The one with "Why We Should Teach The Bible In Public School" on its cover?
I just got it in the mail today, and am reading the feature article, and want to know what others think.
2007-03-24 07:57:40 · 12 answers · asked by somebody 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
For those who haven't yet read the article, the intent is not to teach the Bible as God's word, nor to teach its morals. Rather, the intent is to provide students with an understanding of what is in the Bible and why it's had the influence it's had. Which I think is a valid idea. My main concerns, which the Time article mentions too, are that other religious texts, ie the Koran etc, need to be taught for a comparative framework, that the Bible needs to be placed into history, ie how it's affected history both positively and negatively, and that, since the initiative for these courses was begun by conservative Christians, that very tight control needs to be placed on what actually happens in the classroom (as well as on what textbooks besides the Bible are used).
2007-03-24 08:23:32 · update #1
I haven't read the article, so I can't really comment in reference to it.
But as I have said before, providing students the opportunity to learn about all religions would be beneficial. And some classes are able to squeeze some study in. But, we have so much to cover in the little time students spend in the classroom, that it would be difficult to give all religions the proper amount of time that is necessary.
2007-03-24 08:12:13 · answer #1 · answered by KS 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well a state university is technically a public school and most have comparative religions classes and teach topics that touch religion in humanities. As a course of study to see the inner workings of the belief structure I think for anyone 17 or above it is fine even in a public school. Below that, any education in religion should be kept at home and in their respective place of worship. Oh, and if they are going to teach the bible, they must also teach from all of the other religious texts available - it's an all or none deal.
2007-03-24 15:04:52 · answer #2 · answered by genaddt 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Sure why not!. Teach all the religions. People need to understand them and their history. The only problem that I can see with this scenario is that someone will have an agenda about puffing up one of the religions or perhaps about destroying any or all of them.
Once justice is established in the world people will be more inclined to tell the truth what ever it may be. For now though every little napoleon has an axe to grind and necks to cut. On the clouds of confusion the truth is to be found. Go look for it. Do your own work. You won't be disappointed if you will only ultimately settle for the truth no matter what it may turn out to be.
regarding majority rule: Bad concept to put in place when people aren't spiritual and are concerned only with their own aims and aspirations. Minorities need to be protected. They must have the same rights everyone else has. Majority rule doesn't provide for that. Its dandy for you, I suppose, if you happen to be in the majority.
2007-03-24 15:09:55 · answer #3 · answered by regmor12 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I haven't read the article, but I can see the liberals and ACLU now. "IF the bible is taught, why not the Quran?" If the bible is taught, why not Hindu, etc etc? Why not the bood of Mormon?
So, unless there is a constitution that says 'majority rules' I don't think it should be used. Even though I'm a christian, I'm not ready for the fights of other beliefs! And to add, I do think that majority rules would be a great rule to govern by!
2007-03-24 15:08:53 · answer #4 · answered by nickname 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well thank you for that info. I will check it out. But religion is being taught in our public schools, that is, every religion except Christianity. After all, to teach about Israel is to teach about Jews. To teach about Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc is to teach about Islam. We teach about Tiban Monks, we teach about Hindus. All major religions are taught about except Christianity. But still our children get Christmas off of school.
And funny to, where I live, Milwaukee, WI, the city has just voted to change back to "Christmas tree", from after 5 years of "holiday tree." One Alderman stated and rightly so, "there is no such thing as a holiday tree anyway."
2007-03-24 15:11:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I have no problem with public schools teaching about religions as long as they offered a wide variety.
The problem would come in assuring that teachers teach ABOUT religions and not that any religion is truth.
2007-03-24 15:08:42 · answer #6 · answered by Sun: supporting gay rights 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I have read it. I agree that there should be objective courses discussing the bible in public schools.
2007-03-24 15:06:01 · answer #7 · answered by Ask Mr. Religion 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think there should be a religious education course, and understand the agruements against it,
but part of secular education should be "education",
better religious course then the science lab
2007-03-24 15:01:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm all for it....we live in a time when most kids never has seen the inside of a church, and has never heard Gods word...and we wonder why some kids walk into school and blow away their school mates, why many have no morality whatsoever and so on....The bible used to be the text book that we tought from....it could do nothing but good to have them in the schools.
2007-03-24 15:05:23 · answer #9 · answered by TNT 3 · 1⤊ 5⤋
When the Bible was taught in public schools in the past, we did not have children killing , the crime rate was not where it is today, and teachers did not have to live in fear of their students either. This world was a much better moral place to live. Not like it is now.
2007-03-24 15:03:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋