based on religion.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/03/08/bible.classes.ap/index.html

Quote :

"ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- Georgia is poised to introduce two literature classes on the Bible in public schools next year, a move some critics say would make the state the first to take an explicit stance endorsing -- and funding -- biblical teachings. The Bible already is incorporated into some classes in Georgia and other states, but some critics say the board's move, which makes the Bible the classes' main text, treads into dangerous turf. On a list of classes approved Thursday by the Georgia Board of Education are Literature and History of the Old Testament Era, and Literature and History of the New Testament Era. The classes, approved last year by the Legislature, will not be required, and the state's 180 school systems can decide for themselves whether to offer them. The school board's unanimous vote set up a 30-day public comment period, after which it is expected to give final approval. Senate Majority Leader Tommie Williams, the Republican who sponsored the plan, said the Bible plays a major role in history and is important in understanding many classic literary works. "It's not just 'The Good Book,"' Williams said. "It's a good book." Charles Haynes of the First Amendment Center, a nonpartisan civil liberties group, has said the Georgia policy is the nation's first to endorse and fund Bible classes on a statewide level. The bill approved overwhelmingly in the Legislature was tailored to make it clear the courses would not stray into religious teaching, Williams said. The measure calls for the courses to be taught "in an objective and nondevotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students." But critics say that while the language may pass constitutional muster, that could change in the classroom if instructors stray. Maggie Garrett, legislative counsel for the Georgia branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the curriculum approved Tuesday -- like the Legislation itself -- is vague. "They didn't put in any outlines describing what they can and can't do constitutionally," she said. "The same traps are there for teachers who decide to teach the class." Some teachers might seek to include their own beliefs or be pushed by students into conversations that include religious proselytizing, Garrett said. During last year's campaign-period legislative session, Democrats surprised majority Republicans by introducing a plan to teach the Bible in public schools. Republicans, who control both chambers, quickly responded with their own version, which passed and was signed into law by Gov. Sonny Perdue."

I'm an atheist and adamently support separation of church and state, but i'm not sure i'm completely against this. I like the idea of teaching it as a historical book considering its impact on history. I still have trouble accepting it though because the reason its even being brought up is not to teach it as a historical book, but to have religion in schools

3/9/2007 12:59:01 PM

there was a bible study class in my high school (public)

3/9/2007 1:00:43 PM

I wonder if they'll discuss intersections with the Torah and the Koran with the Bible.

It depends on the curriculum. A class like this isn't a bad idea, and it seems they DO have other motivations in funding the class (why not have a class on Islam or the Catholic bible or religious texts in general?), but I don't know if that alone is reason to be against it.

3/9/2007 1:07:27 PM

im a militantly-agnostic god-damned liberal who supports the ACLU in opposing prayer-in-school.

I also think that a well executed Biblical Literature class with an objective, academic textbook (in addition to the primary Biblical texts) is a worthwhile and appropriate subject for a public high school elective.

of course you have to have an alternate non-christian class. maybe demand wouldnt support a separate Islamic or Buddhist studies, but at least a Survey of World's Religions.

of course, appropriate academic oversight must be maintained, so that it doesnt devolve into a cliquey biblethumping prayer group.

3/9/2007 1:15:13 PM

there was a bible study class in my high school (public)

Quote :

"of course you have to have an alternate non-christian class. maybe demand wouldnt support a separate Islamic or Buddhist studies, but at least a Survey of World's Religions."

I don't agree with this. I mean, if a school system can fund the extra teacher, fine, but I don't think this needs to be a prerequisite to offering the Bible class.

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 1:17 PM. Reason : a]

3/9/2007 1:15:25 PM

could be ok, depending on how it was set-up.

3/9/2007 1:17:08 PM

^^ it doesnt have to be an extra teacher. anyone who is capable of teaching both Old and New Testament Literature, is fully capable of teaching a Survey of Worlds Religion course.

of course if the demand just isnt there, then the demand isnt there. but i think it would be espeically if they alternated semesters.

3/9/2007 1:21:13 PM

I'd much rather see this than prayer in schools


prayer in school seems to me like christian fundamentalists trying to push religion on your kids since they can't force you to take your kids to church or sunday school


I am for allowing prayer if one so chooses to do it however

3/9/2007 1:21:47 PM

studying the bible isn't practicing the religion.....as long as its just studying, go for it, but other religion studies should be made available too.

3/9/2007 2:10:38 PM

Quote :

"The measure calls for the courses to be taught "in an objective and nondevotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students." But critics say that while the language may pass constitutional muster, that could change in the classroom if instructors stray."

Therein lies the only problem I'd have with it. I'd be all for offering the class if the schools that choose to offer it do so the way this plan sets it up. But knowing some of the counties in Ga. ... that might not happen.

3/9/2007 2:23:33 PM

should require a non-christian to teach it.

3/9/2007 2:31:32 PM

I'm all for academic diversity, but since many of our country's students are failing to meet minimum proficiency standards in the core subjects (English, Science, Math) why should we divert funds to go towards what is essentially a politically motivated elective course?

3/9/2007 2:42:21 PM

^AGREE COMPLETELY!

3/9/2007 2:44:12 PM

^^because religion ruins everything.

3/9/2007 2:46:13 PM

What is the fear of "preaching" in the class room?

As long as the course is set up such that it has defined goals about what is to be learned, then that isn't going to leave a lot of room for preaching.

So what if a teacher sneaks in some indoctrination, kids these days are bombarded with all sorts of stimuli and they have to sort it out for themselves who they are going to be.

The weak ones (aka salisburyboy) are going to be impressed and swayed either by some teacher preaching in a classroom or by some website they are viewing in the dark of night while the parents aren't watching.

3/9/2007 2:49:39 PM

i dont have a problem with this

that book has influenced more history than any other

should teach the koran as well

3/9/2007 2:58:31 PM

^^that's what churches are for.....I don't want to pay for preaching in schools.

3/9/2007 3:02:36 PM

Are you an idiot?

3/9/2007 3:03:32 PM

Well there are several things that could be cited in this

1) We begin to go crazy on electives while not meeting proficiency standards for the core.
2) By offering a course such as this, it implies government approval of the validity to the subject.
3) This should either be a college level course or at least a course on religious texts in general.
4) High school kids are not smart enough to look at the content of this course objectively. It will be filled with evangelical Christians who want a better understanding of the bible to fulfill their religious obligations.
5) If a person who wasn't Christian took the class and challenged parts of the curriculum, they could face being ostracized/discriminated by members of the school or community.
6) A teacher who teaches such a class correctly and offers conflicting or possibly contradicting viewpoints from other religious texts will have to deal with angry parents who hear Johnny come home and tell them that the teacher "made fun of Jesus" or is "trying to convert them to Islam".

I really see this as being a negative for any school district that enacts it.

3/9/2007 3:04:13 PM

we had this at my high school. a few non-religious people that i know of took it.
it didn't seem to be a big deal.
and i didn't go to a backwoods school or anything either.

3/9/2007 3:08:38 PM

perhaps you haven't been to Georgia

3/9/2007 3:10:13 PM

not very much, no.

3/9/2007 3:11:35 PM

Quote :

"4) High school kids are not smart enough to look at the content of this course objectively. It will be filled with evangelical Christians who want a better understanding of the bible to fulfill their religious obligations."

This is a joke, right?

Quote :

"If a person who wasn't Christian took the class and challenged parts of the curriculum, they could face being ostracized/discriminated by members of the school or community."

So? Add this to the list of everything else kids are ostracized for in high school. Are you afraid one of them is going to get pissed and shoot up a school...?

Quote :

"A teacher who teaches such a class correctly and offers conflicting or possibly contradicting viewpoints from other religious texts will have to deal with angry parents who hear Johnny come home and tell them that the teacher "made fun of Jesus" or is "trying to convert them to Islam"."

You already said in point 4 they aren't smart enough to look at the content objectively. Now they suddenly are?

3/9/2007 3:12:33 PM

I'm beginning to think more and more that Y2k transported us back to 1900.

3/9/2007 3:16:15 PM

Quote :

"Are you an idiot"

what, no analysis like ^^?

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 3:17 PM. Reason : ^]

3/9/2007 3:17:28 PM

Quote :

"2) By offering a course such as this, it implies government approval of the validity to the subject."

ummm, only, it doesn't imply gov't approval of the Bible's veracity. It implies gov't approval if the Bible's impact on history. totally separate ideas

3/9/2007 3:50:24 PM

if the objective, academic study of Biblical literature ever challenged ANYONE... it challenges the FUNDAMENTALISTS.

tell me that you could ever study Wellhausen's Documentary Hypothesis and come away believing that the Book of Genesis was literally true. Or the Deuteronomic Histories and believe that YHWH is a just and benevolent deity. or that you could examine the Synoptic Problem of the Gospels and continue to believe that the New Testament is internally consistent.

studying the religious literature in an objective context exercises some serious critical thinking skills. If anything, it would complement and supplement the core subjects.

3/9/2007 3:58:04 PM

Do you honestly think they could even begin to approach that kind of critical thinking is a public high school?

3/9/2007 4:12:32 PM

^Why wouldnt they? Cause they're all ignorant rednecks?

3/9/2007 4:16:44 PM

^^of course they could, why would you think otherwise?

3/9/2007 4:19:48 PM

^^^

they can with the right teacher.

with the wrong teacher it can turn into a circle jerking fundie prayer fest.

so there needs to be some rigorous oversight.

thats the only problem i have with it.



[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 4:20 PM. Reason : ]

3/9/2007 4:20:09 PM

^^I think he thinks most Southerners are all idiotic evangelicals

It will be interesting to compare peoples' thoughts about these classes to the Arabic public school thread since the topics are similar ("controversial" school/classes in public school system)

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 4:24 PM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 4:21:05 PM

similar, but a class =/ a whole school.

3/9/2007 4:36:22 PM

oh no doubt

but they're both:

- public schools
- "controversial" school/classes

3/9/2007 4:49:24 PM

Quote :

"^Why wouldnt they? Cause they're all ignorant rednecks?"

Want to stop putting words in my mouth? I read plenty of student essays here at the college level, and I don't think they would be able to teach that at level in high school. First, they need background courses in philosophy or other classes to even be able to discuss the precepts their arguments are based on.

Secondly, the person making the argument graduated in '03 according to their profile ....that probably means they are probably in their mid 20's. Its an ideological fallacy to believe that someone who is 16 and in high school would have a background to discuss these advanced concepts to the degree that someone 10 years their senior and a college degree would expect. You can't examine Wellhausen's Documentary Hypothesis if you don't know what constitutes a valid hypothetical assumption, and with that you need a research methodology course. That goes for Synoptic problems and internal consistency as well.


[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 5:38 PM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 5:37:01 PM

^ im in my mid 30s

i started college late.

i had to do the military -> construction -> heavy drinking route first.


and REL311 and REL312 (intro to old and intro to new testament literature, respectively) have no pre-reqs that i can recall)

3/9/2007 5:42:00 PM

Those are 300 (Junior?) level college courses, no? And generally taken by in major students?

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 5:46 PM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 5:45:55 PM

i don't trust the teacher of this class to not turn it into sunday school. make it taught by an atheist.

3/9/2007 5:58:03 PM

Quote :

"TreeTwista10: Why wouldnt they? Cause they're all ignorant rednecks"

Quote :

"Scuba Steve: Want to stop putting words in my mouth?"

Yeah my bad...you didn't actually say they wouldnt be capable of that critical thinking because they are "ignorant rednecks"...why would I even think you felt that way?

Quote :

"You might as well just discount them as the mindless automatons they are, and hope they will be content driving their Mustang, drinking Budweiser and listening to the newest Toby Keith album"

And didn't you "move to Seattle to get away from people like that"?

3/9/2007 6:54:06 PM

^^^ yes, those classes are 300 level courses with no prerequisites of any kind, and no limit on who can take it. They are open to any major, and freshmen can take it if they can get the seat in time. (but they usually fill up before then)

to say that the course material cant be taught to high school students because they haven't had appropriate background courses, is like saying you cant teach physics in high school because they haven't had calculus yet. you teach the basic tools along with the material at a grade-appropriate level.


^ and I'm the one who moved to seattle to get away from you backwoods bornagain biblethumping retards. get it straight. but unfortunately, y'all are out here too. The Discovery Institute is a local Seattle organization



[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 7:10 PM. Reason : ]

3/9/2007 7:07:27 PM

Quote :

" Yeah my bad...you didn't actually say they wouldnt be capable of that critical thinking because they are "ignorant rednecks"...why would I even think you felt that way?"

I don't think people of any demographic could maturely address this topic in a public high school setting. I am with nutsmackr that it would just become Sunday school.

And I also don't live in Seattle.

3/9/2007 7:41:42 PM

my bad about the seattle thing, i think that must've been something that joe_shmoe actually said regarding "getting away from you people"

but anyway...i dont really feel like arguing about anything at the moment...go wolfpack

3/9/2007 7:45:13 PM

apparently Scuba and I are too damn similar for Twista to tell us apart.

3/9/2007 10:16:28 PM

Quote :

"I don't think people of any demographic could maturely address this topic in a public high school setting. I am with nutsmackr that it would just become Sunday school. "

i could teach the hell out of those classes at a high school level.

and i'd do the shit up right.

3/9/2007 10:18:06 PM

I was referring to the students, not the teacher (sorry if I made that unclear). I don't think that the students would ever have an objective theoretical basis to bring into such a class at the HS level. Discussing those things are somewhat advanced, it would be like discussing Hawking in a HS physics class.

3/10/2007 12:27:56 AM

^ naw i knew what you were talking about.

and no, i dont agree. certainly not every HS student would do well. it would be for the older, and probably more studious kids.

but any 16-17 year old can grasp the importance of the Documentary Hypothesis, or the Synoptic Problem. if they have a suitable instructor who can put it all in context. thats what teachers do, you know.

i dont know why you think HS students are so incapable. this fundamental material is very accessible to the layperson. Carrying the physics metaphor even further, JEDP and the Synoptics are not like some sort of advanced Quantum Theory. They are foundational, more like Newtonian mechanics.

they teach Newton in HS physics without the calculus.



[Edited on March 10, 2007 at 12:45 AM. Reason : ]

3/10/2007 12:43:55 AM

wtf they had a bible class at my public high school 7 years ago

3/10/2007 12:48:11 AM

Quote :

""If a person who wasn't Christian took the class and challenged parts of the curriculum, they could face being ostracized/discriminated by members of the school or community." So? Add this to the list of everything else kids are ostracized for in high school. Are you afraid one of them is going to get pissed and shoot up a school...?"

i agree

Quote :

""A teacher who teaches such a class correctly and offers conflicting or possibly contradicting viewpoints from other religious texts will have to deal with angry parents who hear Johnny come home and tell them that the teacher "made fun of Jesus" or is "trying to convert them to Islam"." You already said in point 4 they aren't smart enough to look at the content objectively. Now they suddenly are?[quote]High school kids are not smart enough to look at the content of this course objectively. It will be filled with evangelical Christians who want a better understanding of the bible to fulfill their religious obligations.""

Students won't have to be able to look at the content objectively to go home and say "this is what they told me in class today" and hear their parents say "that's outrageous bullshit because...."

3/10/2007 1:45:35 AM

yea man i dont know what the hell you just said there man i dont i tell you what.

3/10/2007 2:46:55 AM

Quote :

"Senate Majority Leader Tommie Williams, the Republican who sponsored the plan, said the Bible plays a major role in history and is important in understanding many classic literary works. "It's not just 'The Good Book,"' Williams said. "It's a good book.""

Cool. Up next: classes on Mein Kampf. Of course the teachers will also be expected to avoid "straying" into "indoctrination."

Maybe I am missing something here. The course is offered as a voluntary elective in every sense. And for whom? Well, logic tells me -- if I'm permitted to use it -- that the most devout students would be most interested. The ones who, you know, spend a lot of time outside of school studying the Bible?

So what did Georgia call this legislation? The "Preaching to the Choir Act of 2007?"

At any rate, this legislation is fundamentally unconstitutional. Clearly if Georgia offers classes on the Bible, they must also offer them on other major world religions. To do otherwise is itself wholly exclusionary and preferential. The Christian kids get their favorite class; the Jewish, Islamic, etc. kids are left out. Separate but Unequal is not usually a great principal of governance.

That's not to say they _should_ offer such classes. The school should just stay away from the subject altogether and leave it to higher education or churches.

Yes, Great Literature refers to the Bible. So what? It also often contains thematic violence and sexuality and murder. We don't expect the public schools to start classes on Psychology of Murder-Suicide Killers so we can better understand the Great Gatsby's ending.

There's just one word for this bill: stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Georgia's schools turn out pitifully under-served students; the legislature has too much free time on its hands.

3/11/2007 7:25:59 PM