A plea for keeping things precise (and providing citations whenever possible)
Susan Freiman
susan.freiman.law.65 at aya.yale.edu
Wed Jul 23 04:54:44 PDT 2008
The decrease in crime is related to the prior increase in abortions -
fewer potential criminals being born.
source: Ian Ayres, _Super Crunchers_ (2008), p. 13, citing to Steven D.
Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, _Freakonomics.
_Susan Freiman_
_
Volokh, Eugene wrote:
> Folks: Just a quick plug from the list custodian for maximum
> accuracy. If you want to cite a statistic, please check it and cite
> the source (plus see whether the big picture is more complex than you
> describe). For instance, a quick visit to the Bureau of Justice
> Statistics site
> (http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Search/Crime/State/StatebyState.cfm)
> reveals that the crime rate as reported to the police rose from
> 160.9/100,000 in 1960 to 473.5/100,000 in 2006, a 200% increase (or a
> tripling) -- bad enough, but not 560%. (I realize that not all crimes
> are reported to the police, and the reporting rate changes over time,
> but I don't think the NCVS data goes back to the 1960; if you have
> better statistics, please let me know.)
>
> What's more, the current violent crime rate is pretty much at the
> 1974 level, and there was in fact a sharp decline from 1992 to 2003 --
> not, I take it, because the nation or the educational system has
> somehow gotten less "atheistic." Now I'm perfectly happy to
> acknowledge that various forms of social pathology have increased
> since 1960 (while some have declined); and it's possible, though in my
> view unproven, that this has something to do with the decline of
> religion in public education.
>
> But I'd like to keep discussions on the list as accurate as
> possible, and a 560% increase is not the same as a 200% increase or
> even a 300% level; and a 1960-now comparison doesn't make such sense
> if the current numbers are at the 1974 level. So please let's check
> any statistics we mention, and provide citations when possible. Many
> thanks,
>
> Eugene Volokh
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Ed Darrell
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:52 PM
> *To:* chaplaingate at yahoo.com; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> *Subject:* RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith-
> msnbc.com
>
> Yet leading cultural indicators show that since 1960 in America,
> violent crime has increased by 560 percent, illegitimate birth
> rates have increased more than 400 percent, teen suicide is up
> over 200 percent, the divorce rate has more than doubled, and the
> percentage of families headed by a single parent has more than
> tripled.
>
> It seems to me, thanks to courts and judges that enforce state
> atheism and Ed's social experiment upon our families and children,
> by taking Bibles and prayer OUT of public schools, that...
>
> And that's with increased Bible instruction that violates the
> law. Ed Brayton is right to worry -- looks like more of the same,
> maybe at an increased rate.
>
> Why not study what it really says, study the real literature
> components (as with every AP English course), the real effects on
> history (as with every AP U.S. History and AP World History
> course)? Tougher academics can help -- Sunday school in the
> public schools is, by Chaplian Klingenschmitt's tally, a grotesque
> failure, doing the opposite of what it is intended.
>
> More seriously, pay very careful attention to Mark Chancey's
> comments. He's a very distinguished, and faithful, Bible
> scholar. What the Texas State School Board is working to
> implement is contrary to most Christian faiths, let alone the
> Constitution. Incompetence, weak academics, bad religion -- it's
> a bad brew. When the state board ignores the state's leading
> Bible scholars, the state's teachers and teacher organizations,
> and even the sponsor of the Bill, there's evil afoot.
>
> And when we try to increase the AP offerings, which feature
> increased study of both Christianity and the Bible, these same
> people complain.
>
> Something's rotten in Texas. There's prayer in the schools, but
> sadly, that's all the students have. No wonder crime, illicit sex
> are up, and academic achievement is down. The kids are following
> the State School Board's examples, ignoring all authority, making
> their own, unanchored moral decisions, ignoring the best
> information, etc.
>
> By the way, I don't think the divorce rate has doubled. I think
> it's dropping, in fact. Anybody got a current statistic?
>
> Ed Darrell
> Working in Dallas to get the curriculum planned out for 2008-2009,
> no thanks to the State School Board
>
> */Gordon James Klingenschmitt <chaplaingate at yahoo.com>/* wrote:
>
> Ed writes about teaching about the Bible (as an optional
> elective) in public schools, "the result is going to be very
> ugly and very expensive."
>
> Yet leading cultural indicators show that since 1960 in
> America, violent crime has increased by 560 percent,
> illegitimate birth rates have increased more than 400 percent,
> teen suicide is up over 200 percent, the divorce rate has more
> than doubled, and the percentage of families headed by a
> single parent has more than tripled.
>
> It seems to me, thanks to courts and judges that enforce state
> atheism and Ed's social experiment upon our families and
> children, by taking Bibles and prayer OUT of public schools,
> that...
>
> "the result has already been very ugly and very expensive."
>
> In Jesus name,
> Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt
>
>
>
> */Charles Haynes <CHaynes at freedomforum.org>/* wrote:
>
> I agree that much more guidance is needed (along the lines
> suggested in the consensus guidelines we issued in 2000 --
> "The Bible and Public Schools: A First Amendment Guide"
> http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261.
> What puzzles me, however, is why the State Board fails to
> mention the requirements for training as outlined in
> Section 21.549 of the Texas "Bible Bill." Perhaps that is
> the next step... but there is no mention of it in the the
> board's decision this week.
> If the training requirements mandated by the bill are
> followed, then many of the problems might be avoided...
> But with groups out there pushing unconstitutional Bible
> materials (such as those at issue in the recently-settled
> lawsuit in Odessa) it will be difficult to monitor what is
> going on across the state. Charles Haynes
>
>
> 21.459. BIBLE COURSE TRAINING. (a) The commissioner
>
> shall develop and make available training materials and other
>
> teacher training resources for a school district to use in
>
> assisting teachers of elective Bible courses in developing:
>
> (1) expertise in the appropriate Bible course
>
> curriculum;
>
> (2) understanding of applicable supreme court rulings
>
> and current constitutional law regarding how Bible courses
> are to
>
> be taught in public schools objectively as a part of a
> secular
>
> program of education;
>
> (3) understanding of how to present the Bible in an
>
> objective, academic manner that neither promotes nor
> disparages
>
> religion, nor is taught from a particular sectarian point
> of view;
>
> (4) proficiency in instructional approaches that
>
> present course material in a manner that respects all
> faiths and
>
> religious traditions, while favoring none; and
>
> (5) expertise in how to avoid devotional content or
>
> proselytizing in the classroom.
>
> (b) The commissioner shall develop materials and resources
>
> under this section in consultation with appropriate
> faculty members
>
> at institutions of higher education.
>
> (c) The commissioner shall make the training materials and
>
> other teacher training resources required under Subsection
> (a)
>
> available to Bible course teachers through access to
> in-service
>
> training.
>
> (d) The commissioner shall use funds appropriated for the
>
> purpose to administer this section.
>
> Charles Haynes
> The Freedom Forum First Amendment Center
> 555 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
> Washington, DC 20001
> 202/292-6293 - office
>
> 703/683-1924 home office
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu on behalf of Ed
> Brayton
> Sent: Tue 7/22/2008 1:56 AM
> To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
> Subject: RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools -
> Faith- msnbc.com
>
>
>
> Having seen some of the material already at use in many
> Bible courses in
> Texas, I can only say that the State board of education is
> being incredibly
> irresponsible in not spelling out exactly what can and
> can't be taught in
> such classes. Local school districts are inevitably going
> to teach this
> course in constitutionally dubious ways without such
> guidance. Terri Leo
> claims that providing such guidelines might lead to a
> lawsuit; not providing
> them is going to lead to many such suits - and sooner
> rather than later.
> They are doing the same thing the Louisiana legislature is
> doing with the
> recent "academic freedom" legislation, inviting local
> schools into a "Dover
> trap." The result is going to be very ugly and very expensive.
>
> Ed Brayton
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
> Gibbens, Daniel G.
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 5:20 PM
> To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
> Subject: RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools -
> Faith- msnbc.com
>
> Justice Brennan's well-known statement, concurring in
> Schempp, 374 US at
> 300: "teaching about the Bible" "in classes in literature
> or history" is
> permissible. As literature, surely teaching about the
> Bible is different
> from other literature items, distinctively involving the
> necessity of
> treating these issues:
>
> The fact that some people believe it (or some of it) is
> "the word of God" --
> others believe that it is essential to understanding their
> religion --
> others believe it is interesting literature but otherwise
> irrelevant -- and
> thinking internationally, it is one several books
> presenting similar issues,
> e.g., the Koran.
>
> Arguably, if teachers are not so advised/trained, there
> are indeed critical
> church-state issues.
>
> Dan
> Daniel G. Gibbens
> Regents' Professor of Law Emeritus
> University of Oklahoma
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
> Joel Sogol
> Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 3:41 AM
> To: Religionlaw
> Subject: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith-
> msnbc.com
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25742567/
>
> Joel Sogol
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
> password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot
> be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read
> messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members
> can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
> password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot
> be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read
> messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members
> can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
> password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot
> be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and
> read messages that are posted; people can read the Web
> archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly)
> forward the messages to others.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
> password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot
> be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and
> read messages that are posted; people can read the Web
> archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly)
> forward the messages to others.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password,
> see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be
> viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read
> messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives;
> and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages
> to others.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080723/35df8bb6/attachment.htm
More information about the Religionlaw
mailing list