The Ohio House of Representatives passed the “Charlie Kirk American Heritage Act” last week, allowing public school history classes to teach the positive impacts of Christianity in the nation. The legislation, led by State Reps. Gary Click and Mike Dovilla, both Republicans, preserves the ability for educators to discuss religion as an element of U.S. history.
The bill, House Bill 486, says, “The teaching of the historical and positive impact of religion on American history is consistent with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. An accurate and historical account of the influence of Christianity on the freedom and liberties ingrained in our culture is imperative to reducing ignorance of American history, hate, and violence within our society.”
“Accurate historical instruction regarding verifiable, historical impacts of religion on American history is factual and is not proselytization or a violation of the First Amendment,” it adds.
According to the bill, public school teachers may educate students on the “organization of the pilgrims as a church,” the “religious implications of the Mayflower Compact,” the first Thanksgiving as an “act of gratitude towards God,” the impact of the First and Second Great Awakenings, and other faith-based influences on the nation.
“Charlie was a committed Christian, whose life and work will serve as a testament to the power of conservative ideals combined with a legacy of faith for generations to come,” Click said in a statement.
Dovilla similarly noted that it is critical that schools “highlight the positive influence religion has had throughout our history – uniting communities, enriching our shared values, and safeguarding our First Amendment rights as Americans to speak and worship freely.”
The bill now heads to the Ohio Senate.
The U.S. Congress has also moved to recognize Charlie Kirk’s faith. A House resolution described Kirk as a “faith-based conservative spokesman and thought leader,” while a Senate resolution recognized irk’s values of free speech, faith, and his “defense of constitutional principles.”
