http://animoto.com/play/WfRXrTBAumrVuTho86MoYwReligion in Public Schools

Article 3

Church and State (an organization) argues that the phrase “In God We Trust” is part of our nation.  It claims that if people don’t want this phrase on their license plate, they can have it removed for a fee.  Church and State develops this claim by first stating that this is our nation’s motto.  Lately, it says that if the government supports this phrase, then as citizens, we should too.  Its purpose is to convince the people of America to deal with the fact that God is a part of our nation and we shouldn’t try to exclude Him in any way.

Church and, State, and State Church and. "Michigan Anti-Bullying Bill Omits Religion Exemption." Church & State 65.1 (2012): 3. History Reference Center. Web. 18 Oct. 2012.

Article 2

Martha Nussbaum argues that the laws should support religions being allowed in public schools, that they should all (the religions) be treated equally.  She claims that people do care about the freedom of religion and that it is often distributed unequally.  Nussbaum develops this claim by first looking back on the history of religion in America and how we have religion in schools today.  Nussbaum tells of current situations that deal with religion in public schools.  Lately, the author analyzes historic court cases from over two hundred years (philosopher times) as to how they did or didn’t support religious activity in schools.  Nussbaum’s purpose is to inform us that not all religions are being treated equally in order to stress the importance of the freedom of religion in public schools.

Nussbaum, Martha C. "Liberty Of Conscience: The Attack On Equal Respect." Journal Of Human Development 8.3 (2007): 337. Advanced Placement Source. Web. 18 Oct. 2012.

Article 1

Michael Lemonick, Noah Isackson and Jeffery Ressner argue that evolution should not be taught in school because it is a theory and it can’t be proven.  They claim people have been going to court because they don’t believe that it should be taught to students.  Lemonick, Isackson and Ressner developed this by first breaking down the laws that say what should and shouldn’t be taught in the classroom.  They used the term “church verses state” for the separation religion and schools.  Lastly, the authors describe how religious and nonreligious educators feel about the problem.  Their purpose is to persuade their audience into not wanting evolution to be taught in order to prove a point that evolution is relevant to teaching students. 

Lemonick, Michael D.Isackson, NoahRessner, Jeffrey. "Stealth Attack On Evolution." Time 165.5 (2005): 53. MAS Ultra - School Edition. Web. 14 Nov. 2012.