So if Boulder Valley Schools allows at Monarch High a gay/straight alliance club and a multicultural club and an Amnesty International club, why does it forbid a Bible club?
Well, BVS points out, disctrict policy says clubs are allowed only if there is a direct relationship to the school’s classes.
The gay/straight club, for example, ties into health classes. The multicultural club ties into diversity classes.
The application for the Bible club noted that it would tie into classes at the school that address the Bible and religion, including a literature class on the Old Testament.
Well … um … er … request denied anyway.
Besides, the district notes, they like to have teachers be involved in school clubs, in a supervisory/advisory role — and having a teacher involved with a Bible club would be against school policy that that spiritual paths of students should be defined by parents, not staff.
Yeah. Right.
We’ll see what a courts say.
(via JillMatrix)
The students asked to start a Bible club in September “to teach students biblical principles that will help them in life.”
On the application, the students said the club would serve as an extension of Monarch High School classes that address the Bible and religion, including a literature class on the Old Testament.
Boulder Valley’s policy, approved in 1984, stipulates that student clubs are allowed only if there is a direct relationship to the school’s classes.
Debatable. They’re not talking about discussing the Bible as literature or Christianity as a religion, but rather about teaching the religion itself, or at least part of it.
Say some mischevious students wanted to form a Ritual Magick club and said that, well, the Salem Witch trials got mentioned in history and occult rites come up in literature here and there and in heavy metal lyrics from the ’70s quite a lot. And they’re not going to discuss ritual magick, they’re gonna teach it. On school property, with some school staffer roped into supervising.
Neither one is how I want my tax dollars spent.
The school’s gonna lose though.
And the multicultural club or gay/straight alliance or AI clubs aren’t going to be teaching?
If kids wanted to put together a Ritual Magick club, I wouldn’t have any objection per se. The facilities cost is minimal (running the lights), though I don’t know what the pay issues would be regarding staff oversight. As long as they weren’t burning down the classrooms, stabbing each other, or ingesting illegal substances, so be it.
Or you can go the route of schools that have been forced by courts to allow gay/straight alliance clubs if they allow others, and have simply shut all the clubs down.
Yes Dave, Utah…the land of freedom. The Utah solution the the G/SA was to end all student groups.
As a grad of BVSD, and having been forced to spend a semester in Bible Study Class (The Bible as Literature, no Indoctrination here), and having to buy a KJV bible with my own money. I can’t see why BVSD is all of a sudden having a problem with a bible study club. The one requirment for clubs/groups is that they have a teacher as a sponsor. The artical in the RMN stated that there was a teacher willing to be the club Sponsor…so no problem. Teachers are not paid for time spent doing Extracurricular things, just more unpaid, Volunteer work.
And after having listened to the leader of the CLJ on the radio, BVSD is going to lose big time.
I wasn’t suggesting that the Utah solution (I think it’s happened elsewhere, too) was the best, by any means. I think it’s far too draconic a response to what is, in reality, not that big a deal, IMO.
Oh yeah…Randy, I forgot. The 1984 student club/group rule change was because Conservative parents in BVSD got upset that we (and I use the to mean through out the district) were playing D&D in the Gifted and Talented club. No direct relationship to school classes. Gone! It bacame a really boring group in 1984.
Though, the Rodeo (Yes, at the time Broomfield had a Rodeo team/club, and the FFA) and the FCA continued after the change in policy.
And yes Dave, you are correct, it isn’t that big a deal, especially when you currently allow the FCA as a school club.
Sure the gay/straight alliance will be teaching. No idea what… safe sex? The Multicultie group probably fits right into the curriculum, dammit. Anyway, the thing is, should they be teaching a religion, not about religions, on state property? Yeah, the Ritual Magick example isn’t good, more like — do they allow the Wahhabi club, the Satanist club, the Aryan Nations sect of Christianity (well, the claim they’re Christians), etc.? Any of them might have been mentioned in one class or another. Things like the parent-made plaques with religious messages on the walls of schools after 9-11 don’t bother me. Teaching any religion on state property does.
As a kids’ organization, I don’t mind if they meet in the same facilities as other kids’ organizations. YMMV.
Randy
In the “free market place o’ ideas” all things must be allowed. If a group of kids want’s to start up a Bible Club, then let them start up a Bible Club. And, if another group of kids wants to set up an Athiest, a Qoran, or a Wiccan Club then they get the same freedom of association.
But, if one of these groups uses school time and/or equipment or material to prostilize (sp?) that might go over the edge.
And most schools have guidlines about “hate speech” which would preclude the Aryan Nation folks from starting a group like that.
You should be more worried about religous groups getting Federal Tax Dollars without having to follow the same rules and guidelines as other non-profit organizations.
Dear Dave,
I am a senior at Monarch High School and have seen for myself how this issue is impacting my school. The majority of students are siding with the district and the girls in question have spent an awful lot of time bragging about what they are doing. More than anything this seems to be a ploy for attention. The group of kids who would form the Bible club already meet on school grounds and are left alone to do as they wish while remaining unsanctioned by the school. It is the popular opinion of my classmates that this comes down to a separation of church and state and we would like them to remain separate. The groups request was denied on the grounds of being non-curriculem based and indeed such a club would be. The claim that the Gay-Straight Alliance and Multicultural clubs don’t connect to the curriculum is false, they connect to very specific classes such as health and the understanding diversity class. There is not a class currently offered that adresses the Bible as anything other than a title of an ancient text. That does not constitute support for this club. Should the school district lose this lawsuit I can as good as guarantee that there will be a student response against the court which may go as far as a series of appeals to undo the action. I just wanted to make sure that somewhere the student population involved could have a say in this seeing as how we are the ones who will be exposed to this. It seems to me that this issue has been taken out of the community which it is based in. Thank you.
Thanks, MoHiKid. It’s good to hear the perspective of at least one party at the school.
The purpose of the Constitution, or one of them, is to provide a law of the land beyond what just the local community is interested in. If the BVSD board decided, with the consent of the community, that everyone had to have a cross branded on their forehead, the Constitution would protect against that, as well, regardless of the community sentiment.
If this is merely a “ploy for attention” on the part of the individuals that want to start up the club, then shame on them — but it doesn’t mean that the club is not a legitimate gathering. It does mean it’s likely that it will not last long, though.
I’m a big believer in the separation of church and state, too — but that means the state must be inclusive and tolerant of all religions (or lack thereof). Hence my agreement with Boulder Dude above that a Koran Club, for example, should be equally tolerated.
It’s true that the individuals involved can meet in private, even on school grounds, just as any other gathering of students can. The same could be said for any of the other groups that have obtained formal recognition, whether it’s the ones listed above, or the Pipe Band or Rocket Science clubs.
As to the question of the extent to which the curriculum is tied to the proposed Bible Club’s purpose, it looks like that’s going to be for a court to decide. From what I’ve read, though, I’d say that the argument isn’t a very solid one — the curriculum ties to other classes are sort of dubious in some cases, too, or at least no more concrete than what’s been mentioned here. I’d say it’s fair to have the administration and school board’s decisions challenged in court.
OK. here is the deal. I highly doubt they are trying to get attention. But you say G/S/A club is part of the health curriculum? Since when? The only things i ever heard about it is that we should just respect everybody… Gay, straight, CHRISTIANS… alike… If we have a group for Gay people, that we should respect, shouldn’t we, that we respect as well, let Christians start their own club? Why not? If our schools are as tolerable as they say they are, then why won’t they let Christians meet together, in an official meeting? The truth is, they aren’t. They aren’t tolerable. They allow everybody to show their true selves, but Christians. We must hide, and can’t stand out. I think that if they don’t actually force upon anybody to attend this club, and that no ideas are forced then it should be alright to have this club. Why are you denying us just this one thing?
I agree that the tie between the G/S Alliance and the Health curriculum is either really stretching, or is sort of insulting.
Two questions:1) Does the Bible Club need to meet as a school club? Could these godly teenagers not just meet at another venue? Are there not other institutions that might be happy to host a Bible Club, say a Church or a Theological School?
2. Are all clubs that meet at school supposed to be related to learning? What type of learning? Is math club ok but an RPG club not since they are a “game?” Since clubs for gays and lesbians are ok (under the health department), what about clubs for short, nearsighted people?
1. Certainly there are other venues. I believe that the article mentions that the Bible Club (unrecognized) meets at a nearby church at present. However, it’s certainly more convenient for the kids to meet at the school, and why that convenience should be alloted to some groups and not others is the crux of the matter.
2. The school district rules require a connection between courses and any clubs that are formed.
I think it’s coming down to some admin person at the school deciding what is politcally correct and what is not. Let’s face it, in the current climate of our culture, being involved in a western religion is not polically correct. The context in which religious beliefs are referred to is usually condescending. So, because something isn’t cool or PC, should it not be allowed? So long as the group isn’t forcing attendance or engaging in illegal activities, why deny their right to gather if the facilities are available and an adult volunteer is their to act as guice/chaperone?
In response to Randy’s comment on tax dollars: So because you “feel” that a religious group meeting in a school is a waste or wrong, you would deny them the facilities supported by your tax dollars? What about the parents who feel the the G/SA club is a violation of their beliefs and would deny their tax dollars? Or parents feeling that an RPG club leads to beliefs in violence so they shouldn’t be supported? My point is that inclusivness should include all groups: Gay/Straight alliance, Audio Visual, and religion (regardless of affiliation).
Well lets see if this works…
Looks like BVSD decided let the kids have their clubb after all.
TheStory here…
I’m glad to see it. Thanks for the update, Stan.