• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hobby Lobby’s Steve Green launches public school Bible course

danarhea

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
MUSTANG, Okla. (RNS)—The Mustang, Okla., school board voted to adopt a Bible course developed by Steve Green, clearing the way for the Hobby Lobby president, whose suit against the Affordable Care Act currently is before the U.S. Supreme Court, to enter another charged arena at the borderline of church and state.
Click to expand...

This, of course, is a religion class that Green hopes to distribute to more than 1,000 public schools across the country. In comments, Green has said that he wants to make this course mandatory, which would, of course, grossly violate the separation of church and state. However, at this time, it is an elective course, so I do not have a problem with it. If you don't like it, then fine. You do not have to make your kids take the class.

My only issue here is the courses eventually becoming a mandatory part of school curriculum, in which case, it would be shot down quickly in the courts. As long as it stays elective, no harm is being done here. The separation of church and state is that the government cannot promote or establish a religion. As long as school districts do not establish or promote a religion, and only offer it as an elective, what's the big deal here? And, if there is enough interest in the communities for Judaism, Islam, or any other religion to be taught, those other religions should have the same rights, as long as it is elective. That way, the First Amendment is fully served.

Discussion?

Article is here.
 
As an elective, what's the harm?

I'm sure open-minded liberals would have no issue with this.

I'm absolutely sure this would be the most enrolled classroom elective on campus, which would drive liberals crazy.
 
I support the concept of anything that is an elective course, and the parents have to approve. If people truly believe that children should be exposed to everything, then there's no harm in this. But again with the caveat that it's the parents' choice.
 
A lot of the problem here is funding. If the government is funding a course that peddles a specific religion to children, that's a pretty obvious case of state sponsored religion.

Would the proponents of this be equally as fine if government funds were used to introduce islamic and hindu classes in our public elementary schools as well?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
A lot of the problem here is funding. If the government is funding a course that peddles a specific religion to children, that's a pretty obvious case of state sponsored religion.

Would the proponents of this be equally as fine if government funds were used to introduce islamic and hindu classes in our public elementary schools as well?
Click to expand...

I would, as long as they were elective courses. And actually, I'd possibly even sign my kids up for them so they could get exposed to Hindu. My oldest son is going to India this summer with a classmate whose parents were both born there but who have been here for many years.
 
danarhea said:
This, of course, is a religion class that Green hopes to distribute to more than 1,000 public schools across the country. In comments, Green has said that he wants to make this course mandatory, which would, of course, grossly violate the separation of church and state. However, at this time, it is an elective course, so I do not have a problem with it. If you don't like it, then fine. You do not have to make your kids take the class.

My only issue here is the courses eventually becoming a mandatory part of school curriculum, in which case, it would be shot down quickly in the courts. As long as it stays elective, no harm is being done here. The separation of church and state is that the government cannot promote or establish a religion. As long as school districts do not establish or promote a religion, and only offer it as an elective, what's the big deal here? And, if there is enough interest in the communities for Judaism, Islam, or any other religion to be taught, those other religions should have the same rights, as long as it is elective. That way, the First Amendment is fully served.

Discussion?

Article is here.
Click to expand...

If this were part of a Comparative Religions course offering, I'd be supportive. As it is? I'm betting it won't stand scrutiny.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
A lot of the problem here is funding. If the government is funding a course that peddles a specific religion to children, that's a pretty obvious case of state sponsored religion.

Would the proponents of this be equally as fine if government funds were used to introduce islamic and hindu classes in our public elementary schools as well?
Click to expand...

How is it state endorsed if it's an elective? I agree on a specific religion, but religion in general I see no harm in it. I'm an atheist by the way. I concur with the other poster that stated that a lot of this social science stuff should all be elective anyway. Liberals would lose their collective minds if that ever came to fruition, but it would solve the conservative conundrum of having liberals dominate academia. In fact if I'm a politician running for office, I'm actually running on this principle. Yes, teach math, reading and writing, and science and civics but everything else should be the choice of the student and parents. Schools are always saying parents aren't involved enough, well, put up or shut up is what I say.


Tim-
 
Hicup said:
How is it state endorsed if it's an elective? I agree on a specific religion, but religion in general I see no harm in it. I'm an atheist by the way. I concur with the other poster that stated that a lot of this social science stuff should all be elective anyway. Liberals would lose their collective minds if that ever came to fruition, but it would solve the conservative conundrum of having liberals dominate academia. In fact if I'm a politician running for office, I'm actually running on this principle. Yes, teach math, reading and writing, and science and civics but everything else should be the choice of the student and parents. Schools are always saying parents aren't involved enough, well, put up or shut up is what I say.


Tim-
Click to expand...

1) As I stated, it's about funding, which in this case the government is doing.

2) It is a class about the bible, so that's one religion.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
1) As I stated, it's about funding, which in this case the government is doing.
Click to expand...

So what? Isn't learning about religion; something 97% of the worlds population believe in, appropriate for funding?


2) It is a class about the bible, so that's one religion.
Click to expand...

Actually that would be two religions, but I agree with you in principle. Education on religion(s) is preferable over a single religion, and I see the constitution forbids this and I think quite reasonably so, but I see no harm in classes on religion in general. Just like I see no harm in classes on ethnic studies, or gay and gender studies or _______ fill in the blank social study, BUT I think they should all be elective. Do you concur?


Tim-
 
Erod said:
As an elective, what's the harm?

I'm sure open-minded liberals would have no issue with this.

I'm absolutely sure this would be the most enrolled classroom elective on campus, which would drive liberals crazy.
Click to expand...

You can't use state funds to peddle a religious belief, even if the course is elective.

If they want to teach about religions in school, note religions not just one particular religion, thats fine and good information for people to have in life. However teaching a specific belief as "truth" and not as just "general knowledge about the world" is wrong.
 
Hicup said:
So what? Isn't learning about religion; something 97% of the worlds population believe in, appropriate for funding?

Actually that would be two religions, but I agree with you in principle. Education on religion(s) is preferable over a single religion, and I see the constitution forbids this and I think quite reasonably so, but I see no harm in classes on religion in general. Just like I see no harm in classes on ethnic studies, or gay and gender studies or _______ fill in the blank social study, BUT I think they should all be elective. Do you concur?


Tim-
Click to expand...

The very first sentence of this article completely clarifies that this is a BIBLE class, so I have no idea why you keep acting like this is a world religion class.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
The very first sentence of this article completely clarifies that this is a BIBLE class, so I have no idea why you keep acting like this is a world religion class.
Click to expand...


I'm not, I already agreed that I would not support this from a constitutional point of view, however personally I have no issue with it, I see and respect why others might. I was only contemplating, or furthering the discussion. I see you have no interest in pursuing that line of thought?


Tim-
 
this comes after people freaked out over a college book that talked about gay people being inappropriate for adults in college.

Here is what is funny. Who's translation will be used for the Bible? Who's definition of words? So will it be taught in context, if so will the those who think it is the inerrant word of God? This is a stupid idea. Besides, even as an elective, if taught as fact it would push up against the Constitution. So another right wing attempt to turn this country into the Handmaid's Tale.
 
Wiseone said:
You can't use state funds to peddle a religious belief, even if the course is elective.

If they want to teach about religions in school, note religions not just one particular religion, thats fine and good information for people to have in life. However teaching a specific belief as "truth" and not as just "general knowledge about the world" is wrong.
Click to expand...

The sheer magnitude of things they "peddle" in schools these days is disgusting. I have no personal use for religion, but I'm all for children getting exposed to all kinds of religion and when they are adults, they can make up their own minds if they want to practice a religion or not. I think an elective wouldn't hurt anyone.

My 14 year old showed me his material for a class his school is forcing them to attend which deals with illegal drugs and other malfeasance. In the material, they say heroin, cocaine, pot, etc. are all bad. Okay, that's good so far. Then included in the cirriculum (which is about illegal activities) are pages and pages about smoking, drinking, and gambling, including playing poker. With, by the way, no caveat that these things are only illegal for children. My husband and I both drink socially, and my husband plays poker every other Friday with his friends, rotating shifts so including at our house every few months. And I enjoy a good cigarette with my cocktails once in a while. You know what my son said? He said when he mentioned to Mrs. X that his parents enaged in these activities, Mrs. X told him that we were wrong. Imagine my surprise. I called the school, the Board of Ed, and the NH Department of Education and reminded them all that it isn't ILLEGAL for 2 people in their early 50s to do any of those activities, and it's out of line for a teacher to tell a student his parents are doing something "wrong" when we are not.

In the grand scheme of things in school, having an optional elective to let my kids be exposed to religion is benign.
 
tres borrachos said:
The sheer magnitude of things they "peddle" in schools these days is disgusting. I have no personal use for religion, but I'm all for children getting exposed to all kinds of religion and when they are adults, they can make up their own minds if they want to practice a religion or not. I think an elective wouldn't hurt anyone.

My 14 year old showed me his material for a class his school is forcing them to attend which deals with illegal drugs and other malfeasance. In the material, they say heroin, cocaine, pot, etc. are all bad. Okay, that's good so far. Then included in the cirriculum (which is about illegal activities) are pages and pages about smoking, drinking, and gambling, including playing poker. With, by the way, no caveat that these things are only illegal for children. My husband and I both drink socially, and my husband plays poker every other Friday with his friends, rotating shifts so including at our house every few months. And I enjoy a good cigarette with my cocktails once in a while. You know what my son said? He said when he mentioned to Mrs. X that his parents enaged in these activities, Mrs. X told him that we were wrong. Imagine my surprise. I called the school, the Board of Ed, and the NH Department of Education and reminded them all that it isn't ILLEGAL for 2 people in their early 50s to do any of those activities, and it's out of line for a teacher to tell a student his parents are doing something "wrong" when we are not.

In the grand scheme of things in school, having an optional elective to let my kids be exposed to religion is benign.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with the topic.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
The very first sentence of this article completely clarifies that this is a BIBLE class, so I have no idea why you keep acting like this is a world religion class.
Click to expand...

The Bible is also considered literature. It's a book. Is it now wrong to study a book in school?

They read everything from Beowulf to Mein Kampf to Heather Has Two Mommies in school. Why not another book (even though I personally consider it a work of fiction)?
 
Erod said:
As an elective, what's the harm?

I'm sure open-minded liberals would have no issue with this.

I'm absolutely sure this would be the most enrolled classroom elective on campus, which would drive liberals crazy.
Click to expand...

Maybe an elective class on the US Constitution is more apropos.

I got may first copy out of a 50 cent used civics textbook at a used book store. Do they have any used book stores where you live?
 
danarhea said:
This, of course, is a religion class that Green hopes to distribute to more than 1,000 public schools across the country. In comments, Green has said that he wants to make this course mandatory, which would, of course, grossly violate the separation of church and state. However, at this time, it is an elective course, so I do not have a problem with it. If you don't like it, then fine. You do not have to make your kids take the class.

My only issue here is the courses eventually becoming a mandatory part of school curriculum, in which case, it would be shot down quickly in the courts. As long as it stays elective, no harm is being done here. The separation of church and state is that the government cannot promote or establish a religion. As long as school districts do not establish or promote a religion, and only offer it as an elective, what's the big deal here? And, if there is enough interest in the communities for Judaism, Islam, or any other religion to be taught, those other religions should have the same rights, as long as it is elective. That way, the First Amendment is fully served.

Discussion?

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Don't see much to discuss as an elective. Prefer something like comparative religions, or some rotation with other courses, giving plenty of options. It's the seeming preference of one alone that likely bothers some.
 
Wiseone said:
You can't use state funds to peddle a religious belief, even if the course is elective.

If they want to teach about religions in school, note religions not just one particular religion, thats fine and good information for people to have in life. However teaching a specific belief as "truth" and not as just "general knowledge about the world" is wrong.
Click to expand...

So what about Philosophy?
 
Erod said:
So what about Philosophy?
Click to expand...

If you know one thing about philosophy is that none of it is considered unassailable truth the way faith and religious is, but I have no problem with it so long as its not taught that way.
 
The class would be struck down faster than it would be to set it up. State funding to a public school class teaching about The Bible would fly in the face of the Establishment Clause.
 
I have no problem with it, but I doubt the Courts can let it fly if someone brings a challenge.

"Green explained his goals for a high school curriculum were to show the Bible is true, that it’s good and that its impact, “whether (upon) our government, education, science, art, literature, family … when we apply it to our lives in all aspects of our life, that it has been good.”"

That bolded part is where he's really going to run into issues. A public school can't espouse one religion as being true. Its going to be really hard to teach an accurate history of the Bible in a secular manner and also achieve Green's goals here. A class about the history and impact of the Bible taught in an unbiased way? Sounds interesting. Sign me up. I really doubt that what's going to happen though. I just can't imagine a person who is very devout can create a curriculum that gives a secular examination of the history and impact of the Bible without injecting a personal bias in there. Never mind the atheists or non-Christians who may object to this, what about the Protestants, the Baptists, and other denominations who might interpret the historical meaning of parts of the Bible in a very different manner. How do you teach the historical accuracy of the creation story or the resurrection?

Also, what does the test look like?

Question #1: The Bible is true. (True or False) _______

I kid :)
 
Erod said:
As an elective, what's the harm?

I'm sure open-minded liberals would have no issue with this.

I'm absolutely sure this would be the most enrolled classroom elective on campus, which would drive liberals crazy.
Click to expand...

I want public funds to teach Islam. It's ok, it's an elective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom