Insectman Home
Presentations
Contact Us
My Testimony
Articles
Our Links
Get Saved
Exodus Mandate
The Lie: Evolution
 

EXODUS MANDATE-WV


Opting Out is Not an Option

By Karl Priest 1-18-2014

A federal court ruled in 1984 that t he First Amendment does not protect children from "exposure to morally offensive value systems". Some Tennessee parents objected to children, beginning in the first grade, were forced to study books that taught witchcraft and other forms of magic and occult activities; some values are relative and vary from situation to situation; attitudes, values, and concepts of disrespect and disobedience to parents; one does not need to believe in God in a specific way but that any type of faith in the supernatural is an acceptable method of salvation; man and apes evolved from a common ancestor; and various humanistic values and implied that Jesus was illiterate. The same books depicted prayer to an idol and a child who is disrespectful of his mother's Bible study. The parents’ position was “that their first Amendment freedom to believe as they choose is meaningless if the state can force their children to read books that contain ideas and values to which they do not subscribe.” They wanted the right to “opt out” their children from using the books.

The Tennessee court referred to a ruling from the Kanawha County Textbook War where parents objected to "both religious and anti-religious materials, matter offensive to Christian morals, matter which invades personal and familial morals, matter which defames the nation and which attacks civic virtue, and matter which suggests and encourages the use of bad English." The Tennessee court ruled that “the materials were genuinely offensive to the beliefs of the plaintiffs but that, as a matter of law, there was nothing in the defendant's conduct that constituted an inhibition of, or prohibition of, the free exercise of religion.” The reasons for the ruling were ridiculous. The court claimed (1) Courts cannot intervene in local conflicts and (2) proof was not provided that a particular religion was taught. Other court rulings about prayer, evolutionism, and other complaints by non-Christians and liberals were no different than this one. New Age religion, such as yoga, are widely promoted and protected in “public” schools. (See the report below.)

The parents were not allowed to opt-out!

On December 17, 2014 I heard Laura Ingram interview Mr. Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute.  His advice was for parents to opt-out of sex education classes. Mrs. Ingram advised parents to protect their values by avoiding Planned Parenthood.

That strategy was soundly proven wrong in 1974

First of all, parents cannot trust the school to honor their wishes.  Secondly, and most importantly, Christian values (overwhelmingly) and conservative values (majorly) are absent or attacked in every class, in the halls, and during lunch.

Two Internet items provide details of legislative and legal battles that have been waged regarding “public” schools.

PEW Forum paper “Religion in the Public Schools” (2007)

Belief Net article “ Do Parents Have a Say in What Schools Teach ?” (undated, probably 2013)

It should not take much study to conclude that we CANNOT take back “public” schools.

We must RESCUE OUR CHILDREN!

Also, see the “Third Corner” (scroll down on that page)

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

Following is a related report on how “public” schools are detached from reality.

In 2012 parents tried to top yoga from being taught in a California elementary school.

Mary Eady, the parent of a first grader, said the classes were rooted in the deeply religious practice of Ashtanga yoga, in which physical actions are inextricable from the spiritual beliefs underlying them.

“They’re not just teaching physical poses, they’re teaching children how to think and how to make decisions,” Ms. Eady said. “They’re teaching children how to meditate and how to look within for peace and for comfort. They’re using this as a tool for many things beyond just stretching.”

Underlying the controversy is the source of the program’s financing. The pilot project is supported by the Jois Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded in memory of Krishna Pattabhi Jois, who is considered the father of Ashtanga yoga.

The district has stood firm. Tim Baird, the schools superintendent, has defended the yoga classes as merely another element of a broader program designed to promote children’s physical and mental well-being. The notion that yoga teachers have designs on converting tender young minds to Hinduism is incorrect, he said.

“That’s why we have an opt-out clause,” Mr. Baird said. “If your faith is such that you believe that simply by doing the gorilla pose, you’re invoking the Hindu gods, then by all means your child can be doing something else.”

Ms. Eady is not convinced.

“Yoga poses are representative of Hindu deities and Hindu stories about the actions and interactions of those deities with humans,” she said. “There’s content even in the movement, just as with baptism there’s content in the movement.”

Russell Case, a representative of the Jois Foundation, said the parents’ fears were misguided.

“They’re concerned that we’re putting our God before their God,” Mr. Case said. “They’re worried about competition. But we’re much closer to them than they think. We’re good Christians that just like to do yoga because it helps us to be better people.”

(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/us/school-yoga-class-draws-religious-protest-from-christians.html?_r=0)

In May 2013 the judge hearing the case asked, “What is religion?”
(http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/may/20/encinitas-school-district-yoga-trial/ )

He ruled (July 2013) “ that even though yoga dates back to 1500 B.C. and has its roots in Hinduism, the EUSD came up with a curriculum for its 30-minute yoga classes that emphasizes respect, proper breathing and posture. ‘There’s nothing religious about that. ’”
(http://fox5sandiego.com/2013/07/01/judge-rules-yoga-classes-can-continue-at-encinitas-schools/)

The superintendent completely missed the point that tax-payers are paying for the program. He, and the judge, also don’t understand that their ludicrous liberal side has rejected Intelligent Design from science classrooms even though it has NOTHING to do with religion.

We must RESCUE OUR CHILDREN!

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

Also see:

How about Opting-Out of Objection Classes or Books?

Becoming Mindful of Mindfulness

January 10, 2013 article March 9 and January 10, 2013 WV School News items

April 21, 2008 article March 31 and March 6, 2008 WV School News items

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! Isaiah 5:20-21