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.
"By the end of the year, what they begin to realize is that it is pervasive. You can't get away from it. The kids came back and were like 'It's everywhere,'" said John Keeling, the social studies chair at Whitehouse High School. Whitehouse already offers a Bible elective.
That makes it sound a bit more invasive than the typical elective.
If we take all religious history out of shools we might as well stop teaching history altogether. Alexander's quest to spread democracy and monotheism, the Crusades, the Inquisition... Like it or not religion is huge part of our history. To ignore it is to ignore history.
Read the bill. It's an elective.
Clearly, you haven't bothered to read the other posts on the thread. So I won't bother to tell you why you are completely wrong here--since I would just be repeating myself.
I have already responded to your insistence on teaching the Bible in public schools on a number of levels, as have other people. The Bible is a RELIGIOUS "book." To REQUIRE that all Texas high schools offer study of the Bible as an elective is to break Constitutional law. Period. It doesn't matter how important you--or anybody else--thinks the Bible is. As a foundational religious text, it cannot be required in public schools--as an elective or otherwise.
I doesn't have to be taught as a religious book? Your implying that I want it taught as a religious book, just teach as any other book the bible doesn't have to be religious. If you haven't read the bible then there is no way someone can grasp how much the bible has influenced the arts and literature. And I don't "think" the Bible is the most important book, it is for a fact the most important book of all time.
And your crusade against religious texts being taught in school has already been lost.
Can't teach the Bible without teaching its religious precepts. And as someone who grew up in Texas, I know WITHOUT A DOUBT, that: 1) most Texas high school teachers are both Christian and idiots, and 2) this is an insidious attempt by the religious right to get Christianity in the schools.
So you know most of the HS teacher in Texas damn you must have been in HS for a lot of years.
The course should be taught from the beginning the Old Testament (Judaism), the New Testament (Christianity) and Muslim's (Koran) since all three of these religions are intertwined and relate to one another through out History. The Bible is NOT just a Christian book, it is a Jewish book and has roots in the Koran. So the class should cover all three of these religions if you want to really teach the History of the Bible.
I doesn't have to be taught as a religious book? Your implying that I want it taught as a religious book, just teach as any other book the bible doesn't have to be religious. If you haven't read the bible then there is no way someone can grasp how much the bible has influenced the arts and literature. And I don't "think" the Bible is the most important book, it is for a fact the most important book of all time.
And your crusade against religious texts being taught in school has already been lost.
How can you teach a religious book without teaching the religion? That's like saying you can teach a book without teaching its contents. Biblical references in literary texts can be discussed as they arise. Teaching the Bible itself--to the exclusion of other religious texts-- is unconstitutional.
This law will be struck from the books. And you can count it.
So you know most of the HS teacher in Texas damn you must have been in HS for a lot of years.
The course should be taught from the beginning the Old Testament (Judaism), the New Testament (Christianity) and Muslim's (Koran) since all three of these religions are intertwined and relate to one another through out History. The Bible is NOT just a Christian book, it is a Jewish book and has roots in the Koran. So the class should cover all three of these religions if you want to really teach the History of the Bible.
Then teach a "World Religions" course, which would be a true history course, not a course on the Christian Bible to the exclusion of other religious texts.
If I had a student in the public high schools in Texas, I would be preparing for a class action lawsuit against the state of Texas. You betcha'.
How can you teach a religious book without teaching the religion? That's like saying you can teach a book without teaching its contents. Biblical references in literary texts can be discussed as they arise. Teaching the Bible itself--to the exclusion of other religious texts-- is unconstitutional.
This law will be struck from the books. And you can count it.
Don't teach it as fact or a Doctrine label it fiction for all I care. Bam there goes the religion aspect, and it would be utterly impossible to discuss every biblical reference in every book, and to discuss a biblical reference you first must recognize the reference. Pretty hard to do when you don't know where it came from.
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.
