This is always an interesting topic even among those of us who are secular in mind. Ought we attempt to objectively teach religion in the public schools?

This particular story shows some of the problems with the issue.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blog/ch ... _in_texas/

Church-State Fiasco Looms in Texas

Educators in Wichita Falls, Texas, may not welcome my praise. But they've done the right thing in deciding not to offer a state-mandated elective course on the Bible for high schoolers. According to media accounts (including http://www.news-journal.com/news/conten ... bible.html ), a 2007 state law required high schools to offer an elective course on the Bible's impact on history and Western literature. To make sure the classes would be taught in an "objective, academic manner that neither promotes nor disparages religion," the law mandated what the Austin American-Statesman described as "teacher training" and "state-approved training materials." Then the legislature failed to budget $750,000 to produce any of those things. The law goes into effect this fall, commanding school districts to offer the courses even though the state didn't come through with the things the same law says the districts need before they can create the courses.

Teaching about the Bible in public schools is a church-state minefield. Even if the curriculum and materials stick to historical and literary matters, there is wide latitude for individual teachers to turn the classes into forums for evangelizing. The Council for Secular Humanism believes that the Bible is too hot for public schools to handle unless curricula are designed and carried out with the greatest of care. That's just the opposite of what happened in Texas.

If I had a ten-gallon hat, I'd also tip toward Austin schools, where educators announced that they didn't need to offer the electives because existing history and geography courses already deal with world religions. I don't know whether that's true or just an ingenious dodge, but either way it's very, very smart.

Other school districts are playing a dangerous game, say media accounts. They're cobbling together their own elective Bible courses, notwithstanding the state's reported failure to provide good guidelines. The result is predictable: thousands of Texas schoolchildren will have their civil rights trampled when teachers teach Bible courses that champion religion over irreligion … or Christianity over other world religions … or the Southern Baptist Conference over other Christian sects. Another prediction: lots of Texas school districts who can't afford it will burn through thousands of dollars that ought to go toward books, computers, even footballs -- money that will be spent on lawyers instead.

The Bible elective in Texas may be the most perfectly confounded church-state snafu I've seen. It's a recipe for violating religious freedom and busting school district budgets. Yet it's so easily avoided. More Texas school districts should be like Wichita Falls and just say no, or like Austin and find a credible-sounding excuse.

What educational value is there in teaching the Bible in high schools?

why teach poetry....why teach catch 22, gone with the wind, war and peace etc...

I don't see a problem with it being taught objectively and as an elective course. I may have even taken it. But I agree that it has to be handled properly and carefully, and very well controlled. Perhaps only by teachers with no strong religious affiliation, and offer similar courses on other religious texts as well.

I find it strange that they mandate an elective class... I don't really know where to take a stance here. I don't believe that it should students should be mandated to take religious classes, but I have no problem if educational classes are offered on religion as electives. The feds certainly shouldn't mandate such classe, but is this something the states can regulate? Does this infringe upon anybody's freedom of religion? Near as I can tell...it doesn't...

I think we've discussed this here before, but the reason I'm against it is because it is too fine a line that we're asking teachers to walk between those who would object based on the material being taught too religiously and those who would object to religious material being taught as purely secular. It just invites lawsuits.

Uh, having a mandatory religion class is one thing, having a mandatory christianity class is another. Talk about shitting on the 1st amendment.

I kind of agree with LW. No way should this be mandated, but as an elective, I don't see the problem with it. If there's a demand, and students understand what they're taking, then what's the problem?

Isn't this pretty much on par for school systems? The Feds (or state) mandate something and then don't provide funding.

I think 'theological studies' should be fairly high up on the subject priority list. Just teach it objectively, explain the roles and beliefs of the main religions of the world, touch on some lesser ones. In America, Christianity should probably get a little more of the class time because it has more relevance. Teach how certain beliefs have affected history. Allow students to take part in discussions, without preaching to them or being biased. If students ask for more information on other cultures, indulge them.

It's simply an important subject that kids shouldn't be protected from or indoctrinated with.

In most cases, minors by law are assumed to "not understand" anything they're doing. See: statutory rape.

You make it sound so simple.

It is. You give them facts. You tell them what specific religions believe, you tell them how some people have interpreted the teachings, and how others have interpreted them in another way. Hell, you can tell them what you 'believe'.

It's quite simple to not brainwash people and to avoid forcing certain ideologies.

If you give them enough breadth, it will become fairly obvious to them that there's more than one way of thinking.

You do realize we're talking about human beings doing the teaching here? Some of them are from Texas.

If they're not fit to teach...

dude...

What you suggest is not within the bounds of reality. Not even close.

Assess the teachers more frequently then. If anyone is found to teach such sensitive issues irresponsibly, don't allow them to teach theology again.

Do you want me to instead say...

Yes, teach religion - but there will be obvious human bias and subjectivity thus leading to another generation of indoctrinated and narrow beliefs...so infact we shouldn't teach religion - but the kids will then grow up vulnerable to narrow mindedness from family, community without learning about the wider world...so, yes teach religion.....shall I continue to loop?

Or shall we suggest some guidelines....?

Is this a shtick? Because I don't want to get punk'd by responding point by point to a shtick.

My point is, what are we expecting from this thread...?

The same old on the fence shit we've heard all before?

You joined here less than a month ago, have 400+ posts, and complain about what has been said here before?

I call shtick.