500 MB Nyheder Direkte fra Internet 5/500 MB nyheder direkte fra internet CD 5.iso/start/progs/text/7a.txt

Text File | 1995-06-02 | 15KB | 275 lines

Training Our Children in the Ways of the World
AU's Opposition to Parental Choice in Education
By Roger A. Moran

   Since the mid-1960s, Americans United for Separation of Church and
State (AU), the nations oldest and largest exclusive religious liberty
organization, has argued that "choice" in abortion is a fundamental
requirement for religious freedom. The organization has even argued that
to restrict federal funding for "elective" abortions violates both the
"Establishment" and the "Free Exercise" clauses of the First Amendment.
According to such logic, the Establishment Clause is violated because
laws restricting abortion "establish," as law, a "narrow theological
view" pertaining to the "personhood" of the fetus. The Free Exercise
Clause is violated because it prevents a woman from freely exercising
her "religious" convictions when such convictions allow for the aborting
of her unborn child.

   But on the subject of parental choice in education, AU takes the
anti-choice position, arguing that to allow such a choice is
unconstitutional because it would represent "government aid to religion"
-- a violation of the principle of separation of church and state.
However, "government aid" for abortion is viewed by AU as being
constitutional, since it simply provides the financial ability for all
women to "freely exercise" their "religious right" to abort their unborn
children.

   According to the logic of AU and their allies on the Left, separation
of church and state means that any program that allows parents a choice
in the education of their children -- whether vouchers to parents,
tuition tax credits, or a tax deduction for tuition cost -- represents a
"government establishment of religion," because such programs would
"indirectly" benefit religious-oriented schools. Thus, to allow parental
choice in education is to violate the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment.

   Several important questions regarding parental choice in education
and religious freedom need to be considered. First, how is America's
religious freedom threatened when all parents are allowed to choose a
school that best reflects the parents philosophical world views of life
-- whether Christian or atheist, conservative or liberal? Second,
exactly what is government "establishing," except freedom and parental
autonomy, when all parents are allowed to choose from an array of
schools, representing religious and non-religious perspectives? Third,
has "religious neutrality" and the secularization of public schools
resulted in the undermining of the most basic tenets of the Christian
faith while catering to the most base desires of human nature? Fourth,
has liberal special interest succeeded in creating a virtual monopoly in
government education by virtue of parent's inability to financially
afford an educational alternative? Fifth, is it not religious tyranny
when the force of government and law are used to undermine religious
beliefs and convictions through the educational process? And finally,
can true religious freedom exist where religious parents are denied
viable options for escaping such government schools?

   The answer to each of these questions is clear and obvious, even to
the Left, when intellectual honesty is placed above their agenda.

Training Our Children:
In the Ways of the Lord or In the Ways of the World

   God has given no greater responsibility to parents than that of
guarding and nurturing the minds of their children. It is through the
thought process that God calls us to be "transformed" (Romans 12:2) and
to "train" ourselves "to be godly" (1 Timothy 4:7). In II Corinthians
10:5, we are commanded to "take captive every thought to make it
obedient to Christ," and in Proverbs 22:6, "Train a child in the way he
should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it."

   In Deuteronomy Chapter 6, we get a glimpse of the significance God
places on the role of parents to impress upon their children the
importance of God's Word:

   "These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your
   hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you
   sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down
   and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind
   them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your
   houses and your gates." (Deut. 6:6-9)

   Through the educational process we are to prepare our children to
view the events and affairs of life from God's perspective. The proper
role of government, the purpose of law, economics, justice, freedom,
social responsibility, all should be understood from  a biblical
perspective. But especially, parents are to teach their children the
deceitfulness and consequences of sin, a freedom public schools no
longer enjoy and a responsibility much of America has rejected as
"politically incorrect."

Ideas have Consequences

   Because ideas have consequences and because of the impressionability
of the young minds of our children, we must be careful about what we
allow our children to be exposed to. Good ideas produce good. However,
bad ideas (those that nurture and justify the sinful desires of our
fleshly nature) produce bad. For these reasons, we must be careful about
the TV programs we allow into our homes, the movies our children watch,
the music they listen to and even the company they keep. The Bible warns
us: "Do not be misled: 'Bad company corrupts good character.'" (I
Corinthians 15:33).

   For decades, parents have relinquished their responsibility for the
education of their children to the public school, a government
institution where the freedom to acknowledge God and to impart a
biblical world view has long been rejected as "unconstitutional."

The First Amendment and "Religious Neutrality"

   The religious freedom guarantee of the First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof." From this, the U.S. Supreme
Court has determined that the "No Establishment Clause" requires public
schools to take a position of "religious neutrality," thus assuring that
government does not establish a religious doctrine in the public
schools. However, the end result of "religious neutrality" has been to
ban the acknowledgment of God and reject biblical principles and values
from the educational arena, thus giving rise to the "establishment" of
humanistic Liberalism as the "official" ideological basis for educating
an entire generation of American children.

   Many Christians have embraced the Supreme Court's demand for
"religious neutrality" in the public schools as though there is such a
thing, and as though such an "official" policy would produce religious
freedom. But this has not been the case. While many Americans examine
closely the "judicial philosophy" of Supreme Court nominees because of
the tremendous impact these individuals have on American society, most
have never considered the increasingly liberal "educational philosophy"
of the public schools or the profound effect it has had on American
society.

   While the Ten Commandments were banned from hanging on the classroom
wall, moral relativism replaced the biblical concept of moral absolutes.
While the scientific evidence supporting creation was rejected by virtue
of its "religious nature," evolution became the official explanation
given to our children about the origins of man. And, though evolution
and moral relativism represent the philosophical foundation of Atheistic
Humanism, such teachings in the public schools are equated with
"religious neutrality" by virtue of their "secular" nature. Yet, the
teaching of moral values as fixed and never changing, and presenting
scientific evidence supporting the creationist view of origins, are
equated with the teaching of religion. Exposing America's children to
such radical ideas (whose roots can be traced to the Bible) represents
"religious coercion," using the force of law to force religion on a
captive audience.

Failed to Heed the Warnings

   Overwhelmed, disillusioned, desensitized, and deceived about the
decline of American society, many Christians have failed to apply the
warnings of the Apostle Paul to the area of education:

   "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and
   deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the
   basic principles of this world rather than on Christ." (Colossians
   2:8).

We also ignored the warnings of such men as Martin Luther, who addressed
what we now call "religious neutrality":

   I am much afraid that schools will prove to be great gates of hell
   unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures,
   engraving them in the hearts of youth. I advise  . . no one to
   place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount. Every
   institution in which men are not increasingly occupied with the
   Word of God must become corrupt."

"A student is not above his teacher," the Bible warns us, "but everyone
who is fully trained will be like his teacher." (Luke 6:40). It might
also be said, a student is not above the educational philosophy a good
teacher is required by law to teach in our "religiously neutral"
government schools.

  The natural order of things guarantees that we will reap what we sow
(Galatians 6:7). American society is not unraveling for reasons unknown.
Ideas have consequences, and when sin is justified and encouraged,
social decay and moral breakdown is inevitable. When the educational
process is used to nurture attitudes and behavior that chip away at
America's moral foundation, suffering on a national scale will result.
"Righteousness exalts a nation," the Bible says, "but sin is a disgrace
to _any_ people." (Proverbs 14:34).

   For the Left, parental choice in education represents the ultimate
threat to decades of liberal political activism which has resulted in a
virtual monopoly in government education. When parental choice in
education becomes a reality, no longer will America's children be
trained to think within the framework of the liberal mindset on a
national scale with no viable means of escape for the majority.

Taxes and Tyranny

   Framing the issue of parental choice in education as "government aid
to religion," the Left frequently quotes Thomas Jefferson as their basis
for arguing that to tax the American people to support religion is
wrong:

   "[T]o compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the
   propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful
   and tyrannical."

   Bible-believing Christians agree with Jefferson. Clearly, to tax the
American people to pay for abortions is wrong. But "religious liberty"
organizations like Americans United have argued in court that federal
funding for "elective" abortions is a requirement for religious freedom.
And, clearly, to tax the American people to fund the National Endowment
for the Arts is wrong, at least according to Thomas Jefferson's concept
of tyranny.

   However, Americans United gave their highest award in 1990 to
congressman Pat Williams for his leadership in the battle to re-funding
the NEA. (See article entitled _Desecration of Christ_.) Surely, to tax
the American people to pay for a government educational system that
undermines the deeply-held religious convictions of so many Americans is
equally wrong. But Americans United has focused the vast majority of
their time and energy on creating and sustaining a virtual monopoly in
government education, and then using the force of law to secularize the
educational philosophy of the schools to the point that the most basic
religious convictions of conservative, Bible-believing Christians are
violated.

Religious Liberals and Religious Moderates United in Opposition to
Parental Choice in Education

   Opposition to parental choice in education has not been limited to
the far left. "Moderates" within the Southern Baptist Convention, for
example, have marched in lockstep with Americans United on this issue.
In fact, many leading moderate and liberal Southern Baptists have served
in high positions with AU. This has created much confusion and division
within the religious community as to what religious liberty should mean.

   In a recent editorial of _Word and Way_, the official journal of the
Missouri Baptist Convention, editor Bob Terry used typical Americans
United rhetoric to oppose the issue of parental choice in education, a
view he considers to be "dangerous."

   "Many leaders of [evangelical-sponsored] Christian schools want the
government to pay the bills with public tax dollars while the students
learn reading, writing, arithmetic and religion. To advance their
schools, these religious right leaders have made the public schools the
scapegoat of society's woes."

   In the same editorial, Mr. Terry, a former member of the governing
board of Americans United, equates AU's religious liberty positions with
that of traditional Southern Baptist and Missouri Baptist positions:

   "The truth is that the Americans United stand on religious freedom
and church-state separation has not changed over the years. It has been
consistent with the traditional position of Southern Baptists and
Missouri Baptists. _That is why the organizations have shared leadership
and resources_." (emphasis ours)

   Americans United has always been out of step with conservative
Christians (see _State/Church Issues According to Americans United_),
yet for more than 30 years, the Missouri Baptist Convention supported
and funded Americans United, until the organization was exposed and the
funding was stopped. Many of AU's radical ideas about religious liberty
linger on, as men such as the editor of the Missouri Baptist state paper
continue to write and influence the Southern Baptists of Missouri. (See
article on _Clergy Against Clergy Network_.)

   At the very least, it is deceitful and dishonest to equate parental
choice in education with "government aid to religion." It's parents who
are empowered, it is parents who choose the school that will best meet
the needs of their children and best reflect the views and values of the
parents in the educational process.

   It is clearly time for conservative Christians to closely examine the
religious liberty rhetoric flowing from the Left. AU's concept of
religious liberty has proven to be as distorted as the ACLU's concept of
civil liberties; after all, AU's newest Executive Director is the ACLU's
former legislative counsel. This same man recently reaffirmed that the
First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that grants religious freedom
should also protect child pornography.

From: St. Louis MetroVoice, May 1995, Vol. 5, No. 5.