Texas School Board Adds Bible Class

[CShine]

And of course, they say this is not about pushing Christianity, as if they really think they're fooling somebody. Oh well, theocracy here we come.

The school board in this West Texas town voted unanimously to add a Bible class to its high school curriculum. Hundreds of people, most of them supporters of the proposal, packed the board meeting Tuesday night. More than 6,000 Odessa residents had signed a petition supporting the class. Some residents, however, said the school board acted too quickly. Others said they feared a national constitutional fight.

Barring any hurdles, the class should be added to the curriculum in fall 2006 and taught as a history or literature course. The school board still must develop a curriculum, which board member Floy Hinson said should be open for public review.

The board had heard a presentation in March from Mike Johnson, a representative of the Greensboro, N.C.-based National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, who said that coursework designed by that organization is not about proselytizing or preaching. But People for the American Way and the American Civil Liberties Union have criticized the council, saying its materials promote religion.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...us/bible_class

[lurkette]

In principle I have no problem with offering a course on the Bible in public school as long as 1. it's an elective, 2. it's taught as a critical course that examines the Bible as a historical document, literature, as part of a study on other religion's texts, or in the context of its impact on society. However, seeng that the National Council on Bible Curriculum is involved, my hackles go up. Those folks are loonies, not to put too fine a point on it. They have an agenda to push and are less interested in the adequate instruction of our children than in turning the country into a theocracy. Bible study - how does the Bible say you and everyone else on earth ought to live your lives - is for Sunday school, not public school.

[guy44]

Oh man. Why won't these people just go away? We could do without members of any religion who try and force their beliefs into every public forum over and over again.

The American Taliban strikes again.

And, just because it's fun, I'd like to point out that the head of one of the major right wing Christian organizations, the Family Research Council, who was recently introduced by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist at the Justice Sunday debacle, really does love men in robes:

Four years ago, Perkins addressed the Louisiana chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC), America's premier white supremacist organization, the successor to the White Citizens Councils, which battled integration in the South. In 1996 Perkins paid former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke $82,000 for his mailing list. At the time, Perkins was the campaign manager for a right-wing Republican candidate for the US Senate in Louisiana. The Federal Election Commission fined the campaign Perkins ran $3,000 for attempting to hide the money paid to Duke.

Link.

[Sweetpea]

okay . . . um . . . seperation of church and state?? Even with a petition, how can this be legal? Pehaps 6,00 petitioned for it . . . but is this class optional? What about those who aren't believers in the bible (gasp!) Can they wave this class or will they need it to graduate?

If you're going to teach one religion in school, we should educate on ALL of them and that's alot, so since that's not possible, teaching religion has NO place in PUBLIC schools . . . if they want their children to be taught in a religious style, there are plently of christan based schools to do so.

thanks,

sweetpea

[Cynthetiq]

public school public policies... i swear this whole aggravation is yet another vote for no kids from my loins.

if they want to teach that, then they need to offer Zen Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, and all the other religions as well.

[kutulu]

Onward, Christian soldiers!

[Fourtyrulz]

If you're going to teach one religion in school, we should educate on ALL of them and that's alot, so since that's not possible, teaching religion has NO place in PUBLIC schools . . . if they want their children to be taught in a religious style, there are plently of christan based schools to do so.

That's the exact some reaction I had while reading the article. If the school is offering it as a Biblical history class or an actual study of the events in the Bible then that isn't bad at all. When the class becomes something akin to Wednesday night Bible Club, which it might, then there's something to worry about. If you're so concerned about your children's Christian education send them to a religious-ed. based facility.

I think learning about the "Big Three" religious, Christianity, Islam and Judaism, is a requirement in most social studies curriculi. At least I remember learning about it 7th grade.

[kutulu]

They can call it whatever they want. We all know it's state sponsered Sunday School

[JustJess]

This just gets my hackles all in a bunch. I am truly frightened every day I read something like this... where are we going? Why is one belief system taking over our whole country?
Clearly, I agree with the above posters - education on all religion is a good thing, proselytizing(sp?) is not.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

This really isn't an infringement on the first amendment right, as many of you here want it to be. The law of the land clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...". So unless a petition signed by the residents of Odessa, Texas, or the local school board which funds the local school that this shall be taught at equates to congress establishing a religion, I don't really see what the issue is.

And for the record, I do agree this class should be offered as an elective, and not required.

[CShine]

I found this touching little message from the President of the National Council on Bible Education in Public Schools which is the organization pushing this whole thing.

The curriculum for the program shows a concern to convey the content of the Bible as compared to literature and history. The program is concerned with education rather than indoctrination of students. The central approach of the class is simply to study the Bible as a foundation document of society, and that approach is altogether appropriate in a comprehensive program of secular education.

The world is watching to see if we will be motivated to impact our culture, to deal with the moral crises in our society, and reclaim our families and children.

http://www.bibleinschools.net/sdm.asp

WHOA! If this is all just about teaching good history and literature then what is this talk about RECLAIMING CHILDREN???!!! Yeah buddy, no religious agenda here!

[samcol]

The people wanted it, who cares. I doubt it's a required class anyhow. It's being taught has a history/literature class. The feds need to stay out of education, they've destroyed it. Local communities should be able to decide the curriculum that their children will learn anyhow. I personally think all schools should be private schools so the people can decide what their kids learn, but that's a whole different debate.

[dksuddeth]

It's real simple to deal with in texas. If you dont want the bible taught to your kid you find a different school or you home school.

[Ilow]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

It's real simple to deal with in texas. If you dont want the bible taught to your kid you find a different school or you home school.

That would be fine if it was a private school we're talking about here, but it's a public institution, one paid for with citizens tax dollars. you shouldn't have to take you kids out of the public school because they have a religious agenda.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

The people paying the tax dollars are the one with the agenda in this case.

[samcol]

Originally Posted by Ilow

That would be fine if it was a private school we're talking about here, but it's a public institution, one paid for with citizens tax dollars. you shouldn't have to take you kids out of the public school because they have a religious agenda.

That's the problem with public schools. Religion isn't the only issue, all the tax payers can't possible agree with every school subject and program. There's so many different things that people don't agree with in schools, DARE program, excessive state and federal testing, suspensions for missing school (WTF?).

If parents can't petition to change these issues, WTF good are public schools anyway? Since 6,000 tax payers got together and said we want a bible history/literature class, I think it's a real problem if that doesn't happen. Just because the bible is being taught there doesn't mean they have to have, muslim, buddist, hindu, etc. being taught UNLESS enough people petition for it.

Parents that can't change public school policy is taxation without representation. Either allow them to change the curriculum, or allow them to use their taxes to send their kid to private school.

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

This really isn't an infringement on the first amendment right, as many of you here want it to be. The law of the land clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...". So unless a petition signed by the residents of Odessa, Texas, or the local school board which funds the local school that this shall be taught at equates to congress establishing a religion, I don't really see what the issue is.

You know that that's not how the constitution is interpreted.

I think something like this sets a precedent than is very likely to come back and bite the various parts of christianity that favor it in the ass. If we can establish a tory bible class, who's to say that we also can't establish a koran class, or a class on the church of satan. Raise your hand if you think that the people over at the National Council on Bible Curriculum would all have self-righteous hissy fits if such a thing were to occur. No doubt they would fail to see their own role in the matter.

[VTBrian]

I think this is a gross over reaction. I took a bible as literature course, and not once did we discuss the Bible as it pertained to religion.

[Fourtyrulz]

I think this is a gross over reaction. I took a bible as literature course, and not once did we discuss the Bible as it pertained to religion.

I'm not so sure that the National Council on Bible Curriculum cares much for the literary aspect of the book. As one poster quoted from their website,

The world is watching to see if we will be motivated to impact our culture, to deal with the moral crises in our society, and reclaim our families and children.

, it seems that the organization is simply hiding the class under the guise of literary and historical study.

[Lebell]

To continue from the other thread I posted in recently, if this were part of a world religion class, I would not have a problem with it.

As it stands, I don't see how it would pass constitutional muster.

[Seaver]

It's studying the bible as a piece of liturature. I went to a school where this almost passed, it would have been taught by a teacher (one of the handful that held everyone's respect for following rules to the letter) who ensured she would NOT teach religion. What it's intended to do (in our district at least), it to teach the bible as a liturature piece, not as truth.

Now, for those of you that dont understand, the bible is THE most alluded to book in the history of history. So, teaching the bible as a piece of liturature helps the students understand almost every literacy piece from the middle ages onwards with more depth of knowledge.

If this is indeed a bible school class (which I seriously doubt it's intended to be); I could understand, and fully oppose it. But to just blatantly disagree with it because it's about a book you may or may not agree with, without even bothering to see the truth is not the way to go about things.

[Willravel]

I'd be all for the class if they called it "Religion", not "Bible class". Have it study all major (and some minor) world religions, and all of their various teachings and histories. I would have loved learning about Judism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Shinto, Confucianism, Jainism, Taoism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Bahá'í, and the slew of other religions out there. Of course I didn't just fall off the turnup truck. This class will basically be about how Jesus is a Republican, and how Muslims are all Arab, and they all hate freedom. That might sound harsh, but odds are that's the story.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

Wow Will, that was a really open minded and tolerant statement. Because it's Texas, the Bible, and Christians, they must be bigoted and hate mongerers right?

[Locobot]

I don't see how this qualifies as news. I always understood such bible-as-lit classes to be commonplace in public schools, are they not?

What is different about this case?

[martinguerre]

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

This really isn't an infringement on the first amendment right, as many of you here want it to be. The law of the land clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...". So unless a petition signed by the residents of Odessa, Texas, or the local school board which funds the local school that this shall be taught at equates to congress establishing a religion, I don't really see what the issue is.

And for the record, I do agree this class should be offered as an elective, and not required.

Mojo, do you really want to argue that the 14th ammendment doesn't make the bill of rights binding on state and local governments as well?

[Mojo_PeiPei]

Well if you want to play that game you can refer to the 10th amendment and the delegation of powers and how it relates to the states. To my knowledge there is no standing law that bars people from instituting a class on biblical studies as it relates public or private. What you have is one group of peoples, the liberal "progressive" constitutional interpretation where seperation of church and state exists as law even though there is no mention of it in any legal documents or the constitution. The original intent of Separation of Church and State was meant to be one sided, solely to protect the people from the government delving into religion, amazing how it got warped in the last half century by "progressive" judges. At any rate you could perhaps argue judicial precedent for this particular case, but I would expect that wouldn't hold any weight until this action in Odessa is later determined.

Isn't it funny how liberals and democrats, more these days, love to profess their love for democracy, to claim their motives are in favor of such, but the only way you ever get shit done is by mandate from behind the bench and never by mandate of the people? Weird.

[F-18_Driver]

Originally Posted by filtherton

You know that that's not how the constitution is interpreted.

I think something like this sets a precedent than is very likely to come back and bite the various parts of christianity that favor it in the ass. If we can establish a tory bible class, who's to say that we also can't establish a koran class, or a class on the church of satan. Raise your hand if you think that the people over at the National Council on Bible Curriculum would all have self-righteous hissy fits if such a thing were to occur. No doubt they would fail to see their own role in the matter.

You're a little late. The University of North Carolina already started that shit.

Link

I would take the opponents of the Bible class more seriously if they had been up in arms about the Koran requirement. I'm not surprised at the lack of outcry, though. Christian-bashing seems to be politically correct these days.

And yes, both should be elective.

[Mojo_PeiPei]

Don't forget cases in Chicago where public schools facilitated Muslims with prayers rooms on school property. Or you have a judge in California (San Fran no less) upholding muslim prayer in school, recitation of the Quran, and fasting as a simulation of ramadan for class curriculum.

[samcol]

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Don't forget cases in Chicago where public schools facilitated Muslims with prayers rooms on school property. Or you have a judge in California (San Fran no less) upholding muslim prayer in school, recitation of the Quran, and fasting as a simulation of ramadan for class curriculum.

Exactly. Why do people go off the deepend whenever it's Christian, but similar things happen elsewhere with other religions.

[guy44]

Um, Christians and members of any other religion are allowed to pray on school property. They can even take time out of class to do it if required by their religion. That's a basic right, and I don't see anyone denying it.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

Wow Will, that was a really open minded and tolerant statement. Because it's Texas, the Bible, and Christians, they must be bigoted and hate mongerers right?

Exaggerate
v.tr.
1. To represent as greater than is actually the case; overstate: exaggerate the size of the enemy force; exaggerated his own role in the episode

I hope you now know that I can occasionally exaggerate. I apologize for the misunderstanding. I will exaggerate again, so be ready. I can also be sarcastic.

I was trying to say that this class has a chance of simply becoming a Christian only class, as it is called 'Bible Class', and not 'Qu'ran Class' or 'Torah Class'.