The Next Frontier

Between the attempts by the ACLU and adherents to philosophical naturalism in the science classroom to remove any thought of God from our schools and graphic demonstrations of sexual penetration through sex education, it is clear that liberals know that the classroom is the next frontier for controlling the direction of future generation of Americans. Will these “pioneers” of this new “frontier” seeking to “claim” the minds of next generation go there alone, or will those with a different worldview seek to stake out their “claim,” too?

The United States has been a frontier nation over the years. When it came to geographical expansion and exploration, in the early years the West was the frontier. Then space became the new frontier. But last week it became even clearer where the next frontier is in the so-called culture war.

Last week three events in the news have brought to the attention of those watching the news what many already knew: The public classroom is where the guns are aimed for those who want to reshape America. Actually, this isn’t anything new, but a couple of events in recent weeks woke up a few folks. We can hope that, as Japanese Admiral Yamamoto said after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, these events will have “awakened a sleeping giant.”

Specifically, on Monday night last week over 100 Cheatham County residents assembled to find out what could be done after their local school system signed an Agreed Order drafted by the American Civil Liberties Union in settlement of a lawsuit against the school system. Unfortunately, a lesson was learned the hard way that when the ACLU comes knocking in your town, you don’t rely on elected officials or the lawyers that their insurance carriers provide to protect your First Amendment rights. If any citizen hears of any lawsuit against any local governmental agency by the ACLU or the Freedom from Religion Foundation or even the threat of a lawsuit, that citizens needs to contact FACT or some public interest legal entity that specializes in defending religious freedom.

Sexually Graphic ‘Education’ in Davidson County Schools

Then it made the news that Nashville Cares, an AIDS awareness and education program in Davidson County, taught a sex education class at one of the local public high schools. To describe what was actually done—use of prosthetic devices to demonstrate visually how to have multiple-orifice sex—any more graphically than that would make most people blush or cringe.

While AIDS is an awful disease and we would never wish anyone to suffer from it, we also should not want our young people to be exposed to graphic demonstrations of sexual acts for which our bodies were not designed and which are not healthful. Yet, when a parent spoke out in objection, those in favor of such graphic demonstrations tried to divert the attention away from what was actually done in the classroom. By not wanting to focus on the propriety and necessity of what was actually done, it would appear that the objective of the visual, classroom demonstration of such sexual acts may not be so much to educate as it is ultimately to break down sexual inhibitions in order to advance a sexual agenda.

No ‘Equal Time’ in Knox County Biology Classes

But that was not all that took place in Tennessee’s schools. In Knox County, when a parent complained that his daughter’s biology textbook called the “Biblical creation story” a “myth,” the local school board concluded this was perfectly acceptable. So, while science seems to always resist dragging the Bible into the science classroom, it seems OK to drag it in if the purpose is to bash or ridicule it or those who believe there is a transcendent God behind what we see. It would appear, as with the sex education program in Nashville, there is something more at issue here than simply wanting to have the discussion of creation take place in a theology or philosophy classroom. No, it would appear that the purpose is to make belief in a God “behind” what is seen either not credible or irrelevant. Or perhaps the purpose is, by means of embarrassment as “backwards” and “unscientific,” to silence those students who would disagree. Supporters of the school board can protest their innocence to the contrary all they want, but those are real practical effects of the “myth” statement that was made.

For sure, scientists with a materialistic worldview would think any idea of a Creator a myth and “unscientific,” but the fact of the matter is that there are a number of credible scientists who now affirmatively state that neo-Darwinism as an explanation of origins has run its course. They believe that logical inferences drawn from observations could reasonably lead to the conclusion that the information in the cell and the exquisite, irreducibly complex molecular machinery in the cell indicate the existence of some intelligent, non-natural source for the information and design of the machinery. Makes you wonder what the school board might have said if someone had said that neo-Darwinism, as an explanation for origins, is a myth.

While Intelligent Design is not the same as the creation story in the Bible, both posit that there is a source of intelligence beyond nature that was in some way or other involved in the origins of things. But it would appear that giving equal time to this school of thought is not an acceptable option. To learn more about Intelligent Design, you can visit this link.

Don’t Keep Silent; Report Such Stories to FACT

If you should have a story similar to that of the Davidson or Knox County parent or, if as a teacher, you have felt you could not bring up Intelligent Design, will you let us know?

I hope so, because, you see, here is the real question: “Will these ‘pioneers’ of this new ‘frontier’ seeking to make a God-devoid, anything-goes ‘claim’ to the minds of next generation go there alone, or will those with a different worldview seek to stake out their ‘claim,’ too?” Time will tell.