Clarifying a point on teaching, religion and U.S. history

I think Jean Nicholson may have missed the point of my letter of

Jan. 1 (Mailbag, Jan. 8). She paints me as “one-sided” and accuses me

of giving a negative slant on Christianity and causing confusion with

some students.

That is certainly not my frame of mind, nor my reputation. Of

course, I give both sides in my history class. I personally think

Jesus and his teachings are marvelous examples of how we should treat

each other, and point this out regularly in class, although I am

careful not to impose my religious beliefs on my students.

My point was that when government gets involved in religion, it

has historically led to abuses and atrocities. My point was that the

ideals of Jesus (or Mohammed, or Buddha, for that matter) can be

easily forgotten when political goals and religion get intertwined.

My point was that our founding fathers, even devout Christians like

John Adams, realized that we must keep the government out of

religion, we must not let the government favor any one religion, or

we may face the same horrors, perpetrated by, as Nicholson says,

“power-hungry opportunists.”

By the way, these were, unfortunately, not “isolated” incidents.

Millions died because far too many people cooperated in these

actions. This is why so many people, not just teachers, were

disturbed by the efforts of a school board member to establish a

government prayer and other government-sponsored religious

activities.

We are a spiritual nation, perhaps the most spiritual in the

world, because we have allowed freedom of religion, and not allowed

the government to meddle with our spiritual lives. My own spiritual

beliefs tell me that God is truth, and that finding truth will bring

us closer to God. Hiding the truth from my students would be

unprofessional and immoral.

JOE ROBINSON

Newport Beach