Texas public schools required to teach the bible this year!

Bill - I don't see it that way. Sometimes it seems that the partisan rift (or ****) in the US has gotten so deep that even when one side comes up with a worthy plan or idea - the other side will shake its fist and scream,'No!' just because the other side came up with the plan or idea, without thinking that maybe that plan or idea has merits.

I'm not a rightwing crazy creationist. I do happen to be a Christian. But my first reaction to this, when reading Centroles opening post - was- 'Hell no! I don't want anyone indoctrinating my kids in a public school setting. I want to know what they are being taught in that area and have some control over that.'

But then when I actually read what the plan really IS - at least as proposed initially - I find that I don't have a problem with it- even if the initial idea was arrived at in conservative circles.

But reading further, although it sounded like a good plan initially - I have to admit that my first reaction was probably right - it probably wouldn't be implemented with any sort of set standards because the time, training and funding haven't been there -and that's sad.
Because I think it could have been a good course- now it'll just be another way to waste time and money and provide an arena for liberals and conservatives to spit hate at each other.

It gets sickening after a while - especially when you're viewing it from a remove- from another country where the different parties can actually work together to achieve a common goal for their people.

As long as the class is an elective, I really don't care. I would have taken the course, if offered in my high school. If anything, I could have challenged many of the points offered, and the logic used.

If you have a class about the "influence" of the bible on western culture, the dialog must include the bad as well as the good. If some reasoning is offered on behalf of biblical teachings, having those teachings challenged openly would have been engaging.

T
K
O

What about all the Texas kids who are curious about the impact of the Muslim holy books on the world? I guess (by virtue of exclusive exposure) they will just grow up thinking that the Bible is the pre-eminent document in world history (pssst, little Johnny told me that there are other religions in the world too, like 'Bud-ism', but I think he's just making that up).

I don't have a problem with any public school system deciding that it wants to offer an elective on the bible as literature or as a study on it's influence on American society. What I do have a problem with is a state-wide mandate that such a course be offered. That's where the agenda becomes obvious. Laws such are this are generally passed because someone has an agenda. The sponsor represents a certain viewpoint and works to get his viewpoint into law. So -- if, as Aidan suggests, this could be a good thing for the students if done right then she supports that viewpoint. The thing that always amazes me is that Christians generally don't see anything wrong with bringing Christianity (the practice of it, or now the mandated opportunity for the study of it) into the public classroom.

I have no objections to studying the bible as literature or as a history class -- I've done so myself and found it very interesting -- but I think the class belongs as a college elective or church sponsored education program.

I suspect that schools already have the right to give elective courses on the impact of religions on history, so the law is probably unnecessary unless its intent is to have a state sponsored urging of exposure to a particular religion (which would seem to be unconstitutional).

I think you've correctly identified the agenda.

Of course

Even though the wording of the law appears benign at first, it carries with it many of the hallmarks of the creation/evolution laws which do not really expand academic freedom at all, but seek to guide it down a particular path.

Isn't it unconstitutional?

Whether or not it were unconstitutional would depend upon whether or not it were mandated that the school districts pay for such a course--and then it would take someone's law suit to bring it down. Note that the state assembly didn't fund the courses. So far, no taxpayer money being spent, which makes a challenge based on the "no establishment" clause a more doubtful proposition.

By the way, a law suit is what is most likely to arise from this. School districts here are usually funded by property tax levies--money the home owner has a very precise recollection of having paid.

The Bible, a text containing the following:

The earth was created in 7 days
There is no such thing as evolution
Homosexuals are an abomination unto nature
Slavery is a good thing
Woman should be inferior to men
All hmosexuals and children who have, at one point in their lives, not listened to their parents, should be killed.

Yes, brilliant. I'm bisexual, maybe I should hop along and kill myself. i mean, people have to teach it, so there must be some merit to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir1-A209boQ

they sure do act kinda funny down in ol' Tejas...

It's "The New Intelligent Man's Guide to Science" by Asimov, not the "Intelligent man guide to the Bible".

You're referring to "Asimov's Guide to the Bible" which is an entirely different book.

It is kind of dopey to go off on the tangent on how many Jews there are. You should be talking about whether this law is unconstitutional.

Asimov wrote over 500 books in his lifetime so a little confusion concerning the wording of one of his titles seem not to be a large "sin" <grin>.

Thank for the correction in any case.