TIME Mag Cover: Should the Bible be Taught in Public Schools?
 

quote:
The cover story of this week?s TIME magazine asks the question, ?Should the Holy Book be on the public-school menu?? Surprisingly, the answer given is, ?Yes.? As an avid TIME reader, I was quite taken aback to find a positive case for the teaching of Scripture in public schools.

According to David Van Biema, TIME?s senior religion writer, the teaching of the Bible in public schools is growing considerably. 60% of Americans are in favor of having the Bible taught as an object of study in public schools. Last year Georgia became the first state to offer money for Old and New Testament classes where the Bible is used as the primary text. The two largest producers of Bible curriculum for public schools report that there are 460 public school districts in 37 states that use their materials.

In this article I am going to summarize the positive case made by TIME, and then offer some critical reflection.


The Case for Teaching the Bible in Public Schools according to TIME

1. Teaching the Bible in public schools is constitutional. In the 1963 Supreme Court decision, Abington Township School District v. Schempp, the majority opinion concluded, ?Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Ammendment.?
2. Biblical literacy is shockingly low. Only one in two adults know the title of even one Gospel, and most can?t name the first book of the Bible, Genesis. George Gallup dubbed Americans, ?a nation of biblical illiterates.?
3. The Bible is the most influential book ever written. The Bible has done more to shape literature, history, entertainment, and culture than any book ever written. Its influence on world history is unparalleled, and shows no signs of abating. Even pop culture is deeply influenced by the Bible.





source: http://www.worldviewweekend.com/ ~Sean McDowell

Let the hate and fighting begin.

I feel like burning a bible.

in the article it states a loophole is to teach the bible as literature.

fuck the bible.

Interesting that Time has joined the ranks of magazines catering to the lower intelligence (or so they think) of the US readers compared to the rest of the world - everyone else in the world gets to see a cover story about

"The Truth About Talibanistan," about the resurgence of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan (and also, Pakistan), and how it's "the next battleground of the war on terrorism"

Same thing Newsweek is doing with their dumbing down stories for US readers

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eat-th...n_e_44218.html

Optional. I wouldn't want it being rammed into my kids head by someone with an agenda. But if the jesus freaks want it for their kids it could be a choice.

Ideally though separation of church & state without the hypocrisy from the far right.

if it was optional then i would approve of it but at the same time i think it should be something that doesn't focus just on the bible but covers all religions.

raise your kids not to be sheep. who cares if they study the bible in school? it is a fascinating piece of literature.

As long as it is 100% optional I don't care. But at the same time if they have the Bible as an option they also need to have the Qur'an, the Tao-te-ching, the Veda, and other holy books as options as well.

Perhaps as part of an optional history/philosophy/religion/literature course. It shouldn't be mandatory - I think there are more practical subjects that should be taught.

I've never taken a course on religion, but I'm almost certain they offer courses in all kinds of religions in university. They don't teach it as the word of God but as historical pieces of literature. Religions are no less important than politics and techonology in the history of humankind.

I think its a bad thing it goes down a path, that the framers didnt want this nation to go.

i don't think there should be a bible class per say.
but i'm open to there being a religious studies class that has equal representation from a bunch of religions and is an actual study and not a push in the direction of one particular religion.

What exactly do you mean?

if your only teaching the bible its like getting ready for a government religion. Bad move.

I think you guys are vastly outnumbered in America, 90% of American believe in God.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17879317/site/newsweek/

:1orglaugh

One very good reason why these nutcases should not be listened to.

That is why we have the bill of rights. To protect the minority.

You shouldnt listen to 90%+ of the country?

90% of the country said not to go after hitler

Haha I know alot of the country didnt want to go after Hitler, Pearl Harbor kinda changed that. I DOUBT it was 90% tho, I sure would like to see your source on that claim. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

No, the 50% who don't believe in evolution.

They are gallup polls taken pre-ww2 I will find some links with them. I saw them on both CNN and MSNBC

Hell no! If you want your kid to learn about religion send them to a religious school. Plenty of catholic schools around here and you don't have to pay or anything to send them to one.

agreed. vouchers are needed.

You are so jealous of their power. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Science: The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

Religion: A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

You would be surprised just how similar they are, why should they not both have equal attention in public schools?

No, I'm appalled by their idiocy. :1orglaugh

Those definitions don't sound alike at all. If you want view creationism as a science, well I just don't get that. Maybe touching on it as a theory but entire classes based around religion don't have a place in education at all in my opinion. Isn't that why people go to church/sunday school?

Who is more idiotic, the guy who is owned by idiot masters, or the masters who are the idiots?

Science is THEORY.

Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

You are simply TAUGHT to believe that it is "FACT" when in fact much of science is not entirely accurate and changes all the time.

Public school should teach the full spectrum of human knowledge, and that includes religion.

Yes, science is a theory but with religion there is nothing "widely tested". Just a questionable book. If religion was looked at objectively, I might have a different opinion.

So you have no problem with them teaching the koran in public school?

I'm not owned by anyone, least of all those mindless drones.

Certainly religion can "generically" explain lots of phenomenon, I am not saying logically that I believe it is accurate over science BUT like I said before the WHOLE SPECTRUM of HUMAN KNOWLEDGE should be taught to our children in public school. You seem to think religion is just "the bible and christianity" when there are thousands of religions that have helped and harmed our civilization over the years. To not pass this information down to our children is selective historical revisionism.

Not at all! I think ALL religions should be at least generally explored by all young people. That doesnt mean "FOLLOW" the religions it means study them, there are GOOD things that come from many religions such as teachings of tolerance and peace, you seem to focus only on the bad things from religion. Science has its bad side too buddy, nuclear technology used for warfare for one. Look I will intellectually destroy you on this subject so I dont want to get to deep, I hope you can comprehend what I have written.

That would be 90% of the people who were polled - of which 82% were Christians and another 8% of other religions
Doesnt say how that compares to the real breakdown of the total US citizenry - since Im pretty sure that the total population has more than 2% jews

You couldn't intellectually destroy anyone Splum, except maybe a kid with Down's Syndrome.

Frankly, theology is university level stuff and it is pointless teaching it at high school when they should be focussed on literacy and other basic skills. Waste of time.

Holy shit, I actually agree with something that Splum said.

Why shouldn't we teach religion in school (as a part of history and literature)? We teach the beliefs of ancient Egyptians, the Greek Gods, etc. So why would such teachings of Christianity, Islam, and others be exempt? As long as it is taught with no bias, I fail to see how teaching our children where we came from, why we act certain ways, and so on.

This goes beyond religious crap too. We need to stop being so politically correct in our teaching. Do you know some high schools are not allowed to teach "Catcher in the Rye" and other classics? Lets teach our kids about life and what goes on in it instead of coddling them to be failures in the world.

So lets ban evolution/science in K12. Make it fair.

I can agree with that but if you look at the article it talks about bible classes, new and old testament. Somehow despite the best intentions I can't see someones persona views and bias not seeping into their teachings. Can you picture teachers in the midwest talking about the koran? I never had religion classes in highschool but in grade 5 we had a religion class, it consisted of two guys who came from a local church basically making us memorize "facts" from the bible. We all got a little bible of our own to keep and prayed at the beginning and end of class. Two classes in and I got my mom to pull me out because it wasn't about learning, questioning things, expanding our minds. It was about getting that information into our minds while we were young and vunerable.

I don't think it's theology. It's no different than any of the old books you read in English class. We read Oedipus, Shakespeare, and ancient stories all the time in class. Why should the bible not be treated as a piece of literature?

But the biggest teaching of it is in history. From the Crusades, to the evolution of Europe, religion has played a huge role. The same goes for the Middle East. How can you teach any history without teaching them of their beliefs?

The reality is that it isn't science vs religion. Only fundamentalist wackos make it out to be that way, and nobody takes them seriously. Evolution is basic science that is the foundation of a number of scientific disciplines. It is essential stuff. Theology is not.

"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. - Theodosius Dobzhansky"

I have no problem with religion being mentioned in context, such as in history class but Splum is suggesting it be covered in detail in some sort of comparative religions class. Kids can barely read and write these days. Personally, I think teaching theology on its own is a waste of time. Let them do it in detail at university if they are so inclined.

Or we can just teach our students better and not let schools dumb down tests so kids can pass. I agree that kids have other things to worry about, but they shouldn't. It's embarrassing that kids in high school are still learning the basics of reading and writing. That we aren't capable of teaching them the classics because of their lack of intellect. We either need better teachers, more schools, or more involved parents. My dad read me Poe when I was in Middle School.

I don't believe in a comparative religions course in high school since there are simply too many religions to compare. But I do support it in the context of teaching history. My brother was in high school and was talking about the crusades (when Kingdom of Heaven came out). They learned about the crusades, but none of the religious implications behind it (the school wasn't allowed to). It just amazed me that we can't teach our children basic history without getting into a religious debate.

But I agree, religion and science aren't the same thing. They have no business being taught in the same class. The reason it is an issue is because most science contradicts religion. It's hard to read the bible and then find a fossil that is hundreds of thousands of years older than the bible says the world is.

Science itself is a religion.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

all the major religions should be taught, as well as all the classics etc.

Agree with pretty much all of what you say. I agree it should be covered in history class but Splum is framing the debate (like all religious wackos do) as religion vs science. His agenda is transparent. Science class is for science, as it should be.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Funny stuff.