at Park Lakes Elementary humiliated a boy by calling his parents – while the rest of the class watched – and complained to his parents that their son, Giovanni Rubeo, was reading “a religious book” – the Bible! Starnes reported that as the other students watched, the teacher left a terse message on the family’s answering machine.

“I noticed that he has a book – a religious book – in the classroom,” she said on the recording. “He’s not permitted to read those books in my classroom.” (Listen to the voicemail she left)

It is frustrating that censorship of Bible reading in class persists when the U.S. Department of Education has clarified for the past 19 years that reading the Bible during free reading time is perfectly legal. Since 1995, the federal government has issued guidance to all public school superintendents on three separate occasions (1995, 1998, and 2003) asking them to inform teachers and students of their religious rights. The guidance specifically state:

“Among other things, students may read their Bibles or other scripture, say grace before meals, and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other non-instructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities.”

The law is clear about Giovanni’s freedom to read the Bible during free reading time. Sadly, even after 19 years and three nationwide publications, many teachers are not familiar with these federal guidance.

Ironically, fifth-grade teachers in Florida are expected to teach about the influence of Christianity when it comes to people’s rights. In Gateways to Better Education’s, “The Bible in State Academic Standards,” we highlight where the Bible and Christianity are expected to be taught. According to the Florida Department of Education, fifth grade students are to:

“Explain the definition and origin of rights. Examples are John Locke's ‘state of nature’ philosophy, natural rights: rights to life, liberty, property…” (Civics and Government, SS.5.C.1.3)

In the late 17th century John Locke wrote:

“The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions; for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker; all the servants of one sovereign Master, sent into the world by His order and about His business; they are His property, whose workmanship they are made to last during His, not one another's pleasure.” [Emphasis added]

John Locke would most likely shake his head in disbelief that an American teacher thinks she must suppress a child’s religious freedom while being expected to teach about natural rights that come from God.

-----------------------

Click here to receive a Summary of your State Academic Standards.

Find out more about Gateways’ pamphlet, Free to Speak: What the U.S. Department of Education says about public school students’ religious liberties.

ACLU not Happy with Free Speech in Tennessee

Against the wishes of the ACLU, Tennessee legislators passed, and the governor signed into law, a bill that clarifies students’ freedom of religious expression in class as well as at events and graduation ceremonies. The Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act will become law for the 2014-2015 school year. Critics of the law (including the ACLU) wring their hands that this will expose students to a fellow student’s specific religious beliefs as if student speakers now have the freedom to preach the Gospel and have an altar call at a graduation.

With convoluted logic, the ACLU of Tennessee asserted in a press release that suppressing religious freedom actually preserves religious freedom: “We are asking Governor Haslam to veto this bill to ensure that Tennessee schools are moving forward, welcoming all students and preserving their religious freedom.”

Huh? Does the ACLU now assert that free speech should only occur when everyone in the room agrees with the speaker?

The law amends existing state law and gives greater detail regarding the freedom students have to express their faith in homework assignments, class discussions and oral presentations. The language of the law parrots the 2003 guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Education:

“Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”

Regarding graduation ceremonies, the law also clarifies that students have the freedom to express themselves at school events. However, it is very specific about the parameters of student speech at ceremonies. For instance, regarding graduation ceremonies, the law states:

“The subject of their addresses shall be related to the purpose of the graduation ceremony, marking and honoring the occasion, honoring the participants and those in attendance, and the student’s perspective on purpose, achievement, life, school, graduation, and looking forward to the future. The subject shall be designated for each student speaker, the student shall stay on the subject…”

The law continues regarding religious expression:

“The Local Education Agency (LEA) shall treat a student’s voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the LEA treats a student’s voluntary expression of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against a student based on the religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.”

Students are not employees of the state. They have First Amendment freedoms to express who they are and what they think, whether it is in a classroom speech or a graduation speech.

While religious expression at graduations tends to get a lot of press, the day-to-day power of this law is the clarity it brings to religious expression in classrooms throughout the school year. Unfortunately, it is far too common for public schools educators to believe (erroneously) that religion expression is forbidden in class. It is this “culture of censorship” that must be corrected.

My hat is off to Tennessee lawmakers for standing up for religious freedom. Now, the real task will be for local school leaders across the state to: (1) make sure their educators are well informed about the freedom students have; and (2) make sure all students from kindergarten through high school understand that they are welcome to express their faith in class.

 --------------------

To promote greater awareness of students’ freedom of religious expression, ask your church to distribute to its students and congregation Gateways’ pamphlet, Free to Speak: What the U.S. Department of Education say about public school students’ religious liberties.