Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's essentially a history class. Sounds like an easy half a credit. I was raised in Houston and took Spanish as a foreign language.
I'm an atheist but would have no problem with my kid taking this elective. In fact, I would encourage it. For better or worse religion has made a huge impact on all aspects of western culture.
As usual the press put a spin on it and people freaked.
Nope. No religion in the schools. Yes, the Bible has been constantly referenced by major literary works, primarily from Milton on. After all, how can one talk about "Paradise Lost" without referencing the Bible? And in the discussion of those literary texts, the influence of the Bible should certainly be discussed. But a class on the Bible itself is a class of religious instruction--NOT acceptable in the public schools.
But what if its not taught from a religious stand point, just another book? Like I said they should be able to choose to read the bible.
Ok I went back and re-read the article, you are correct. My apologies. I do still think that a believer could teach it though.
From my experience - I taught in a public high school for 25 years - the teachers who would be capable of maintaining the necessary objectivity would not be believers to start with. The "believer" teachers in my school would never have been able to objectively teach a course involving the Bible - their religious beliefs would have made it impossible for them to separate facts from their religious fiction.
But what if its not taught from a religious stand point, just another book? Like I said they should be able to choose to read the bible.
I think Movingforward had the best solution in a previous post:
"The only religious course that should be offered in public schools is a course on "World Religions." THAT would be a general history course. To pass a law that requires only the study of a Christian text be offered as an elective is a clear effort to get Christianity into the public school curriculum."
It's essentially a history class. Sounds like an easy half a credit. I was raised in Houston and took Spanish as a foreign language.
I'm an atheist but would have no problem with my kid taking this elective. In fact, I would encourage it. For better or worse religion has made a huge impact on all aspects of western culture.
As usual the press put a spin on it and people freaked.
No, it is NOT a "history class." It is a class that teaches a particular religion. The study of individual religious texts should take place either at a place of worship, in the home, or in college. But selecting one major religious text, and REQUIRING that that text--to the exclusion of all other major religious texts-- be taught (if there are enough interested students--and since this is Texas, is there any question that there would be?) is simply an attempt to get religion in the school.
Texas has large urban areas directly on the border - some of the highest poverty areas of the nation; AZ does not. Look at a map.
A question for you - Why is California only two spots (and 1.3%) ahead of Texas? I thought blue states were supposed to have all the problems solved.
I do believe that both of Arizona's major cities Tucson and Phoenix are only a reasonable drive from the boarder and the decent sized Mexican city of Nogales Sonora is on the Arizona boarder.
I think Movingforward had the best solution in a previous post:
The only religious course that should be offered in public schools is a course on "World Religions." THAT would be a general history course. To pass a law that requires only the study of a Christian text be offered as an elective is a clear effort to get Christianity into the public school curriculum.
Yes thats a good idea, if I was talking about religion. Thats not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the Bible, a book.
But what if its not taught from a religious stand point, just another book? Like I said they should be able to choose to read the bible.
Nobody's stopping anybody from reading the Bible. But it CANNOT be taught in the public schools. Period. What part of "separation of church and state" do you not understand?
No, it is NOT a "history class." It is a class that teaches a particular religion. The study of individual religious texts should take place either at a place of worship, in the home, or in college. But selecting one major religious text, and REQUIRING that that text--to the exclusion of all other major religious texts-- be taught (if there are enough interested students--and since this is Texas, is there any question that there would be?) is simply an attempt to get religion in the school.
Well if you have kids then make sure they don't sign up for this 4 month elective class in high school. That is your right as a parent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
