Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The only part of the constitution that Republicans respect is the 2nd amendment.
☭proletarian☭;2044686 said:Interesting... the OP calls it into question on the grounds that it's fiscally irreponsible and the first two replies evade the issue and try to defend against an objection that wasn't raised. Why is that?
They are teaching a bible as literature class. I don't have a problem with that. I took one in high school and it didn't turn me into a Jesus freak...quite the opposite.Hmm pay tax dollars for bible study in public schools when they can get it for free in church?
Ahh the wisdom of the Republican controlled KY state senate.
This will fix our recession problems.
☭proletarian☭;2044686 said:Interesting... the OP calls it into question on the grounds that it's fiscally irreponsible and the first two replies evade the issue and try to defend against an objection that wasn't raised. Why is that?
States decide what their schools will teach, it is THEIR business not yours. They will pay for it in THAT State. Again NONE of your business.
☭proletarian☭;2044686 said:Interesting... the OP calls it into question on the grounds that it's fiscally irreponsible and the first two replies evade the issue and try to defend against an objection that wasn't raised. Why is that?
States decide what their schools will teach, it is THEIR business not yours. They will pay for it in THAT State. Again NONE of your business.
☭proletarian☭;2044686 said:Interesting... the OP calls it into question on the grounds that it's fiscally irreponsible and the first two replies evade the issue and try to defend against an objection that wasn't raised. Why is that?
States decide what their schools will teach, it is THEIR business not yours. They will pay for it in THAT State. Again NONE of your business.
A course in comparative religion would be approprate; a course on the bible seems to be an effort to proselyize - and of course that is exactly the intent.
Yeah well it is MY state and I do not want my school tax money I pay to go for teaching religion in school.
They are actually teaching that the bible is a work of fiction. Godless Commie school teachers with their liberal agenda to destroy America can now teach school kids that the Bible is nothing more than fiction.Yeah well it is MY state and I do not want my school tax money I pay to go for teaching religion in school.
Yeah well it is MY state and I do not want my school tax money I pay to go for teaching religion in school.
But there's a diference between teaching religion and teaching about religion.
If the class is truly the Bible as literature, then there is a secular purpose, it's not teaching the kids to believe anything, and therefore is fine. Other religions should ideally be taught as well, but the Bible has had a strong influence on music, art, literature, and Wester society in general that it should be taught in schools. It just shouldn't be taught as fact or as any particular interpretation.
States decide what their schools will teach, it is THEIR business not yours. They will pay for it in THAT State. Again NONE of your business.
A course in comparative religion would be approprate; a course on the bible seems to be an effort to proselyize - and of course that is exactly the intent.
I would agree with you. Except I googled this particular law and it appears that it focuses on the bible in literature.
A course in comparative religion would be approprate; a course on the bible seems to be an effort to proselyize - and of course that is exactly the intent.
I would agree with you. Except I googled this particular law and it appears that it focuses on the bible in literature.
does it also focus on other religions holy texts as well?
That is the point.
I would agree with you. Except I googled this particular law and it appears that it focuses on the bible in literature.
does it also focus on other religions holy texts as well?
That is the point.
Again, I disagree. While there ideally should be classes on other religions as well, if you're only going to teach one holy text it should be the Bible because of its cultural significance. That is NOT establishing a religion nor is it showing preference to one religion based on its teachings. Teaching only the one book because it has had the most significant impact on US culture is in no way contrary to freedom of religion.
☭proletarian☭;2044686 said:Interesting... the OP calls it into question on the grounds that it's fiscally irreponsible and the first two replies evade the issue and try to defend against an objection that wasn't raised. Why is that?
States decide what their schools will teach, it is THEIR business not yours. They will pay for it in THAT State. Again NONE of your business.
Not true to the extent that what they teach has to conform to constitutional mandates...like separation of church and state.
That said, I think there's nothing wrong with teaching how the bible shows up in literature, which these classes appear to be (based on a very limited google search).
It's funny, this issue actually turned up last week because my son told me that in his school teachers aren't allowed to talk about the bible at all. Yet, when I was in high school, we read, The Passion; We read Miss Lonelyhearts; We read a some amazing literature that was filled with biblical imagery and biblical references. How can one be literate and not be taught those things? Or at least to know those things exist.
I think sometimes we go overboard and get goofy about stuff.