School Voucher Debate Continues
Daniel Downs
February 02, 2007
President Bush raises the ire of liberals again. During his ‘State of the Nation’ speech, the President briefly mentioned his continued support for school choice programs. Many were quick to notice his intention to continue pursuing implementation of his school voucher plan. Even though it was removed from No Child Left Behind, it was implemented in District of Columbia schools, and it is working. Liberals, however, oppose it as unconstitutional. According to the American United for the Separation of Church and State (AUSCS), school vouchers “effectively force taxpayers to finance religious indoctrination and discrimination.”
One of the implications of such rhetoric is that only public schools are allowed to indoctrinate America’s children. If not religion, what beliefs and values do government schools indoctrinate children? Liberals claim secularism evident in public school curriculum is values neutral, but is it really? Two key positions of modern secularism are evolution science (and liberal education)--not God or religion--is the only salvation for the problems of society and human freedom must include uninhibited consensual sex. An often-heard solution to increases in prison population and to income disparity is more education. Sex education has been criticized because it instructs youth about abortion and how to use condoms and birth control pills. In some schools, condoms have been made available to youth as well as abortion counseling. But, why is such curriculum and policies even needed?
As I understand it, modern sex education and the state sanctioned liberation from past moral constraints of sexual behavior is a product of the secularization of American culture. Like the previously mentioned kinds of policies, sex education is part of the agenda of secularization better known as humanism. Its secular agenda was spelled out in the various editions of the Humanist Manifesto, the first being introduced in 1933. It was primarily the work of religious Unitarians and approved by education philosopher John Dewey. The Manifesto was revised in 1973 with the support of many scientists. By replacing God with evolution science, they could justify eliminating all previous norms based on traditional religious values and beliefs. One outcome of secularism can be seen in the long debate between Darwinian evolution, creationism and now Intelligent Design. Their 1973 version outlined those sex-related policies still discussed as serious social issues of our time. The new secular agenda was stated the following way:
“In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil….” Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their life-styles as they desire.”
How successful has been secularism? Since 1973, the number of reported abortions has exceeded 37 million babies, and the number of divorces has increased 410 percent. The National Center for Health Statistics reports the rate of teen pregnancy to the unwed was 35% in 1974 and by 2000, the rate had climbed to 80 percent. According to the Bureau of Justice (BJS) statistics, the number of forcible rapes has increased to 2,799,355 since 1973. Of reported rapes, 44% were perpetrated against females under 19 years old and no less than 16% were committed against girls under 12 years old. Concerning exploratory consensual sex, the International Herald Tribune recently reported the pedophile party in Netherlands was seeking to lower the age of consent to twelve. In North America, Canada has become an attraction for sexual tourism. Because the age of sexual consent had been lowered to fourteen, Canada was becoming a haven for pedophiles, according to a recent CBC News report. Modern secularism has certainly achieved its goals.
In his book “Religion & American Education,” Warren Nord acknowledges public education is hostile toward Christian beliefs and values. That is because secularism is not values neutral, but opposes the values of many Americans who says they believe God, creationism, and biblical morality. Secularism also directly contradicts those beliefs and values the Constitution is supposed to protect and guarantee, e.g. God is both creator of nature and source of our inherent human rights like life and liberty. Therefore, the only just solution to the problem with public school indoctrination is either curricular reform to reflect those beliefs and values or give parents their share of tax dollars to educate their children in any school of their choice, religious or not.
Another statement made by the AUSCS was that “forcing taxpayers to foot the tuition bill for students in religious schools is a huge step towards established religion…, for there is no better way for a government to advance religion than to pay for it.” According to the Supreme Court decision in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the voucher program in Ohio does not violate the First Amendment in any way. Because tax dollars are given directly to parents rather to any parochial or charter school, vouchers do not advance the establishment of religion.
One of the implications of such rhetoric is that only public schools are allowed to indoctrinate America’s children. If not religion, what beliefs and values do government schools indoctrinate children? Liberals claim secularism evident in public school curriculum is values neutral, but is it really? Two key positions of modern secularism are evolution science (and liberal education)--not God or religion--is the only salvation for the problems of society and human freedom must include uninhibited consensual sex. An often-heard solution to increases in prison population and to income disparity is more education. Sex education has been criticized because it instructs youth about abortion and how to use condoms and birth control pills. In some schools, condoms have been made available to youth as well as abortion counseling. But, why is such curriculum and policies even needed?
As I understand it, modern sex education and the state sanctioned liberation from past moral constraints of sexual behavior is a product of the secularization of American culture. Like the previously mentioned kinds of policies, sex education is part of the agenda of secularization better known as humanism. Its secular agenda was spelled out in the various editions of the Humanist Manifesto, the first being introduced in 1933. It was primarily the work of religious Unitarians and approved by education philosopher John Dewey. The Manifesto was revised in 1973 with the support of many scientists. By replacing God with evolution science, they could justify eliminating all previous norms based on traditional religious values and beliefs. One outcome of secularism can be seen in the long debate between Darwinian evolution, creationism and now Intelligent Design. Their 1973 version outlined those sex-related policies still discussed as serious social issues of our time. The new secular agenda was stated the following way:
“In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered "evil….” Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their life-styles as they desire.”
How successful has been secularism? Since 1973, the number of reported abortions has exceeded 37 million babies, and the number of divorces has increased 410 percent. The National Center for Health Statistics reports the rate of teen pregnancy to the unwed was 35% in 1974 and by 2000, the rate had climbed to 80 percent. According to the Bureau of Justice (BJS) statistics, the number of forcible rapes has increased to 2,799,355 since 1973. Of reported rapes, 44% were perpetrated against females under 19 years old and no less than 16% were committed against girls under 12 years old. Concerning exploratory consensual sex, the International Herald Tribune recently reported the pedophile party in Netherlands was seeking to lower the age of consent to twelve. In North America, Canada has become an attraction for sexual tourism. Because the age of sexual consent had been lowered to fourteen, Canada was becoming a haven for pedophiles, according to a recent CBC News report. Modern secularism has certainly achieved its goals.
In his book “Religion & American Education,” Warren Nord acknowledges public education is hostile toward Christian beliefs and values. That is because secularism is not values neutral, but opposes the values of many Americans who says they believe God, creationism, and biblical morality. Secularism also directly contradicts those beliefs and values the Constitution is supposed to protect and guarantee, e.g. God is both creator of nature and source of our inherent human rights like life and liberty. Therefore, the only just solution to the problem with public school indoctrination is either curricular reform to reflect those beliefs and values or give parents their share of tax dollars to educate their children in any school of their choice, religious or not.
Another statement made by the AUSCS was that “forcing taxpayers to foot the tuition bill for students in religious schools is a huge step towards established religion…, for there is no better way for a government to advance religion than to pay for it.” According to the Supreme Court decision in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the voucher program in Ohio does not violate the First Amendment in any way. Because tax dollars are given directly to parents rather to any parochial or charter school, vouchers do not advance the establishment of religion.