Speaker 1: Welcome to the Nonprofits the thrice weekly show, where we
Speaker 1: address news and current events through the lens of atheism
Speaker 1: and secular humanism. For our first segment this week, we'll
Speaker 1: be looking south to Oklahoma, where some fishy things have
Speaker 1: been happening with their statewide school standards. Steven Harder, please
Speaker 1: give us the lowdown.
Speaker 2: You bet, thanks so much, Scott. Oklahoma's Superintendent of Public Instruction,
Speaker 2: Ryan Walters, is in hot water again, this time from
Speaker 2: nearly three dozen religious leaders, atheists, parents, students, and even teachers.
Speaker 2: He and his state Department of Education are being sued
Speaker 2: for not only the new education standards that they have published,
Speaker 2: but also for how they went about enacting them. Highlights,
Speaker 2: or rather low lights, include things such as injecting Christian
Speaker 2: nationalist talking points into all grade levels, teaching conspiracy theories
Speaker 2: as facts, and quickly changing what was and wasn't included
Speaker 2: in the four hundred page document mere hours before it
Speaker 2: was supposed to be voted upon. Plaintiffs requests that the
Speaker 2: new standards be struck down before the new school year
Speaker 2: begins in the fall. This story is from The Friendly
Speaker 2: Atheist and Matt Meta on July second, twenty and twenty five.
Speaker 1: All right, thanks, Steven, I want to stay with you
Speaker 1: for a second. Let's pick this apart a little bit here.
Speaker 1: The article talked about there's odd timing with how these
Speaker 1: changes in the standards were presented to the state Board
Speaker 1: of Education. What happened with that odd?
Speaker 2: Indeed, like a quick breakdown of the timeline, we'd be
Speaker 2: looking at, say December twenty twenty four, that's when Walter's
Speaker 2: first submits a draft of the standards that gains a
Speaker 2: lot of national attention because they are aggressively pushing reiight
Speaker 2: wing talking points onto children. Then later on, in May
Speaker 2: twenty twenty five, just a couple months ago, Walter doubles
Speaker 2: down on some of the most problematic portions, making them
Speaker 2: even worse, and submits this updated four hundred page version
Speaker 2: around four pm, so end of day, the day before
Speaker 2: the vote takes place, So about nine hours later, the
Speaker 2: committee meets and votes to pass on the standards. No
Speaker 2: one's had time to review the four hundred page document
Speaker 2: to see what has and hasn't been changed. They just
Speaker 2: vote on it, didn't go with it. But a week later,
Speaker 2: people start digging in and they start noticing the differences
Speaker 2: and that's when his underhanded tactics come to light and
Speaker 2: backlash increases. Now July second, the suit was filed arguing
Speaker 2: that the standards violate the Constitution, the whole separation of
Speaker 2: church and state, the process lacks transparency, and they should
Speaker 2: be struck down before the new school year begins.
Speaker 1: All right, Yeah, that definitely seems like kind of a shift. Shifty.
Speaker 1: I think we're being generous there when we say that
Speaker 1: that was shifty. I want to jump over to Eli
Speaker 1: for a second.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 1: Stevens just laid out some of these questionable strategies that
Speaker 1: they used to get it through the approval process. How
Speaker 1: else was the system right there? I think there's I
Speaker 1: think we're just scratching the surface here. What else is
Speaker 1: going on? How did he rig the system in his
Speaker 1: favor in getting these changes?
Speaker 3: Asked so because it goes beyond like it's not just
Speaker 3: a biblical indoctrination, which he swears he's not doing, by
Speaker 3: the way, but like he's he's taking that and he's
Speaker 3: shoehorning it into a bill that also mandates things that
Speaker 3: you know, are that people will generally agree with, like
Speaker 3: free breakfast and lunch for kids, and like more funds
Speaker 3: going towards the benefit of the students instead of what
Speaker 3: he calls like the bureaucratic bloat, which is like administrative
Speaker 3: fees and bureaucratic fees for the school, more money for teachers,
Speaker 3: more incentives for teachers, and things like that to attract, like,
Speaker 3: you know, and keep more teachers in the state. So
Speaker 3: these are things that are on the surface if you
Speaker 3: don't pay attention to like the details of how he
Speaker 3: wants it done. On the surface, they sound good, but
Speaker 3: then he so he's taking people that want to vote
Speaker 3: in favor of those things because they really really want
Speaker 3: Oklahoma to come up from like forty ninth I think
Speaker 3: forty eighth or forty ninth in the country in education.
Speaker 3: And they're like, well, if I have to deal with
Speaker 3: the Bible, you know, to make that happen, then you know,
Speaker 3: is that really all that bad? And I think, you know,
Speaker 3: people are going to feel differently about that.
Speaker 1: But there's almost literally it's like a shit filled eminem, right,
Speaker 1: he's candy quoting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I mean in a way. Yeah, And the
Speaker 3: thing is that the candy coding isn't even all that
Speaker 3: effective because like the lunch program, for example, isn't viable
Speaker 3: in most districts. He wants them to submit budgets immediately
Speaker 3: detailing how they're going to account for the free meals
Speaker 3: for the students from funds that they are already getting.
Speaker 3: He's not planning to allocate more funds for the purpose
Speaker 3: of doing this.
Speaker 1: He funded mandates. Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 3: Unfunded mandated? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, and.
Speaker 3: Then he intends to if they cannot comply, if they
Speaker 3: can't work it into their budget, he'll send some people
Speaker 3: to talk to their budget, and if they just can't
Speaker 3: make it work, he will withdraw state funding from the
Speaker 3: school to punish them, I guess for being poor. So
Speaker 3: it at first it sounds like a shit filled eminem,
Speaker 3: but once you get closer, it's it's not. It's just shit.
Speaker 1: Okay, So maybe just painted to look like an eminem. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: there's there's there's definitely a road we can go down there.
Speaker 1: I should probably divert us right away. I want to
Speaker 1: jump back to Steven here. So obviously his methodology is
Speaker 1: again will be generous, questionable at best here, But what
Speaker 1: were what's some of the meat of what was going
Speaker 1: on here? What were some of the additions and changes
Speaker 1: that the new standards are going to focus on it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, like he is very very proud of the
Speaker 2: fact that there are forty references to the Bible in
Speaker 2: these new standards that are sprinkled across all grade levels.
Speaker 2: So it's like in every every grade level learning about
Speaker 2: just how important the Bible is and how we need
Speaker 2: to give two talk about what the Bible says because
Speaker 2: for fallacious reasons obviously. Also it talks about how students
Speaker 2: are to understand how Christian morality shaped American law and government,
Speaker 2: which just just smacks of indoctrination and not an iota
Speaker 2: of critical thinking of actually asking like, is this actually
Speaker 2: does a stand up to scrutiny, because what is Christian morality?
Speaker 2: Apparently it can mean anything from owning slaves if you're
Speaker 2: asking the founding fathers, certainly any kind of racist undertones
Speaker 2: as well. And there's new facts to be talked to
Speaker 2: students as well, things that yeah, of course knew, not
Speaker 2: not the fake facts, the real facts of how maybe
Speaker 2: COVID nineteen was created in a Chinese lab and maybe
Speaker 2: there were let's explore the discrepancies in the twenty twenty election,
Speaker 2: just all stuff that President Pumpkin would love, love, love
Speaker 2: what he would feel so firm, so validated to know
Speaker 2: that children, children with taxpayer money are being fed this
Speaker 2: by authorities in their lives.
Speaker 1: I don't know, call me crazy, but that sounds like
Speaker 1: a big misuse of power there to me.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I want to jump back over to to to Eli.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 1: So Stephen was talking about some specific content changes that
Speaker 1: have been pushed through, but I want to I was
Speaker 1: wondering if you could address some new directions for the
Speaker 1: philosophy of this of the social Studies curriculum. I mean,
Speaker 1: what are some of the other more maybe broad strokes
Speaker 1: on the changes they're making here.
Speaker 3: Yes, so, and I was grateful to him at metaphor
Speaker 3: this being the journalist that he is, he included some
Speaker 3: screenshots of the bill and the curriculum that talked about
Speaker 3: you know what. He wanted to include some specific examples. So,
Speaker 3: firstly is the idea that he wants to that that
Speaker 3: Ryan Walters wants to incorporate American exceptionalism into the social
Speaker 3: studies curriculum, which is this idea that the United States,
Speaker 3: which contrary to the name, he does not mean all
Speaker 3: of the Americas he means the United States is inherently
Speaker 3: exceptional because of all of the influence that you know,
Speaker 3: the early settlers and the founders had from the juju
Speaker 3: from the Christian Bible. It's not just that we need
Speaker 3: to give two fucks, like you said, Stephen about the Bible.
Speaker 3: It's that the giving of fuck comes from the Bible.
Speaker 1: And that's kind of where you know that passage.
Speaker 3: Yes, it was the eleventh commandment, give a.
Speaker 1: Fuck to the Bible.
Speaker 3: Okay, got you. But there's some examples from the curricula
Speaker 3: for in first grade, for example, explain the purpose and
Speaker 3: meeting and meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance and the
Speaker 3: significance of the phrase under God. And by that I
Speaker 3: don't think he means the fact that it was added
Speaker 3: to the Pledge of Allegiance in nineteen fifty four, right,
Speaker 3: not when it was written originally.
Speaker 1: Identifying the frying print, Right, you got to read the
Speaker 1: print to get that kind of stuff right.
Speaker 3: Identify and explain the meaning of the United States official
Speaker 3: motto in God we Trust, including the importance of religion
Speaker 3: to the American people. I guess we're not Americans. Well,
Speaker 3: I mean, Stephen, but Scott, I guess, I guess we're
Speaker 3: not Americans because religion is not important to us. You know.
Speaker 3: Second grade identify stories from Christianity that influence the American
Speaker 3: colonists and the founders and culture, including the teachings of
Speaker 3: Jesus and Nazareth e g. The Golden Rule and the
Speaker 3: Sermon on the Mount, and for eighth graders, evaluate the
Speaker 3: role of Judeo Christian ideals in supporting colonial demands for
Speaker 3: independence as exemplified. This is specific in the Greek as
Speaker 3: exemplified by the Bible being a frequently cited authority by
Speaker 3: America's founders. I'd be like, if that were naturally the conclusion,
Speaker 3: Like when you when you say evaluate the world Judeo
Speaker 3: Christian ideals, you know in this thing, I feel like
Speaker 3: if you have to say, as exemplify by this specific
Speaker 3: thing like that, it's because that's not a natural answer
Speaker 3: to to like what you're asking for. And you're like,
Speaker 3: what he's saying is teach specifically this because specifically this,
Speaker 3: and like he's he says, you know, we don't want
Speaker 3: to preach to in in the classrooms. We shouldn't be
Speaker 3: indoctrinating the students, wink wink. But what he says is
Speaker 3: to focus on the historical, literary, and secular value of
Speaker 3: the King James version of the Bible. And I think
Speaker 3: that there is no historical or literary value in that
Speaker 3: Bible that you can't get from anywhere else. And there's
Speaker 3: no other secular value to speak of that I'm aware of.
Speaker 1: And the thing makes maybe a good paper weight or something,
Speaker 1: and they I suppose that would be a secular value,
Speaker 1: right yeah, pap, Wait.
Speaker 2: Really not even go ahead like well, like secularly speaking,
Speaker 2: like I like I am. I'm thrilled when these lawmakers,
Speaker 2: you know, tip their hand and say, well, it's got
Speaker 2: to be the new King James version, because like, the
Speaker 2: more that children can be forced to endure the King
Speaker 2: James version of all versions, the more they can distance
Speaker 2: themselves and say this is bullshit, I don't really care
Speaker 2: about this. That will that change them from like identifying
Speaker 2: oh yeah, I'm Christian on the surface. No, but at
Speaker 2: least that won't have any The more that they get
Speaker 2: forced into this kind of exposure, hopefully, the less roots
Speaker 2: they actually are able to put down, especially using a
Speaker 2: version like the King James.
Speaker 3: I wonder if it would just kind of reinforce what
Speaker 3: they're learning in church.
Speaker 1: You know what I mean, that's the whole point. I mean,
Speaker 1: isn't exactly the objective here.
Speaker 3: That's kind of That's kind of what I thought, because
Speaker 3: I remember when I was a kid of thinking how
Speaker 3: different the things were that I was learning on Sunday
Speaker 3: and then learning Monday through Friday. And so the idea
Speaker 3: here is put the same thing from Sunday and every
Speaker 3: other day so that they get this consistent this this
Speaker 3: consistent influx of his information, and it will seem more true,
Speaker 3: it will feel more naturally true, I.
Speaker 1: Guess, right, yeah, or at least less conflict to deal with,
Speaker 1: it would be it makes it easy to swallow basically
Speaker 1: sticking with that eminem metaphor there, right, yeah, so coaches
Speaker 1: with a spoonful of sugar. I want to jump back
Speaker 1: to Stephen real quick here. So I think we all
Speaker 1: know what the real motivation is here, right. We want
Speaker 1: to this is unashamed, unadulterated indoctrination of Oklahoma's children. And
Speaker 1: I mean, can you expand on that a little bit more?
Speaker 1: I mean you were just kind of touching on it
Speaker 1: a little bit there. I mean, what do you what
Speaker 1: do you think about that they're doing this to the
Speaker 1: Oklahoma's children.
Speaker 2: Yeah, like it was. It was so good for me.
Speaker 3: Like it was.
Speaker 2: It was like for me to just like dig into
Speaker 2: this article and the why why is this happening, and
Speaker 2: it just became like a real crystal moment that white
Speaker 2: supremacy doesn't need burning crosses anymore, that this is all
Speaker 2: about feeding a Christian nationalist base, sucking off President Pumpkin,
Speaker 2: dumbing down the public, and paving the way to privatize education.
Speaker 2: All of those things. All of those things are things
Speaker 2: that support folks that have privilege while erasing those without.
Speaker 2: There's nothing, there's nothing about this that is trying to
Speaker 2: increase diversity. It's all about crystallizing power around the people
Speaker 2: who have power. It's about building those buttresses, about building
Speaker 2: those barriers, and this is a way of radicalizing children.
Speaker 2: It's so great to be able to look at countries
Speaker 2: that we cultures that were not familiar here right in
Speaker 2: North America, to look to places in Asia, to look
Speaker 2: to places in the Middle East, and to not understand
Speaker 2: how they can be so different, so barbaric in air quotes,
Speaker 2: and like even just the idea of Israeli's mentally checking
Speaker 2: out and say, well, no, they're not really human, they're
Speaker 2: just Palestinians. They're a different kind of human. And for
Speaker 2: us to be like, whoa, that is so radical? How
Speaker 2: could you possibly think that? And to see that, Okay,
Speaker 2: this is what this is how you get to that
Speaker 2: place by feeding children this kind of bullshit and just
Speaker 2: using your power, using your privilege to force it upon them,
Speaker 2: and too like this is just a buttressing of that
Speaker 2: that system, a systematic marginalization of people who aren't in power.
Speaker 1: I'm getting I'm getting a weird sense of deja vu
Speaker 1: as I listened to you there, Steve, and it seems like, hmm,
Speaker 1: this seems like some kind of recurring theme. Eli. So
Speaker 1: how do you think this fits into like a bigger
Speaker 1: strategy for Christian nationalism in the United States.
Speaker 3: Well, we were just we just talked about this, I
Speaker 3: think it was last week on a non profits. Texas
Speaker 3: just passed the same thing, the Ten Commandments in public schools.
Speaker 3: We covered this on Oklahoma when they first put you know,
Speaker 3: Ryan Walters. We talk about Ryan Walters a lot. I
Speaker 3: feel like maybe he and I should kiss. I don't know.
Speaker 1: But the point being, every week on the nonprofits.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we talked about him so much. I just feel like,
Speaker 3: I don't know, let's just get it over with Ryeber.
Speaker 3: But sorry, I lost my train of thought. Texas just
Speaker 3: did the same thing last week. He he wants the
Speaker 3: KJV in classes UH five through twelve, Grades five through twelve,
Speaker 3: Ryan Walters does in Oklahoma. And like I mentioned a
Speaker 3: little bit ago, it's for you know, the secular value.
Speaker 3: And color me skeptical, but I don't know of any
Speaker 3: secular value like I mentioned a minute ago, that you
Speaker 3: can get out of the Bible. And the only value
Speaker 3: I see that is novel to the Christian Bible is
Speaker 3: theological in nature. So like the moral codes you get
Speaker 3: them from you know, you get them from Sumerians, from
Speaker 3: the code of Hammurabi, from Uh the Submerians. Was like
Speaker 3: or namu, I think, But like you know, all those
Speaker 3: more ancient codes than the Hebrew law that these you know,
Speaker 3: Judeo Christian values are coming from. You can get them
Speaker 3: elsewhere without the theology. So why is it specifically the Bible,
Speaker 3: Why is it specifically the Christian Bible, And why is
Speaker 3: it specifically the KJV. It's just it's it's the same
Speaker 3: they're they're just they want the same blanket Christianity across
Speaker 3: the the you know, the nation. And it has been
Speaker 3: said many times before any man I can't remember the
Speaker 3: words of I think it was Hamilton who had said
Speaker 3: it originally, Like whoever, and any any church, any government
Speaker 3: that can rule you know, on one you know, sect
Speaker 3: of Christianity can rule out any other sect of Christianity. Right,
Speaker 3: So yeah, it doesn't.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's something that I think that many religious people
Speaker 1: kind of miss out on. You know, they're they're push
Speaker 1: in favor of theocratic I mean, and this and this
Speaker 1: really does reek of theocracy here, right, we're incorporating the
Speaker 1: theology into the school, into the school curriculum. But any
Speaker 1: kind of theocracy, you run the risk of losing that
Speaker 1: religious freedom. Religious freedom is not just freedom from religion,
Speaker 1: but also freedom on what kind of religion you want
Speaker 1: to you want to be a part of. And so
Speaker 1: if I mean, this kind of thing is just as
Speaker 1: bad for other Christians as it is for Muslims, as
Speaker 1: it is for Hindus, as it is for the non
Speaker 1: religious like us or or whomever, or people who are
Speaker 1: staunchly Christian and just want to have a secular government,
Speaker 1: and you know it's it's it's really very troubling. So
Speaker 1: thanks for that, Eli. I want to I have a
Speaker 1: question that I want to address to both of you. Textbooks.
Speaker 1: Textbooks are an issue because because we're not when you
Speaker 1: change standards, when you make drastic changes to standards like that,
Speaker 1: it's not just like, oh, the schools just need to
Speaker 1: change what they say next Wednesday, you know, change this
Speaker 1: one paragraph. I mean even though they have to get
Speaker 1: all new materials, they need to have textbooks designed around
Speaker 1: those standards, and they have to have teacher training and
Speaker 1: all this kind of stuff. So it really is a
Speaker 1: significant effort on the part of the school districts to
Speaker 1: implement these changes. It's not just a wave of a
Speaker 1: pen or sneaking something under the wire like happened here.
Speaker 1: So I have a two part question here, and I'll
Speaker 1: give you both a chance to take a stab at here. First,
Speaker 1: is so, given the political climate in the US today,
Speaker 1: do you think these changes in the standards can survive?
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously there against the US Constitution, but these
Speaker 1: days that doesn't guarantee that something's going to get struck down.
Speaker 1: You know, do you think they're likely to be revoked
Speaker 1: and or rewritten. Are they going to stay for a
Speaker 1: little while or is this the bell weather for bigger
Speaker 1: changes that are on the horizon. That's part one. Part
Speaker 1: two is assuming that publishers will us for these really
Speaker 1: highly specialized changes in the standards in time for the
Speaker 1: upcoming school year. Right, we got just like another two
Speaker 1: months until the school year starts. Do you think that
Speaker 1: independent publishers like oh, I don't know, Prager, you or
Speaker 1: the Heritage Foundation or anything like that, do you think
Speaker 1: they're going to step up and fill in the gap there?
Speaker 1: Do you think that might be part of the intention?
Speaker 1: Could we even see chick tracks in Oklahoma classrooms? And
Speaker 1: so I want to I want to start with Stephen
Speaker 1: there first. Do you think these changes are likely to
Speaker 1: stay or are they? Are they a sign of what's
Speaker 1: more to come? And do you think that the the
Speaker 1: late introduction of these for this coming school year do
Speaker 1: you think that was maybe part of the plan so
Speaker 1: that they could use some of this uh private uh
Speaker 1: privately produced materials?
Speaker 2: Well, I don't know. That would sound kind of profitable
Speaker 2: for these Christian publishing places to be able to churn
Speaker 2: out and get these books off their shelves into government
Speaker 2: run schools. That's I don't know. I don't think Christian
Speaker 2: publishing houses are that unethical, are they? Yeah, yeah, it's
Speaker 2: thankfully Yeah, it would be an issue like not only
Speaker 2: for you know, generating textbooks out of nowhere, clearly they
Speaker 2: would have to be reaching out to Zondervan or some
Speaker 2: other publishing place to help fill those gaps. But also
Speaker 2: like I'm not a I'm not a classroom teacher, but
Speaker 2: just the idea that suddenly I need to be reworking
Speaker 2: all of my materials to emphasize these new standards, and
Speaker 2: that that doesn't sound like a quick and easy overhaul.
Speaker 1: There is no small task there. That is a major
Speaker 1: deal there, that's right, right, Yeah, of course, yeah, if
Speaker 1: you care.
Speaker 2: And especially for for Christians, for teachers who are not Christians,
Speaker 2: who aren't a member of the faith or are part
Speaker 2: of a different faith. Like yeah, let's I don't know,
Speaker 2: I don't know if Hindus are allowed to live in Oklahoma.
Speaker 2: I don't know if they're allowed to teach in Oklahoma.
Speaker 2: But what do they know about? Are they as well
Speaker 2: versed in the Sermon on the Mount as everybody else? Right?
Speaker 2: Should they have to be and yet will it stand?
Speaker 2: I hope that it doesn't, but I also hope that
Speaker 2: we're living in a simulated.
Speaker 1: Reality exactly exactly. Ye don't we all? Eli, I want
Speaker 1: to abandon the questions that I was just asking because Steven,
Speaker 1: what Stephen was saying just kind of gave me a
Speaker 1: question here, So I want to I want to focus
Speaker 1: on one last thing before we wrap things up here,
Speaker 1: and that is the idea that so the teachers, there
Speaker 1: might be non Christian teachers in Oklahoma that have to
Speaker 1: learn this material. Do you think they're trying to proselytize
Speaker 1: the teachers as well with this?
Speaker 3: That is super interesting because I didn't take it exactly
Speaker 3: that direction, but when Steven said that, I thought the
Speaker 3: same thing, like, Yeah, there's a bunch there's got to
Speaker 3: be teachers that like don't really know the stories in
Speaker 3: the Bible. Now they have to spend the next you know,
Speaker 3: two forty two to four to five weeks not only
Speaker 3: preparing all their other lesson plans, but also reading the
Speaker 3: Bible and familiarizing themselves with what it says so that
Speaker 3: they can teach it in the ways that they're expected to.
Speaker 3: I mean, it certainly would serve a theocratic or maybe
Speaker 3: it's going to drive out some of the non Christian teachers.
Speaker 1: You know, maybe maybe they're hoping the non Christian teachers
Speaker 1: will just throw their hands up and you know go
Speaker 1: to you know, Colorado or something.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't know, somewhere better there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, we should. We should get him on the
Speaker 1: show to have him talk about it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he's he's I think he's way on his way
Speaker 3: out of Oklahoma. I don't know who knows, but the
Speaker 3: It definitely would be serving to a theocracy to you know,
Speaker 3: to have only teachers that who know and believe what
Speaker 3: the Bible says and believe that it is, you know,
Speaker 3: fundamental and and inherent to the origin of the United States.
Speaker 3: So yeah, it might not just be the kids that
Speaker 3: they're they're they're targeting, right right.
Speaker 1: I suppose if all the teachers were Christian, then there
Speaker 1: would get much less pushback from the teacher organizations and
Speaker 1: so forth.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, it would kind of be this way already
Speaker 3: to a smaller degree.
Speaker 1: Well, that's whatever, however that's going to work out. I'm
Speaker 1: imagining it's not going to be entirely pleasant.