Texans considering law to require bible classes

My question is how are they going to determine which teacher is right for the job. The folks over at the Baptist Church would not particularly like someone from the Church of Christ or Assemblies of God churches teaching their children about the bible and vice versa. ( I know all about this I grew up in the south ) I think this sort of class should be left out of the public school system. Growing up and studying the bible and then studying Ancient Greek and Roman history I didn't personally see much significant historical information in the bible, but then again maybe I just didn't pay attention.

Reply

this is wrong on so many levels. if they are going to teach about the bible, then they should have to teach about ALL of the different religions. what about the students who have been brought up to belive in something different. there are so many different religions. this is a horrible idea. i was raised catholic, but don't really practice it. i have had my kids christened,i go to church on major holidays and i plan on getting married in a church. but that is all my choice. religion shouldn't be shoved down kids' throats. they will grow to resent it.
and besides...wasn't there a reason for the seperation of church and state to begin with???

Reply

If they want to teach religion as a form of "cultural literacy", why limit themselves to the bible? Why not instead insist on an elective comparitive religion class? Instead of studying one religious text, look at many different texts and expand a student's understanding of the variety of religions of the world. (And maybe even show them how similar many religions really are when it comes down to the basics.)

Wanting to offer a class only on the bible does feel like they're trying to sneak Christian bible classes into public schools. The number of people practicing religions other than Christianity in the US is growing by leaps and bounds. I think they're missing a real opportunity by limiting themselves to just the bible and not exploring the true diversity present in our culture from the variety of religious backgrounds represented.

Reply

The key word in the story is "elective." No student would be forced to take this class. This is a class that the student would CHOOSE to take. So in that case, this Study of the Bible...not Bible Study...would be like yearbook, fender bending, or woodshop. It would actually benefit people of any religion to study another one's doctrine and text. Opinion + Lack of Knowledge = Ignorance!

Reply

Sure, it will be an elective, but why just the Christian bible? I think a push for a world religions class would be much less controversial and beneficial for all students.

I live in Texas, and I've been seeing quite a bit of coverage on this. One woman said that it would be a good idea for those kids whose parents aren't Christian to be able to get the bible's teachings. She didn't say it to mean that the kids will learn about the bible, she meant that it would be good to make them believe in the bible.

If I could be confident of a straight History Channel sort of class, then I would be more comfortable with this idea. But, like the other comments, I'm afraid it's going to be more like a Sunday school.

Of course, this is Texas, so this piece of legislation is just another way to try to get around the separation of church and state. It's not about education at all. It's about some legislator being able to show his Christian base that he got a bible class into public schools.

Reply

It's an ELECTIVE! A child would not be required to take the course. The course would fall under the Social Studies/History department probably. The Bible is a historical document and the Old Testament can easily be taught that way. You can't please every one, and if someone wants a Jewish or Muslim based course, appeal to the school board! BTW, the Old Testament first five books are the core of the Hebrew text! Christianity sprang from Judiasm and they are forever linked, no matter how much some Christians try to deny it.

Reply

Yes, Amy, it is an elective class. And I think we all can understand what that means. But the issue is that it is not appropriate to offer a Bible Study course as an elective without offering the study of other religious texts as elective courses. We call that indoctrination. And that does not fall under separation of church and state.

Reply

*Required* to offer a Bible studies class?

Way over the line of church-state separation for publicly-funded institutions, unless they *also* mandate Atheism Studies, Judaic Studies, Tenets of Islam, Enlightenment of the Buddha, etc. etc. etc.

Reply

If this were an elective, general religious studies course, no problem. If they wanted to offer elective courses on other major religious texts in addition to this one, no problem. But only requiring schools to offer an elective course on the Bible, big problem.

Reply

I am Christian and in principle I would not be against a class like this offered as an elective in a public school, however in practical application my reservation would be along the same lines as the point made by Kathy Miller.

"'The fear is that teachers with limited training and no guidance will be called upon to teach a course for which their experience draws largely from Sunday school,' said Kathy Miller, president of the Texas Freedom Network. 'It would be difficult for them to keep their own religious perspective out of the classroom.'"

If it was just strictly the text of the Bible being taught, I would have no problem, but it seems likely that in practical application there would be denomination doctrine mixed in (presented as Bible text and not as doctrine of that denomination). A blurring of the line between exactly what the text says and what the teacher believes would be unacceptable for our family.

I also agree that classes should be offered on other texts of major religions (Koran, Book of Mormon, etc.). If the classes could be taught using strictly the text, I would have no problem with my child taking such a class (I would actually be excited for my child to take class on other religious texts).

Reply

I think it would be great if schools offered courses in religions other than whichever one a kid studies on the weekend. If I were, for example, an immigrant from a country where Christianity is a fringe religion (for example, India or China), I would want to study it just to know what's going on when exposed to religious celebrations, discussions, allusions, historical events, and borrowed vocabulary. For similar reasons, I'd love for Christian kids to take courses on the Vedas / Upanishads / Baghavad Gita, Tao Te Ching, Koran, etc. However, I agree that if the courses were not taught in an intellectual and non-judgmental way, they would do more to spread ignorance than intelligence. Considering the general problems with many public school curricula, I would hesitate to require public schools to offer this class. I could say the same thing about a lot of other classes too, though.

Reply

I wonder how "elective" the elective will be.

I wouldn't have a problem with an elective on comparative religions (including atheism) taught as part of sociology or ethics. I believe that learning about beliefs other than our own leads to understanding and acceptance. Somehow though I don't believe that's what the Representative had in mind.

We Christians can't agree (among other things) on which Bible is the correct translation, how much water to use in baptism, or whether a musical instrument is allowed. Many of us take these differences very seriously; even to the point where denominations have split over the length of a woman's hair, card playing, dancing or lipstick.


Aside from the attempted end run around the separation of church and state, how can we possibly agree on how to teach this class?

Leave it alone and let parents and religious leaders educate kids as they think best.

Reply

To those of you who want a comparative religions course taught, and would like it to include atheism:

Atheism is NOT a religion. It is, in fact, the ABSENCE of a religion, so I don't see how it has any place in a class designed to compare religions.

This point has absolutely nothing to do with one's personal views on atheism; this is simply a fact.

Reply

We're all familiar with the concept of atheism, Jeannie, which is why I feel strongly that it should be included in any serious comparative study of viewpoints concerning the Diety or lack thereof.

Reply

Nancy, YOU are making the class out to be about "the Diety or lack thereof." A religions course teaches that which espouses a Diety. "Lack thereof" can be taught in a number of courses, but it just has no logical place in a religions course.

Now, I would be fine if Witchcraft, for example, were included in a religions course, because Witchcraft is, to some, a form of religion. It has a supreme being, a dogma, rules, etc.

Atheism, on the other hand, is defined by the LACK of these things. In fact, atheists in their true form would not want to be included in a class about religions - because atheists do not HAVE a religion. It is not that atheists worship "alternative" beings; it is that they do not worship AT ALL.

Reply

Certainly, not worshipping at all is worthy of note when comparing what and how people worship around the world. Probably not a big part of the course, but I would imagine it's worth letting young Texans know that atheism satanism and that one can be good/moral/whatever while still not believing in the bible.

Reply

Atheism is the response of millions of people around the world to the concept of the Deity and religion. You may have your own opinions about it, Jeannie, but when I took coursework in Comparative Religions at university it was certainly included as an equal, viable, rational alternative to organized religions.

Reply

I might add that viewpoints such as Jeanne's are precisely why I would vehemently oppose any mandated Bible or religions course in public schools, particularly those which fail to present atheism and agnosticism as viable alternatives to choosing to subjugate oneself to the whims of an omipotent Diety, and present the strong implication that one must choose one of the major organized religions to follow.

Reply

How would they like it if I went into their churches and started teaching creationism? There is a time and a place for religion and it's not at school.

Reply

I took a class in college within the Anthropology department, "Magic, Witchcraft and Religion" It was the most eye opening and fascinating class I ever took. It opened my eyes to other beliefs around the world, not just the mainstream religions. It also made me stronger in my Christian beliefs. I am in favor of an elective Bible or Religion class in public schools but as I posted earlier, as an elective.

Jessica, as to your reply and comment of indoctrination. Aren't all classes taught some form of indoctrination? All teachers have a bias, we all do. Elective means that if a student wants to hear what the teacher has to say, they take the course. If they aren't interested, fine, don't take the course.

Reply