You just can’t make this stuff up.  Today, the Texas State Board of Education voted on a variety of amendments to the state social studies and U.S. government curricula.  Get ready to be appalled at the outcomes.  As reported by the Texas Freedom Network, the Board voted to

1)      remove Thomas Jefferson from world history curriculum on the impact of Enlightenment thinkers

2)      include discussion of the right to bear arms in curriculum on First Amendment rights and free expression

3)      strike down an amendment that would have required students to “examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others.”

What is most unbelievable and emblematic of the Board’s far-right majority’s (lack of) understanding of the separation between religion and government in America is the third item in this litany of woes.  According to Cynthia Dunbar (one of the more prominent conservatives on the Board), the separation of religion and government wasn’t actually the Founders’ intent— they wanted to promote religion.  Therefore, said Dunbar, the proposed amendment was “not historically accurate.”

While (luckily), Thomas Jefferson isn’t out of Texas education curricula as a whole, there is no doubt that he is one of the preeminent American scholars of the Enlightenment era and it is a shame students will not learn that.  Also, last time I checked, the right to bear arms had its own section of the Bill of Rights, you know, the Second Amendment.

What’s more unfortunate is that such a narrow minded group of individuals have such power over what children learn across the country, that these are “guidelines that will affect students around the country, from kindergarten to 12th grade, for the next 10 years.”  Why? Because the state of Texas buys or distributes “a staggering 48 million textbooks annually,” which leads “educational publishers to tailor their products to fit the standards dictated by the Lone Star State.”

To quote our friends at the Texas Freedom Network: “Let the word go out here: The Texas State Board of Education today refused to require that students learn that the Constitution prevents the U.S. government from promoting one religion over all others. They voted to lie to students by omission.”

Share on Facebook

“Did you accomplish anything this week?” That question, posed to me every weekend by one or more people, raced through my head repeatedly as I spent most of Tuesday in a meeting in an office of the White House.  Often the answer to that query is “yes.” Tuesday’s response was “Yes, taking one small step.”  However, that small step involved far more than a single day. It required an investment of focused attention, persistent action, research, commentary, and advocacy that stretched from 1999 to the present moment.  And still more steps are required.

About a year ago I was asked to serve on President Obama’s Task Force on Reform of the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.  The assignment of the task force was to recommend steps for bringing that office more in line with the Constitution.

I had opposed the establishment of such an office since 1999 when presidential candidates in both major political parties voiced support for allowing government funds to flow into religious organizations to support faith-based social ministries.  This new initiative within the executive branch of our government posed an unprecedented threat to our nation’s fidelity to the religious freedom clauses in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

The Obama Administration knew they were inviting a critic on to this task force.  Indeed, U.S. News and World Report carried a story on my acceptance of the invitation on its blog.  Immediately after the presidential election I had met with the Obama Transition Team to request that they abolish the faith-based office in the White House.

Today the recommendations of our task force are being presented to cabinet members and other leaders in the Administration who will engage the president in conversations about the issues we have raised. Getting to this moment took time.  Members of the task force are incredibly diverse–racially, politically, professionally, religiously, economically, and ideologically.  Some members wanted a relaxation of emphasis on church-state separation while others, like me, were interested in strengthening the constitutional guarantees that have saved our nation from an entanglement of religion and government that has caused problems in other nations.

Our recommendations span several concerns—transparency, public postings of recipients of government money and for what purposes, attentiveness to religious freedom issues, and more.  From the first time we met, however, one question had loomed larger than all of the rest—whether or not to mandate or only suggest that religious recipients of government funds form a separate legal entity into which to receive that money in order to protect the integrity of the religious organization and prevent a merger of taxpayers’ money and tithes and contributions from offering plates.  For a year, the debate went on—passionate but civil.  In the end, the vote on the recommendation endorsed the mandatory position—by a majority of one.  Such is the divide on the meaning of religious freedom in our nation as well.

As I sat in a White House office, I wonder if all of the time and work were worth it to assure such a small step, to win what some would consider a minimal victory for religious liberty.  Yes is the answer that resounds inside me.  The fate of the big issues in our time are decided by hundreds of small steps taken, minor victories won, and the Constitution defended word by word one issue at a time.  At least for this moment, a slide toward government-subsidized religion has been stopped.

This small step, this minor victory, likely will go virtually unnoticed.  But, without it, the news would be big—journalists reporting a sea-change, a major shift, in which legal and religious leaders endorsed a position contrary to the United States Constitution.  So goes the work of a lifetime—tracked one step at a time.

Share on Facebook

But not necessarily for the beaches…

According to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal, Jamaica is adding a new attraction to draw tourists: its Jewish history.  The  island’s tourism board hopes to draw more visitors by highlighting the history and cultural impact of 17th-century Jewish immigrants who fled to Jamaica to escape the Inquisition.   And, equally fascinating are the Jewish pirates (like Moses Cohen Henriques) who trolled the Caribbean attacking Spanish ships carrying silver.  I may have to add Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean to the State of Belief reading list, but in the meantime, check out the article for some info (and travel tips like the island’s sand-floor synagogue).

Share on Facebook