The current movement afloat is educational requirements to expand our historical knowledge of the middle east. In the midst the calling is to require the study of A middle eastern religion in a country based on a constitutional requirement to leave religion in it’s place and the government of life in another. How does one teach history by only teaching one religion versus the relationship that all religions have in common (often not peaceful among each other). That is like teaching one viewpoint on events, or not hearing “The rest of the story”. If we maintain only one perspective we only learn one perspective. We either teach all religions or none. Our constitutional creators recognized that our foundation is based on the freedom to exercise your religion, in the context of the law of the land and not to establish one over another. My friend, and many others I have known, were brought up to study and compare a number of religions. The confusion caused by a sincere study of religious doctrine as presented by a number of sources purportedly given to you as  a message from a shared source (GOD, SUPREME BEING, MESSENGER or whatever) has resulted in most of these people refusing to be intimidated or swayed to join any of them as a result of the inconsistency of their doctrines within their own umbrella of faith let alone others. From my viewpoint of Unorthodox Christianity, Love One Another is a plenty sufficient message without any more doctrine attached. Doctrine is only a center for power, not a path to peace.