The Ohio State House of Representatives has passed legislating critic say will countenance public schoolhouse students to get full marks on scientific discipline run if their answers shine “ sincerely held religious belief ” , even if they ’re factually wrong . Arguably if the bill lapse the Senate and is signed by the regulator , all student will need to do is find a religion that endorses every erroneousness , and claim it is their own . Granted , this may be more work than actually studying for the test , but it could also be more fun .
Ohio House Bill 164 , known as theOhio Student Religious Liberties Act , includes some seemingly reasonable clauses , such as preclude schoolhouse from deny students access to facilities because of their religion . However , controversy has focused on a plane section that register : “ Assignment grade and score shall be depend using average academic standards of substance and relevance , including any legitimate pedagogical worry , and shall not penalize or reward a student base on the spiritual content of their work . ”
According to local television stationWKRC , students ca n’t be marked down for an solvent that is in lineage with their spiritual belief , even if it contradicts the adept science .
The bill ’s patron , Representative Timothy Ginter , has dispute this , claiming “ ordinary donnish standard ” imply answering in line with the syllabus . However , at least until the police is tested in court , some teachers may be loth to penalize unscientific answers in the side of a potential lawsuit arguing they have breached the student ’s religious liberty .
Every Republican and two Democratsvoted for it , while 31 Democrats opposed . The Ohio Senate has an even more overwhelming Republican majority than the House , and the regulator is also Republican , so its luck of enactment are high .
Gary Daniels of the American Civil Liberties Union expressed the most far-flung fear about the law , questioning whether a teacher could mark a scholarly person wrong for enunciate the world is only 10,000 years old . “ Under HB 164 , the answer is ‘ no , ’ as this legislation distinctly states the instructor ' shall not penalize or reward a student based on the religious content of a student ’s employment , ” he toldCleveland.com .
regardless of the intent , the danger is the chilling effect the natural law could have on those unsure of how to interpret it . A instructor faced with a paper claiming the Sun go around the Earth might have fuss marking it , not knowing if the scholar belong to a cult that accommodate this persuasion , or plainly had n’t been give attention in class .
Ginter , who rather fitly represent Salem , justified the law by line the pressures students face from drug utilisation , natural depression , and self-destruction . It appear to be his truly held notion this legislation will help , although it is less clear how .
