The secular curriculum

[Marie A. Failinger]

I agree. . . .and, as some on the list have ponited out, the amount to
which religious and secular values are at odds may well depend on the
variations on secular ideology from place to place as well.  However, if
released time becomes part of the fabric of American life again, I would
think that the instances of public school hostility to religious values
would fade, since most established systems do "get the hint" and conform
their educational ideologies to the current thinking.

I don't see how there could be a religious discrimination problem if the
only way to cure it would be to run afoul of the Establishment Clause.
However, if there is a way to provide religious equality that does
not--if, for instance, vouchers or tax credits are to be found
constitutional--and the state cannot justify refusal to adopt them on any
secular basis (i.e., taking the money away from public schools---if indeed
that is happening--would gut them), I think this kind of argument would be
appropriate.  Since the remedy of choice is usually to gut the new program
rather than extend equality to the minority group, however, I would hope
that religious minorities would not go after released time as a way of
achieving their ends, or we would be back to square one.

 Marie Failinger

 On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Mark Rahdert wrote:

>         I find myself troubled by Rick Duncan's and Charles Haynes's
> reference to "the problem" of a secular curriculum that released time
> "doesn't fix."  It is probably accurate to say that released time doesn't
> fix "the problem" for some individuals (almost certainly including Rick),
> but it may very well suffice for others.  Whether it does or doesn't depends
> on how thoroughly at odds one's religious view of the world and the schools'
> secular view of the world are.  This seems to me to be the point of several
> of Marie Failinger's recent posts.  Among religious groups, there is a broad
> spectrum of responses to the public school curriculum, ranging from those
> who find it thoroughly congenial, to those who think it acceptable but in
> need of supplementation, to those who would mix major elements of it with
> their religious perspective, to those who would scrap virtually all of it
> and start over.  Clearly, released time does not address the needs of the
> last group.  But it might well address the needs of most people in the
> second group (secular ed. is acceptable but needs supplementation).  Query:
> does it violate establishment principles (Zorach notwithstanding) to set up
> such a program, if we know that it will benefit some religious groups but
> leave the needs of other religious groups unaddressed?
>
>         Mark Rahdert
>         Temple University School of Law
>