{"id":4986,"date":"2006-06-07T10:26:04","date_gmt":"2006-06-07T10:26:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/?p=4986"},"modified":"2006-06-07T10:26:04","modified_gmt":"2006-06-07T10:26:04","slug":"why-im-not-a-zealot-about-church-and-state","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/?p=4986","title":{"rendered":"why I&#8217;m not a zealot about church and state"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>We saw a student production of <i>Godspell<\/i> last weekend in my little daughter&#8217;s Washington, DC public school. In a different DC public school years ago, I attended a PTA fundraiser that was pervasively religious, all of its rhetoric drawn explicitly from the evangelical Black church. I&#8217;ve argued <a href=\"http:\/\/www.google.com\/url?sa=t&#038;ct=res&#038;cd=1&#038;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.peterlevine.ws%2Fmt%2Farchives%2F000768.html&#038;ei=rRuGRL3bA67c4QGXx5jkDg&#038;sig2=SLNbTMj88bkzANlwNDlFoA\">here <\/a>that it should be constitutional to teach intelligent design (even though it&#8217;s bad science and worse theology). In these three cases&#8211;and others like them&#8211;I&#8217;m not zealous to keep religion out of public schools.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;m not saying that authority figures in state schools like the ones we have today should make sectarian, religious pronouncements while they perform their official duties. To mention an easy case, the principal of a neighborhood public school should not get on the P.A. system and tell all the kids that they must embrace Jesus Christ as their personal savior. But in closer cases, I&#8217;m inclined to tolerate religion in public schools, for these reasons:<\/p>\n<p>First, the purpose of public schooling is to reproduce and enhance a culture (not simply to produce economic &#8220;returns&#8221; for graduates). Because cultural reproduction is a common good, we need to subsidize it with public funds: otherwise, many people will leave the expense to others. Of course, &#8220;culture&#8221; is heterogeneous and controversial. That is why citizens need to participate in shaping their schools. The debate about what values we should teach is not a cost, but an opportunity to create our common future. By the way, there must be some local control over education, because a national debate about culture will produce the lowest common denominator.<\/p>\n<p>Education should not be conceived as value-neutral, because that is impossible, and the effort to strip it of overt values has negative consequences&#8211;such as those that I mentioned yesterday in reference to civics textbooks. I am not terribly offended if some of the values taught in public schools are religious, in part because I think almost all modern norms have religious roots.<\/p>\n<p>As Eugene Volokh&#8217;s recent <a href=\"http:\/\/volokh.com\/posts\/1149615849.shtml\">post and the replies<\/a> indicate, the founders of the United States favored public schooling largely in order to inculcate values. I would reject their assumption that religion was a necessary foundation of public morality. (The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 said: &#8220;Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.&#8221;) But I would endorse the premise of the Northwest Ordinance that certain virtues are important for good government and public happiness, and that public schooling should promote those virtues. If my fellow citizens see religion as part of morality, so be it.<\/p>\n<p>Second, I would rather have the freedom to participate in a robust debate about the content of our children&#8217;s education than to see courts dictate a position, even if I agree with it. For instance, when a judge rules that the teaching of intelligent design is unconstitutional, we cannot seriously discuss the issue. Likewise, if a court were to rule that public schools may not produce <i>Godspell<\/i>, we would have less scope to debate that play.<\/p>\n<p>Third, Harry Brighouse argues in <a href=\"http:\/\/crookedtimber.org\/2006\/03\/18\/on-education\/\">On Education<\/a> that there are some perverse, unintended consequences from the American policy of barring religion from all state-funded education. A substantial group of parents is uncomfortable with secular public schools, because those institutions are materialistic, highly individualistic and competitive, and tolerant of premature sexuality. Brighouse (pp. 87-88) describes the typical high school:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is a 2000-plus student institution, in which no individual knows every other individual; in which many children never have any teacher for more than one year of instruction; in which the prevailing values include pep rallies for sports and a slavishly conformist loyalty to school and neighbourhood. These schools maintain a deafening silence about spiritual or anti-materialist values, take sides in the Cola wars, and accept as a given the prevalence of brand names and teen-marketing. Religious parents often, with justification, believe that their own beliefs are at best ignored, at worst actively worked against by the schools. &#8230;<\/p>\n<p>I suspect that in the US many parents are drawn to private religious schools not by any interest in having their chidren indoctrinated, but by their horror at the experience of the shopping-mall high school, and, in fact, an unarticulated sense that the values of the peer group, tolerated by the school, threaten, rather than serve, their children&#8217;s prospective autonomy. Religious parents fear that schools that do not incorporate strong moral values, and which treat spirituality as just another lifestyle option &#8230; endanger their and other children&#8217;s prospects for a balanced and satisfying life.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In most foreign countries, these parents would opt for state-funded religious schools. Some are not fundamentalists (or even necessarily believers), so they add diversity to religious schools by enrolling their own children. In most countries, state-funded denominational schools are regulated so that, for example, they must teach core democratic principles and tolerate non-believers.<\/p>\n<p>In the United States, however, we have pervasively secular public schools that aim for value-neutrality (sometimes with bad consequences); and we have religious schools without any access to state money whose curricula are completely unregulated. The religious schools may draw religiously zealous parents who are hostile to the mainstream culture. When this happens, their students become a homogeneous group, deprived of diverse influences.<\/p>\n<p>American Catholic schools, although not state-subsidized, give a taste of what would happen if public schools could introduce more religion&#8211;or if private religious schools could get state money. After Vatican II, Catholic educators chose not to proselytize, but instead to teach a set of values that are highly compatible with secular democracy. They also draw diverse student populations. They appear to do a better job of secular civic education than the public schools&#8211;on average. Thoughtful observers like Jim Youniss and David Campbell believe that modern Catholic education succeeds because it is grounded in strong moral commitments.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>We saw a student production of Godspell last weekend in my little daughter&#8217;s Washington, DC public school. In a different DC public school years ago, I attended a PTA fundraiser that was pervasively religious, all of its rhetoric drawn explicitly from the evangelical Black church. I&#8217;ve argued here that it should be constitutional to teach [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4986","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-education-policy"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4986","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4986"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4986\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4986"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4986"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peterlevine.ws\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4986"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}