Ethics Articles

Articles: Education


>> = Important Articles; ** = Major Articles


The New School Prayer

Free Methodist Manual

‘Reality’ show sleaze (Washington Times, 040719)





The New School Prayer


This was written by a teen in Bagdad, Arizona.

This is incredible!!!!!!!!!!!


Now I sit me down in school

Where praying is against the rule

For this great nation under God

Finds mention of Him very odd.


If Scripture now the class recites,

It violates the Bill of Rights.

And anytime my head I bow

Becomes a Federal matter now.


Our hair can be purple, orange or green,

That’s no offense; it’s a freedom scene.

The law is specific, the law is precise.

Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.


For praying in a public hall

Might offend someone with no faith at all.

In silence alone we must meditate,

God’s name is prohibited by the state.


We’re allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,

And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.

They’ve outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.

To quote the Good Book makes me liable.


We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,

And the ‘unwed daddy,’ our Senior King.

It’s “inappropriate” to teach right from wrong,

We’re taught that such “judgments” do not belong.


We can get our condoms and birth controls,

Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.

But the Ten Commandments are not allowed,

No word of God must reach this crowd.


It’s scary here I must confess,

When chaos reigns the school’s a mess.

So, Lord, this silent plea I make:

Should I be shot; My soul please take!




If you aren’t ashamed to do this, please pass this on.

Jesus said, “ If you are ashamed of me,” I will be ashamed of you before my Father.”

Not ashamed. Passing this on.




Free Methodist Manual


630.3.2 Education of Children


The Free Methodist Church views the education of its children as a parental responsibility (Deuteronomy 6:5-9, Ephesians 6:4). Part of that responsibility may be delegated but not relinquished to public, private or Christian institutions of education.


The church wishes to support public schools and recognizes the challenge to Christian teachers, parents and students to be as lights in the world. When parents choose to use Christian schools or home schooling, we also support them in their decision. We request that our children be excused from assignments and activities which conflict with the values held by the denomination. When conflicts arise, we request of the school that the student’s academic standing not be jeopardized, and when necessary, other assignments be given.


The church is concerned that concepts of first origins shall have fair consideration in our public schools. Instructional materials are available that permit a scientific treatment of the several concepts of origin, including special creation (that all basic life forms and life processes were created by a supernatural Creator). We therefore urge that the concept of special creation be presented in, or along with, courses, textbooks, library materials, and teaching aids dealing with the subject of first origins.




‘Reality’ show sleaze (Washington Times, 040719)


Who would have imagined five years ago that the fad, the rage, the phenomenon of network television would be the “reality” show? It’s the 21st century and network executives are putting aside expensive actors and scripts for average Americans trying to claw their way into 15 minutes of fame. At least 20 percent of the prime-time schedule in the February sweeps period was devoted to reality programming.


Unfortunately, these “unscripted” moments are even less acceptable for family viewing than the old, unfashionable scripted shows. A new study by Aubree Rankin of the Parents Television Council examines the reality-show “Race to the Bottom,” and confirms what we all knew. Most reality shows scrape the bottom of the barrel and send young viewers all the wrong messages. Not only do these shows encourage voyeurism by filming contestants in intimate situations, they also contain some of the vilest language imaginable.


For example, during the study period of 114.5 hours of reality television in 2003 and 2004, there were an alarming 1,135 instances of foul language, 492 instances of sexual themes, and 30 instances of violence for a total of 1,657 instances of offensive content. That’s an increase of more than 50 percent from 2002’s hourly rate of offensive content on broadcast reality shows.


In the world of “reality” television everyone curses a blue streak. There were 199 bleeped uses of a sexual obscenity on reality shows studied, making it the most commonly used profanity on broadcast reality programs. There were 76 bleeped uses of a scatalogical obscenity in this study.


UPN’s “America’s Next Top Model” had one aspiring supermodel screaming at another: “Robin, how [bleep] dare you show me that ‘foolish is the atheist’ Bible verse this morning and ask me what do I think of it. What the [bleep] am I supposed to think of it? You know what I think of you? Foolish is the woman who believes that [bleep] damn tripe.”


Thank goodness the show’s title isn’t “America’s Next Role Model,” even though this is the kind of example young girls who might aspire to modeling see on television.


Then there’s the sex, and the sex talk. While the usual sexual innuendo far surpassed all other forms of sexual content in this study, nudity was the second-most-frequent type of sexual content on reality TV shows, followed by anatomical references and references to or uses of pornography.


The PTC also counted 16 instances of sexual activity on reality programs included in the study, as well as one reference to bestiality, two references to masturbation, 18 references to kinky sexual practices (including group sex), and two implications of oral sex. Does that sound like great family viewing right after dinner?


We won’t get into — no kidding — the bikini-waxing segment of the “Top Model” show. But how about the moment on the very popular “Survivor” series in the Amazon where the women Heidi, Jenna and Shauna were bathing topless and talking about how they should use their nudity to distract the men and advance in the game? It’s not surprising two of them later ended up in Playboy, having created a market demand for men to see what was behind the network pixilations.


Reality programs thrive on one-upmanship. ABC’s “The Bachelor” lets a man pick a bride from a group of single, attractive women hand-picked by producers. Fox’s “Married by America” let the audience pick the bride. “Big Brother” hopes for a “hook-up” it can televise nationally. Fox made couples to “hook up” or get kicked off on “Paradise Hotel.”


Every time a reality show ups the ante with outrageous behavior or shocking footage, it is encouraging subsequent shows to add more skin, more twists and more shocking behavior, resulting in that perpetual race to the bottom.


What’s a young viewer likely to learn from reality TV? Backstabbing and betrayal will get you ahead in life (“Survivor”)? Marriage is not to be taken seriously (“Married by America”)? Money matters more than love when choosing a life mate (“Joe Millionaire”; “For Love or Money”)?


Networks are clearly pushing the envelope with reality series, so parents ought to write to network executives and advertisers. The FCC needs to be vigilant in enforcing commonsense decency standards for broadcasters.


Producers make choices when editing the hundreds of hours of raw footage into each episode and have repeatedly chosen to include explicit language or graphic sexual content, bleeped out or pixilated whenever absolutely necessary. But make no mistake: They want those final restraints removed. It’s the logical next step in Hollywood’s race to the gutter, and absent a national outrage, it is precisely what will happen.


L. Brent Bozell III, founder and president of the Parents Television Council, is a nationally syndicated columnist.