Printer-Friendly Version

Atheist Education State Standards
By Jennifer Schroeder
April 30, 2003

Public schools and textbooks have a license to control our children's thought process under the banner "critical thinking." The definition is well written, but in reality it opens the door for teachers and textbooks to instill atheist beliefs in our children. Example: from Houghton Mifflin's "Modern World History," (pg 627):

"Human beings are spiritual animals...Men and women started to worship gods as soon as they became recognizably human; they created religions at the same time they created works of art."

Using California's State Standards as an example, page 23 states:

"Students should understand the intense religious passions that have produced fanaticism and war as well as the political arrangements developed (such as separation of church and state) that allow different religious groups to live amicably in a pluralistic society."

These state standards admit RIGHT HERE that the goal is to water down the faith of children. We can believe, just do not believe passionately. "Intense religious passions that have produced fanaticism and war." What about the intense religious passion that has prompted so many to love with acts of compassion? Overwhelmingly the largest charities and free service organizations world-wide stem from passionate religious faith. But public education endeavors to abolish passionate religion. It was the passionate religion of our forefathers that shaped the foundation of this nation. To diffuse the passion of religion is not the purpose of public schools.

"Students need to understand why a democracy needs citizens who value give-and-take on issues, who do not feel it necessary to go to war over every idea, and who seek the middle ground on which consensus and cooperation can flourish." (pg 39)

There IS a right and wrong, at times we should be passionate. The quote above is not about peace, it's about dumbing down America, teaching us to be non-responsive and apathetic. What if Patrick Henry or our forefathers were conditioned this way? There is such a demand in society to deny right and wrong and put everything in the gray, but this will not achieve peace, rather we will become sheep ready for slaughter.

California's State Standards declare:

"The skills involved in critical thinking enable students to question the validity and meaning of what they read, hear, think, and believe. Critical thinking requires a questioning mind and a skeptical withholding of assent about the truth of a statement until it can be critically evaluated. While such skills are developed through everyday living as well as by schooling, the history-social science classroom is an especially appropriate setting for developing such skills." (pg 41)

Why is the history-social science classroom an "especially appropriate setting for developing such skills"? The Houghton Mifflin textbooks are a prime example of "critical thinking" propaganda. The textbooks are literally saying, "This is a religion and this is how you cut it apart." The presented religion is not fact based, as openly admitted the goal is to present the positive attributes only, (except for Christianity and Judaism).

Critical thinking is indeed "especially appropriate" for atheists eager to apply skepticism of religion to young impressionable minds. A far better application of "critical thinking" would be in science class. Why not teach children to scrutinize Darwin's theory of evolution? "To reach conclusions of solid evidence" would be a welcome reality check.

California State Standards, page 24:

• "This framework proposes that critical thinking skills be included at every grade level. Students should learn to detect bias in print and visual media; to recognize illogical thinking; to guard against propaganda; to avoid stereotyping of group members; to reach conclusions based on solid evidence; and to think critically, creatively, and rationally. These skills are to be taught within the context of a curriculum that offers numerous opportunities to explore examples of sound reasoning and examples of the opposite.

The "sound reasoning" as determined by a now atheist (separation of church) public education.

• "To detect bias in print"

The Houghton Mifflin textbook is loaded with previously undetected bias. Obviously public education is incapable of discernment.

• "To recognize illogical thinking"

As determined by who? Teachers insist Islam cannot be taught without induction practices, yet teach American history stripped of its Christian foundation. Public education can't recognize its own "illogical thinking."

• "To reach conclusions based on solid evidence"

This is the opener to attack faith. We walk by faith not by sight.

• "To guard against propaganda"

Houghton Mifflin's textbooks should be used in courses as examples of propaganda, not history.

• "To think critically, creatively, and rationally."

Our children already do that. Children are able to make up their own minds if you give them FACTS and not public education programming.

----------

By Jennifer Schroeder, founder of BlessedCause.org, an organization dedicated to restore sanity to our schools. Jen Schroeder began the crusade that has resulted in a federal lawsuit by Thomas More Law Center against indoctrination of Islam in public school.

Sources: "History-Social Science Framework for California Public Schools": http://www.cde.ca.gov/cdepress/hist-social-sci-frame.pdf