Should the Bible be taught in public schools?

[AngryAmish]

This is a loaded title but please bear with me.

The Bible obviously has a large impact on our society. Should the basic stories be taught in school (obviously for older students) kinda like greek mythology is taught to kids? Or is this too hot a topic to be addressed in school? A problem would be very religious children would or could get real offended when their version is not taught. And obviously atheistic kids could also feel alienated.

I went to Catholic school so this was not an issue for me growing up. But should the bible stories be left entirely out of school?

[Occulus]

1. Teach it as literature.

Put it right alongside all the other fiction, biographies, etc. and then watch all the "christians" tip their hands by wailing over the lack of special status that placement gives them and their "religion".

[FreedomAngel82]

19. I agree and I'm a Christian

[FlaGranny]

67. Question

You said, "Same with any other religious belief system AGAINST Christianity." I hope you didn't mean "against." Reasonable people of any religion (or no religion) are not against Christianity. Reasonable people of all faiths, and those with no faith at all, respect the beliefs of others, just like you seem to do. I wish all religious folks could be more like you.

[Kailassa]

117. Actually, many reasonable people are against christianity.

An incredible lot of harm has been done to other countries by missionaries over the last few hundred years. Christians for so long have been a front for wealthy white interests, including many working hard to help the slave traders and to wipe out the natives of Canada and Australia, that hating Christianity is a perfectly reasonable attitude.

You might say that's just the work of misguided or devious individuals, but these people all had their churches behind them. Try reading through the old testament, and seeing how many times god supposedly told the Israelites to take over cities and towns, with strict instructions to kill everyone in them, even the babies, only saving a few to be slaves and "wives".

The witch-hunts were perfectly Christian, it says clearly in the bible "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." The invasion of Iraq can easily be justified as just a repeat of the old Israelite conquests ordered by god. And the bible clearly states that homosexuals, along with adulterers and disobediant sons, should be killed.

There is no way around it. Jesus did not change any of this, he stated clearly he was not here to change any of the old law. The fact is, Christianity uses the bible as its manual, and the bible is a frightfully evil book. There is no way a book proscribing murder for so many people and teaching that a group of people were "chosen" and therefore justified in carrying out horrendous massacres should be taught in schools.

[FlaGranny]

160. I'm

an atheist and I don't have a thing against Christians or anyone else for their religion or any other belief systems. I am not against anyone because they call themselves Christian. I don't much like organized religion though.

I don't disagree with much of what you say. My father was raised in a fundamentalist religion with lots of emphasis on that old testament and it surely turned him into an atheist. The Bible, I agree, is a rather horrifying book, filled with murder and cruelty. While you quote Jesus as stating he was not "here to change any of the old law," he did preach love and care for the poor. No Christian I know would kill a disobedient son, even though it says to do so in the old testament. I don't know any who would kill a witch either.

I'm not against comparative religion being taught in public schools on a small scale. I actually believe that any half intelligent kid old enough to understand would actually start thinking about what he or she believes in a little more depth; and perhaps some of them would start to question some of the glaring inconsistencies and injustices. They might even wonder why an all-powerful God was so lacking that he has to demand total devotion from his followers.

I don't know, I guess I just believe knowledge begets wisdom, and I still believe reasonable people don't hold someone's religion "against" them.


Of course, I could be all wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

[Kailassa]

165. When a religion is used to justify abusive behaviours,

not only now, buy right down through the centuries, and when the book on which that religion is based contains clear justifications for those abusive behaviours, then it is not unreasonable for a person who has been abused by that religion, or who feels for others who have been, to be against that religion.

But, that said, you are now bringing in a red herring of holding someone's religion against them. Just because I'm aware of some of the incredible amount of evil Christians and their churches have done, does not mean that I would hold the fact that you are a Christian against you. I would never suggest that you might do anything wrong in the name of your religion, but don't let your own loyalty to it blind you to its dark side.

[FlaGranny]

185. My loyalty to my religion?

I have no religion. I'm an atheist and have been since I've been old enough to think for myself. Have you misread my post?

A person's beliefs are a person's beliefs and I respect them. Christians aren't evil. What has been done in the name of Christianity (and other religions, I might add) is what is and was evil. My opinion is that the evil that has been done in the name of religion was not caused by the faithful, but by selfish, greedy, self-proclaimed leaders who use peoples' faith and fear to mislead them.

[phylny]

41. Agreed

Even in the Virginia public school my kids went to, they taught different bits about most religions in the historical or literary context.

My kids never got wigged out about it, and neither did I.

[all.of.me]

61. i read it as lit in 8th grade, and i remember loving it.

it's a great story (what i remember for 40 years ago!). i had an excellent english teacher, too, so she got us all excited about lots of things that a boring teacher would have made me hate, i am sure.

[nashville_brook]

96. new testament sucks as lit

old testament has some merit but the new testament has been so monkey'd with there's nothing left of it.

[Laelth]

171. Hear, hear.

Literature is appropriate. Science is not.

-Laelth

[La Lioness Priyanka]

2. i am all for history of religion being taught

but if the bible...then also the koran..gita...etc

[rodeodance]

12. children need to be exposed to all religions.

[FreedomAngel82]

20. I agree

About a year or so ago I saw this Canadian show called "Degrassi" on a network I have. They had a day where the kids got to wear their cultures traditional clothes and bring food and items and give a presentation on their cultures and religion. I would love something like that because it would help you to understand people and where someone is coming from and where they want to go. We as a country have so much to offer each other, but instead those with loud mouths and hatered in their heart want to just be the only people who have anything. It really is sad. :(

[notadmblnd]

59. no they don't

kindly keep your religion to yourself and away from my child. And I promise I won't shove my belief down you and your childs throat. Because if you cross the line.. you're going to find out some things about god you just might not want to know.

[Xithras]

70. I don't know about that

I had a historical literature class in high school that focused on the books, writings, and texts that western society is founded on. The Bible was in there (and we read several large chunks of it), as were a number of other tomes.

That's at least one example of a place where a Bible is appropriate, but a Koran wouldn't be. There are others as well.

Religious equality is only needed if the purpose of the class is to promote the religion itself. The publically funded college I work for has a class called "Fundamentals of Historical Christianity" which is, for all practical purposes, a bible study class that you get gredits for (it counts as a literature course for a couple associates programs). We have a comperable class that teaches Mysticism centering on Wicca and the Norse religions, but nothing for Islam or Buddhism. Why the disparity? Lack of interest from the students, and a lack of faculty willing to teach it.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that, and we will add other religions when students express an interest in having them or faculty step forward willing to teach it, but in an academic setting it would be improper to withold the Christianity course simply because other courses aren't ready for prime-time yet. You offer what's requested, and fill in the rest as needed.

That's how our Wicca course got started, by the way. It was originally just the Christianity course, and then one of our lit teachers, a practicing Wiccan, asked if she could teach a comperable course for her religion. The administration approved, and allows her to teach the course even though she typically only has 5-6 students take it per semester (and only 2-3 complete it).

Oh, and neither of those classes even mention other religions to their students.

[nashville_brook]

88. at my publically-funded university, Eastern Religions was so popular

it always filled up the first day of registration.
and the history of christianity course never cracked a bible. it was HISTORY -- first century rome, etc -- economic and political environment from an unbiased POV -- i thought that's what history was all about. i history class taught by the bible isnt' much use, imo.

[A HERETIC I AM]

3. In a comparative religion class, sure...as literature, ok....

as history? No way.

[Wapsie B]

4. It could be taught in a comparative religion course.

Teach the basic stories out of the Bible as teachings for Christianity. Then do the same for Judaism, Hindoism and so on. Problem is conservative fundies would want it taught and nothing else.

[unblock]

5. the bible as literature IS taught in public schools

at least it was in my high school.

but that's so irrelevant to the politics of the situation. the entire issue centers around religious teaching, not bible teaching. in fact, most of the people who want to cram religion down your throat don't actually want you to READ the thing! that would undermine their power!

[Wapsie B]

16. They really wouldn't want to read the whole thing.

I can see it now,"Class tomorrow we'll be covering the story of Lott and his daughters."

[annabanana]

42. And they can leave out the "begats" too..... whew!...n/t

[MADem]

122. But no, children, not TRENT!!!!! n/t

[Kailassa]

129. But Lot remained pure,

it was all the fault of those dastardly devious little girls. And history proves it, as their progeny have ruined the Catholic church by seducing pure, innocent priests.

[Wapsie B]

142. Of course he did.

He was just another victim of that evil feminist conspiracy. :sarcasm:

[Kailassa]

144. And let's hope they suffered in childbirth in accord with god's will,

as he ordained in Genesis as a punishment to all women for Eve eating that apple. (Or smoking that pot, if you follow Rastafarian tradition.) These doctors daring to give women painkillers in child-birth all must be stopped, as it is clearly against the will of god.

[Wapsie B]

145. Women suffering is the will of god

for the original sin. They've got to be punished and made to submit to men, ALL men if they want to have a mate.

[Kailassa]

148. Exactly, especially the one with a bible in his hand. ;-) .. n/t

[Wapsie B]

149. That's right.

Gotta keep those women in line or else they'll get these weird ideas about voting, owning businesses and worse, thinking for themselves. ;-)

[MaggieSwanson]

6. Absolutely not.

As an atheist parent, I am appalled at the thought. Perhaps when the world can see the bible as another form of the Greek mythology you mentioned, it might be appropriate as a historical footnote.

Peace,

Maggie

[Canadian Socialist]

7. Yes

I didn't study the "Bible" until I was in University (History of Science course). Never saw it until then. It was one of several "holy books" compared. Just sayin' BTW, I was brought up as a "Christian"... however I was also told to examine everything. If it didn't make logical sense, the the odds were, it was wrong.

[Carolab]

8. NO. Not unless you also teach the Koran, etc.

America is supposed to be about diversity and FREEDOM of religion. For Pete's sake.

[Walt Starr]

9. I have no problem with religious texts being taught in school

as literature, which is what any mythology is.

[longship]

10. Comparative religion

Not science. Probably not literature either.

[applegrove]

11. I would be for comparative religion to be taught in schools. At the right

age. Perhaps a month or two out of ancient history class. High school. But taught as a science and not like you are at the pulpit. The history of religion.

[MADem]

13. Not only no, but FUCK NO

If the kids who are SENIORS, who have taken all their requirements, and who are brilliant, want to take a course, and a RESONABLE philosopher is willing to give it FREE OF CHARGE, without cost to the taxpayers funding the goddamn schools, then fine, let them take it.

But if a penny of taxpayer money goes for it, I am opposed. VEHEMENTLY!!!!!!!!!!

Look, I pay a brutal, ugly bundle to my town for taxes, I have no kids in the schools at this time. I get irritated when they spend money on horseshit, and it seems that they cannot afford buses, but they can afford a hugely expensive and bloated administrative staff at the superintendent level. And when I was a kid, there were not all these ASSISTANTS. If you got in trouble, the PRINCIPAL whipped your ass, not the assistant principal, or the assistant to the assistant, or the "discipline officer." Half the time, the principal was a seventy year old skinny lady, and you were scared shitless of the woman. We did not misbehave--those that did, ended up in REFORM SCHOOL.

When I was a kid, buses were free, music lessons were free, hell, even field trips, less your stupid lunch, were free. Now, the kids have to pay for everything, save taking a crap.

Let's teach the little fuckers how to add, subtract, multiply, divide, and do a bit of science. And oh, yeah, READING...that is FUNDAMENTAL!!!

If they want the damn Bible, that is what the weekend is for....

[driver8]

38. I agree with you 110%!!!

I took a course in college called "The Bible as Literature." If a course like that were taught to seniors, that would be one thing...but I don't want my children's school teaching them the bible.

Leave the bible and religion out of our schools. That should be something that is taught at home by the parents.

[nashville_brook]

103. amen, sista! kids in my neighborhood NEED math, writing

not more freaking religion. there's a church on EVERY BLOCK. there's a bible in every motel room. there's no lack of bible study. but there's a major lack of understand of our country's history, our struggles and our philosophy.

and hardly any student graduating HS can write worth a crap.

here's something -- why not teach kids to write their own damn bible. that would be interesting!

[Bryn]

14. Greek Mythology

was once a "true religion" to the Greek so will The Bible become mythology someday. So much of it hasn't been proven to be historically fact.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[unblock]

18. the right to simply bring a bible to school is very settled law

i've never heard of anyone prevented from simply carrying a bible with them to school, or from spontaneously and non-disruptively reading and/or praying in school.

i've certainly never heard of a lawsuit on that matter and i would strongly be on the side of the student in such a matter.

[FreedomAngel82]

21. I did when I was in high school for a class

I did and this was in 1999 or 2000. I was a junior or something like that and I needed another class to take and the high school had "Bible History". It was one of those classes you could take instead of computer or art (I already had my art grade with band). If it's something like that that's fine, but that isn't what the "religious right" wants. They want it as a curriculum class that if you don't pass it you fail. They don't want it as an optional class. I'm sure there are some who are more reasonable and willing to negotiate but not those who follow Dobson and his like.

[Art_from_Ark]

71. In 1969, representatives of The Gideons International came to my school

and handed out New Testaments.

[Kailassa]

136. I cannot find a single case of a child being forbidden

by a school to bring a bible to school. If you would like to relieve my scepticism by showing some proof that it has happened I would be most interested.

[Rabrrrrrr]

17. Yes it should. It's an ESSENTIAL component to Western culture

So much of our great literature and art is not fully understandable without a working knowledge of what is in the Bible.

The Church, whether the long tie between the ROman Empire and the Church, or the Protestant Church and its countries, etc... but The Church also was one of the most significant movers and shakers in Western History, both good and bad. Mostly bad, sadly, but some good.

I really think we're shortchanging people when we aren't giving them (and I say to do so non-doctrinally, obviously) any lessons and/or exposure to the one book that informed so many centuries of politics and arts.

[GreenArrow]

64. well said

It is very difficult to be an educated person without having at least a background knowlege of the Bible and its contents.

[Rabrrrrrr]

74. Thank you!

I'm very surprised (though not really) at the "head in the sand" attitude so many in this thread are showing.

One simply cannot understand Western culture without understanding the Bible; just as trying to give a history of eastern Asia, without making reference to Buddhism, would be utterly ignorant, so also trying to do western history without the Bible and reference to the Church.

[GreenArrow]

191. don't mention it.

I've seen the same attitude on other threads, and while it is disheartening, it isn't surprising to me anymore. Studying the Bible can allow us to understand who we are and where we came from as a people, or more accurately, as a broader culture. It might also give us understanding as to where we are going.

"One simply cannot understand Western culture without understanding the Bible; just as trying to give a history of eastern Asia, without making reference to Buddhism, would be utterly ignorant, so also trying to do western history without the Bible and reference to the Church."

You could not have put this any more succintly.

[EnfantTerrible]

22. In a course on Propaganda?

Sure.

[Bluebear]

23. Be "taught"??? NO!!!!

If some enlightened school district chooses to offer a comparative religion course, I would not object to its being studied. But certainly not "taught".

[Dorian Gray]

24. I think

in a World Lit., a World History, a World Cultures or a World Religion class it would be appropriate.

There are some great allegories, poetry, and other literary devices that would be useful to teach for context in a lit class. (I was a literature teacher. In one class I taught sections of the Bible in conparison with sections from The Epic of Gilgamesh. I also took creation stories from various cultures.

That was at a private school in Hong Kong. While I attended public school, we didn't touch upon any religious texts.

[JanMichael]

25. As what? The "Truth" or as a piece of History?

It's a part of society in a way so some reference should probably be made but certainly not "teaching" it.

Remembering verses? No fucking way.

[AngryAmish]

29. I think my language was bad

Essentially, the who's and the whats of the big bible stories might be taught in a non-offensive way. Of course teaching in the sense of this really happened and you should believe has no place in a public school.

When I was in seventh grade we had a semester on greek and roman mythology. It was a great class because these myths are a foundation of western culture and there is also a great insight into human behavior because they are timeless stories. (The Peloponnesian war should also be taught to children but that is another discussion entirely).

I think as an educated person who Moses is and what he supposedly did for the jews should be within an educated persons set of knowledge. But the whole issue is so thorny and prone to abuse.

[AntiCoup2K4]

26. The Bible is a very important historical document

....and so why not teach it as such? You don't have to endorse it as the Word of God in order to examine it's influence on 2000 years of history and culture. And that includes the good and the bad. Those who were behind the Crusades and the Inquisition claimed the Bible as their authority, but so did those who marched in this country for civil rights.

In the context of a comparitive religion class, or as part of world history, I can't see any rational objection to including the Bible, or any other religious texts.

[TreasonousBastard]

27. Absolutely, but...

not as religion, like some of the religious right want.

The Bible is simply too ingrained in Western culture to be ignored and it's difficult to understand much of history and literature without understanding the Biblical background for much of it. Even the movie "Taxi Driver" loses a lot when you don't understand the concept of redemption through blood sacrifice.

Schools have no problem with Greek and Roman, or even Viking, mythology and how it relates to medern society.

But, NEVER, EVER, cross the line teaching the Bible, or any other religious text, as religion to be believed.

[BiggJawn]

28. Absolutely NOT.

Suppose 70% of the people in this country were followers of Zeus. And these people had a bloody history of killing other peoples who didn't believe in Zeus themselves, and blew up medical facilities in the name of Zeus.

I wouldn't want Zeus taught in the public school, either.

Go teach about him in your temples and homes.

Same thing for the Christian Bible. Teaching it alongside the Koran doean't make it "all right", either, because there's people who don't believe the tales told in EITHER book.

How are you going to teach the bible, anyway? As a historic document? a collection of fairy tales? (that'll get a response from that persecuted 70% I was alluding to earlier)
An interesting book, but not really relevant to modern life? The "Inspired Word of GAWD"?

Leave the teaching of the Bible to the churches. There's plenty of THEM to accomodate the curious.

[beam me up scottie]

31. Nailed it.

Thanks, BiggJawn.

What the hell do people use the churches for anymore?

Good grief, there's not enough time, teachers or money to teach the kids the basics, screw the superstitions.


I hear libraries are also able to accommodate the curious.

[BiggJawn]

58. You bet.

In tody's public school realm, where state lawmakers have put excruciating pressure on teachers to have their schools "Perform", they don't even have time, and these days MONEY, to do anything but "Teach The TEST", it's ridiculous to suggest that they also need to indoctrinate our little ones in the KJV.

I would imagine ANY church in ANY little town would just PISS themselves to be able to teach you everything they ever wanted you to know about their particular flavour of The Greatest Myth Ever Told.

But keep your eyes on your local school boards, because there's people out there who think the churchs can't do the whole job themselves....

[MADem]

124. Heh, nowadays the churches are used as fundraising arms of the GOP nt

[beam me up scottie]

153. D'oh!

How stupid of me.:spank:

They're looking at the BIG picture.

Install the zealots who will turn this into a theocracy, and the indoctrination of children will become automatic.

[Carolab]

32. I was being sarcastic by mentioning the "Quran".

I don't think ANY religion should be "taught"--in fact, anywhere or anytime.

[BiggJawn]

56. No, it was germaine to the argument.

You really weren't being sarcastic, even if you didn't realize it.
If you're going to teach the Bible in the Public School, that covers the Chrisitians, AND the Jews, because of the OT containing the Pentateuch.
So in the interest of "Fairness", you would HAVE to include the Koran.

To do otherwise exhibits a bias, IMO, and is why I think the Church, Synagogue, and Mosque are the proper setting for teaching these books.

[Ladyhawk]

65. Thank you. This is what I wanted to say, but didn't have the words

for it presently. :) Thanks!

I had a Bible class every day from second grade through high school. I had to memorize vast tracts of scripture. I learned that god was bloodthirsty and genocidal...ugh! I want those years of my life back. What a fucking waste of time!!!

[0rganism]

30. It's a mistake NOT to teach it as part of a western lit curriculum

I know this will not be popular sentiment here, but what the heck. There is far too much literary symbolism in the "Great Books" that references the bible to ignore it entirely. The bible is an important source of inspiration for many authors, and deserves its place alongside Moby Dick and Paradise Lost. No one needs to read the bible in public school MORE than atheists (like myself) and agnostics and non-Christians coming to America from Asia. (Most other Americans will have ample opportunity to read and study the bible, one way or another.) Some understanding of the bible and its cultural impact is absolutely necessary to comprehending the last 2000 years of western civilization, at any level.

I'll leave it at that.

[Dorian Gray]

68. Good point......

How can you read Milton, Shakespeare, Dante, Boccavvio, Steinbeck, Hemingway without a passing knowledge of biblical texts?

[MADem]

128. That is what google is for

If you don't understand the reference, look it up. But why spend a semester reading a load of fairy tale horseshit to understand one or two references?

[Dorian Gray]

158. One or two?

Have you READ Paradise Lost? The whole thing is biblically based. Every line has a reference to a biblical, Greek or Roman mythological, or historical character. If you were to look up every single reference that you didn't understand, it'd take you years to read the darn works.

Also, constant look up interferes with the flow of a work.

[MADem]

166. Every book is not loaded with such references

In fact, most are not. Sorry, the improved understanding of PARADISE LOST does not justify spending public money on teaching a Christian book of worship, in any of it's many iterations...do we go with the Catholic text, the King James, or how about the large text GOOD NEWS version??

So, if someone writes a compelling piece of literature that touches on, say, scientology or satanism, we need to teach that too, so the little fuckers can better understand the work??? How about all of the Persian and Arab writers? Do we need a "QURANS R Us?" course to sort all that out? And Shakespeare--hath not a Jew eyes? Do we need to start with Moses?

Spend all your time deconstructing Milton, and you'll flunk your NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND test, and not have to worry about college...but hey, WALMART is hiring!

And doing research is actually GOOD for kids--teaches them how to go out and find shit on their own, instead of having it spoon fed to them by indoctrinating professors with a point of view.

[Dorian Gray]

175. Look....

I never advocated teaching the Bible in full in public schools. In MY public schools, we NEVER touched upon it. I learned it in my CCD classes, and at my Jesuit university.

When I took my pesky Milton and Shakespeare classes, I was happy to have the background that I did have in Biblical literature, as well as Greek and Roman mythology. Hell, throw in some of the Norse gods that I found fascinating in high school classes, and I was pretty good to go with literature.

I never advocated teaching the Bible for the sole purpose of reading Paradise Lost. If you are interested in literature, however, as I am, it's a good foundational work to familiarize yourself with. If not, no skin off my back!

[0rganism]

182. Many of the great and influential ones are

That includes most of the books and poetry we read in AP English.

Of course, many of them also have references to Greek and Norse mythologies, so I count myself fortunate to have attained a more substantial background in those than I did for the prevalant religion of my country.

As for your child left behind bullshit, I certainly don't see how reading the bible and knowing how to deconstruct Milton is going to prevent kids from learning arithmetic. If anything, it will make their work in literature easier and more efficient, because they'll know what they're doing.

'Course, we could always just teach to the test. Let's have an arithmetic-and-grammar-only public school. Would that make you happy? That'll keep everyone from working at Walmart, because we all know that only people who flunk the NCLB test are working at Walmart. Then Walmart will go out of business because no one will be around to run their stores. Right? :crazy:

[MADem]

184. Wow, you really are aggressive

I do not wish to see my tax dollars spent teaching the Bible. I can't make that any clearer. Now, suddenly, I am somehow evil, and per your logic, would be OVER FUCKING JOYED to see NCLB flunkies slaving away at WALMART.

Perhaps the course that needs to be taught in high school is LOGIC, not MILTON.

Schools cannot even afford BOOKS anymore. Education is woefully underfunded, and kids are graduating not being able to read past the sixth grade level, if at all.

If kids need to deconstruct those books, they can go home and do their HOMEWORK. They can take summer classes and PAY FOR THEM. They can even, oh horror, wait until COLLEGE for that stuff.

When they are in public school, I want them learning things that will help prepare them either for advanced education or to make a goddamn living and contribute to the economy.

There are only so many positions in this country for AP english teachers. Milton might be nice, but it is not essential. I would wager that many children graduate every year who, when they think MILTON, they think BRADLEY...

[0rganism]

196. And you aren't?

Pot, it's time to meet the kettle. Look, I don't enjoy fisking, but your response demands it.

> Now, suddenly, I am somehow evil, and per your logic, would be OVER
> FUCKING JOYED to see NCLB flunkies slaving away at WALMART...Perhaps
> the course that needs to be taught in high school is LOGIC, not MILTON.

That and reading comprehension, apparently. Do you even read what you write before you post it? My reductio ad absurdum isn't falling far from the tree, if you get my meaning -- which, based on our exchange thus far, I don't see as likely.

> Schools cannot even afford BOOKS anymore. Education is woefully underfunded

Understand, then, that this is because the voters themselves are slashing the revenue stream for public schools to the point where they simply cannot keep pace with population growth. Why are the people whose children would most benefit from a decent public education supporting the destruction of the public schools? We could have dozens of threads about that topic alone.

One of the reasons might just be the prevalent idea that the public education system is promoting godlessness and homosexuality. This is easily exploited by a thuggish priesthood and irresponsible punditry into support for anti-tax and anti-school-bond ballot initiatives. There's even a belief -- and I'm not kidding, this was dropped offhand from one of my ultraconservative correspondents on another message board -- that the public schools don't allow kids to bring bibles to school for personal use. Of course this is patently false, but it is an idea in circulation nonetheless.

Anyway, as far as funding goes, I don't think you have a point. If there's one course for which you could count on damn near every student to provide their own copy of the textbook, and have private institutions donate copies for the rest, it'd be a bible-as-lit course.

> If kids need to deconstruct those books, they can go home and do their HOMEWORK.

Silly me. I thought "those books" were part of the standard curriculum for western literature. You think students don't do their homework? I can tell you this much, when I was in high school we didn't get class time to read the primary material. That was homework by definition.

> They can take summer classes and PAY FOR THEM.
> They can even, oh horror, wait until COLLEGE for that stuff.

Sure, because we all know that the only people who deserve an opportunity to learn about literary criticism can afford to attend summer classes and college. Don't know about the college you went to, but the ones I've been to require some rudimentary skills from incoming freshmen -- such as how to tell when a writer is pulling from a body of myth to establish analogy or allegory.

> When they are in public school, I want them learning things that
> will help prepare them either for advanced education or to make a
> goddamn living and contribute to the economy.

I want them learning things that will prepare them to THINK and articulate those thoughts in the appropriate media. Whether it's about ancient mythologies or quantum physics or the best way to stock shelves at Walmart, I want the people coming out of our public schools to be able to translate interest into understanding through inquiry at whatever level they are capable. That means they will require critical thinking skills. I cannot emphasize this enough, but there is no document or set of documents which should receive more critical scrutiny than the Bible.

And it is on this very count that our culture, which widely professes to hold the Bible in such high esteem, falls woefully short. You simply cannot reasonably expect people to teach about the Bible at home or in Sunday school. Those are places where one almost certainly learns a religion, rather than analysis of content. Do you think the interests of either higher education or economic contribution are well-served by blind religious faith and dogma? I would say no, in the long run they are not.

For some of the same reasons you decry the teaching of Bible-as-literature classes in public schools, I would support them -- only as an elective class, but available nonetheless.

[0rganism]

159. Hey, while we're at it, students can just read the "Cliff Notes" instead

Why bother with big texts and difficult original sources, when you can just get the Cliff Notes versions and write your reports that way? Oh, silly me, did I just say "write reports"? What I meant to say was, "go online and order your pre-fabbed report from an essay service, then hock it on e-bay after the teacher returns it."

Yeah, google solves everything.

[MADem]

164. Oh, come off it

If you read an obscure, one line reference in a work of literature, are you going to go get a PhD in the subject to understand the single thought? Maybe you are, but then you will be a child left behind, because there is no time left to teach the little bastards how to add and subtract, or maybe learn a little science.

I stand by my assertion that the Bible should stay the hell out of public schools.

[0rganism]

183. You come off it, that's insane

Where do you come up with this crapola?

Assertion: "the Bible should stay the hell out of public schools"

Rationale: Using the Bible in the process of literary analysis will make children (aka "the little bastards") incapable of learning addition, subtraction, or science.

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[MADem]

186. Your damn right it will

The schools right now are suffering mightily, and they barely have the teachers, materials, and even facilities to teach the bare bones basics. Children ARE being left behind, and it is because of funding, lack of teachers, and lack of time to learn the essentials.

And again, if you want to learn the Bible, you should get yourself to Sunday school, or have your parents teach it to you. I will not advocate funding it. That is INSANE, it is the first step down a slippery slope, and we are already living in a half Taliban America as it is.

I do not see how a book of fairy stories must be TAUGHT at the public school to make a person worthwhile in this world. If someone wants to delve into books with Biblical references, they can DO RESEARCH, and not have a teacher with an agenda spoon feeding them myths... when what they need to be learning is long division.

[0rganism]

162. Exactly. Like other mythologies, the Bible is an essential source

of 8 vitamins an minerals, and part of a healthy breakfast.

D'oh!

I was raised Jewish, so I had a fair grasp of the Old Testament early in life. Unfortunately for me, I didn't read the New Testament thoroughly until my first year of college. I was completely blown away because all kinds of things that just seemed off-the-wall random about the European and American lit I'd slogged through in high school finally fit together -- not to mention a whole mess of other cultural phenomenon.

Not going through the bible is a real handicap to understanding western civilization, one that a lot of us don't even know we have.

[FM Arouet666]

33. Your going to open the door to christian abuse.

Not the abuse of christians, but the abuse by christians. I have seen responses suggesting comparative religion classes, and in a perfect world I would agree. However, considering the assault upon science in the form of (un)intelligent design I can foresee abuse of any mandate to teach the bible.

Comparative Religion 101, Little town, Red State, U.S.A. An all inclusive course covering the worlds religions with emphasis on the superiority of the christian religion. Atheism will be included as an example of a perverse world view.

Yep, sounds like a fabulous idea........:evilfrown:

[Kickin_Donkey]

34. That's a good question.

I'll give my experience, but I don't know if it'll shed any light on the subject.

I went to a public high school in a rural, conservative area of California. When I was a freshman in high school, in the spring of 1977, I was enrolled in the English course for the X-track students (the "good" students). The course was called Comparative Cultures (why it was an English course rather than Social Studies, I don't know).

Earlier that year, we'd read the tales of King Arthur, Beowulf, Greek myths and Greek plays like Antigone, etc. Toward the end of the year, the teacher, Mr. B., said we would study the Bible. He justified this by saying that "people didn't know the Bible nowadays." I assumed he meant in a cultural sense, rather than as received truth. Nobody else in the class seemed to think it was a big deal, either good or bad. These were essentially apolitical and not particular religious 14-year-olds in the late 1970s. The evangelical movement was getting revved up, but it was not the huge presence it is today. The late '70 were mellow politically -- the Carter years -- and there was not the polarization we have today. And most, if not all, of the 30 students were from Christian backgrounds of varying degrees, so the presence of Bible study in class didn't alarm them.

I think we studied four lessons in the Bible and had to write an essay at the end. Mr. B covered the four Bible stories as stories, not religious scripture.

Interestingly, Mr. B was among the first wave of Born Agains. But he was one of the better teachers I had; he was sharp and had a presence about him. He left a year later to work for a Christian publishing house in Arkansas. However, he was also a liberal and a Democrat. He voted for Carter in the '76 election; he defended Mexican migrant workers from some of the racially motivated comments made in class when it touched on the subject. But this was 1977. I wonder what Mr. B would be like politcally today.

I often wonder if Mr. B taught the Bible lessons in the class to further a Christian agenda, or simply as part of cultural studies. He didn't push sermons down our throats in class -- but the mere presence of Bible stories in class might have a prosyletizing effect or give the Bible more legitimacy. Would he have taught Bible stories in class if he hadn't been a Born Again?

At the time, I was nominally Christian (went sporadically to a Presby church) who was becoming agnostic; now I am an athiest. I would say that the Bible shouldn't be taught in public schools today, even as literature or cultural myths. The fundy/evangelical movement is too powerful today to give it that toehold in public classrooms and there is too much room for abuse. Too dangerous.

[Neil Lisst]

35. Each religion should be taught - but not by its followers

That way, you get history, not fantasy.


http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst

[I_Make_Mistakes]

36. Actually, If teaching the bible, would mean a correct interpretation

and no the RW propaganda, then I would say "Yes". The RW talks about Christ but has no idea who he is.

I transferred to a local (good college for medical reasons, close to home). It turned out to be a Methodist (pretty sure UMC) college. They had a comparative religion class (had to take 3 Religion and/or Philosophy classes). I had taken an intro to logic at a PSU satellite from a Brown University graduate professor (she had no clue about an undergrad, intro class), so, religion was more appalling.

The first class was OT, took the easy prof., who had a heart attack and got the seminary prof, what a beotch. The non-western religion class was awesome. I took it thru the summer (12 wks. into 4), it was enlightening. I can came away with, we basically believe in the same thing (one with the universe).

I think that if the class was taught objectively, it would be a great awakening to all. I loved the the class, even though I learned a new religion every other day. It would eliminate the religious fighting over whose God is the RIGHT ONE!

Because, when sorted out, it was all the same bottom line, with a different means to the end. This would break down stereotypes and foster a greater working together for the greater good. Of course, those Holier than thou RW's would never approve, because they are so special and above reproach, you know "They are the chosen ones", cough, cough.

[Neil Lisst]

123. I_Make_Mistakes, I agree, we need secular teaching of religion

We do not prepare students to understand the history and role religion has played in the history of the world. If anything, they learn a little about the Roman Catholic Church from Constantine to Henry VIII, maybe a mention of Martin Luther and the roots of the Protestant branch of Christianity, maybe a mention of the creation of the Church of England by Henry VIII to facilitate divorcing his wife in favor of another.

We live in a world where not understanding the religions and cultures of others is dangerous and thoughtless. We have to do a better job of teaching the world's religions to students, not as religions, per se, but as cultural and historical facts.

http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst/

[Kailassa]

143. There can never be such a thing

as a single "correct interpretation of such a mish-mash of contradictory stories and ideas as the bible. Not even if everyone concerned was willing to look at it rationally.

[Swamp Rat]

37. "The Bible" ... which one? ... all versions? ... religions?

How about the "Volkswagon Beetle Bible?"

If one is taught, then they ALL should be taught. :)

[annabanana]

43. all of them... as literature, historical documents, stories..

the so called "veracity"?.. no
Unless someone studies the concept of "inerrancy" (sp?) and it's influence on politics - pro and con..

[AAARRRGGGHHH]

39. As a catholic ...

No.

[blindpig]

40. not on my dime

Perhaps comparitive religion in 11th or 12th grade, though I question that it could be evenly handled even then. I can imagine a lot of nod/wink/snicker behavior going on in all too many schools when non-christian religions are discussed. It is probably a topic best reserved for college.

The bulk of my local taxes go to the schools. We are childless but never say boo about making our contribution to the commonweal. That will change when they try this or introduce so-called intelligent design to the curriculum. Time for a taxpayer revolt.

[jody]

44. Yes along with every other religion, agnosticism, and atheism. n/t

[bread_and_roses]

45. How about we try teaching the Constitution first?

Schools don't seem to spend much time on that, judging from the few people who have even a basic grasp of it. (In my own school, lo these many long years ago, we spent a few hours at most in "Civics" class in 9th grade - that was it - maybe things are different now but I somehow doubt it.)

As for some points other posters have made, one mentioned the time factor, which is important - how are we going to fit in Comparative Studies of the bible as Literature to our student's days?

And who reads "Moby Dick" or "Paradise Lost" in HS? Or the "Epic of Gilgamesh?"

I never read the Bible - haven't to this day - but read constantly and widely and managed to pick up an excellent working knowledge of the bible from references in other works.

[MADem]

120. Wow, what a NOVEL CONCEPT!!!!

I'm with you--nowadays most kids think the Bill of Rights can be paid with a credit card, and the Declaration of Independence is when you tell your parents you don't want to take out the trash or babysit your little sister anymore.

[Neil Lisst]

133. MADem, nice job! Liked the Bill of Rights comment.

Instead of having them stand and pledge allegiance, why not take that minute every day to talk about either a provision of the Constitution or one of the amendments to the Constitution?

In one minute a day for every school day, you could tell students in one minute bites important facts about the Constitution, facts they would hear every year on that day for 12 years.

I could write 180 one minute segments on the Constitution. Hell, I could do it today, with no notes.

1776
Declaration of Independence
1781
Articles of Confederation
1787
Continental Congress
James Madison
John Jay
Alexander Hamilton
Federalist Papers

See, there are the first two weeks topics, one minute a day, instead of a pledge. Don't tell them to be loyal. Show them the history and let them develop loyalty.

http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst/

[MADem]

137. You should consider writing a book along those lines

American History in One Minute A Day. Write it at the eighth grade level, that way it is accessible to some of these kids in COLLEGE, or those who never went on to higher education.

It would make a great bathroom book too--way better than Reader's Digest, or Trivia Facts!!!

[Neil Lisst]

155. You're right, I should. Maybe I will. History is my unrequited love.

But first, I'm going to get Neil Lisst published in book form, hopefully the size that people who are desperate to buy a Christmas gift for their 16-30 year old child might like.

I'm thinking it will sell for about 5.95USD.

I want citizens who are loyal to the ideals that made us great, not the flag, not the president, not the military, not the politicians, but the ideals.


http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst/

[DemBones DemBones]

46. I think the Bible should be taught in public school,

but obviously not as religion since the public schools include students raised with many different faiths and students raised without religious belief. Instead, the major stories of the Bible can be taught as literature or in comparative religion or social studies classes.

When I was in school, we studied all the major stories about Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Norse gods in sixth grade social studies. We didn't study the Bible but in those days most kids were learning about the Bible at their church and/or in their home. With fewer adults attending church today, it follows that fewer children are learning about the Bible.

A great deal of Western literature assumes that the reader knows the Bible stories and the Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Norse stories. Those who aren't famliar with the stories won't understand many literary allusions. Knowledge of all those religions also is helpful in understanding the history of their cultures. Students should also study Eastern civilization and that includes learning about Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto, etc.

I don't know how these topics are covered in most schools today; let's hope someone else can tell us.

[jody]

47. Suggest reading "The Ruins" by Volney (1791) free on the Internet. n/t

[jus_the_facts]

48. NO that's what churches and private schools are for......

...keep the separation of church and state...SEPARATE!

[WritingIsMyReligion]

49. In an OBJECTIVE, COMPARATIVE lit class.

That's about it.

[Jawja]

50. Yes, as part of

a History of Religion course. Include it with the Koran and also teach along the history and philosophies of Buddism, Hinduism, Taoism, Mysticism, etc. Teach not only the Creation and Flood stories of the Bible, but also the duplications in other cultures, such as Peru, Greece, India, etc.

In that context, yes, parts of the Bible should be taught.

on edit: a for a really enlightened course, add the traditions of the early Northern Europeans - the Norse, the Druids, etc.

Call it "Intelligent History," if you will.

[proud2BlibKansan]

51. It's literature

It's part of our culture.

It's easy to include the stories without endorsing one particular religion.

[CRK7376]

52. I have no trouble teaching Bible

History as an optional class in the Literature or Social Studies Departments. My school offers a Biblical History elective course. It is an elective and by no means a required course.

[baldguy]

53. As myth.

[stepnw1f]

54. Why Should It Be?

There are bible study classes already. Will the Tora and Koran be taught as well? I thought Theology was already taught in colleges.

[Rabrrrrrr]

75. Obviously the question isn't about teaching theology

it's about teaching the Bible in a non-doctrinal way.

Think of all the Asian immigrants coming into this country - how handicapped are they going to be in studying Western culture, and trying to enter into this culture, if NOTHING is told to them about the Bible and the Church.

Yoiu just can't do Western culture and history without it. whether you buy into the stories or not is irrelevant - and certainly we don't want to teach that the Bible is the one true book in our public schools - but so much of our history, art, literature is tied into that book; lots of what happened in western history happened because of readings (and often misreadings) of that book.

[stepnw1f]

77. Oh Puhleeeeeze

"how handicapped are they going to be in studying Western culture, and trying to enter into this culture, if NOTHING is told to them about the Bible and the Church."

You have got to be kidding me? I now need a shower.

[Ron Green]

79. Rabrrr is right. There's no way to separate Western Civ. from the Bible,

and anyone who wants to see the whole picture, warts and all, has got to study this. People in the day of Shakespeare and Milton knew the Bible better than any book, and knew it better than WE know any book. It's just dumb to "do education" without including the significance of the Bible.

[stepnw1f]

84. Nobody Should Be Subjected To Other's Faith without Consent

This is supposed to be a Democracy made up of many faiths and perspectives. This country is NOT a Christian Nation, although many want all to believe it is. It's purely propaganda. My children should not Have to study the Bible because a few insecure morons need to legitimize their lack of faith.

If people WANT to study the Bible, they can chose to. What you want is to take that CHOICE away from them.

Don't give me your intellectual crap about forcing people to understand christian perspective in our NATION. There is No need. And if there is, then faith no longer exists.

[Ron Green]

90. It's not about forcing people to understand Christian perspective.

It's simply about the study of history. The very language you speak, and the way you see the world, are directly descended from thinkers whose entire world view was informed by a deep study of this book. Their world was even called "Christendom," and for good or bad they and their letters were the foundation of where we live. Only now (in the past 50 or 100 years) do the writings of the East start to define and influence the way we live.

It's not about "faith," it's about education.

[stepnw1f]

92. Nope... Sorry... I Ain't Buying It

There are choices we need to preserve in this country. You are advocating the elimination of those choices, however covertly. Once you get the bible into public schools, do you expect there not to be any indoctrination of faith? Take a look around you. You ignore what is OBVIOUS. You propose to blur the line separating Church and State. The religious right will abuse what you propose. And YOU CAN'T DENY IT!

SEPERATION of CHURCH AND STATE
- our forefathers

END

[Ron Green]

100. Is teaching about drugs the same as using drugs? How about sex?

Do you also advocate that sex not be taught in schools? Instead, leave it to the back seats of cars.

:crazy:

[stepnw1f]

108. You Lost the Argument

Now you are intentionally being OBTUSE.

Sex and drugs already applies to most in our society. That's very different from what we are talking about, but you know that. Swallow your pride.

SEPEARTION of CHURCH and STATE

[Ron Green]

112. Religion also applies to at least as many as does drugs.

It's a valid point... it you're going to proscribe the EXAMINATION of something just because you don't want its use, then you've lost the battle of the light vs. the dark.

Your answer to the examintaiton of the Bible is "just say no."

[stepnw1f]

119. You Don't Give Up Do You

That was so convoluted.

Once again: "Separation of Church and State"

See.... that was easy. Choice is good! I want to pass that choice down to my children. You propose to take that away. And stop pretending the bible is only a book. I studied it.

And stop pretending that there are no negative repercussions to our "Separation of Church and State". I really don't appreciate your intellectual dishonesty. And I would appreciate a bit more maturity.

[Ron Green]

132. How about "Separation of Church and Bible?"

If you think the Bible is not "only a book" (which is what you wrote), then you are giving much more power than it needs, IMO. By your reasoning, teaching ABOUT the Bible is the same as "Church." That simply seems silly to me. Explain how teaching ABOUT the Bible is the same as faith, or worship, or proselytizing.

[stepnw1f]

138. Semantical Wishy-Washy Argument

You know the bible to be more than just a book to many. And no, I don't need to explain anything to you.

"teaching ABOUT the Bible is the same as faith, or worship, or proselytizing."

Like a bad attorney, you place words in my mouth. Your argument has been squashed already. You are very rude and arrogant.

The Final Verdict:
Separation of Church and State

[nashville_brook]

101. then rest assured that the christian children are better educated and

leave the rest of us to our blissful ignorance. you will overcome with your superior education and we'll live in peace knowing our children get the religious teaching WE approve of.

[Ron Green]

150. No way do I suggest that studying about the Bible makes one a Christian.

I suppose by "Christian children" you mean kids from homes where the Bible is believed to be the word of God and is to be followed as a guide for living and so forth.

That's not what I'm talking about at all. I'm saying that people who examine more traditions and build richer contexts are better educated.

I'm guessing that your post is sarcastic; I'm not being sarcastic, but tyring to explain my view that the Bible needn't be such a scary thing. It's part of history - why not study it?

[Neil Lisst]

156. Ron Green, you're right. The Bible is a part of history.

Its role in history and politics cannot be ignored. Studying it reveals the holes in all the major groups who tout it as vesting them with some special status.


http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst/

[Rabrrrrrr]

81. I think you are having a very difficult time differentiating

between teaching (or perhaps a better word is exposing) and indoctrinating.

Just like you can't understand Middle East history without klnowledge of Islam, and just like you can't understand Chinese history without Buddhism and Confucianism, and can't understand the history of India without understanding Buddhism and Hinduism, so also Western history and culture is very tied into the Bible and the church. For good and bad, whether you agree with whether the Bible should have had any influence or not, the truth is: the history of Christianity and the history of Europe and America (at least until the 1900s) are inextricably linked.

I don't understand why people want to hide their heads in the sand over this issue.

[stepnw1f]

89. Let Me Make It Simple

You are taking away OUR choice to not study a religion. Do you understand what that means?

You are forcing people to do what our forefathers did NOT want to impose upon our supposed Free Nation. You blurring the Separation between Church and State.

[Rabrrrrrr]

118. But why would you want our children to remain in ignorance?

Should we, then, just pretend that Christianity had no impact or effect on 2000 years of western civilization? Not mention it at all?

Pretend that Buddhism had no effect in Asia?

Pretend that Islam had no effect in the middle-east or Indonesia or India?

How can one, in any capacity of honesty, teach history - or art - without making at least some passing reference to the fact that a religion had an effect, and then talk about that effect?

Or do we just teach history and art as though it all happened in a vacuum?

Personally, I prefer to be intellectually honest and admit to the elephant in the room. You can't separate western and christian history. Not at all.

I don't think you can go to a school with the attitude "I don't want to study any religion". That's gonna be a pretty empty, half-assed bit of schooling, leaving tremendous blinders in one's life.

[stepnw1f]

130. You Now Try to Insult Me?

Because I won't agree with you. You sure assume alot. I studied the Bible and as I said before, I want my children to have the choice to do the same. How dare you! You sound like some right wing 'higher than Though" religious fanatic. "Live in a vacuum" because people don't learn the bible? Well... excuse me!

You have a nerve. Get lost.

[Ron Green]

135. Would you give your children the choice to study or not study any other

thing? How about math? How about biology? If the child doesn't want to do it, just let him opt out?

What Rabrrrrr is saying is that the Bible is such an important part of the history of the West, to ignore it is to choose ignorance.

[stepnw1f]

141. Ahhh... the Tag Team

I don't need your translation nor should Rabrrrrr. Go push the your bible elsewhere. And you call me ignorant.

[beam me up scottie]

154. You equate knowledge of the bible with that of math and biology?

Well.

That's all I needed to know.

You are ignoring the fact that the impact on society by religion is already taught in history class.

Everything from the inquisition to the attempted christification of America by the religious right.

What christians want is for the "good" part of their religion to be taught in public schools.

If parents want to expose their kids to the bible, they can do it at home and/or at church.

Forcing other's kids to learn about christianity is a violation of church and state, not to mention extremely unethical.

Do it on your own dime.

[Ron Green]

157. I suggest that equating teaching ABOUT the Bible in public school is like

teaching about the effects of THC on the body and mind, and something that should be done.

On the other hand, teaching the Bible is like teaching the kids how to roll a joint. This information is available elsewhere, and doesn't belong in public schools.

[Rabrrrrrr]

170. It's unfortunate you did not read my post.

I did not that you are living in a vacuum, nor did I even come close to implying it.

I asked "Or do we just teach history and art as though it all happened in a vacuum?"

I am not a religious fanatic, and I have no religious investment in this issue.

I merely believe that historical study should maintain a certain level of integrity, and even if someone has a horrendous visceral response ot the Bible and Christianity, the fact remains that western history - and art - is utterly linked with Christianity. And Christianity is utterly linked with the Bible.

It is the denial of this fact, and the refusal to want to teach it, that upsets me.

[MADem]

167. Well, then, by your logic, we must teach Bhuddism and Islam to kids

before they can be allowed to study world history.

Looks like we will have to keep kids in high school until they are 21, in that case...between the Christians, their many sects, Islam, Bhuddism, Shintoism, and who knows what else, every kid will be a theology major before they learn how to balance their checkbook.

[Rabrrrrrr]

187. Yes, I think we should.

Especially now that the world has grown so small, actually teaching our kids about other people and religious motivations is especially important.

Do I think these need to be years' long courses? Of course not, though to fit your very hyperbolic "age 21 scenario", we'd have to. A passing overview is all that is needed, something done in a day or two toward the beginning of a "China" unit, etc.

And I don't know why you are insistent that these would be lessons in theology - I've said before I'm not interested in the kids learning theology. I don't want them to be able to write theological papers for Buddhist journals - I want them to know what the fuck it is.

I'm interested in them learning about the world around them, and, in terms of learning western art and history, learning about one of the most significant and prime motivators: Christianity and the Bible.

How could one POSSIBLY even think one could POSSIBLY understand what's going on in the middle-east right now without having at least a passing working knowledge of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity? One cannot. How can one POSSIBLY even imagine to get a handle on what's happening in the US *today* without a knowledge of the weapon and the motivation of the fundy fuck right?

Don't ignore the elephant in the room - people's religions MATTER. Whether you think the religion is insane or ignorant is irrelevant - it MATTERS to the course of history.

Quite honestly, I'm opposed to any pedagogical method that is based on hiding one's head in the sand. That's the Taliban and the fundamentalist Christian perspective, to pretend that other views simply don't exist.

[MADem]

189. I have an in depth knowledge of Islam and I did not learn it in school

What I did learn in school is how to do research.

[Az]

80. Speaking as someone with two Chinese sister-in-laws

I can assure you they are not ignorant of the bible in asia. Having studied and traveled in Japan again, I can assure you they are not ignorant of the bible.

It is interesting to note just how ignorant we are their particular teachings and beliefs. Perhaps a class where the bible is taught alongside books such as the Tao Te Ching or perhaps the Eight Fold Path of Buddhism. Both play critical rolls in social development of major populations of the world.

But of course the problem is that as soon as we started teaching other cultures religions and beliefs there would be a tremendous cry from the religious right.

[Rabrrrrrr]

83. And I imagine your sisters-in-law were educated well.

And my Japanese partner also is very fluent in Christianity and the Bible.

And sure, there are even Christians in China and elsewhere in Asia, esp. Korea.

I was thinking more of the rural peasant farmer immigrants who had little exposure beyond their own immediate culture who come here, and raise their children here.

And I agree with you about our ignorance of other cultures - I said in another post that trying to studying a culture without studying its religious texts makes no sense.

And I also agree that, if we were to start teaching Buddhism in order to more fully understand China (or India or Japan...), the rightwing would cry foul and scream bloody murder, unless everything was prefaced with "They did this bad stuff because they follow Buddhism, which isn't a very good religion, so we can't expect anything better from them."

[Az]

91. It doesn't work

There is some sense to your thinking. But it doesn't work. There is no way through this without tarnishing either the government or the religion.

Unless you enshrine the bible and teach it as absolute there will be an uprising of the faithful. But to do that is to violate the church/state issues.

[stepnw1f]

97. Seperation of Church and State

Pretty simple.

[Rabrrrrrr]

107. Perhaps the question itself is worded wrong

When asked "Should we", I think, "Yes, we should - not to do so is to be intellectually dishonest". Just like I think we should study Buddhism if we study China, and Islam and Judaism (and even Christianity) if we study the middle-east, and Hinduism if we study India...

But if the question were phrased "Knowing that we SHOULD teach the Bible, do we dare take the risk knowing what the right will do?", to which I would answer, no, we probably shouldn't take the risk; at least, not so much of a risk as to make it a national or even state manadate, and instead leave it up to each school to decide.

In this thread, I am answering the first question.

I think a lot of others are answering the second question.


And it's sad that we can't answer "yes" to both, but the Christian Taliban can't be trusted.

[Az]

111. I think I can agree with that

:)

[Zynx]

55. Only either as literature or as a tool for analyzing certain periods of

history since the Bible had a significant effect on the affairs of society for quite some time.

I'm Catholic and I say this.

[notadmblnd]

57. no, you go to school to learn reading writing and arithmetic

and you go to church to learn about god.

[tlsmith1963]

60. Absolutely Not

Religion belongs at church, not at school. If people want to learn about the bible, go to church.

Tammy

[donco6]

62. I think the stories are critical to our understanding of Western Civ.

Surely there's a way to teach them without having to regard them as factual. We do it with Greek mythology, with other creation stories, with Native American lore, etc.

Of course, those religions don't have a modern-day fanatical element insisting they be taught as fact.

[GreenArrow]

63. it should be taught

but as literature, history, folklore, and not as a practical religious text. Given the current zeitgeist, I'm not sure how that could be done.

[FlaGranny]

66. Well, equal

representation should be given to all religious writings, but not too much time should be taken away from other subjects to do it. Maybe once a month a major religion's beliefs could be studied. But in depth study of the Christian bible? No way. That would take way too much time and be way too conflicting and confusing for kids.

Edit: These religious ideas should be taught ONLY as a means for understanding others, their beliefs, and their cultures. Certainly, no church is going to teach kids to be tolerant of others' beliefs.

[philosophie_en_rose]

69. Hell no. (Too much sex, violence, & raping)

First of all, little kids have a lot on their plates without bible study. They need to learn and play and imagine without religious proselytizing.

Kids can choose to read the Bible, if they want. However, biblical teaching in the school leads to a slippery slope where kids are forced to either defend their religious beliefs or bully others.

Not to mention that the subject matter is incredibly inappropriate for school children. I'm not a prude and I don't believe in banning books, but there is too much incest, violence, and other offensive material to explain to children. It would take all school day to explain those parts of the Bible.

Now anyone that says "only teach the lovey dovey parts" is being ridiculous. If there's a non-religious point to teaching the Bible, it's misleading and pointless to teach only the flattering parts.

I have no problem with children learning about religion, but they don't have to do a Bible Study to learn about Christianity.

[Az]

72. They have these marvelous places where they teach all about the bible

They are called Churchs. And really.... you think the religious arguments here in DU can get fiesty? Wait till the first disagreement turns up in a class room... it will not be pretty.

Here's a story about something that happened here in Michigan. This group of kids got together to do a bible study after school. They got permission to have their group meet in a classroom at the school. Since it wasn't sponsored by the school it was not a violation of church state seperation.

But then a group of atheists wanted to have their own bible study group. A lot of resistance went up against this group. But finally since they allowed the Christian bible study group they were compelled to allow the atheist bible study group. Thats when things really exploded.

As soon as the atheists got permission to meet the community went ape. There was such an uproar that the only recourse the principle had was to cancel all after school groups.

The problem is not allowing religion into a public school. Its that we cannot favor one over the other. If you introduce the bible you have to introduce the koran, the talmud, and you probably have to include texts critical of them as well. You can imagine how that would go over.

[Pepperbelly]

73. Is is a very interesting Bronze Age document.

It has intrinsic value, even for those who do not use it for spiritual guidance.

Philosophically, there are many things of value in it. For example, in Proverbs, when Solomon notes the things that God despises, a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, minds that are quick to design mischief and feet quick to run to mischief and shit-stirrers, I think that the Bible really identified the most dangerous subsets of humanity ... the assholes, if you will, very early in our written history.

I am down with God or whoever wrote this about those sorts of folk.

[Nikki Stone 1]

76. The bible, no. The Betty Crocker Cookbook, yes. (Far more useful)

:)

[nashville_brook]

85. i couldn't agree more!

cooking shouldn't be an elective. everyone should know how to cook, clean and take care of themselves! (if only my hubby had that education... :)

[Nikki Stone 1]

172. Everybody should know the basics. And knowing how to cook Italian is even

better. :)

[goodboy]

78. Sure, just like Greek/Roman Mythology...(nt)

[nashville_brook]

82. teach history of christianity -- the bible is DEVOTIONAL

teach critical thinking
teach plato
teach model UN Security Councils
teach world religions as a survey
teach mind quieting and visualization
teach philosophy of science
teach art history
teach life skills
teach civics
teach ecology
teach affective skills
teach writing

leave the dang bible to the church -- they need to feel needed.

[Ron Green]

87. You can't leave the Bible to the chuch, any more than you can leave art to

the museums. It's such a significant part of Western history, of who YOU AND I are, that to be afraid of it and try to ban it from liberal education is just short-sighted.

[nashville_brook]

93. i got thru high school, college and grad school without ever needing to it

it is DEVOTIONAL.

[McCamy Taylor]

86. WHICH Bible? There are lots of them.

[nashville_brook]

94. exactly -- now, if you want to trace the REASON for the diff editions

that would have educational merit.

[Ron Green]

95. WOW, what I'm seeing in this thread is a kind of Fundamentalist fear of

learning. I think many well-meaning people are so afraid of the Religious Right that they've clouded their own understanding of a liberal education, which is about open inquiriy into history, thought, and the history of thought.

Some people seem to think that opening a Bible invokes some sort of otherworldly power that shuts down thinking. Hey, folks, if wer'e going to be educated and enlightened people, we have to have the courage to THINK, not just run from the religio-crazies.

[nashville_brook]

98. there's plenty of CHURCHES teaching the BIBLE -- my taxes don't need to

pay for MORE crappy bible study. besides -- what would all the dowdy, goodie-2-shoes girls have to do in the dorm if they weren't having bible study. you'd take away their only means of rebellion.

nah, leave the bible where it is.

[Ron Green]

104. I think you're confusing TEACHING with PREACHING.

Have you taken some Western Civ. classes? What is your understanding of the importance of the Biblical myths in the history of the West? I mean, I was a freshman in college many years ago, but this was standard stuff then. College students weren't nearly as afraid of the Bible as people seem to be these days. I'm thinking that if we start to DEFUSE the insane power that this book seems to have over so many people, even here on this board, we can bring back some enlightened attitudes instead of the fear that surrounds this issue now.

[nashville_brook]

no, i'm not confused.

we don't teach devotional texts.

[stepnw1f]

102. And You Ignore Simple Facts

Separation of Church and State. The Freedom to study and not study the bible, Koran, Tora.....

I can't believe you don't see the danger? Are you a Fundamentalist Christian? Please be honest. Because if you were, I'd actually understand your point of view. There is no reason or need to force the public to study the Bible. Our forefathers were sensitive enough to think of those who did not want to have to read the bible. You are essentially legitimizing teaching a faith in our public schools with our tax dollars. I find that incredible that you would even try to argue around that fact, while ignoring a very important principle(Separation of Church and State).

[Ron Green]

109. I am not a fundamentalist Christian, but I value liberal education.

Maybe you're right - people in our schools, people throughout this country are too Goddamned stupid to be able to differentiate learning from indoctrination. It saddens me to see the fear of the Bible on this thread. What you fear, controls you. It's just a f**king book, don't you see? The more you try to make it "special" and consign it to the church, the more power you give it. Its importance in my life is nil - its importance in history and culture is huge.

Don't be afraid of this book. To study its importance is not to "believe" in it.

[stepnw1f]

113. Now You Are Angry

You still ignore the Principle of "Seperation of Church and State". By the way, I have studied the bible. I am glad I had that choice. Don't take that choice away from my children.

[Ron Green]

139. I suppose we can't find common ground on this,

but I suspect you are in the majority among liberals, which is that you don't want the Bible anywhere near the public realm. I understand that point, because I don't want religion anywhere near the public realm.

I believe that if we were to teach ABOUT the Bible in public school, we would start to take away the insane power that it has in our society. Religious crazies are held in thrall by it, and liberals on DU are so afraid of it they won't admit it into a proper study of the history of the West.

You're right -- it's too dangerous a book. Better leave it alone. You win the argument. Back into the Darkness.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

99. Should Human Sexuality be taught in Church? n/t

[stepnw1f]

105. That Actually Already Applies to Every Human Being

But a particular faith doesn't.

I could see an argument for the study of sexuality. With of course a sensitivity to parents who want their children the choice to opt out.

[Kailassa]

147. It's the childrens' right to learn about sexuality, whatever their parents

want. So no, a parent should not have the right to opt their child out. My mother was 6 months pregnant with her first before she found out just how the baby came out. She was wondering if one coughed it up or it came out through the belly button. (1949) We cannot have girls being sent back to the dark ages like that, no matter what their parents would like to do. Lack of information in that area is a form of child abuse.

[Rabrrrrrr]

115. Absolutely. It was taught in mine

and I'm thankful for it.

[LynnTheDem]

106. NO.

eom

[oregonindy]

110. yes but under mythology....

unicorns, satyrs, 1000+ year old people, stories that dont withstand even the whiff of logic, stores that contradict other stories in the bible, giants.....I could go on and on and on and on....

mythology plain and simple

[2Design]

114. religion course where you study the other 'holy' books too

it is not the only book purported to be insprired by god

study jewish and islam and pagan, and wickan - sure as part of a religious studies group

[OnionPatch]

116. It should be taught in literature

and sociology classes, etc. along with all the other beliefs and religions in the world.

Here's my point on this: Conservatives need to remember their belief in ******individual responsibility****** and understand that they also have the "individual responsibility" to preserve and advance their own religion. They need to teach their own children in their homes and churches according to their own beliefs and stop depending on the government to do it for them!!! These are PUBLIC schools we're talking about. Which are funded with all of our tax dollars, even the atheist's. How dare they want to use ALL OF OUR money to push their beliefs on the rest of us. How unbelievable ly RUDE.

How pathetically negligent of their parental duties are they that the absence of a prayer before Math class is going to affect their children's spirituality?

My message to conservatives who want to teach the Bible in school:
Put your money where your mouths are and take responsibility to preserve your own religion. Don't depend on Uncle Sam to do it for you.

[Dark]

121. It should be an elective in high school. n/t

[tomg]

125. I teach lit on the college level, and

my wife teaches 7th English, so we are "before" and "after" high school. It seems to me that if you are teaching a high school elective course on comparative religions, ethics, philosophy and the like then teaching ( parts of ) the Ot and NT in that context is as legitimate as teaching the Qu'ran, the Upanishads, Buddhist texts in Comp. religion, or Aristotle or whomever in Ethics and so on.It's part of the material. That seems fairly obvious. In fact, to knock it out is wrong in the same way that eliminating, say, Plato (who I really hate but sometimes teach in my Dead White Guys Course)would be wrong.

As literature at least stylistically and historically, it also seems appropriate, provided it is in its proper and limited context. For example in literature, to do anything less than parts of the King James would be, to me, totally insane. The King James is - as literature- one of the central texts that really established what we know as the English language < I will now cut out lots of historical bullshit> in the same sense that Shakespeare, and Marlowe, Donne, Jonson and other Elizabethan writers formed that language. So for a class in English Literature that deals with that time period, it is sort of central. But, again, that has zip to do with content.

As "cultural material," I personally believe it should also be taught. I could very easily be dismissive of it, and from a purely theological perspective, I am ( If Fred Phelps wants to be consistent, he needs to start picketing Red Lobster. Some is magnificent - some of the Psalms and The Sermon on the Mount, although no more so than other religious and non-religious ethical systems - and some is slam f***ing nuts). But insofar as it has had a major impact on the development of the complex and beautifully diverse culture in which we live it is crucial. Think of King's glorious speech and not having a sense of where the City on the Hill comes from, or try reading Steinbeck and not recognizing the power of a dream of a Promised Land. We lose so much of Toni Morrison, William Faulkner, the Blues, Dante, Shakespeare, St. John the Divine Cathedral, Bach and Handel. It is not that we don't "know" things. It is that we really lose, to an extent, the power to feel things that should resonate deeply for us. Clearly it is not the "beliefs." I am a happily lapsed Catholic ( and my therapist really earned her fees).

And that is why I truly hate how the Christian ( and corporatist) Right continually turns something that part of all of our cultural inheritance to their own morally and politically arrogant ends. Whether it is the Flag, the Bible, FDR, the Civil Rights Movement, I'll be damned if I'm going to give up anything to those fascists.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

126. No school "taught" me Greek mythology.

I discovered mythology on my own at the library, same as Grimm's fairy tales, etc.

What you suggest is that bible stories are part of world literature. There are already literature electives for older students. Younger students' curriculum should focus on teaching them basic skills. There are no skills in the bible.

For the record, I attended both parochial schools (5 years) and public schools (7 years) and was a primary school student in 1962 when school prayer was banned. The kids in my family attended Sunday catechism whenever we were enrolled in public schools, so the ban had no impact on our religious education.

With one exception we all grew up to be nonbelievers.

[MADem]

Dupe, sorry, tricky mouse

but those cards ARE great!!!

[MADem]

140. Are those your cards?

They are hysterical--the feline nativity one is a hoot!!!!

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

151. I wish!

Don't know anything about them except I found the site surfing one day.

I'm particulary fond of the pterodactyls swooping above the ice-skating children. Too bad the artist only sells the originals...I would love a box of those for Xmas greetings.

[MADem]

152. I like the cats as Mary, Joseph, et. al, gathered around the Jesus Fish

in the XMAS card section....hysterical!!!

Edit to add the one I mean:

[troubleinwinter]

127. I took a fascinating class...

"Anthropology of Religion" in COLLEGE.

[Booster]

131. In my opinion, religion should not be taught to students until they

get to college, and then it would be an elective class along with all the other religions of the world. It should not be taught in public schools unless it opens the door to tax churches the way they should be taxed. I don't want my tax dollars to help people like Robertson and Falwell.

[lateo]

134. In a purely historical context....yes.

I studied the bible in a World Literature class in college. It was very interesting to learn that Genesis had 3 authors and one of them was a woman.

[AndreaCG]

146. Comparative religion courses

would do a lot of good, if ther eis an atheist/agnostic day it ht ereadings of Madelyn Murray O'Hair or some other prominent atheist included (yeah that'll happen.)

[malachibk]

161. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Religion has no place in any publicly funded institution. Period.

[Lethe]

163. sure, teach it....and start with Psalm 137:9

then keep going through the bible's stories of cruelty, murder and incest. i'm sure the kids will all come out atheists.

[MADem]

168. To graduate high school, you will have to take the American

Taliban NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ESSAY TEST (from an old joke we have all seen before):

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. The passage clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

[Kailassa]

169. But you know none of this is in the Real Christian bible.

Now pass me a bible and a pink high-lighter, and in five minutes I can mark out for you the nice bits that nice Christians base their nice religion on. And then we can join in with pretending the rest isn't there.

[jonnyblitz]

176. that is what you have to do to be a liberal christian..ignore a

good chunk of all the despicable stuff which the bible is rife with..

[in_cog_ni_to]

173. NO. I thought that was what churches were for?

And Sunday school class? and Bible study groups? And revival meetings? And the 30 religious TV channels on TV? Damn. I feel a Theological society coming on. Ayatollah Bush? GEEZUS.

They start teaching the Bible in public schools, my son is outta there. Keep religion where it belongs...IN THE CHURCH. Please. Thank you.

[Cleita]

174. To be honest, Christianity , including stories from the

Bible, have been taught in public schools in the past. Since Christmas and Easter fall during the school year, it has been really hard to acknowledge these holidays in the classroom without a little background in the history of them. Although, the teachers really tried to limit the celebration of the seasons to the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, the story of Jesus just had to come into it to make sense.

I think a study of the Bible would be appropriate in a sense as literature, like we learn Homer and by default the mythology of the Greeks. I personally love reading a lot of the books of the Bible because it does tell us a lot about those people and how they thought. I think it would be nice also to include other mythologies like of the Native Americans and Hindus to round it out.

[mykpart]

177. We teach Greek, Roman and Norse mythology in

literature classes. We could also teach Christian mythology, as long as it is labeled as such.

[leesa]

178. Why? If someone wants to learn about it they can go to a bible study.

Where do you draw the line? The Torah? The Book of the Dead? The Koran?

If you want to learn, take a comparative religion course or a literature course featuring one of these books.

[Darranar]

179. In a comparative religion class, definitely. n/t

[LWolf]

180. The Bible should not be "taught," but

comparative religion classes should be standard. When studying the world's religions, past and present, no one religion should be given more weight, more focus, more time, or more legitimacy than another.

[rucky]

181. Yes you should expose students to the most influential book...

in the history of Western Civilization.

The book that defines the major religion in western civilization.

Wars were fought over this book. Kings and Popes justified tyranny and benevolance from this book.

Ignoring its impact by not teaching it is kinda like not teaching evolution - total revision of the facts. In this case, historical facts.

[Rabrrrrrr]

188. Exactly and precisely.

I still don't understand people's negative response to this. Well, no, partly I do - it's a visceral response to the abuses of the Church and the intolerant Christian talibans of the last 2000 years... but still, to pretend that it doesn't matter is pure wishful thinking, and an intentional choosing of ingorance over understanding.

[Rodger Dodger]

190. I'm apposed to teaching any religion in school

Religion is a myth that can neither be proved or disproved.

My problem with religion is that God (who ever he is) gets all the credit an none of the blame.

God is credited with creating all thing. That is especially troubling, to me. If the Bible is to be taken literally, then it's a fact that we are descendants of incestuial ancestors.

The recent tsunami kill thousands of people. Those who lived give thank God. No one criticized God, for allow the disaster to occur, and thousand to die. Would that be considered post-birth-abortion?

There are people claim they experienced near death: they saw that "bright light" and lived. But no one in a similar situation reported see hell's fire and lived.

Everyone want to go to heaven but no one is willing to die to get there. WHY?

Amen.

[Dem Agog]

192. I went to a Christian school...

And I must say that even taken as pure "literature" I don't find the Bible to be that compelling a piece of work. I vote no on teaching the Bible in public schools. Too many better works out there to waste the time.

[PowerToThePeople]

193. No way it should be taught. n/t

[oregonindy]

194. the bible is so full of inconsistencies and fantasies....mythology

so many specific things in the bible can be used to support my point but lets just use my favorite. It is dealing with the most important thing in the new testament and they cant even get that right.



I'll make it very simple. Tell me what happened on the 3rd day after jesus died.




which one happened?

A. did only mary go? John 20:1

B. did both mary's go Matt 28:1

C. was it both mary's and salome? Mark 16:1

D. was it the women and others? Luke 24:1


when whomever got there what did they see?

A. Both Mary's saw an earthquake and an angel who rolled the stone away Matt 28:2

B. Mary by herself saw the stone rolled away, saw no one and nobody told her what happened to the body and ran for peter and others John 20:2

C. The stone was rolled away when they got there and there was a single young man in white inside who told them what happened and they ran away and said nothing to anyone until jesus appeared to her at some undisclosed time Mark 16:2

D. They and some others went and found the stone rolled away and there were 2 men in dazzling clothing who told them what happened. They then went and told the eleven and everyone else. Luke 24:2


just like the sesame street song "One of these things is not like the others," except its all of these are not like the others.



definition of inconsistency:--- the relation between propositions that cannot both be true at the same time

thus there are inconsistencies in the bible and it should not be taught in school as anything but another mythology

[Kal Belgarion]

195. I read the Bible in English class

For my (public) High School AP English class, we read certain stories from the Bible so that we'd better understand allusions to the book in the classic literature we were reading. For example, "The Grapes of Wrath" is a much better book once you know where Noah and Rose got their names, Moses' early history, and how the Preacher's life mirrors that of Christ.

It wasn't read for religious reasons--just as an influence on so many pieces of Western literature. I think that's perfectly alright.