S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools: transcript

Sure, I can address the amendment is 2 68 the edu uh, Religious curriculum in schools? Yeah. So the amendment would take out a reference to, um, I think a un, uh, document that had drawn some controversy. Okay. So, uh, that's All it does.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I want Senator Rebe to know I am in a car, but I'm not driving, so I don't want her to be concerned about that during my presentation. Um, so the bill focuses on how religion and religious liberty are addressed within public education and higher education. Uh, the bill seeks to amend our educational standards, um, to specifically allow, um, instruction on religious liberty as part of the social studies requirement, um, specifically within the American Constitutional government and citizenship courses, it clarifies that educators may examine the role of religion in historical and constitutional context, including philosophical questions concerning religion, comparative religion, and the history of religion. Uh, the bill reinforces that students, uh, should be allowed to express their beliefs and their assignments, homework, artwork, et cetera, without facing discrimination based on the religious perspective of their work. Uh, Senate Bill 2 68 is amended proposes to change the requirements, um, for higher ed grads regarding their understanding of religious liberty. This, um, ties into the broader effort to ensure that college graduates have a foundational understanding of the US Constitution and the role that religious freedom has played in the American legal system. Um, the legislation, um, emphasizes a thorough study of historical documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, while ensuring that schools maintain neutrality and respect for both religious and non-religious views. Um, so LEAs can teach about religion to promote and respect and understanding of our, of our state and our country's history and instructional activities can include the influence of religion on music, art, law, and, and politics. What it doesn't do, um, Mr. Chair, is it doesn't mandate, it doesn't force any teacher to say anything. It doesn't force any speech or anything. I think that we're in a weird place in our society, in our culture right now where nobody knows what's safe, uh, anymore. And I think my primary purpose in running this legislation is to make sure that the teachers in this state, uh, know that it's safe to talk about what motivated the pilgrims, uh, to come across the ocean or what motivated the pioneers to cross, uh, the planes. And, um, I I think that, um, I think that that's a message that we need to send, especially if it's in response to a question being asked by a student. A sincere question. Um, you know, our, one of our founding fathers, George Washington, um, he often referred to Providence, and if you read, um, anything about him, you know, that when he said Providence, he was referring to God, he was referring to the Almighty and to teach American history and to try to intentionally leave that out, I think is a disservice. With that, let me kick, uh, let me kick my, as part of my presentation, uh, to Michael Erickson, who's a, a local attorney at, uh, Kurt McConkey, and I've worked with him on various issues, uh, for several years. Michael, go ahead and state your name for the record and who you're representing today.

Thank you, uh, Michael Erickson. Uh, correction on the, uh, not with Kurt McConkey, with another firm, Ray Qui and never Kurt, and I'm just representing myself today. Okay. Um, thank you Senator Weiler and, uh, chair committee members. Thank you for this opportunity to, to speak in support of, of s SP 2 68. Senator Weiler has given a, uh, a, a description of what the bill, uh, does and provided, uh, his, uh, sentiments and his support. Uh, and I'd like to just give some background and explain why I approached Senator Weiler about, uh, this bill and, and asked if, if he would present it, uh, to the legislature. I'm, I'm going to be speaking today from my experience as a, a citizen, as a, uh, an attorney, and as a former adjunct professor at Utah Valley University. Uh, but my comments are only my own. I approached Senator Weiler about this bill because of my experience, my personal experience as a public school student and as a public university educator. As a young public school student, every day I pledged allegiance to the Flag one nation under God. But I never learned in school what it meant for the United States to declare itself as a nation under God. I suppose I learned that pilgrims on the Mayflower were religious and that the First Amendment protected religious freedom, but I don't remember learning much else about the influence of religion on US history or government. In preparing for law school, I read a bi, a biography about America's most famous lawyer, Abraham Lincoln. And I was surprised to learn that when he announced to his cabinet, they had finally decided to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. He said it was because he had made quote, a promise to my maker, or as another cabinet member, recorded in his diary, quote, A covenant with God. Lincoln made this promise when the outcome of the battle of Antietam was uncertain. But when Union soldiers forced the Confederate army to retreat, Lincoln took it as an indication of divine will that he should move forward with emancipation. At the time, I thought to myself, why didn't anyone tell me this before? I would've liked to know that such an important decision in the history of our country was influenced by Lincoln's belief in God. Ever since I have been surprised to learn how much religious faith influenced the most significant moments in United States, history from religious clergy who preached Independence over the pulpit during the American Revolution to faith-filled abolitionists who taught that quote, the slave is our brother from Franklin Roosevelt's nationwide Radio Prayer as US soldiers battled on the beaches of Normandy to Dwight Eisenhower's, including under God in the Pledge of Allegiance, in ideological opposition to communism. And perhaps no movement in American history, was more influenced by religious faith than the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, which is almost exclusively organized in the black churches of the South, the only place where African Americans could safely organize themselves. When I was invited by Utah Valley University to teach a section of American heritage in the political science department, I decided to include some of these inspiring examples in my course materials. One of my children asked me one night over dinner, dad, can you teach that in a public school? Of course I can. I replied, it's our history. In the decades since the Supreme Court prohibited school sponsored prayers and devotional worship in public school classrooms, there has been an unintended and unfortunate chilling effect on any discussion of religion, including its vital role in United States history. Fortunately, in recent years, there has been a growing awareness of this overcorrection, and there has been much needed clarification, including by the Department of Education and both the Biden and Trump administrations, that the teaching of the role of religion in US history is constitutionally permissible. Senate Bill 2 68 advances this correct understanding of the Constitution and American history. As a university professor, I was deeply grateful for comments from students who as surprised as I was, to learn about the role of religion in our nation's history. Here are just two comments from my students. First quote, the most surprising thing that I learned this semester was how much religion has been involved in some of the biggest turning points in American history, such as the end of slavery and the Civil rights movement. I had only ever thought about these movements in terms of politics or society. So it was eyeopening to read about how religion was right at the forefront, motivating activists, and giving the moral case. Second, I think it would be ridiculous to avoid talking about religion in this class, given its deep rooted relevance to the subject matter. Christianity was central to many of the figures covered in the course. So to do them justice and to truly understand the history, it's only right that there is a religious emphasis when learning about them. This comes from someone that isn't religious herself. I don't believe in God, but I still firmly believe that it should be okay to talk about it in the way that you did close quote, because I don't believe that US history can be taught accurately without including the role of religion during the most significant moments in American history. I respectfully support Senate Bill 2 68. Thank you members of the committee.

Did? It does. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, you know, I'm going to say, as a teacher, I feel a little bit of whiplash with, you know, anti DEI, anti CRT laws, and that has really caused some of this consternation with some of these conversations. Um, when I think about the religions you mentioned here, I can say that religion is a concept in every part of our world that people look to when they're in dire straits. And some of them are mentioned here, but others are not mentioned here. And that's a part of my frustration as well. Um, when we think about some of these concepts, we don't really talk about the Native Americans and the indigenous people that were here beforehand. And so that's not listed. And, um, we also have a, i I said this just the other day, we have a Satan's temple here. And would they, would they be allowed to be talk talked about as well, uh, when we start prescribing who we can talk about and why we should be talking about them if we don't make the list as comprehensive, as long as possible, people left, feel left out. Um, I, I don't really think, when you think about a religious liberty instruction, that's the American Revolution completely. Um, I don't think moral equality is just from religion. I feel like I'm a moral person. Um, and I don't really follow any organized religion right now. So, um, I think that in my experience, I've been told that I can speak about all religions and we can discuss all cultures. So I think that this bill is, um, something that we already can do. And when we start defining it in different ways, then we get back to this CRT bills and these DEI bills, which are our, our teachers are really struggling with that as well. So, um, giving them this list doesn't seem like it does the, um, the justice that it should do to every kind of religion out there. And only further mothers further muddies the water about what things we can teach and what we can't, because then we have parents saying, well, it's not on this list. I can't teach it. So my question would be how do we make this list more comprehensive to include every type of refugee, every type of religion, and also, um, maybe some of the people that we don't like. I mean, you mentioned fascism, but you also don't talk about communism and nazim and all the other types of isms.

Uh, may I answer Mr. Chair? Sure,

You know, if, if the good senator wants to run her own bill on DEI or any other subject, I would invite her to do that. This bill doesn't mention any religion. What it mentions is that if it's relevant to our country or our state's history, uh, that it, it, the teacher is, is welcome to include. It doesn't mandate that it be included. But, um, um, you know, uh, I, I, this bill is very clear. Uh, we have religious foundations for the state's founding and for our country's founding. And the bill makes it clear that that is not, um, uh, prohibited from being shared in the classroom. So that would be my response.

So I, you know, it, it, it's interesting to me, and I'm actually glad you brought this bill. Uh, I was in, you know, fifth grade, uh, in Utah history, right after a lot of this stuff had occurred, right? These, and, and I went home to my parents and I said, you know, it's really odd we're studying Utah history, but not once did we talk about the migration of the Mormon pioneers to Utah. And, you know, we talked about, you know, we talked about Jim Bridger. I remember those lessons. I re you know, I remember a lot of these things, but it, it hit me so strongly when I was there that, that we never mentioned that. And why didn't we mention that? I asked my parents. And then, you know, we got into this discussion about these, uh, lawsuits that had taken place. And, you know, it's, it interesting to me that, you know, when we, you know, in some of the popular history books today, I, I find it interesting that they talk a lot about Jamestown, but don't mention much about Plymouth Rock. And, and when you think about it, when you know, and, and while that comes up, you know, you have to read Alexi de Tocqueville to really understand why that was so significant, those differences, and why, why this constitutional republic worked here, but it didn't work in his Native France. And he talks a lot about that in that book. So I think that's really interesting. And then, and then when I was studying about the Civil Rights Movement, one of the most impactful, I think, things that Martin Luther King did, uh, when you look at the letter from Birmingham Jail, uh, pretty, pretty amazing. But understanding and having read about Sir Thomas Aquinas and then understood that Martin Luther King understood what Thomas Aquinas said, right? And he referenced that to show that that what was happening in the south was not right. And there was a difference between right and wrong. And, and I think that ignited the nation and they understood, uh, what was going on. So I, I'm really glad you brought this up, because I don't, I don't see how we can talk about the founding of the country. And, you know, people want to talk about others coming here, and that's okay, but why did they come here? What was it about this nation that was different than everywhere else, right? And what, what, what in that foundation made us different? And, you know, I, you know, know, I don't mind people talking about critical theories and other things, and they can, they can talk about the oppression that came and everything else, and I don't mind that. But I think it's really important for a, a sequencing problem where, where kids can actually understand what was different here. And the very liberties that that, that we talk about, really, were inspired by this, right? And, and to really understand them, to understand why can, why we can march down the street with signs, right? To understand what it really means and how this constitution, our constitutional republic, set that up, I think I, I think is amazing. And so I'm really glad, and, and again, when I look at your bill, Senator Weiler, it, it seems to me you, you know, you're not talking about catechism. You're not talking about teaching, uh, you know, a a religious dogma or you're not. You're, you're talking about how this impacted our history. And I, and I, I really, I, I really like that idea. And, uh, you know, I'm, I'm thankful you brought this bill forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have my follow

Thank you. Uh, I don't really feel the need to run a bill because this is already a law and everybody can do this. And I think emphasizing it only makes it seem like we have an agenda. Uh, I know that we have Jehovah's Witnesses who feel very, um, left out in our schools, but that's not always part of our curriculum. As a Roman Catholic, I was raised Roman Catholic. I don't always feel included in some of the, the conversations here in the state capitol, but I, I don't feel like it's my place to assert my religion into other people's religions. So I think as we start talking about these things, um, we, we, we, uh, we only emphasize certain religions, and it comes up organically. So Jehovah's Witnesses isn't listed in Puritans, Catholics, Quakers and Jews and Jehovahs Witnesses and, um, the, uh, the people from China who do Roman Catholic. But if it came up, we could talk about it organically. So I think this list is prescribed, and it actually puts boundaries around what we should be speaking about. And it's already a law that we can talk about all these things. So I think this is unnecessary. And when you start to point out what you can do and you're prescribed, then you actually make it seem like you can't do the other things. So I, that's my statement. Thank you,

Yeah, well, thank you. And you know, I bringing all these other religions in on line, uh, 84, where it says, early settlement of North American colonies by religious refugees. I, including Puritans, Catholics, Quakers, and Jews. The Mormon church wasn't around then. The, I don't know if the Holy Rollers was around then. They're not talking about any other religions. They're not talking about Hindus. They're not talking, they're talking about the ones that was the early settlers of America. And to bring all this other crap in here is not right. Uh, that that was the people that was here that settled the country. And it's not, I'm talking not after the fact of anything else. It's just this is the part of history. And so I think that's, that's the end of it. I mean, I open it up to public call the question. It's Friday afternoon. I want to get outta here.

I'm gonna, I'm gonna put it at two minutes again. Perfect. I'll be even less than two minutes because of that. What? Timely comment. Okay. Thank you. My name is Bill Duncan. I represent the Sutherland Institute. We're, we speak in support of this bill. We think that this adds a critical context to discussions about history and our, our nation and all of the, all of the specific contributions, for instance, of Jehovah's Witnesses to, uh, the, the way that our, um, uh, courts now protect religious freedom would be part of that discussion. And this clarify provides, I think, a critical clarification for teachers about what they're allowed to do. And that's why we're, we're so supportive of this. Bill.

Marianne Christensen, executive Director with Utah Eagle, Utah Legislative Watch. Um, I'm very much in support of this bill. This is one of those bills that makes me get up and dance when I read it. 'cause I think this kind of instruction, it may be in the code already, but it's lacking in what's being taught to our children. The way I can tell is because our children, increasingly generation over generation, are learning to hate our country more instead of love it like I do. And we need to fix that. This, I'm, I mentioned the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff instead of the fence at the top. This is the fence at the top where we go back and we teach our kids why they should love our country. If you put 14 greats in front of the word grandfather, you'll be talking about my, my ancestor Edward Fuller, who was on the Mayflower inside the Mayflower Compact. He was a Protestant, not my religion, but I'm very happy to learn about him and the rest of the people on the Mayflower because they were so crucial to the founding of our country. Thank

Uh, Jenny Earl. I'm speaking on behalf of myself. I just have two provisions in here that I wanted to kind of address. Well, actually three. One of those is I do think that, um, the accurate history does represent, as has been stated, it as what was taking place at the founding of our nation as we're learning history, we should have the, the accuracy of that. Um, the second thing is that under the 50 3G ten two oh two, which is recognized here, is that philosophical questions concerning religion that's left as a, as a broader thing, including the historical religion, comparative religion. And it goes on that, that's a, that's broader, that allows for some of that discussion to take place. And as long as it's not the instruction in religion, which is, which is very clear in here, and I appreciate that. And then the last provision that I wanted to just address was grateful that, um, students in their work, in their, the things that they're, they're producing don't have to feel like they're restricted. They can, they can actually express themselves if it is a, um, if, if it has a component of religion in it, they don't feel like they have to maybe be restricted in that. So I appreciate the work that's been done on this. Thank you.

I'm Julie Jackson. I am, um, on the Granite School Board. I'm here speaking on behalf of myself. I just wanted to add to the conversation. I just read cover to cover two Utah history textbooks, um, from the fourth grade and one from the seventh grade. And I was really interested to realize as I read through those, um, and then thinking about this bill, I, I don't feel there's a need for this bill, because I think we already have, um, plenty of opportunity to talk about this in our, um, textbooks. They have lots of discussion about the ideology behind what happened with the Mormon pioneers. Many chapters that talk about that. They also have chapters where they talk about our natives and their ideology, and also, um, even when they go into the Chinese who were here to build the railroad, and they talk about the problems that happen between ideologies and what that meant for our state. So, um, I feel like this is already an opportunity and it's already in statute and that this is not a needed bill.

Good afternoon. Thank you. My name is Deborah Gare. I am a teacher. I'm here representing myself, and I am actually a history teacher. This is my 17th year in the classroom, and I've taught everything from seventh grade Utah studies to 12th grade government and all the core subjects and, and multiple electives in between. So I'm, I'm here to discuss some concerns. Obviously, accurate history is essential, and students need to do, need to understand context. And without context, history is incomplete. I, I fully agree with that, uh, discussion and that concern. That said, uh, when I taught Utah Studies, I had no issue talking about the pioneers. Had no problems talking about the LDS faith. Uh, I teach a films class right now, and I've had no issues talking about Harriet Tubman and how she was a woman of deep faith, and that drove many of her actions, uh, in US government. It's a semester class, and there's already more than we can possibly teach. So it's interesting that in addition to the required stuff, now we're being given some things that we may teach as context if we so choose to teach. But it's already context, it's already allowed because it's history. Our founders were not monolithic. Uh, the new Light Baptists were hated and persecuted by colonies that had official religions, which is one of the reasons why we have the First Amendment structured the way it is. Uh, slave hoarders, of course, they used religion to justify enslavement, and they used it to justify the brutality towards the people that they mistreated and, and exploited as slaves. So my concerns are that, uh, this concept of religion as part of our early founding is more complex and nuanced. Then the, the bill suggests. And that is also concerning with context. And my other real concern is with the framing, where the law tells us what we will teach, and it's more than we can teach. Now. We're being told that you may teach this in addition, if you would like. And the reason that framing is so distressing to me is normally the law says what we have to do. And anything that's not restricted we can do. But if we add something that, okay, now you, you can do this, that suggests that if it's not on the list, we can't. And that framing is deeply disturbing to me as a history teacher and as a teacher in general. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is David Bell from West Jordan. Um, I am speaking on behalf of myself. Um, I'm a school educator, I teacher as well. I teach science. Um, and I'm opposed to this bill, uh, for a number of reasons. It has been stated by a few other people, but my biggest concern, uh, is that this bill frames things in a way that is, does not show the nuances are, has already been stated. Um, slavery was justified using religion. Um, the founding documents of our, or the founders were fighting a tyrannical government from across the notion that was saying it was there due to their particular religious position on the king as a, as a, as being placed there by our deity. And so I worry that this bill promotes a very one-sided view, um, when it is much more nuanced. Yes, we understand that religion played a major part on making the world and our country where it is now in a lot of great ways, but I worry that this bill promotes an unrealistic, uh, view of what that looks like.

Good afternoon. My name is Kim del Grosso, and I am a daughter of the Mayflower, daughter of the Revolution and Daughter of the Pioneers, whatever. Uh, my, my families were crazy, right? I have never really learned, even through my years how important religion was. I don't think it's been taught as a history for decades, and I can't think of another reason. I, I just listened to David Barton talk about the day. Luckily you guys don't beat each other up, but the day that they were hitting each other as they were forming, um, the Constitution, declaration of Independence, because they all came from a different religion, that was fascinating to me. All of the founders, a lot of them came from a different religion. And there was one religion, and you can correct me because I wasn't taught it, that was considered the most hateful. And, um, they actually came together and asked him to pray. And the day that he prayed is when they came together, and they were able to sign it and go forward. That's phenomenal. And I feel like we are, we need to teach our children this because they have to have that foundation. And I think this is very important. And, um, I am in, I'm in big favor. I'm with Utah, um, Eagle Forum. I support this bill wholeheartedly.

Chair members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Joseph Carey. I serve on the Utah State Board of Education, representing the best district in the state, the Ogden, the Ogden Weber School Districts. Um, I also chair the Law and Licensing Committee for the State Board of Education, but I, uh, my comments today are my own. I support SB 2 68 because we need it. We need to clear up some of the confusion and ambiguity that is in our classrooms regarding the teaching of, uh, historical topics with an emphasis, not an emphasis, but a recognition of the religious significance sometimes around those events. SB 2 68 carefully maintains constitutional boundaries while strengthening civic literacy and historical accuracy. This bill does not authorize religious instruction, nor does it allow schools or employees to endorse, promote, or disparage any particular faith or belief. What this bill does is ensure that students with their teachers can meaningfully examine the role of religion in American history, and understand why religious liberty is central to our constitutional framework. This bill gives teachers clarity and confidence. It protects educators who responsibly discuss the role of religion in pivotal moments in our history, some which were discussed earlier, teachers should not have to fear that acknowledging these historical realities will be mistaken for religious endorsement. We have often treated religion as if it were contraband, rather than a central force in our civics and history. SB 2 68 restores this context without promoting Creed, and I would appreciate your support for it. Thank you.

Um, hello. Um, I'm Vicki Little, and I am from Wyoming. Um, but I'm here representing myself. And I just wanna say that I, I am in, in support of this bill. Um, I'm a product of public school. I Uintah public school and state school for college. And I didn't know any of this. I, you know, I never learned anything about, um, you know, George, that George Washington or, um, i I being influenced by the hand of God. And so I think it is a disservice to us and our children and, and our creator, um, to not acknowledge that, that, uh, it's not that you're asking religion be taught, you're just acknowledging that these things influenced these people, their decisions and our trajectory. And that's what makes us so unique. And that's why people can come here. And, and, uh, you know, it, it's not asking you to choose a religion or follow a religion, it's just acknowledging that these things happened and we're here 250 years later. So thank you and I appreciate

Yeah. My name is Trevor D***s. I'm a student of John Adams College, and I'm speaking in favor of this bill. Um, I am a student. I'm, and though I'm not in this age range at this time, I have appreciated understanding the role of religion in its nuances. Um, there have been some concerns stated that this doesn't actually address the nuances of religion, the way it was used for good and for bad, but actually doesn't specify that it's only to be talked about in positive light. In fact, it encourages discussion on all the different subjects that it has and understanding the good along with the times it was used for bad, um, as religions, one to the primary motivators of humanity, um, I think is very important to understand, not just because of the past, but because of events that we see happening in our country and in the world today. I think it's very important to understand the primacy of religion as a human motivator, and to begin learning that from your youth is one of the vital, uh, things that you can do. And with that, I am in support of this bill. Thank You.

Um, my name is Carol and Michelle. I live in Sandy, Utah, and I've got a grandson now who is not wanting to go to public school. And he's a home. I'm home teaching him and done a lot of learning. I've had also had some grandchildren that I was discouraged that they didn't know some things like, for instance, the Mayflower Compact and some of the documents that are would be taught. I think it's really important. I'm in very much in support of this bill. I love it. Um, I'd like to just read from you a quote from a book. God has indeed blessed America under his Providence. Over the last two centuries. America has risen to levels and achievements attained by no other nation in the history of the world, yet ironically, in a nation once distinguished for its faith and made great by its people of faith. In recent years, public expressions of that same faith have been viewed as a menace to society rather than an asset. And nowhere had this change been more evident than in the courts. There are many court examples of this. In the case of Warsaw versus, um, te Apache, a federal court ruled that it was unconstitutional for a public cemetery to have a planter in the shape of a cross. Because according to the court, if someone were to view that cross, it could cause emotional distress and thus constitute injury. In fact, in the case of Roberts v Madigan, a federal court ruled that a teacher at school could not be seen publicly with, with his own personal copy of the Bible, and then rule that a classroom library containing 237 books must be removed from the library, the two books dealing with Christianity. I'm very much in support of this bill, and I think it is something that we need to vote for. Thank you. Thank

Good afternoon, committee. Can you hear me? Yes. Wonderful. Thank you. I'm Sarah Jones. I'm with the Utah Education Association. I wanted to speak about a very practical consideration on this bill that I haven't heard addressed by any other, um, public comment or committee discussion. And it's the timeline for the adoption of this new standard. So as I read the bill lines 54 to 56 create a new standard to examine the role of religion in, in US history and primacy of religious liberty in the Constitution. And this is embedded under the standard for American Constitutional government and citizenship. And that requires the state board to create standards for all of these kinds of courses, beginning for the 20 26, 20 27 school year. So my question is, if we are incorporating a new standard that has to go into effect for fall of 2026, how will that standard adoption process for the state board occur by then? And how will teachers be trained on the new standards by August of 2026? And, and that's my, that's my concern. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would make a motion that we pass out Senate bill 2 68 with a favorable recommendation as amended. Okay. So the motion is to send out, uh, senate Bill 2 68, Senate bill 2 68 as amended with a favorable recommendation.

Thank you. I would like to make an alternative motion to move the agenda since this timeline doesn't fit. And I know that two of my colleagues voted against a bill of mine that would protect students from laws that they didn't understand because they felt the curriculum was too, um, two weighty. And we couldn't have our schools being burdened with more curriculum. And so the bill that I tried to run was the conversation you had that we had too much to do in our schools already, and my bill failed. So with that, I think that you should probably have the same feeling about this bill. 'cause we can already do it. So I mo mo moved to move the agenda.

Yeah. Thank you. Um, Mr. Chair. I, I, I'll, I'll make the commitment if the bill moves out of committee, that I'll work with the state school board and other stakeholders if we need to delay the implementation back by a year. I can make that amendment on second reading. Um, um, but, uh, to the other points, this is not, uh, adding any curriculum. It's, it's clarifying that when the history that's also being taught, that is already being taught, that it, it can, it, it, it doesn't have to try to sidestep these historically significant events and, and, uh, you know, and the influence that went into them. So, uh, I would ask, uh, I would ask the body, the committee to vote no on the motion.

As I was told, when I run my bill, we have so much to teach in class, so we shouldn't be adding to the agenda by my two colleagues here. That's why they failed my amendment. So I think that all of these bills that are unnecessary and, um, don't really need to happen, should be voted on the same way. So I'm standing with my motion.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It was a good discussion. I'll, I'll, I'll waive. Thank you.

I will waive as well. Uh, well, I, I'll, I, I actually would like to say, you know, this is the first, uh, public hearing on this bill. It's a Senate bill, so there'll be a house, uh, opportunity to weigh in on it. And that committee can stay there as long as they want. But I really appreciate the, uh, the, the sponsor of the bill, and I think it's a good bill, and I appreciate it. And, uh, it's just call a question.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And in the interest of time, I think I'll probably, um, not do a lot of my presentation. It's, it's pretty self-explanatory, and I have a guest here who has a lot to share. And, um, this bill is basically just focusing on the fundamental role that religion played in the United States history and making sure that that, um, can be part of our curriculum. So I will turn it over to my guest. Thank you.

Thank you chairman and members of the committee. Uh, my name is Michael Erickson. I am speaking today as a citizen and attorney and a former adjunct professor of American Heritage at Utah Valley University. I do not represent anyone, and my views are my own. I approached Senator Weiler about this legislation because of my personal experience as a public school student and as a public, uh, university educator as a K through 12 public school student. Every day I pledged allegiance to the Flag one nation under God, but I never learned in school what it meant for the United States to declare itself to be a nation under God. I suppose I learned that pilgrims on the Mayflower were religious and that the First Amendment protected religious freedom. But I don't remember learning much else about the influence of religion on US history or government to prepare for law school. I read a biography about Abraham Lincoln, and I was surprised to learn that when he announced to his cabinet that he had finally decided to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. He said it was because he had made a promise to my maker. As one cabinet. Remember, recorded or as another, described a covenant with God. Lincoln made this promise when the outcome of the battle of Antietam was uncertain. But when Union soldiers forced the Confederate army to retreat, Lincoln took the result as an indication of divine will that he should move forward with emancipation. At the time, I thought to myself, why didn't anyone tell me this before? I would've liked to know that such an important decision for our country was influenced by Lincoln's belief in God. Ever since, as I have studied American history and visited famous sites, I have been surprised to learn how much religious faith influenced the most significant moments in United States history. When I was invited by Utah Valley University to teach a section of American heritage in the political science department, I decided to include some of these inspiring samples of my course materials. One of my children asked me one night over dinner, dad, can you teach that in a public school? Of course I can. I replied, it's history. And the decades since the Supreme Court prohibited school sponsored prayers and devotional worship and public school classrooms, there has been an unintended and unfortunate chilling effect on any discussion of religion, including its fundamental role in United States history. Fortunately, in recent years, there has been a growing awareness of this overcorrection, and there has been much needed clarification, including by the United States Department of Education, which issued guidance during both the Biden and Trump administrations, that the teaching of the role of religion in US history is constitutionally permissible. Senate Bill 2 68 is based on specific language from this Department of Education guidance, it advances a correct understanding of the Constitution and American history. The fundamental role of religion in US history and the significance of religious liberty to American constitutional government is a topic that is ripe for bipartisan support that George Washington prayed in Valley. George is familiar history for many political conservatives. It is similarly significant that Franklin d Roosevelt led the nation in prayer during a radio address on D-Day, likely the largest mass prayer in world history, Ronald Reagan's memorable farewell address described America with the well-known biblical illusion of a city on a hill. And in the terrifying aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks, George W. Bush quoted Psalm 23. Even though I walked through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil for you are with me. On the other side of the political spectrum, Lyndon b Johnson's 1965 inaugural address invoked the theme of an American covenant and Barack Obama's seminal speech, honoring the 50th anniversary of the Civil rights marches in Selma, Alabama, concluded with these words from Isaiah, those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on the wings like eagles. They will run and not grow weary. They will walk and not be faint. The historical topics identified by Senate Bill 2 68 include the role of religion in the colonization of North America, the Mayflower Compact, the American Revolution, the Declaration of Independence in the Constitution. All historical topics frequently discussed by political conservatives, but the topics also include the role of religion on the abolition of slavery, the 1950s and 1960s civil rights movement, and the social welfare and reform movements of the 19th and 20th centuries, including women's suffrage, freedmen's aid, child labor, immigrant aid, and anti-lynching movements. Those who are concerned about an anti DEI backlash leading to the whitewashing of slavery and segregation from American history, would find allies among those who are concerned about these subjects being taught in a way that whitewashes the role of religion in abolishing slavery and ending racial segregation. Martin Luther King Juniors nonviolent Tactics were based on Gandian philosophy and the Christian teaching to love your enemies. John Lewis, another great civil rights leader, and afterwards, a longtime democratic member

I I will conclude right here. Thank you. Thank you. Um, democratic member of the US House of Representatives said that without prayer, the civil rights movement would've been like a bird without wings. Uh, because I do not believe it's possible to teach, uh, US history accurately without including the fundamental role of religion during the most significant moments in American history. I respectfully request your support for Senate Bill 2 68. All right. Thank you to the comm to the Committee for clarifying questions.

Go Ahead. Uh, Gail Ika with Utah Eagle Farm. You know, I just won't take much time just about to just tell you I love this bill. I think you just heard all the reasons that I could possibly say why it's such a great bill and what, and absolutely our children should be taught all of these and the things in the school. So please vote Yes.

Thank you, chair. Uh, my name is Joseph Carey. I serve on the Utah State Board of Education, and I'm speaking in support of this bill. What this bill does is ensure that students with their teachers can meaningfully examine the role of religion in American history and understand why religious liberty is central to our constitutional framework without fear of reprisal or retribution. For years, we have often treated religion as if it were contraband rather than a central force in American civics and our history. This is not neutrality, this is hostility. This bill would fix that. Thank you.

Thank you. Maryanne Christensen, executive Director of Utah Legislative Watch. And I am also here in favor of this bill. Um, not too well, it's probably been a few years ago now. Um, I heard someone, uh, say that, uh, statistics that by the time our children are reaching the end of their college years, 80% of them are leaving the religion that they were raised in. I didn't believe it at the time, but not too long after that, the Deseret News published a Piute chart that said exactly that same thing. And, um, I think that it's partly our fault because we've kind of eliminated the talk of religion in public life. And I think it's really important to reintroduce it here, to validate religion, the religious ideas that made this country the great nation that it is. So thank you for voting yes. For the bill.

Okay. Thank you so much. Joanne Briton, state Board of Education, speaking for myself. And I just, I love this bill. As a former former history teacher, I just wanna applaud everything that's already been said before in support of this bill. The foundations of our country are rich with religious heritage. The, our laws are based on the 10 Commandments, and for too long, it's been kept out of our public sphere. And I don't think there's anything that's been more misinterpreted than the separation of church and state where Thomas Jefferson really meant we shouldn't be under one sectarian religion. But he never intended that religion was removed from the public space. So I just wanna thank the sponsor and Representative Axer and all, um, who are in support of this bill. It will greatly help our students understand our great history and heritage. Thank you.

My name's John Paul, and I am speaking on behalf of myself as a former teacher, a history teacher for 10 years. Um, I don't think this bill is necessary. I think that it is just a way for people to shove Christian nationalism down our children's throats if we're gonna talk about religion, which I did as a Utah history teacher for 10 years as a US History teacher for 10 years, I did it just fine. Uh, but if we're gonna talk about the role of religion and banning slavery, we also need to talk about the role of religion in keeping slavery, because the Bible was used to make slavery legal. Um, we need, we don't need to shove religion. We have religion, freedom of religion for all religions, not just Christianity. And Christian nationalism is not a benefit to our students or our state. And it needs to stop. And this bill should not be passed.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to, uh, amend with House Amendment five.

Just briefly? I, I really, really like this bill. I like everything in it and everything about it. My concern is, is that there is some, um, duplicate definitions that are being added here that already exists in some other areas. Um, we already have, um, some good, uh, language around this. We already have Supreme Court ref, uh, precedent around some of this. And I don't want to create a whole, uh, a tiny little section of code here that may actually confuse the issue. Um, making definitions of religious texts and the history of religion and philosophy. Um, I think that we already have that, from what I understand from the state, um, superintendent, we already have that. And that the Supreme Court has already made that pretty clear. So I just don't wanna muddy the issue. And I think if we can just cut those seven lines right there, the rest of this bill would be perfect. Is, so that's my, uh, amendment, Uh, to the sponsor on the motion to amend.

Thank you. I think that's a fair point that these things are already, um, allowed. So I would consider that friendly.

Mr. Chair, go ahead. Representative motion to pass out favorably SB 2 68 as amended.

Would you like to speak to that motion? I'll waive. Alright.

Thank you. I know we're, we're late. I just wanna speak in favor of this bill. This is an area that we dabbled in a little bit last year, and you can't teach the history of America without teaching. Like where we came from. I do think the, the last commenter had a good point is like we, religion has to be considered in all of its historical context, but without understanding who we are and, and how we got here and the religious foundings, you really have a hard time, uh, understanding America. So can't talk about America without discussing religion. Uh, Supreme Court's already weighed in on this. I don't know that we need it, but if it adds clarity to our teachers, then I fully support.

You. Just briefly, when I think about, and I love history. So when I think about World War II and learning about the Japanese kamikaze warriors, you don't understand the context that they were coming from unless you understand their history, and especially with their samurai background, with, you know, saving face and, and shame and, and all of that, that is not part of the culture that founded our nation. And so I really don't think that when we're talking about our American history, that we can dance around the fact that our founding fathers, in addition to the classical literature, also looked to their religious beliefs as the guiding principles, as they were envisioning and building their new nation. We usually call these radical beliefs that started the American experiment, but those beliefs did not appear out of nowhere. Preachers up and down the Eastern seaboard gave sermons for over 200 years, or around 200 years, espousing the principles of religious liberty, freedom, equality, and self-government. And it's only natural that our under, that our students should be able to understand that part of our history.

Um, Senate Bill 2 68 would basically allow, uh, teachers, um, uh, to, and schools to address the religious, um, foundations of our country. Not, not to teach a religion, not to proselytize, not to evangelize, not to encourage anybody to join one church or not join another church, but rather to talk about what motivated the pilgrims to leave their home countries and come to the United States. Uh, what, what George Washington said about Providence. Uh, the fact that Abraham Lincoln, uh, felt like he was inspired by God to free the slave slaves. What motivated the pioneers to cross the planes and risk death of their children and their spouses, uh, to come to Utah? So this would, um, allow, um, teachers to, um, teach and, and explore and answer questions about some of the religious, um, uh, historical, uh, facts, uh, of our country and our state. Um, I think that we live in a, uh, a, a weird space right now in our culture, in our society where people aren't sure what's safe, uh, what would get them in trouble, what would get them fired. And, um, I do think it's appropriate, um, to, to to, to have, uh, a curriculum, um, and have a safe space for teachers to be able to talk about, um, um, all of our history and not just to try to, uh, whitewash it and discount it to, to, to, to, to only the secular things. So again, if, if this bill was pushing one religion or or promoting faith, um, that that's not, uh, it's not, not, I wouldn't be running the bill. What it's doing is it's allowing, um, the fact that George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, all those people I mentioned, uh, that they, that they, they said things about why they were doing what their motivation was. Um, and that would a, allow that to be part of our school curriculum. That's what the bill does. And, um, with that, I'll yield to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. President. Um, is there anything in the law right now that says we cannot teach these things? Senator Weiler?

Yes, I will yield Senator Riebe. And, um, there's nothing in the law that says you can't, but this would actually change the, uh, curriculum, uh, to include it in the curriculum. And from what I understand, uh, teachers teach what's in the curriculum, and this is not in the curriculum right now. Thank you. Senator Riebe.

Thank you. Um, would we have to have a USB board meeting and curriculum study to change the social studies curriculum before we were allowed to enter this into our curriculum?

Okay. Thank you. Senator Riebe. Thank you, Mr. President. I believe that we can teach all these things. I believe that putting specific things into the curriculum actually creates a, um, a curriculum that hasn't been vetted by the State School Board. So I'm going to be opposing this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. President. Uh, the sponsor has said that he will yield to questions, I assume. Go ahead. Yes. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate the intent here. One of the things we are dealing with is, uh, uh, decades of, uh, challenge under, under the Lemon Law, which says anything that, that the government has, has to be completely secular based. And that has changed. And it's that the under the current rulings the Supreme Court is, is those things that are rooted in tradition are presumed to be constitutional. And there was a time that the whole curriculum of education was studying the Bible, learning how to read and memorize and everything, and, and using that as a form. And I, I appreciate the language and the efforts, the good sponsor, but I, when, when we talk about the role of religion and our Judeo-Christian Foundation and our, the world biblical view that has created and formed our nation, 30%, over 30% of the quotes of our founders were based in the, uh, Bible and, and quotes from that. I'm just wondering if there's, we, I, I would like to, to to explore with, with the sponsor if it's not the role, but a foundational role and wondering if how the sponsor would feel about that, adding that foundational in front of Senator Weiler. Yeah.

So thank you. The, the good senator kind of approached me and I, I told him if he wanted to, to make an amendment, I, I, I certainly wouldn't oppose that. Thank you. So Senator Stratton, Thank you. That president, the, uh, that term is used here and there throughout the, uh, document, and maybe I'll just put together proposed amendment that would allow that as the bill moves forward, but I would encourage the bill to move forward as well as it is.

Thank you, Mr. President. A question to the sponsor

Thank you. Just, um, there were a couple of bills that we have passed in the last couple of years, and one is by a former representative, um, gymnast, and then another one was a bill related to anti DEI that have a provision related to protected classes including religion. So can, how is this gonna combine with those bills that are already in our state code?

Thank you, Mr. President. I, I don't see any conflict. Um, this bill says that, um, the schools and the teachers are allowed to teach all of our history, and they don't have to water it down and try to take out, uh, a quote from President Lincoln or a quote from President Washington or, or, or a commentary about the pilgrim's motivations. And so I don't believe that teaching all of our history, uh, is going to be in conflict with, with either of those prior bills.

Thank you, president. I am, uh, wondering if the sponsor could speak to the decision to take the support United States A little. I

You. I'm wondering if the sponsor could speak to the, uh, decision to take the United States support for the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights out of the, uh, code with this bill. Senator Weiler?

Yeah. Um, this was an amendment made in committee, and I think that, um, um, the reference to that document created more confusion than it did clarity. And so I took it out.

Thank you. I, I think, uh, that speaks to what is being accomplished here, which is really to, to whitewash our curriculum that we shouldn't be getting into as a, as a Senate ourselves. I think this is better left up to our, uh, local school administrators and the folks that may make these decisions at, uh, at the curriculum level, normally not. Uh, folks who seem to wanna politicize everything.

Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to sum, there's a biography about Abraham Lincoln that shows that when he announced to his cabinet that he had finally decided to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, he said it was because, and I quote, uh, that he made quote, a promise to my maker as one cabinet member recorded, or as another described a covenant with God. Lincoln made this promise when the outcome of the battle of, um, an was uncertain. And, but when Union soldiers forced the Confederate army to retreat, Lincoln took the result as an indication of divine will that he should move forward with the emancipation. So I, I'd like, uh, Mr. President for us to ask ourselves, why, why isn't this being taught in our schools? I would like to have known that such an important decision for our country was influenced by Lincoln's belief in God. And with that, with that, uh, summation, I'd like to move that Senate Bill 2 68.

Thank you, Mr. President. Personal privilege, um, colleagues last year, a,

who preached Independence over the pulpit during the American Revolution to faith-filled abolitionists who taught that the slave is our brother alike as children of God. From Franklin Roosevelt's nationwide Radio prayer as American soldiers battled at Normandy to Dwight Eisenhower's, including the words under God in the Pledge of Allegiance and ideological opposition to communism and perhaps no movement in American history, was more influenced by the religious faith than the 1960s Civil rights movement, which was almost exclusively organized in the black churches of the South, which was the only place where African Americans at the time could safely organize themselves. In the decades since the Supreme Court prohibited school-sponsored prayers and devotional worship in public school classrooms, there has been an unintended and unfortunate chilling effect on any discussion of religion, including its vital role in US history. Fortunately, in recent years, there's been growing awareness of this overreaction and clarification, including by the Department of Education in both the Biden and the Trump administrations, that the teaching of the role of religion in US history is constitutionally permissible. Senate Bill 2 86 advances this correct understanding of the Constitution and of American history. Um, Mr. President Pro Tim, I have amendment number three, which encompasses amendment number two, uh, that I'd like to move and it does three things. Um, first of all, it pushes back, um, the, um, implementation date to give, uh, the school, school state school board a little bit more time, uh, for implementing part of the bill. Um, it also incr, uh, inserts the word foundational, uh, before the role of religion. Um, and lastly, it adds the words. Well it focuses the, the debates in the constitutional convention and the state ratifying conventions on the adoption of, of those, uh, documents. So it doesn't substantively change the bill. Uh, adding the word foundational, um, was senator, uh, Stratton's suggestion. So with that introduction, I'd like to move amendment three.

but I think the language in your bill is fundamental. I Meant fundamental. Okay.

No, I, well, I like to just, um, well, I'll wait. No, not nothing further.

Thank you Mr. President ProAm. I appreciate the sponsors good work and don't think I could do, uh, a lot. To add to the, the presentation he stated, only state say that the, as we look at the challenges in our society today, the landscape that we face, uh, there are a lot of the answers to the challenges are not found in what we do in our legislative and executive and judicial branch. It's found in opening up hearts and humbling ourselves and recognizing the roots that have brought us where we are. And this is a very timely, timely, uh, given our 250 year celebration and just stand in support and appreciation for this, this, uh, work and of the sponsor and the legislation. Thank you Mr. Speaker Prote

Thank you Mr. President Prote, I rarely do this, but I would like to ask for a call

Thank you. In brief summation, Mr. President pro Tem, Can we, uh, have the, the, I know we're having a big party here,

In brief summation, Mr. President, um, I I hope that all of my colleagues will want the, the fact that some of the biggest, uh, taught that some of the biggest turning points in American history such as the end of slavery and the civil rights movement involved, uh, the, uh, faith of some of our historical figures. I think it would be ridiculous to avoid talking about these motivations, um, in covering those historical events. And because I don't believe that US history can be taught accurately and completely without including the role of people's faith and the motivation of some of what they did, like Abraham Lincoln. Um, I respectfully ask your support for Senate Bill 2 68. And with that I move that the Senate passed Senate Bill 2 68 as amended.

Thank you Mr. President ProAm, I'd like to explain my vote. I I'm a no because all of these things can be taught already in school. All these things are already taught in school and when we create a list of things that we may teach, we actually emphasize things that might not be organically, um, presenting themselves in schools. So this list is comprehensive but it also leaves out a lot of things. And when you create a list that you leave out things for, you actually create a situation where people think they can't teach something. So I think a shorter list is better where people can actually teach whatever works with their curriculum and however that works. So I support all of these concepts, I support all of these ideas, but it does say May and this bill is unnecessary 'cause we can already teach all these things. So I may know

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, this bill is about, um, examining the role of religion in, um, our foundational principles and different movements throughout history in the American Constitutional government and citizenship course. And it has a list of optional topics that could be, um, examined during that time. And then also, um, just a provision to make sure that students can express their religious beliefs freely in their artwork or other assignments without any, um, fear of reprisals or discrimination.

President, I'd like to ask the house to recede From their amendments.

To concur. There was a one word change. It was supposed to say Legislature and it said Senate

So at conference committee we, we reached a good, um, compromise. We took out, uh, the philosophical stuff that the house was objecting to, but we kept what, uh, Senator Stratton and I liked about the bill and so I would like to move to Concur.

Senator Vickers Baldy A Lewin b Brammer Bus Colmore Aye. Escamilla Fillmore Grover Harper Aye. Grover Aye. Kins Ipson Johnson. Juab McKay Mikel Aye. Milner Musman Owens Picture Plum Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers Weiler Wilson Winterton Musman pitcher Plum President Adams

Motion to adopt the conference Committee report.

Um, so we met and there were a couple provisions that the house felt strongly that they did not want in that bill, and we were able to keep that out. And then also just preserve the intent of the foundational role that religion played in, um, our early founding.