Raymond Cruz was recommended by the 3rd District CC rep, Chris Valenzano, as deserving of the endorsement during his last run office. Mr. Cruz is in a different district.

Chris V. used to intern for Tony Strickland and he is currently on the County Board of Education. Chris and his wife and Tony's mother are currently the Republican representatives on the CC.

Uh-oh, a Christian. Better keep him out of government, that whole church-state separation thing. You wouldn't want his Christian beliefs influencing his actions on the school board!

Brian, my first impression is that he shouldn't have to give up his seat on the central committee. They're two different roles, and I don't see any particular conflict of interest arising.

I agree with you Owen that he shouldn't have to give up his seat but he may have to recuse himself from voting if there is a conflict of interest.

I think Brian said the only reason he mentioned Mr. Cruz's religious beliefs is that the candidate himself brought it up himself in his last run.

It is pretty clear that religion and public education don't mix - but if he gets votes that way, more power to him. The Public Education system is broken anyway. We are raising a nation of illiterates.

As far as I know there is no conflict of interest for serving in public office and being on a central committee. One of the goals for a central committee is to find quality candidate to run and serve in public office. So there would be no reason to resign from a central committee.

Does Mr. Cruz intend to hire his wife and pay for her work with campaign donations again in this campaign?

Will Mr. Cruz accept free campaign literature from the VCRCC in the form of Membership COntributions to finance his campaign?

If Mr. Cruz accepts the help of the VCRCC will he disclose to the public that his campaign is being underwritten by an organization whose largest contributor is Altria/Tobacco money?

I brought it up because Ray Cruz made it a major point on his last campaign to explain his background, experience, and qualifications. If I thought for any reason Raymond Cruz wanted it to be private I wouldn't have mentioned it.

Cruz is calling for only creationism to be taught in public schools, gosh Owen, do you agree with Cruz? The law is not with Mr. Cruz, doesn't this mean he is trying to force his Christian extremism on others? Does McCain also believe that only creationism should be taught in public schools?

Campaign Contributions - you bring up a interesting point - who was his wife?

Should a school board candidate be accepting tobacco money in the form of Membership Communications?

One of Cruz's biggest campaign contributors was Dean Kunicki, Ventura County Board of Education.

Dean Kunicki is the person who solicited the money from Altria in the first place.

What kind of lesson are we teaching students that School Board Trustees want to win their election with the help of money from tobacco companies.

Interesting question. Why isn't the Democratic Central Committee running some of it's people for office?

Campaign Contributions says "What kind of lesson are we teaching students that School Board Trustees want to win their election with the help of money from tobacco companies."

Get a clue! What kind of influence would a tobacco company have over a school board trustee?

I say what kind of lessons are we teaching our children when we vote for candidates who are funded by and beholden to special interest teacher unions who do not support higher standards and accountabilitiy?

Why do religion and public education not mix? I fundamentally disagree that we should keep religion out of the public space. Moreover, without a knowledge of the religion, history and most classic literature are unintelligible.

JTF: I'm so sick of people using single issues to divide us. When I support a candidate, I look at the whole person. I don't pick based on single issues, and I would hope you don't as well. Americans are tired of these kinds of cynical tactics.

Why is believing in Creationism "Christian extremism?" I suppose that by your definition, believing in anything written in the bible is "extremism."

I think evolution should be taught in schools. Critically, if possible. It is, after all, the predominant scientific explanation, and anyone who wants to go to college should know of it.

Again, though, I don't vote on single issues, and I'm not even sure that is his position. Our children are poorly served if we focus on political side issues rather than educational policies.

Creationalism denotes the Earth is 6,000 years old and man as we know him and dinosaurs roamed the Earth together. As a previous poster so eloquently stated, should we also start teaching that the Earth rides on the back of a turtle as some cultures believe?

There are so many interpretations of the Bible - especially the Old Testament.

Focus on education, not idoctrination.

Simple question Owen, do you think Cruz is right that only creationism should be taught in science classes and that evolution should not. Does McCain support only teaching creationism in science class? Do you and McCain really believe the earth is only 5,000 years old? Don't you think it will hurt Simi Valley students if the Cruz extremism is forced down their throats? Don't you believe a trustee should uphold the laws of the State of California?! Try to answer these questions Owen instead of doing double talk the way McCain does. McCain has become a real flip flopper.

JTF: What part of "I think evolution should be taught in schools," did you not understand? You consider that double talk? Let that be proof enough of your judgement. Unfortunately, I'm not really free to talk in public anymore about the McCain campaign. For a general response to your rhetoric, let's just defer to your willingness to ignore straightforward sentences.

Katie: Education is indoctrination. Especially during the early years. "There are so many interpretations of the Bible." Yes, and the Russians love their children too. We're not talking about finer points of theology (not that I'm opposed to it). Funny how you say there's many interpretations of the Bible, then give a simplistic definition of Creationism. Yes, there are many different creation myths. What is wrong, however, with the school system teaching the predominant one in the region where it's located? I'd be willing to bet that far more people in Ventura Country believe in the Genesis account than the turtle one.

Katie, are you really promoting the idea that we ought to select a board member based on one particular piece of curriculum? Evolution should be taught. I'm neutral on whether Creationism should, it doesn't really matter much to me.

I'm far more concerned about making sure that our children get a good all-around education, and putting the focus on them, instead of entrenched interests and ideas. Let's not allow our children's education to be sidetracked because of one tiny thing that's not going to be decided by this particular individual anyways.

I guess we're not allowed to talk about Hope and Change when it comes to education . . .

I'm the wrong person to ask about the quality of education in the public school systems. Both of my children went to private school.

But I have seen the product of public education and it isn't pretty. Nor are many of the school boards.

Can any school board member take money from tobacco and then be trusted to make sure that the dangers of tobacco product are part of the health education curriculum in the schools?

Owen, my kids went to a school that taught Creationlism so I know of what I speak. And it is wrong to use the "predominant view" as a basis for logic - banning interracial marriage, treating non-whites and women as second class citizens, etc. were and in some countries still are the predominant view.

Creationalism denotes a specific set of parameters, intellegent design is more better!

The state, not the local school district, sets the standards for science classes.

Creationism is not the belief held by a majority of people locally. It isn't the belief that all Christians hold either. Many churches are fine with evolution as a scientific theory.

As far as Raymond Cruz's campaign employees please post a link as proof or I will be taking down the comment.

I think the issue here is whether Mr. Cruz is a single issue candidate (creationism). And, are single issue candidates a benefit or a detriment to the workings of a board? Would this cause a schism that will make decision-making more difficult on other issues?

And, it is legal for Mr. Cruz to run for school board and remain a member of the Central Committee. He should abstain from any votes allocating funds that could benefit his own campaign.

So for the record. Owen will not say if McCain only wants creationism taught, but Owen thinks Cruz is wrong on his creationism only stance and Owen thinks it is okay for a school board member candidate to use tobacco money for his campaign.

Wow! I just watched that youtube video of Ray Cruz and he did not seem to know that Simi had passed a school bond recently. I won't be voting for him!

Leslie,

I never brought up if it was legal or not as it is of course legal to be on a school board and a private group's leadership committee.

Just wondering if it is something that matters to people.

Katie, you stated that both of your children went to private schools where they were taught creationism. If creationism is such a bad thing, why did you send your children there? I also find it odd that you praise secular public schools for teaching evolution while excluding creationism, yet at the same time say things like, "I have seen the product of public education and it isn't pretty".

You must believe that private schools are doing a superior job educating children since you sent your children to private schools, and since you clearly have a very low opinion of public schools. Yet exposing your children to the scourge of creationism apparently hasn’t harmed your children, hindered them academically, or somehow poisoned their minds. And yet you seem so determined to insure that other people’s children aren’t exposed to the same material that you were willing to pay for your children to receive.

One of the primary purposes of our education system is to teach students how to reason, and to open up their minds to different ideas and perspectives. So why are we so afraid to let children know that there can be many different opinions and theories on a given subject? The same folks that insist that we have an obligation to educate our children on sex education at the same time refuse to allow children to be exposed to the idea of creationism. We tell our children to celebrate diversity, but at the same time actively filter out material that a small group of individuals deems to be inappropriate. According to Katie, the “religion and public education don’t mix�. So it is OK to hand out condoms, but not to mention God?

As Katie so aptly points out, our public education system doesn’t have such a good track record. With dropout rates of 25% state-wide, high levels of illiteracy, consistently low achievement scores, violence in our schools, high rates of teen pregnancy, and wide-spread drug use, is creationism really the problem here? Do you really think that banning God is a solution to anything? It is common for those who support teaching creationism to be accused of wanting to push our educational system back to the dark ages. I have news for you, our educational system is in the dark ages, and creationism had nothing to do with it.

I also sent my children to a very orthodox Catholic school where they were taught evolution with a caveat of God behind it.

There are plenty of private schools out there that teach religion. Creationlism is a religion based belief. It should stay in private schools.

I don't think the lack of religion is what ails public schools - it's the parents, society and the unions. If Mr. Cruz promises to address those unpopular but necessary changes, he'll be a force. He probably won't get the vote though.

As Brian says, the curriculum is state mandated - Simi needs someone who can make sure that happens. Anything else is noise and wastes time and money.

Wouldn't the public schools have to teach all religions if they choose to teach Christianity?

Don't burn me at the stake it's just a question?

Wouldn't the public schools have to teach all religions if they choose to teach Christianity?

Don't burn me at the stake it's just a question.

"What is wrong, however, with the school system teaching the predominant one in the region where it's located?" (Owen)

Here is the problem. Do we want to go back to a time when state & local govts each made the decision which religion would be made official and which wont? Owen, your way is a fast track to the Bosnia-fication of America. We would quickly have state oppression along religious lines, movements of whole groups of people from one state to another and the left-overs (most likely Jews and atheists) struggling to avoid being targeted for violence and oppression by the majority.

There is always a chance they might fight back.

Any candidate who brings up creationism vs. evolution as the first thing they want to focus on is telling you they want to talk about this, because they don't want to talk about how to fix your public schools. It's a Red Herring.

The question shouldn't be about creation/evolution science (6000 years vs. 6 billion) - the questions should be about science and math SCORES (or the lack thereof).

Tim,

Welcome back! Thanks for reading and commenting.

Anytime you want to write a guest entry about your past campaign or another topic let me know.

I agree that creationism is a nonstarter. Even groups that support it call it intelligent design because the courts have said over and over creationism is religion, not science.

Looking at science and math scores requires research into data from past years, state standards, and researching the practices uses by schools with similar demographics.

That might be really hard to condense into a sound bite or to stir the passions of partisans.

Brian -
Sorry, didn't mean to sound like I was making a declaration on the legality of being on a Central Committee and running for school board. I meant it more in the, "since it's legal you have to accept it" tone. I do think it's good information to know about a candidate, but doesn't say everything about them. Past school board members who have been members of the Central Committee include Mike Dunn and Greg Stratton - they had/have very different approaches to education.

Now if a Central Committee had part of it's plan to fill school board positions with single-issue extremists or people controlled by certain donors, that's a different angle, and I suppose what you're trying to find out here. But being a Central Committee member doesn't automatically make it wrong.

I'm the product of public education, K-college. Brian, too, as far as I understand. It's not as bad as we sometimes make it out to be. Much depends on the individual and their family, as it should. I don't remember learning about evolution in any of my science classes, and I certainly wasn't taught creationism (Intelligent Design hadn't yet become a buzzword).

"Predominant view" is the essence of Democracy. Argue against it if you will, but I'll take it over elitist declarations from on high. Brian, "view of majority" is most practically demonstrated by elected representatives. If the people elect to the majority representatives who advocate Creationism, then that is, for all intents and purposes, the majority view. Again, I'm in favor of democracy against elitist top-down control. Why is that such a controversial point?

I agree with Tim. People bring this up to avoid discussing the real issues. As Brian, Katie, and others have pointed out, he can't change this anyways. Why do so many people on this board want to make it an issue? So they don't have to face real questions and real challenges. To those trying to derail the discussion, I reiterate from above - let's not allow our children's education to be sidetracked because of one tiny thing that's not going to be decided by this particular individual anyways.

GS and Nobody: On my very first post back in a long time, you've reminded my why I left. For you this is a theatre of the absurd. Talking with you is pointless. Fortunately, most voters live in the real world. Nobody can be considered well educated in this culture if they don't understand the basics of Western Civilization, which is impossible without at least a cursory knowledge of Christianity. I'm not opposed to teaching about other religions, as well, but Christian thought and culture pervade our history, it's the foundation on which much of our common heritage is built. You would sacrifice quality education to your ideology of the moment. Forgive me if I consider that short-sighted.

Nobody: Christians are persecuted all over the world, still killed today. Show me where Christians are burning people at the stake. http://www.persecution.org/ Though that might not bother your sensibilities.

GS: Your characterization is shockingly ignorant of history, and condescending towards Americans. America has never had an official religion, and is one of the most tolerant places in the history of the world. Do you really think so little of Americans that your scenario could possibly happen? Moreover, what occurred in Bosnia was complicated, and took place in an entirely different historical, cultural, geographical, and identity context. Apparently, for you, Americans are a bunch of little Eichmanns, and the moment Creationism is taught in schools, we'll go on a rampage slaughtering Jews and atheists.

Democratic Party: Please give people like nobody and GS a huge microphone and buy them airtime. Just let the voters know what your most vocal supporters truly think, and we'll have no problem at the polls.

No,Owen, little Eichmans are the people who wrap their rhetoric in a flag and claim to be Americans while they insist that the majority gets to make up whatever rules they want...such as allowing each state or county to decide what religion its schools will teach, regardless of what the nation's original social contract says.

Is this policy of let each state decide on its official religion part of McCain's platform also?

You guys really can't deal with straightforward sentences . . .

"America has never had an official religion"

Where did I ever propose otherwise? Keep trying to shift the discussion away from the issues that really matter. We all see it for what it is.

For SVUSD 2007 Life Sciences/Biology STAR Testing: 53% of students tested received a score considered proficient and above.

47% were considered basic or below.

For SVUSD in 2006 Life Sciences/Biology STAR Testing: 47% of the students tested received a score considered proficient and above.

While it doesn't seem like much, it's a 13% improvement in our science test scores from 06 to 07.

How can we get this test score even higher?

I know Tim Keaney has a lot of great ideas to improve science scores. I remember Donna Prenta admirably put out scholarships to help students in science and math. A few years ago it was brought to my attention that Jerre Reimers was involved in Robotic competitions with students.

These are fantastic things from a broader community and we need more of it.

I also think it'd be great to get the students engaged in science programs from college programs and fully execute more accelerated-style programs locally even considering strategic sourcing to learning centers for further improvement.

I'm sure we can continue to improve scores.

Well said Owen. It is refreshing to have contributors with thoughtful and unique perspectives, such as your own. Unfortunately ideas like yours don't sit well with the group-think mentality that is so prevalent around here, especially with those who have a vested interest in the status quo. I hope you keep blogging, but I certainly understand if you've lost your stomach for it.

For a young man, Owen is amusing to watch as he gains maturity. Perhaps one day he will recognize that the very religious freedoms that we all enjoy, also protect us from having Owen's religious dogma taught to our children in our public schools. If we want to hear that, we have the right to enroll our children in religious private schools.

What do YOU call it, Owen, when a state or local govt, through its voters, chooses which religion it will teach throughout its classrooms? You can play a game of semantics all you want but is all the same....THAT religion becomes the official religion of those classrooms.

So, by finding out you've backed yourself into an indefensible argument you're now trying to divert attention by claiming that I'm changing the subject?! Get real.

Again, does McCain agree with your policy about letting majority rule trump the Bill of Rights? I and a lot of blogs would love to know who McCain's surrounding himself with.

Scott,

Have you researched comparable school district scores to see how Simi Valley schools are doing in that context?

Brian,

Thanks for the kind words and the invite to write. I very well might take you up on it. Warmest greetings (and I do mean warm) from Central Texas.

Tim

Brian,

Thanks for the kind words and the invite to write. I very well might take you up on it. Warmest greetings (and I do mean warm) from Central Texas.

Tim

Owen,

I didn't make creationism an issue. It is a part of Raymond Cruz's past platform.

There is no law that stops the teaching of religion as part of the proper course work in local schools. For example, teaching the Bible as literature is not prohibited. Explaining moral arguments for and against slavery is not prohibited. The start of World History has a unit on the foundation's of Western Society and Judeo-Christian traditions. Read about it here:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/hstgrade10.asp

Some states have even tried to have electives in Biblical literature. But frequently they fall prey to religious groups that try to use the course not to promote the secular course outline but instead to promote their own view of Christianity, which differs from other Christian views.

I would be interested in a Bible as literature course if it was truly not heavily influenced by a faction or used as a tool to attack others.

But teaching creationism in a science classroom has been ruled as teaching religion, not science by many courts. It isn't even widely agreed upon by Christians. Have you read what the Vatican has had to say about it? What about mainstream Jewish or Islamic thought? I am not interested in altering a science class to bring in religious views.

When you said:

"Why do so many people on this board want to make it an issue?"

You got a key fact wrong. To my knowledge not a single board member has been bringing this up in Simi Valley. In fact, I only know of Raymond Cruz bringing it up as something that needs serious attention locally.

What needs more attention is school funding, making sure more students meet the requirements to transfer to a 4 year school, and test scores. But most of that isn't as exciting as religion in a science classroom.

Brian:

I'm a little concerned with the notion of the state and yourself wanting the Bible taught as literature. Literature is generally defined as "creative writing of recognized artistic value" and while many of the biblical stories have beautiful metaphors, wonderful story-telling, and great proverbs and psalms, I simply am not comfortable with the state defining or implying my bible as a work of artistic fiction.

I doubt many Jewish, Mormon, Islamic, or any other religion would want their word of God defined by the state as works of fiction either, but I could be wrong.

Brian: Do you think the New Testament is a work of fiction of non-fiction?

Brian:

What are the comparable districts? Do they have specified comparable districts?

Scott,

The courses that meet legal standards do not classify the Bible as fiction.

Read about the Texas case. I think a decent knowledge of the Bible helps out to understand much of literature. I would want it to be neutral on religious questions but explore the use of metaphor, the historical time period it was being written in, and the writing devices it uses.

Here is an article on the subject:

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/apr/15/nation/na-bible15

I am not endorsing their version of the class.

I do not believe the Bible should be taken literally. Nor do I believe it should be put in the fiction section of a library.

Comparable districts are determined by demographics including median income and other factors. They are listed somewhere in the maze that is the California government's website.

Does SVUSD openly list certain districts it compares with or do I have to go through the maze? (Please don't make me go through the maze.)

If a teacher get's the question from an inquiring student in these Bible classes, "is this bible fiction or non-fiction?"

What is the teacher instructed to say?

In addition, by not establishing any religion, is the state establishing the irrelevance of faith as a component of the education process?

I think this encapsulates Owen's concern more than an argument over creationism or intelligent design.

Isn't the state education system merely endorsing a non-religious critical agnosticism?

By saying nothing, it is saying everything.

Owen: I think to answer your concern about faith and piety being part of the education system, one must look no further than teaching solid English and American literature. Just reading a bit of Hawthorne's Scarlett Letter or Shakespeare's plays and you'll catch the greatest values of Western civilization.

Anyway, I hope that I answered a little bit of your concern.

Just don't tell too many on the left about the literature. I don't want them to know that literature is sneaking religion on campus everyday. :)

Scott,

I don't know anyone on the left opposed to religious themes in literature. I know many people opposed to a government endorsing a specific religion and worse yet a particular faction within that religion. The Vatican has spoken out against attacking evolution. Most mainline Protestants don't oppose evolutionary theory as valid science.

I would expect the teacher would explain that some view it as literature and some view it as fact. I would want a student to know the different sides to the story. To understand culture, history, and literature more atheists, agnostics, and believers should all know the basics of the Bible. I would make it an elective course so that those that already have a basic knowledge or are uncomfortable/not at all interested with the subject could avoid it.

The state or teachers aren't making religion irrelevant. America is a very religious nation and has been. Are you saying you want them to establish a religion?

Would you object to creationism being taught in public school biology classes?

I don't typically like the culture war personally because it is so divisive and pits people's entrenched views against each other in ways that turns discussion where we probably agree radioactive.

Anyway, I'd follow state law on the matter, but would encourage a way in communities to start a conversation on controversial topics such as these to end the culture war.

Am I saying I want them to establish a religion? No, I was saying those that use the establishment clause to keep religion out and demonize people like Ray Cruz also establish their own values in the process without seeing the hypocrisy and the consequences for better relations in the long term.

Those who use the legal system to keep out points of view are just as responsible for creating the culture war as those ostracized from the school system.

The public school system is everyone's and should reflect the marketplace of varying ideas even if I disagree with them.

Brian:

Since you are open to having bible class on campus as an elective, which I think is a pretty decent idea. How about a religious science or even an intelligent design class as an elective?

In addition, are you prepared and is the SEA prepared to defend teachers who may be terminated for teaching students the scientific weaknesses in evolutionary theory.

For instance, there is some debate about whether the fossil record shows any evidence of species evolving.

Another observation by anthropologists is that the famous ape to man progression is inaccurate and based on assertions not evidence.

If a teacher taught real flaws to Darwin, would you support termination?

CAP: "we have the right to enroll our children in religious private schools." Really, so you support vouchers? That's remarkable progress. Or do you just assume that everyone has the resources to enroll their kids in private schools?

Brian: when I said "board," I meant the blog, using oldspeak - admittedly confusing in this particular context. I would support a class that teaches about the major world religions. I have never said we should teach Christianity as Truth in public schools, and use teachers to convert kids. All I've said is what you agree with, that children need to have a basic understanding of Christianity and how it relates to our culture and history. GS and nobody know that they can't argue against that, so they pretend I'm arguing for forcing kids to go to daily services (while also insinuating that Americans are murderous maniacs, hanging on to civility by a thread). For them, it's perfectly acceptable for teachers to say that God doesn't exist, but an infraction of the highest order to say that he does. Their views are out of the mainstream, which is what counts in democracy. Perhaps that's why they're so opposed to democracy, and instead prefer small groups of elites to make enlightened decisions for us.

Parents can teach their children religion at home or take advantage of free churches or the free public library system. Teaching religious views isn't in the domain of public school systems.

Taking a religious stance on a school board is mere political posturing - a transparent effort to turn out the vote created for the more gullible. Real change comes from taking on the unions and the parents - which will never happen.

A school board member soliciting or taking tobacco money is a political no-no and leave the candidate really exposed. The Altria funds should be returned with a big Mea Culpa and perhaps a resignation or two.

I hate paying taxes to support public education when I also paid $$$ to send my kids to private school. But vouchers aren't going to happen for the forseable future. My children got religion but the parents mission was academic superiority (not hard when California places 48th in the nation for its public education results).

Owen, sure I endorse vouchers. We always have.

The majority don't redefine civil rights in our Country. We have a Constitution and Bill of Rights for that purpose.

Religion is great for many, but don't confuse religion with science. If you do, it shows that your scientific education is surely lacking.

Owen, your argument is bouncing all over the place, like a pinball, hoping to hit a bumper that'll score points.

"All I've said is what you agree with, that children need to have a basic understanding of Christianity and how it relates to our culture and history." No, Owen. That's NOT what you said.

This is what you said,

"What is wrong, however, with the school system teaching the predominant one in the region where it's located?" Two wholly different notions with a potential for two totally different results.

You may have meant something else but instead of clarifying that remark you went on the attack instead.

I have no problem with comparative religion being taught in public schools, as part of our kids social development. I've said this on several early Dennert threads. I'd just as quickly have an activist atheist suspended from the classroom as an activist baptist. What either does outside the classroom is their business.

I happen to have complete faith in God's existence. You apparently are so insecure about the matter that you don't believe God can take care of Himself and needs your earthly support in some scheme to carve up the Nation into religious fiefdoms. Again, maybe you didn't mean it that way but that's the conclusion I came up with and its the conclusion you should have challenged.

Instead, you adopted the classic far right battle stance of aiming labels and hoping they'll stick. labels like UltraLiberal, Atheist, UnAmerican, Anti-God.

As far as being out of the mainstream, most Americans DON'T want any particular brand of religion being taught by their schools. That makes YOU and yours the minority, and under your logic the state would have the right to bring the full force of the law down on your heads for not abiding by law of the land.

YOU are the one who advocated that each locality gets to choose which religion they would adopt in their schools. That's the part of your argument I challenged. Then you went off on your pinball shoot to avoid answering the questions I posed.

So again, Owen, is this 50 state official religions idea really yours or is it something McCain's also advocating in secret, as a way to pander to the far right fundies? I admit it'll look great on a new set of collectible US quarters. Fess up.

And one last thing....

"Their views are out of the mainstream, which is what counts in democracy." In case you didn't know, this is a paraphrase from a well-known Serbian patriot who was recently arrested and sent to The Hague for the murder of 10s of thousands of Moslems men, women & children...because their views were outside the mainstream.

Another of McCain's secret policies for a future America?

My comments on the matter have been consistent from the beginning. As have your anti-democratic rants and comparisons of Americans to blood-thirsty murderers. As for your belief that God can take care of himself, it reminds me of the story of William Carey: http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/special/131christians/carey.html

Yes, Owen, you are in the subset of society that believe only they see the true light. May you one day fly on your magic carpet with your copy of the Constitution and Bible to your maker. As long as you never attain a position of power, you can not do too much harm.

How well would Wm Carey have done had he insisted that each of the Moghul kingdoms choose to teach an official religion?

It was due to the universal toleration of those he depended upon for Carey to conduct his mission. The Christian mission is the noblest of all...until it's usurped by those who feel its not working efficiently enough for their tastes. Folow in Christ's foot steps, don't try to race ahead of Him.

Katie,

And who would those resignations from the VCRCC you are advocating for be exactly? Probably Osborn and Kunicki, I would imagine.

How convenient. Then you and Leslie could slide back into power, eh?

Owen,

I don't know any teachers that use their classroom to deny God exists. Did you experience that at all? I don't have a problem with a teacher briefly mentioning their religion or letting it be known. For example, wearing a Star of David or a Crucifix doesn't seem to violate the establishment clause to me.

Scott,

The Bible is the foundation of many religious beliefs including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It is also frequently a part of literature and political debate. For that reason I think it has a wide audience including atheists, agnostics, and many faiths. It would also serve students that want to be writers or other creative types.

I do not support creationism being taught in a public school classroom.

The people who push for creationism are coming from a small segment of the community. They are not typically mainline Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, agnostic, or atheist.

I would support a religious studies class that is broad and serves the purpose of many, not a few.

The main reason that the class is hard to start is some religious groups try to hijack the class to push their version of religion on public school students.

Mike - I was just a volunteer/worker bee and have none, zero, no, nada, zilch interest in re-joining the VCRCC.

Just calling cards as I see them - and there is no room for tobacco money on school boards.

Brian - I have to say UCSB did not treat believers very kindly. I took a lot of science classes and the disrespect the professors had towards Christians was pretty palpable. Of course, these professors also had a fair amount of disrespect towards work as well so I put them in the "useless" category.

In 2006 Ray Cruz made it a platform of his campaign that he wanted creationism taught in Simi Schools, and unless he flip flops like McCain, it will be part of his platform again. Cruz has not denied being part of the Christian Coalition and as a member of the VCRCC, it seems they are all hard core Christian Coalition members intent on forcing their values on others through school boards and city councils. McCain flip flopped on off shore oil drilling, three days after saying he wanted oil drilling on pristine California beaches and coasts he received a check for one million dollars from big oil. McCain like Bush, is bought and paid for by big oil, if you like high gas prices vote McCain.

Katie,

That's right. You've already joined the VCDCC. Thanks for reminding me.

Scott,

Thanks for reading and commenting on my blog. I know many value your input.

I am looking into that comparative district question that you posed.

Owen,
Your idea of teaching "the prominent religion" in public schools is moronic. Owen you're suggesting America become Afghanistan pre-911. Christians that kill and/or force their religion on people are the same as Muslims that kill and/or force their religion on people. If you believe in your God so much let Him decide who dies and who He wants in his flock.

Owen,
I don't know what college you went to but it didn't teach common sense that's for sure. Owen you are a perfect example of where public schools fail. CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS. You ain't got it.

Owen: I'm very happy to report that California High School textbooks use the version of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address that uses the term "Under God".

There are many versions floating around that do or do not use this term, but this one follows the one most accounts accept.

I believe Statuary Hall in the Capitol where Lincoln served as a Congressman used to perform church services on Sunday. Lincoln even attended church services at the Capitol while President.

In addition, California sent two statues to Statuary Hall. One in honor of Thomas Starr King, a Unitarian Preacher, largely credited with keeping California in the Union during the Civil War and Father Junipero Serra famed for establishing many of our California missions.

Sorry for the length, but I think I just want to point out faith in the public square appears to be thriving. Below is the Gettysburg Address with "Under God"...

The Gettysburg Address (1863)

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate—we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, UNDER GOD, shall have a new birth of freedom— and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Owen,

You know we disagree on many fundamental issues.

I didn't see you type anything about forced conversions or only teaching one version of religion. I also didn't see you endorse faith in a science classroom.

Students should be aware of the major tenets, beliefs, and practices of the followers of the major religions of the world, regardless of their own belief. If they want to go deeper there are local worship groups that can help. You agree with that basically?

We should love thy neighbor by understanding their belief systems.

With how many posts are on this entry I think the conversation has pretty much run its course.

The comment from Tim Keaney summed up my thoughts the most.

Owen, thanks for reading and commenting on my blog. I appreciate it.

Amen.

Brian:

Most private companies usually have access to analysis of like companies. For instance, there is a group called Risk Management and Associates (Formerly Robert Morris and Associates named for the famed financier of the Revolution) that actually develops financial standards based on asset size or sales revenue.

I'd be curious to know if school districts are developing like standards of performance such as test scores, financial standards and so on.

Let me know what you find.

One thing about blogs you can't say you didn't say something.

Owen said;
"What is wrong, however, with the school system teaching the predominant one in the region where it's located"?

It is obvious why the McCain campaign doesn't want Owen to comment in public and Brian Dennert does.

None of you can prove there is a god anymore than you can dis-prove there is a tooth fairy. Keep your religion in church, not in the classroom Mr. Cruz.

I agree public school classrooms should not be used to push a religion on the students. That is why I oppose teaching creationism which is a religious, not scientific, concept.

Brian, would you support the academic study of religions in PS classrooms if it weren't part of the science curriculum?

GS,

Yes.

It is a part of many social studies classes already.

I also support expanding the course offerings to include religious studies classes. Most people don't object to being exposed to a variety of ideas as long as there isn't a clear intention of pushing an agenda.

I think a 9th grade world religions class would be a great idea.

I think diversity should be taught in preschool. Religious studies in the third grade.

In your opinion, what's the best movie ever created?

Cant resist!!!

THE QUIET MAN