South Dakota House Mulls Encouraging Public Schools To Teach The Bible

[JoeChalupa]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/south-dakota-house-mulls-encouraging-public-schools-to-teach-the-bible/

The South Dakota House has voiced its support for a measure allowing the state’s public schools to teach the Bible as part of its curriculum, although it has yet to be officially approved.

The discussion surrounding this measure has, predictably, prompted mixed reactions, with some in the state believing that teaching the Bible not only toes the line in the separation of Church and State, but that it also might “confuse” some students. Others feel the move would be a positive, promoting the “traditional values that America was founded on.”

According to local ABC affiliate KSFY, If the measure is approved, a course on the Bible would not be mandated, but, rather “encouraged” in public schools.

~~So all you doubters have a problem with this?

[clambake]

they should also have to take a finals test on the "matrix"

[baseline bum]

Nothing makes one drop Christianity faster than reading the bible tbh.

[Blake]

~~So all you doubters have a problem with this?

If I was a true believer, I would still have a problem with it.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They teach Greek mythology in most English classes.

[Winehole23]

If I was a non-believer I would still have no problem with it. The bible is too important for literature and so-called Western Civ to be willfully ignored. Leaving the bible out of the curriculum is akin to leaving out Shakespeare.

Also, good atheists should have at least some familiarity with what they criticize.

[boutons_deux]

I have no problem with teaching the Bible as literature (but teach also the Torah, the Koran, Bagavad Gita, etc), and/or in a comparative religions class, or in history of religionS class.

but teaching only the Bible in red-state will mean, no doubt, and is meant to be, teaching Christianity as the preferred/endorsed "exceptionally American" religion, exclusively, in a taxpayer funded public school.

[mercos]

I have a problem with this, because we all know it is not meant to teach the Bible in a historical context. They want to endorse a religion. With the state our education system is already in we don't need children learning things that won't help them get jobs. Our education system needs to be geared towards producing adults who can make a living for themselves.

[Blake]

I guess I misunderstood this to be a creation thread.

No problem here with Bible being taught as literature.

[Winehole23]

I have a problem with this, because we all know it is not meant to teach the Bible in a historical context. True. That's a valid beef.

With the state our education system is already in we don't need children learning things that won't help them get jobs.like Shakespeare, history and social studies, you mean?

[baseline bum]

If I was a non-believer I would still have no problem with it. The bible is too important for literature and so-called Western Civ to be willfully ignored. Leaving the bible out of the curriculum is akin to leaving out Shakespeare.

Also, good atheists should have at least some familiarity with what they criticize.

In a world history class, a literature class, or a philosophy class its study is definitely warranted. What I worry about is the superstition creeping into science classes.

[Spurminator]

There's really not enough context in the story. On the surface it doesn't sound like they're talking about creationism/I.D., so that's good.

Assuming it's treating the Bible as a literary subject, I don't see the problem with it, but my question is what was keeping them from doing that in the first place? People act like all discussion of Christianity has been banned in public schools just because we don't have someone leading a prayer right after the Pledge.

[EVAY]

I'm opposed to it for the same reason that I am opposed to school vouchers. To me it definitely blurs the church/state line.

[EVAY]

I believe that it is a step toward theocracy.

[EVAY]

I had 16 years of education that included the study of the bible, Western civilization as seen through the eyes of the development of the Roman Catholic Church, and Theology.

Every minute of that education was privately funded, and that is how it should be. I'm all for people who want that education to get it...just not from taxpayer supported dollars. I'd rather they put back in music and art appreciation (both of which are generally not available anymore due to funding cuts) than religion.

[JoeChalupa]

I guess I misunderstood this to be a creation thread.

No problem here with Bible being taught as literature.

I concur.

[Goran Dragic]

They teach Greek mythology in most English classes.
They don't teach it as a legitimate scientific theory for how mankind was created

[Goran Dragic]

No problem here with Bible being taught as literature.
Agreed tbh since that's what it is. An interesting piece of literature tbh.

[mercos]

True. That's a valid beef.
like Shakespeare, history and social studies, you mean?


Precisely. I believe a lot of what is taught should be optional. For example, a chemist does not need to take literature classes. On the flip side, a writer does not need to know trigonometry. We spend way to much money on education for the results we get. Our education system is not efficient, and the constant struggle by the religious right to add more fluff to the system is not helping things.

[baseline bum]

Agreed tbh since that's what it is. An interesting piece of literature tbh.

It's not that interesting if you read it tbh. Culturally significant for sure, but it's definitely not good writing.

[Goran Dragic]

I figured that if billions of people use it as something to live their life by it at least had to be well written fiction. I guess people are just really stupid.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They don't teach it as a legitimate scientific theory for how mankind was created

Sure and the moment they include Genesis in biology classes and Deuteronomy in government, I will most certainly take issue.

Although its obvious fiction the Bible is the singlemost important piece of literature in all of western civilization.

[baseline bum]

I figured that if billions of people use it as something to live their life by it at least had to be well written fiction. I guess people are just really stupid.

It's probably not as good as Dianetics tbh; at least that was done by an accomplished writer of fiction.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's not that interesting if you read it tbh. Culturally significant for sure, but it's definitely not good writing.

Reading Saul's bipolar love-hate rants to various locales hes trying to peddle Christianity is hard to read until you use the lens of comedy. 2nd Timothy is great as he sets out to write his own Deuteronomy.

I actually enjoyed Kings as they were good stories. If you think any of that literally happened you are a fool to have begun with.

[Jacob1983]

So you say you have a problem with anything that comes from South Dakota.


What about her?
http://img.poptower.com/pic-69933/january-jones.jpg?d=600

[ChumpDumper]

By most accounts, she's an insufferable bitch.

[ElNono]

I have no problem with teaching the Bible as literature (but teach also the Torah, the Koran, Bagavad Gita, etc), and/or in a comparative religions class, or in history of religionS class.

I agree with boutons on this. If this is about teaching history of religions or even literature, why not include any of the others just as historically important writings?

The fact that the Bible is singled out is what makes me suspicious as to the actual intentions.

[boutons_deux]

Conservatives, so pure and holy, doing the oilco/Kock Bros bidding, the whores:


Conservatives Use Creationist Playbook to Attack Climate Change Education in Schools

A few years ago, Cheryl Manning assigned a research project on climate change to her high school environmental science class in Evergreen, Colo. She presented the basic facts and data from peer-reviewed studies, then asked the students to look into the issue themselves and report back on what they learned.

Halfway through the unit, three students came to class up in arms. They questioned whether the data was made up and if government scientists were part of a plot — “like conspiracy theorists that say we never went to the moon,” Manning said. At a PTA meeting the students’ parents accused her of trying to undermine their children’s religious belief system.

“Peer-reviewed science is the Kool-Aid of the left-wing liberal conspiracy,” they said, adding a warning: “Be on your guard.”

Manning’s superintendent backed her up, and the parents eventually pulled their kids out of school. But she said her experience is common enough that many teachers shy away from the subject of climate change.

Manning’s experience in Colorado is just a microcosm of a larger fight being waged in classrooms across the country. Reminiscent of the evolution-vs.-creationism clash, the overwhelming scientific evidence that says humans are causing the warming of the planet has emerged as the new battlefield in middle and high schools in the U.S.

That concerns the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) in Oakland, Calif. For 25 years the Center has worked to keep creationism and “intelligent design” out of public schools. Now it has expanded its scope to defend and support the teaching of climate change science, against the efforts of skeptics or deniers to intimidate teachers.

“We have been hearing for several years now that teachers were getting pushback on teaching climate change, and some of the playbook used by those promoting teaching ‘both sides’ was very similar to the attempt to have evolution ‘balanced’ by creationism and intelligent design,” said Mark McCaffrey, who is spearheading the Center’s new initiative. “From my experience working with teachers, it is clear that the so-called ‘controversy’ about climate change science is a major impediment to teachers and the polarized political climate around teaching the topic is a big problem.”

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/153909

"teaching balance" is conservatives pushing their UCA-bought LIES in balance with scientific truth.

[Nbadan]

Forget the bible, we need more religion in some schools....people have forgotten to teach their kids proper morals....

[Jacob1983]

Isn't evolution a theory?

[z0sa]

Isn't evolution a theory?

Most scientists consider it both a fact and a theory.

Wikipedia on the subject (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory)

While not an absolute science because of the ever developing nature of life, evolution is considered by many a fact.

OTOH, creationism or ID is nowhere near a theory, with only the loosest foothold in factual basis.

What the politicians on the right SHOULD be keeping in mind:

" Does the evolutionary doctrine clash with religious faith? It does not. It is a blunder to mistake the Holy Scriptures for elementary textbooks of astronomy, geology, biology, and anthropology. Only if symbols are construed to mean what they are not intended to mean can there arise imaginary, insoluble conflicts. ...the blunder leads to blasphemy: the Creator is accused of systematic deceitfulness."

— Theodosius Dobzhansky, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" (1973)