well you can't teach that in school because it isn't the truth! DUH!

It's meaningless. There are lots of things you can say, protected by freedom of speech already, that you can't teach in school, like the truth about intelligent design.
~~
Matthew 15:14

Nice to see language expanded to include non-practitioners.
"I can use stage combat in a real life fight, right?" - Blade

It protect religious folk tooAs an aside of course. I don't want to take away from its of focus of atheist protection
If this is Locke, then who's in there?

The (sic) is not necessary. You can use a or an in front of historic
^This. Some people pronounce 'historic' with a silent 'h' while others pronounce it with an aspirated, not emphasized 'h' that is barely audible. This would make 'an' the correct indefinite article. For those who place the emphasis on the first syllable with a clearly audible 'h' the correct word is 'a'. So in written form either is acceptable.

"An aversion to homosexuality is called heterosexuality." - ErJen

And I can actually speak and write it properly, unlike you.
"Whether homosexuality causes less harm (than slavery) is debatable" -
Hada

Being English myself
You're English? What a coincidence.
Laws are silent in times of War - Cicero

Being English myself and speaking it on a daily basis. It's "a historic event", unless you're a cockney. Your students should complain.
"Whether homosexuality causes less harm (than slavery) is debatable" -
Hada

Not in proper English it isn't
How would
you
know?
Laws are silent in times of War - Cicero

Not in proper English it isn't you ignoramus.
"Whether homosexuality causes less harm (than slavery) is debatable" -
Hada

The 'h' in historic is not always silent Joff but is after the article. Get over it.

The English teacher thinks the h in historic is silent?!
Your poor students.
"Whether homosexuality causes less harm (than slavery) is debatable" -
Hada

Can't you get someone to teach you English?
All roads lead to truth if you're willing to travel honestly.

Last I checked, Oxford wasn't in the US
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/a-historic-event-or-an-historic-event
Also last I check, this isn't the 18th or 19th century anymore.
They both sound fine to me. 'Istoric', however, does not.

The colloquial usage doesn't win, except in the USA.
"A horse" sounds fine because the H is voiced but it isn't in historic. (Except probably in the USA)

Try saying "a historic" out loud.
Actually, to be fair, "a horse" or "a hair" sounds fine, whereas "an horse" or "an hair" doesn't. VomisaaCaasi was right; the [sic] was unnecessary. There may have been a time where 'an historic' was proper English according to the textbooks, but colloquial usage wins again.

She also missed closing the parentheses for the 3,672nd time.

"An aversion to homosexuality is called heterosexuality." - ErJen

^They put Ole Yeller down long before he got this bad so what the hell is the hold up?

"An aversion to homosexuality is called heterosexuality." - ErJen

You can use a or an in front of historic
Wrong. Try saying "a historic" out loud. (Maybe it sounds okay with a chaw a' baccy" in your mouth, but it's an abomination.
Laws are silent in times of War - Cicero

After all, if atheism is simply a "lack of belief," what is there to protect?
They have to protect an atheist's belief that there is no God. They also need to protect the atheist religion.
I have no interest in refraining from my dishonesty and stupidity.
-Cash

I used to think "an historic" sounded awkward, but now I think "a historic" sounds awkward. I guess if both are "correct", then more power to either.

Just as an aside, there are actually quite a few regional dialects in the US that treat the 'H" as a vowel. A few in the NE and a couple down south.
"I can use stage combat in a real life fight, right?" - Blade

Your reading comprehension is on par with Ada's.
The irony of this quote is killing me. I love it!
Which is why they don't pronounce it like that anymore.
Anymore? You mean like they did in the 18th and 19th centuries?
SuperDoof.

a bill to protect something that atheists generally deny
What exactly do you think we "deny?" Or are you unaware that "freedom of religion" includes "freedom FROM religion?" It's safe to say you're unaware that laws in seven American states expressly and specifically prohibit atheists from holding office. And before you claim I made this up:
https://thehumanist.com/news/national/unelectable-atheists-u-s-states-that-prohibit-godless-americans-from-holding-public-office
The Dumpster gives a whole new meaning to "red" states.