School tries to silence fifth grader’s speech on religion

[cbayer]

http://www.salon.com/2013/12/17/school_tries_to_silence_fifth_graders_speech_on_religion/

TUESDAY, DEC 17, 2013 08:36 AM MST

A Florida student writes about injustices committed "In the Name of Religion"

MARY ELIZABETH WILLIAMS

Zachary Golob-Drake is the kind of kid any school would be proud to have representing it. And last week, the Tampa, Florida fifth grader won a first place blue ribbon in a class contest for his speech about how to make the world “a better place.” He was then set to deliver that speech to his entire fourth and fifth grade, and, if he did well, go on to represent his school at the regional 4-H Tropicana Public Speech contest. Instead, the boy says the school tried to strip him of his prize and block him from sharing his speech with the school.

Entitled “In the Name of Religion,” Golob-Drake’s brief speech notes that “The world’s major religions all have messages about coexisting,” but “Religious differences have always sparked conflict, even leading to warfare and mass murder.” As examples, he cites the Crusades, the campaigns of Genghis Khan and the attacks on the United States of 9/11. He ends by stating, “Religion provides moral guidance for most of the seven billion people on the earth” and invoking the Golden Rule of “Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.” Seems reasonable enough. The boy says that after he won the prize, “I was excited and happy to represent my school.”

But then Golob-Drake says the assistant principal Candice Dodd told him that “She thought my speech wasn’t appropriate for fourth and fifth graders and she thought that probably I would have to rewrite my speech, take the religion out or not compete.” When he said he wanted to think about it, “She said to me probably the fairest thing to do is to take your ribbon.” Shocked at the sudden reversal, his mother and brother talked to the school, which then returned his ribbon and agreed to let him deliver the speech – if his classmates brought in permission slips from their parents. School District Spokeswoman Tanya Arja says the problem wasn’t that it was critical of religion, but that “The concern was over the topic of mass murders.” And a WFLA report adds that the school asserted the topic was “a little too deep for fourth and fifth graders” – despite, apparently, the fact that it was written by a fifth grader.

Discussing religion in public school is a tricky matter. There are seemingly endless battles over whether God should be pledged to in the classroom, whether Bibles should be handed out to students and whether students should use their valedictorian speeches to say the Lord’s Prayer. How do we encourage kids to be questioning and critical about the world in which they live without imposing ideology on them, without turning a space that ought to be free of religion into one in which religion is discussed and debated?

more at link

[cleanhippie]

1. I thought that, at least in FL, if a student brings up the topic, religion is ok?

Must be that that rule only applies when the student is advocating for Christianity.

[DetlefK]

2. The example for Genghis Khan is wrong.

The medieval Mongols were pretty tolerant when it came to religion: Most were Shamanists, a few were Muslims, very few were Christians.

Though Genghis Khan himself was deeply religious man, I doubt he had religious motives: Hunting, raiding, pillaging, warfare, those had been the everyday lifestyle of Mongols for centuries!

The only difference was that the unification under Genghis Khan's rule forced them to set aside their internal conflicts and gave them the numbers to launch really big wars.
Before Genghis Khan, the mightiest lords could wield about 10,000 warriors, when calling in favours and allies. Genghis Khan's united army was 120,000 warriors strong at its peak, not counting auxiliaries like chinese siege-engineers.

[okasha]

3. You're right.

The idea that every movement--military, philosophical, whatever--that's headed by a religious person is somehow religious in nature is a widely accepted fallacy.