Request to bring Bible back to school selective

Dear Editor:
In October 2025, I directly expressed a profound sense of disapproval with the newspaper for allowing Caroline Epp to write a regular column. I harbor a deep love of history; however, I draw a line at legitimizing a well-known conspiracy theorist by giving her a reputable platform. The column she writes sounds less like a history lesson and more like a Christian Nationalist’s scripture. This week, after reading about her desire to bring the bible back to school, and seeing her reference how much she’s learned from her columns, I find myself frustrated once more.
Since Epp seems so eager to reference Webster’s original dictionary, I looked up the definition for Freedom of Religion in the current Merriam-Webster edition. It states: “The right to choose what religion to follow and to worship without interference.” It does not state one religion to follow, which religion to follow, how to follow it, when, why, or where. Freedom encompasses all -- yet I don’t see the Epps fighting for the Quran, Torah, or any other religious scripture to be represented in schools. I’m sure she’ll say it’s because Christianity -- the world’s leading religion with 2.3 billion followers -- is somehow under attack. I don’t know, it sounds like selective free speech to me -- rights for me but not for thee.
If the newspaper wants to celebrate America’s 250th anniversary by talking about its history, by all means, do so. However, I would recommend enlisting the help of an actual historian or educator -- not an individual intent on cherry picking the facts to fit a narrative, and narrowing the definition of “religious freedom” for a private political agenda.
Gabrielle Brosman,
Aurora