Smrt Lernins

Perhaps it’s proof that God loves the secular homeschoolers, too–or at the very least, humors us–that a friend of mine should pass this link along to me just in time for a Secular Thursday. Pharyngula, a blogger at ScienceBlogs write about his dismay over the way a “science” textbook published by Bob Jones University presents the topic of electricity. I am equally dismayed.

You can view the scanned page here or at ScienceBlogs, but here’s the text:

Electricity is a mystery. No one has ever observed it or heard it or felt it. We can see and feel and hear only what electricity does. We know that it makes light bulbs shine and irons heat up and telephones ring. But we cannot say what electricity itself is like.

We cannot even say where electricity comes from. Some scientists say that the sun may be the source of most electricity. Other think that the movement of the Earth produces some of it. All anyone knows is that electricity seems to be everywhere and that there are many ways to bring it forth.

How would you have to change the way you get ready for school if you did not use electricity?

“The voice of thy thunder was in the heaven: the lightnings lightened the world: the earth trembled and shook.” Psalm 77:18

Ok, what in the happy crap is that? I’ll tell you what it’s not: Science.

Did the person who wrote that book ever read an actual science text? Do they actually know anything about electricity? Have they ever even bothered to look up electricity on Wikipedia? We do, in fact, know what electricity is and where it comes from. It’s generated by a myriad sources. It isn’t, as Pharyngula points out, “something like oil, a substance lying in large deposits that must be harvested and poured into your hairdryer to make it work,” as the BJU text’s author seems to think.

Obviously, BJU’s presentation of things like the origin of life and changes in species is going to be significantly different from that of secular science. While I think their presentation is based on an entirely non-scientific premise, I acknowledge that said premise is going to lead to a certain way of presenting certain topics. Fine. I won’t teach that to my kids, but if you think people lived with dinosaurs and the earth is only 6000 years old, you feel free to teach that to your kids.

There is NO excuse, however, for completely misrepresenting topics like electricity. Really, how is explaining about particles and currents not compatible with creationism? Can someone explain that to me? Does electricity have to be dumbed down and falsified and just…just…stupid-ized purely for the sake of making it different from secular science? What is the purpose here?

I’m absolutely baffled, is what I am. Can’t you teach your children a creationist viewpoint without screwing up the rest of science? DO you have to distill it down to something, as Pharyngula points out, worthy of the Insane Clown Posse [if you aren't familiar with ICP, please be warned, anything related to this band contains EXPLICIT LANGUAGE]?

I just find it hard to believe that Christian homeschoolers really want their children to be dumber than a Juggalo. Why would they tolerate this insulting level of pseudoscience?

“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” — Voltaire

* * *

Who am I?

Who am I, to tell you what you can and can’t teach your child?

Who am I, to tell you that you must teach things that I believe in or be forbidden to teach?

Who am I, to tell you that because I am a secular homeschooler, that you must educate your children secularly or be forbidden to teach?

Who am I, to tell you that because I am a classical homeschooler, that you must educate your children classically or be forbidden to teach?

Who am I, to tell you not to impart your religious, moral, ethical, ideological, etc. beliefs to your child?

Who am I, to tell you to lie to your child and tell them that what you believe to be true isn’t true (whether or not I think it’s true)?

Who am I, to tell you that you must teach all values and all beliefs to be equal, whether you believe them to be or not?

Who am I, to tell you that what you teach must be regulated carefully, because you might teach the “wrong” thing?

Who am I, to tell you that what you teach must be regulated carefully, because someone else might teach the “wrong” thing?

Who am I, to legislate for everyone what is the “wrong” and what is the “right” thing?

Who am I, to legislate morality?

Who am I, to legislate belief?

Who am I?

Here’s a hint, I’m not Jean Valjean.

PhD in Parenting has been writing about homeschooling lately. She currently lives in Germany, where homeschooling is illegal and children are under legal compulsion to attend public school. Today, she wrote a post about different schooling methods and how she views them through the lens of the “right and duty to learn.”

On the whole, I found her opinions on homeschooling to be quite positive, but I take issue with some of the concerns she mentions in her post:

At the same time, there are things that concern me about home education:

• I worry that parents who homeschool for ideological reasons may be shielding their children from the realities of the world (other belief systems, other cultures) and their selves (sexuality, gender issues, personal expression), which I believe is dangerous for the individual and for society.
• I worry that a small minority of parents who homeschool for ideological reasons may be doing so specifically to pass on discriminatory and hateful viewpoints to their children.
• I worry that parents who take their children out of school out of frustration with the school system (generally or for their specific child) may feel forced into home educating their children when really the school system should be changing and adapting to address those concerns.
• I worry that children who grow up under the guidance of the most gentle, patient, loving and inspiring parents without being exposed to teachers who are strict, ineffective, jerks, play favourites, or use coercive methods may not learn how to deal with those types of people before entering the workforce and may be at a disadvantage (although to be fair, a lot of today’s schooled youth aren’t dealing with them themselves anyway – they are getting mommy and daddy to do it for them).

You all know how I feel about the “school as a place to learn to toughen up for the ‘real world’” stance, so I’ll just link to my comment I left on the PhD in Parenting blog and leave it at that.

What about her other concerns, like the idea that parents who homeschool may be doing so to instill hateful or dangerous ideologies in their children? How harmful is “immersing [our] children in [our] beliefs and shielding them from others?” Are parents really more or less likely to attempt to instill their ideologies in their children based on where their child schools? Are homeschooled children more likely to be racist, bigoted, etc. than their institutionally-schooled counterparts? To what extent should the State or the collective get to choose the ideologies to which your child should be exposed?

And what about her assertion that “in most cases [parents choose to homeschool because] there are perfectly reasonable and factual things taught as part of the school curriculum that the parents do not want their children to learn (evolution, birth control, homosexuality, other religious beliefs)?” Was this a motivating factor for you? For the homeschoolers you know? To what extent? Was it because the curricula covered topics you felt were inaccurate or inappropriate? Was it because the curricula were too religious or not religious enough?

And finally, what about her statement that she “believe[s] more strongly in the child’s right to an education than [she] do[es] in the parent’s right to raise their children any way they want?”  Is a child’s right to a specific set of academic knowledge greater than your rights as a parent to pass on your morality, ethics, culture, or ideology? If you’re an unschooler or (I am warming to this term) “life learner,” do you think the child’s right to an education is more or less important than his freedom to make his own decisions, even if those choices are towards the less academic?

I know my answers to these questions. I’ve read some of the exceptionally thoughtful comments to her blog (like Kelly and Kim @ Beautiful Wreck’s). Now, I’d like to hear yours.

Teaching Tolerance, the educational publication from my beloved Souther Poverty Law Center, has published many excellent sets of lesson plans on educating students on religious differences and espousing religious tolerance. I’m very pleased to see that they have now published a great lesson plan on respecting non-religious people–atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, deists, and free thinkers–as well!. The three sets of lesson plans cover grades 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12, and while it is geared towards the public school classroom, many of the lessons could easily be applied to homeschoolers.

Teaching Tolerance explains the need for such a curriculum:

Students often learn the importance of respecting people of different religions, and of respecting religious beliefs that are different from their own. But what about people who do not hold religious beliefs at all? Too often the right not to believe is excluded from lessons about tolerance.

Yet atheists and others who do not believe in God experience discrimination because of their nonbelief. In this lesson, students learn about episodes of anti-atheist discrimination; and they develop ways to educate others about respecting nonreligious, as well as religious, diversity.

I couldn’t agree more! I’ve seen a fairly high level of expectation of tolerance of their religious views from Christian homeschoolers, but don’t often see the same level of tolerance extended by them towards the beliefs non-religious homeschoolers among us. I think of that absurd “don’t call it ‘Christian mythology’” nonsense from a while back, as one example. The non-religious are expected to treat religious text as sacred and factual, out of “respect” for the Christian homeschoolers…who don’t seem to realize that they’re treating the non-religious homeschoolers with the same level of disrespect they believe they’re being shown.

An interesting read and could be helpful for understanding how to respectfully discourse w/ the homeschooling nonbeliever.

[Note from Smrt Mama: My dear friend The Mama from Concordia Classical Academy is doing me a very special Secular Thursday favor by guest blogging this wonderful post about how religious homeschoolers view secular homeschooling. I hope you'll appreciate her unique insight into the differences between our worlds as much as I do.]

Most of you regular Smrt Mama readers don’t know me, so let me first introduce myself. I’m the Mama, mother of three children: Sweet Pea, 6, Little Bird, almost 3, and Moose, 7 weeks. My elder two are girls and the baby is our first boy.

I live in the northern part of Minnesota in a little town that isn’t near very much. Except woods. Remember reading Little House in the Big Woods where Laura Ingalls Wilder talks about woods that go for days without end? It’s like that, only not in Wisconsin. Anyway, besides the children which quasi-qualify me to blather on about homeschooling, I am part of a family that fits neatly into the religious category: I’m married to a conservative pastor, we lead a pretty traditional family life, we dress modestly, and we teach religion as part of our day. I’m probably the stereotype that you now can picture in your mind! Smrt Mama told me that it’d be interesting to see how religious homeschoolers view the others–the seculars. I decided to take it upon myself to speak for a diverse, divergent community, so here it goes!*

Social graces

Since the most common question homeschoolers seem to get pounded with by others is about the s-word (socialization, or the lack thereof) I thought I’d start with how we religious folk view this. You may have noticed the plethora of religious homeschooling groups and co-ops, many of which require a member to sign a belief statement to get into the club. Why? Why keep out people who don’t agree? There’s some differing viewpoints here, and I’ll try to hit on those that come to mind:

Book Learning

When it comes to science, there are three main groups: Those who believe the world was created in about a week, roughly 6,000 years ago, those who believe evolution and creation co-exist in intelligent design, and those who believed this all evolved over a massive amount of time. There’s even debate, from all sides, if all of these views are science, so it’s no surprise that this is an area that there’s some big disagreements. Most religious homeschoolers kind of shake their heads at secular science and how prevalent it is. Some even have apologetics–defense of the faith–as a part of science class or its own subject.

Relaxation and rigor: it’s probably untrue, but there’s a big feeling that some seculars are way too loosey goosey with academics. And that eventually this’ll negatively impact homeschooling for everybody.

The Future

Goods news, though: despite the worries about your kids cohabiting and living free and easy, I do think most religious homeschoolers think secularly homeschooled kids will shake out better then their publically schooled peers.

I will say that most of my current homeschool chattering is with secular folks who’ve chosen a similar academic path for their schooling. By circumstance, most of my friends are of a reiligious bent similar to my own. I think both groups could have a lot to share…if we could all just play nice in the sand box. And, you know, do things my way.

*I know there are religious homeschoolers who share none of my viewpoints or are deeply offended by my sentiments here. To you: I am deeply, sincerely sorry!

Daisy asks, “In light of the recent news articles about homeschooling families who have flown under the radar and abused their children, do you think there should be more government oversight of homeschooling?”

My experiences haven’t convinced me that either system is worse or better for protecting children from (or leaving them subject to) child abuse as a whole.

I don’t think homeschooling is to blame for this. Not in the slightest. I think officially enrolling a child in homeschooling may provide a simpler means in the long term of hiding extensive child abuse, but a public or private family could easily withdraw their student from the school in the name of moving (to another school, district, town, or state) and just not re-enroll — most states don’t have the resources to follow up with every student, especially if that child isn’t using any government services that would keep him/her fresh on their radar.

Children enrolled in public or private school are victims of abuse every day, too. It goes unnoticed or unreported. Children can fall through the cracks anywhere, long absences can be excused, transient families can easily slip out of the sight and minds of the school system. Just because a system is full of mandated reporters, it doesn’t mean that they will notice the abuse. It doesn’t mean that they will take it seriously even if they do. I went to public school with an individual who was abused extensively (both sexually and physically) by a parent throughout the time we attended school together. I had no idea and I don’t think most of the teachers did, either. Until we install cameras or human monitors in every family’s home (homeschooling or public schooling) for 24-hour “oversight,” we can’t catch every incident of abuse.

The important common factor I’ve noticed in many of these deaths is not that the children are schooled at home, but that the parents adhere to a strict set of religious beliefs, keep themselves isolated from anyone outside their insular religious community (in fact, they’re encouraged to cut themselves off from people with differing beliefs who might lead them astray), and follow supposedly Bible-based parenting “guides” such as To Train Up a Child by the heartless, conscience-less, and utterly godless (beyond a belief in their own righteousness) creatures, the Pearls.

Religious extremism and blind obeisance to a dangerous parenting method killed those children, not homeschooling. Those same crimes, committed under the instruction of the Pearls’ books, could have been perpetrated by the parents if their children had been enrolled in private religious schools. They could have been perpetrated on children enrolled in public school, though I think it’s unlikely that these parents would have enrolled their children in public school. Government oversight of homeschooling wouldn’t have changed the fact that these parents believed God wanted them to beat their children until they obeyed perfectly and cheerfully. The Pearls specifically instruct parents to beat their children with 1/4 inch flexible PVC pipe, because it hurts, but the marks fade quickly. Child abusers often develop methods to disguise the abuse they are committing and the Pearls teach parents how to be meticulous child abusers…and that the only way they can be right with God and raise godly children is through systematically breaking the child. Unfortunately, some children aren’t broken as easily as others, so the beatings continue.

You know where government oversight might help? Through investigation of the dangerous cult of child abuse led by the Pearls (or other churches espousing child abuse). I was shocked that they were NOT listed on the SPLC’s “Hate Group” watch list, because the Pearls clearly hate children. They also hate women, but they seem to view women as large children who need the same degree of abuse and mastery. You want to reduce the number of deaths in homeschooled children? Start investigating the churches that hold TTUAC “parenting” classes (I use “parenting” in quotes because it’s more like “prison guarding” than parenting). Look for the churches that are telling their congregation that the only way to be right with God is through frequent application of the “rod.” Look for the families that are gobbling up the advice to beat their children as a path to righteousness. The parents who believe their child should be beaten until she pronounces a word correctly (because Michael Pearls says that sort of willfulness deserves a beating) will beat their child whether she’s in public school, private school, or homeschool. If the government can investigate the FLDS community because of potential child abuse, surely they could investigate the Cult of Michael Pearl. They can investigate child abuse if someone reports it. REPORT IT! There’s even a precedent for investigating churches/pastors who are espousing child abuse. You CAN investigate the church and its leaders if that church is telling you to break the law…or break your child.

Most homeschoolers (religious or secular) do not beat their children and many, many abused children are attending school within the public system. Oversight applied to all homeschoolers won’t catch this abuse, because abusers are often sneaky. They’re careful. Do you think that a child will be covered in bruises on check-in day? Of course not. Pearl-trained/abused children are squeaky clean and perfectly polite when they’re marched out for company. If you want to stop these abuse death, you have to go to the source. Stop the abusers from teaching other parents how to abuse. If you belong to a church that espouses the Pearl methods, speak up against the wrongness and danger of these methods. If your church is considering starting Pearl (or Ezzo, or other religiously-based child abuse classes) speak up. Say, “NO, this is NOT the way to God! This is the way to kill or seriously injure your child.” If they continue with the classes, keep your eyes peeled for signs of abuse and turn the abusers in in. You may not be a legally-mandated reporter, but you are a morally-obligated one.

Dear Crazy Internet Christians,

It’s time I had a little come to Jesus meeting with y’all, alright? And yes, I’m aware of the irony there.

Now, you intelligent and compassionate Christians, who treat others with respect and who actually try to live life as modeled by Christ, can just sit right back down. This isn’t about you or even about Christianity (or at least, its foundations). I know that the crazies aren’t the only representatives of Christianity, or even comprise the largest percentage of Christianity, but they are, unfortunately, the loudest. You reasonable people have my love and appreciation for making this world a kinder place, though most of us differently-believers and non-believers wish your voices were a little easier to hear over the fray. God bless you for trying.

I’m talking to y’all over there, the other Christians, the ones who use your religion as a weapon of hate and denigration against others, who expect everyone in this world to treat your beliefs as true and absolute while you dismiss all of theirs as falsehoods and heathenry, who balk at any implication that an alternative set of beliefs might ever be acceptable to discuss (or God forbid, to actually believe), who wander around like rabid dogs in a hot summer street, looking for a chance to become righteously offended and bite anyone who commits the grievous crime of not thinking how you think.

If this is your version of Christianity, well, I feel awfully happy that I’m not a Christian (and even if I were, I’d be happy that someone like you probably wouldn’t consider me the right kind of Christian). You are not convincing me to become a Christian. You’re not convincing me to think highly of Christians or Christianity. You’re certainly not convincing me to think carefully about what I say, out of fear of offending you punkin dunkin liddle baby feelings.

Have you ever wondered why some people seem to hate Christians so much? A little hint — it has nothing to do with being afraid that your religious beliefs are right, being jealous of you, being lead astray by the devil, or any of the other nonsense your more extreme Christian groups keep claiming. Here’s a great example of the behavior that triggers that sort of response from others: Getting worked up over someone asking for recommendations of “books about Christian mythology for non-Christians”, dressing them down for daring to (accurately) use the term “Christian mythology” to refer to “the body of traditional narratives [everything] associated with Christianity,” accusing them of “insulting [your] intelligence” by asking for secular resources in a manner you find unacceptable, and really, when it all comes down to it, making an ass of yourself because someone is addressing a question to non-Christians on a board where you seem to think that everyone should feel obligated to ascribe to your narrow and unreasonably rigid view of Christianity, all while making plenty of blatantly insulting and ignorant comments about adherents to other faiths and their beliefs in the exact same thread and plenty of others.

That’s why people hate you. You’re narrow-minded. You’re petty. You’re completely self-absorbed. You see insult where none is meant just for the pleasure of feeling wronged. You’re judgmental. You’re hypocritical. You’re passive aggressive when you aren’t being openly aggressive. You cast the first stone into your neighbor’s eye. You’re just plain mean.

In short, you give Christianity a very bad name and you look like pure fools in the process. The best thing you could do to win people to Christ would be to just shut up, because y’all aren’t doing him any favors right now.

Sincerely,
Smrt Mama McLernins

P.S. The heathens called and they’d like their holidays back.

It seems to have become quite trendy among religious homeschool co-ops and resources to require parents to sign a “statement of faith” before enrolling their children in the program. These “statements of faith” may be as simple as swearing you are Christian and as complex as to make sure you match, theologically and philosophically, with the ideals of the co-op’s founding individual or organization on every single level. If you do not sign, you do not join. Insisting on a signed “statement of faith” may be within these groups’ right, but I don’t think it is right, morally. I also don’t think it’s particularly Christian.

What’s in a “statement of faith?” Ead’s Home Ministry would be happy to walk you through creating one for your religious co-op, because nothing says “love thy neighbor” like something specifically designed to “[e]xclude families that do not share the faith [you] have,” right? Among the many families you can exclude through your carefully worded “statements of faith” are those who practice “Non-Christian faiths and the cults” ( “cults” usually meaning “Mormons and/or any sect/denomination we don’t like”), believe in any form of “liberal theology” (like the notion that the Bible isn’t absolutely literal, accurate, and perfectly translated — not matter what version you’re using), or who don’t believe in the “truth about hell” (“truth” being a word I’ve noticed gets thrown around a lot in groups of this nature).

The words that springs to mind when I see such required “statements of faith” aren’t “devout” or “Godly.” They’re “defensive” and “insecure.” Surely, one who is secure in the rightness of one’s faith wouldn’t feel threatened by the inclusion of someone who didn’t think exactly alike. Surely, allowing a secularly homeschooled child to participate in a math or art class with your children won’t shake your children’s religious foundation or be an affront to your God. What’s the real intent of a “statement of faith” anyway? Is it really to help protect those of different faiths from being “uncomfortable” or feeling out of place, as the above website claims?

Do religious homeschool co-ops really believe they are in danger of being inundated by secular homeschoolers, with the intent of converting (or unconverting) their children and bringing down their organizations? The teachings of some fundamentalist churches are awfully paranoid, so perhaps they are ascribing an agenda to secular homeschoolers and our children. Concepts like “tolerance” and “inclusivity” are presented as subtle ploys to undermine belief. Personally, I’ve never met a secular homeschooler who wanted to waste their money and their child’s educational time on a creationist science class or Titus 2-style daddy/husband worship Bible study program, period, let alone one who desired to waste that time and money simply to undermine the program. We might like to enroll in classes on art, music, math, or a variety of other subjects. If we find the subject matter or the co-op itself to be so offensive, counter to our beliefs, or beyond our comfort level, we just don’t sign our kids up for it.

I know a few secular homeschoolering families who participate in religious co-ops in order to have access to classes and opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise get. Their goal isn’t to disrupt class or try to dispute any religious messages. They don’t teach their children to argue with the teachers or try to convince the other children in the class that their beliefs are wrong. The expect their children to be respectful of the co-op’s teachers, rules, and beliefs, just like you would respect the rules and beliefs of someone in whose home you were a guest. Most of them use the differences in beliefs as an after-class teaching tool, to show that people who believe different things can still come together in certain areas. Isn’t that a message we want to teach children, rather than the message of excluding and reviling anyone not exactly like us?

In many areas, especially smaller towns and rural regions, religious co-ops are the only game in town. Thankfully, not all religious homeschool co-ops and resources require these exclusive “statements of faith.” Some have them listed on their website or in their paperwork, which is helpful in making the theological and philosophical foundation of the organization obvious, but don’t require that parents or children sign them. Some require only that their administrators and/or teachers sign. Plenty seem to still actually believe that their goal should be educating children and providing services to the community. That seems to mesh a whole lot more with what I’ve read about Jesus than “keep your kids away from mine, you sinner” — then again, secular homeschooler here, so I supposed my understanding of the Bible is automatically suspect.

Incidentally, I’ve yet to come across a secular homeschool co-op that required anyone sign a “statement of non-faith.” In fact, our co-op is “an all-inclusive group” that “welcomes diversity” and doesn’t “discriminate on the basis of race, religion, nationality, political views, or teaching style.” Is that really so very threatening?

I’m having one of those days where I want to reach through my screen and throttle people on the homeschooling forums. The hypocrisy from the religious homeschoolers towards the secular homeschoolers invokes The Slappening.

We secular homeschoolers are to keep our mouths shut and sit on our fingers. We are never to offer any thoughts on the efficacy or rigor of a curriculum. We are never to voice our concerns about the injection of religious content into materials, especially those that appear to be touted as secular. We are never to comment on a thread labeled “CC” (Christian content) or any thread that might in any way though on any topics pertaining to religion in any way under any circumstances…including evolution, which we just made up because we hate God, anyway. We must steer away from these places, where our opinions are not wanted. We can’t put “secular” in a post title as a warning that the post contains nothing for religious homeschoolers — the very notion is offensive and invites plenty of unwanted, unneeded criticism. Any mockery from secular homeschoolers of content we find ludicrous (literal 6 day, 24-hour creation of a 5000 year old Earth, anyone?) is “mean.” We must be accepting, even praising, of their “opinions” about things. You know, I think some of those “opinions” are pretty damn ridiculous, but I don’t leap all over their “CC” posts and say that — I keep it where it belongs, in secular posts or “what do you think” posts.

Religious homeschoolers, on the other hand, can say anything they want to us. They have no qualms in invading a secular thread to criticize its content. They have no problems dropping a snarky little remarkinto a thread of secular content…but we’d be reamed if we did the same. A secular homeschooler can’t call a creationist ignorant, but a religious homeschooler is perfectly fine with calling someone who believes in actual evidence-based science ignorant, arrogant, or ungodly. Sorry, unGodly. Any mockery (though of course, “Christians” like them would never mock…they’re just “being helpful”) of our educational content is because they are studying the One True Curricula that God Adores Best and it Just So Rigorous (despite having absolutely no basis in evidence) and ur doin it wrong. We have “opinions” and they have “truth” or, God save us, capital T “Truth.”

I could post until the end of days about how to make my child’s curricula more Godly or how to encourage more modesty, chastity, or religious devotion — that’s perfectly acceptable, no matter how many people disagree with that. If I post about how to make my child’s curricula more secular or how to encourage my child to question matters of faith instead of following them blindly, to avoid bigotry and hatred towards people who are LGBT, how to be strong and independent (especially if they’re girls)…well, that post should be completely torn to shreds by the “Godly” set.

I know not all religious homeschoolers are like this — most probably aren’t. I know not all Christians are like this — most probably aren’t. The vocal minority, however, makes it difficult to avoid painting them all with the same brush. After all, if they didn’t agree with it, why wouldn’t they speak up? Why wouldn’t they say, “Let’s respect this person’s right to believe differently or even to disbelieve” or “This post was labeled ’secular content’ so I don’t think our pro-religion input is needed here” when their more aggressive, extreme brethren (sistren?) start ruffling the secs? Speak up so we know we’re not alone and that it’s not about religious vs. secular, but a small handful of hypocrites vs. the rest of us.

Hypocrisy isn’t an attractive color on anyone and no amount of “Godliness” is going to make it any more flattering.

“If Jesus were being homeschooled, God would have taught him about Evolution.” –Nana (aka “Smrt Mama’s momma”)

While I strongly, strongly, strongly disagree with creationists (especially “young earth” creationists), I understand why people who believe in that would feel the need to rewrite all the science books to fit into their beliefs. After all, one really must come up with explanations to justify all the nonsense and debunk all the actual scientific evidence in order to not feel like they are in some way ignorant or gullible. I see where religious text can fit into a literature, writing, or grammar program. One needs example sentences, after all, so why not insinuate Bible passages at every possible opportunity. I can even see why it’s necessary to rewrite (or at least heavily edit) history from a fundamentalist Christian perspective in order to justify the unjustifiable and try to give back-applied context to historical events.

Math, however? Surely math is a subject that can remain secular. Surely math doesn’t need a religious context to be taught in a religious curriculum. Math is what it is and doesn’t require a lot of dressing up, right? I do not understand why even the most fundamentalist of Christians would feel the need to Jesus-ify mathematics, and yet, I assure you that they do. “Young Earth” creationists and Bible literalists just couldn’t stop with science, history, and literature. The “Christian approach to mathematics” or “Biblical math” has resulted in numerous math curricula. In fact, some claim that only through studies of the Bible can one “genuinely understand and affirm the real agreement about mathematical truths.” Math is a “testimony to God’s faithfulness” and you can order all manner of materials to help you learn more.

And lo, how Jesus does crop up in homeschool math curricula. Of course, all the Christian curricula publishers have their own math program, but some of the programs make math all about the Bible. Christ Centered Math will provide “a strong Scriptural foundation for arithmetic” for your Kindergartner, just in case they weren’t getting enough Christ in their Christ Centered Phonics. Bob Jones University Press promise that its math curriculum will provide “nothing to conflict with the Truth and everything to support it.” BJU Press is subtly letting us know that math will NOT stand in the way of Jesus. A Beka Book isn’t hung up on subtlety. “No subject matter better reflects the glory of God than mathematics. To study mathematics is to study God’s thoughts after Him, for He is the great Engineer and Architect of the universe,” says A Beka Book, who also promises to eschew “modern theorists” and their “modern theories” (like the dangerous set theory). Christian Perspective doesn’t exactly sell a curriculum, but will sell you a CD on how to teach math Biblically to your homeschooled children (along with several CDs on socialization) so they can “discover God in your math class.”

I don’t know about you, but I don’t really need God in my math class. I need math in my math class. All the Bible verses and that Biblical “perspective” are just getting in the way of actually imparting mathematical skills to children. Pretty soon, they’ll need a Christian Calculator to make sense of everything.

Why can’t it be enough to have God (and/or Jesus) in your heart? Why do you need God in your Calculus, too?