Hey, look, Bible classes.

Kagom

Senior Member
Jan 16, 2006
2,161
142
48
Vicksburg, MS
Georgia OKs Bible Classes, Commandments

By SHANNON McCAFFREY, Associated Press Writer

ATLANTA - Georgia became what is believed to be the first state to offer government-sanctioned elective classes on the Bible, with Gov. Sonny Perdue signing a bill into law Thursday.

The governor also signed a bill permitting the display of the Ten Commandments at courthouses, an issue that has raised thorny constitutional questions.

Critics say the measures blur the line between church and state. National civil rights groups said they want to see how the laws are implemented before deciding whether to challenge them in court.

The Bible is already incorporated into classes in Georgia and other states, and some local school districts have passed measures permitting classes devoted solely to the Bible. But education analysts say the law in Georgia is the first time a state government has endorsed such courses.

The new law allows elective classes on the Bible to be taught to high school students. Local school systems will decide whether to teach the courses.

The state Education Department has until February to craft curriculums. The law requires that the courses be taught "in an objective and nondevotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students."

The state's new Ten Commandments law was prompted by controversy over the posting of the commandments at the Barrow County Courthouse. A federal judge ordered the display removed in July.

Backers of the law made clear they were trying to craft a statute that would survive any constitutional challenges.

In a split decision last June, the U.S. Supreme Court declared exhibits of the Ten Commandments constitutional if their main purpose was to honor the nation's legal, rather than religious, traditions, and if they didn't promote one religious sect over another.

Both bills passed the state Legislature by comfortable margins.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060420/ap_on_re_us/bible_bills
 
But education analysts say the law in Georgia is the first time a state government has endorsed such courses.
That's probably not true. Bible reading and prayer were used in school daily all over the country until halfway through last century.

But, other than that, I think it's great. People should have an opportunity to study this if they choose.
 
So long as no child is forced to take the class, and that another class isn't bumped out of the curriculum to accomodate for it, I could care less.
 
mom4 said:
That's probably not true. Bible reading and prayer were used in school daily all over the country until halfway through last century.

But, other than that, I think it's great. People should have an opportunity to study this if they choose.
Ok, in honesty I do not believe that the bible should be part of public school curriculum. With that said, which is more challenging to 3rd graders, Genesis or talking vegetables? Which builds self esteem, not to mention vocabulary?
 
cranston36 said:
What a waste of money.
We ask for small government and get stuck with big religion.
Your opinion. I say, "Hooray for GA!" Long time coming!
 
cranston36 said:
What a waste of money.
We ask for small government and get stuck with big religion.

Exactly what is wrong with allowing people to electively choose to study the Bible?
 
cranston36 said:
What a waste of money.
We ask for small government and get stuck with big religion.

Actually, this shrinks the government, as it prevents the government from restricting the rights of high school students to take a class on a book that has actually proven to be historically accurate and has had more of an impact on western society than any other book in history.
 
cranston36 said:
What a waste of money.
We ask for small government and get stuck with big religion.
Why dont you stick to your whining on local boards in Indiana I think they spend a lot of time ripping you a new one. Besides your not here for debate your just here to insight.....
 
Hobbit said:
Actually, this shrinks the government, as it prevents the government from restricting the rights of high school students to take a class on a book that has actually proven to be historically accurate and has had more of an impact on western society than any other book in history.
How exactly does an elective bible class shrink government? Or did you mean shrink the control of government?
 
Avatar4321 said:
Exactly what is wrong with allowing people to electively choose to study the Bible?

If they're teaching a comparative religion class encompassing many beliefs, then nothing is wrong with it. If they're teaching Christianity, or some brand of it, it's clearly not Constitutional.

And, a question, if I may: why is it the same people who say they have enormous trouble with the concept of schools teaching "morals", have no problem with them teaching "religion"? I'm not trying to be disrespectful. I'm trying to ascertain how those two views are reconciled.
 
jillian said:
If they're teaching a comparative religion class encompassing many beliefs, then nothing is wrong with it. If they're teaching Christianity, or some brand of it, it's clearly not Constitutional.

And, a question, if I may: why is it the same people who say they have enormous trouble with the concept of schools teaching "morals", have no problem with them teaching "religion"? I'm not trying to be disrespectful. I'm trying to ascertain how those two views are reconciled.
If they are studying Christianity as an elective class, what's the problem?

I'm not saying I think public schools should teach religion, but I think that the problem most "religious" people have with schools teaching "morality" is that the NEA's idea of morality is a lot different from theirs.
 
mom4 said:
If they are studying Christianity as an elective class, what's the problem?

I'm not saying I think public schools should teach religion, but I think that the problem most "religious" people have with schools teaching "morality" is that the NEA's idea of morality is a lot different from theirs.
So it'd be acceptable to you to have an elective class on the bible, an elective class on homosexuality, and en elective class on safe sex?
 
mom4 said:
If they are studying Christianity as an elective class, what's the problem?

I'm not saying I think public schools should teach religion, but I think that the problem most "religious" people have with schools teaching "morality" is that the NEA's idea of morality is a lot different from theirs.

They shouldn't teach Christianity because the State isn't allowed to endorse one religion over another. Are there electives teaching Judaism? Islam? Hinduism? Buddhism?
 
The ClayTaurus said:
So it'd be acceptable to you to have an elective class on the bible, an elective class on homosexuality, and en elective class on safe sex?
yes.
 
jillian said:
They shouldn't teach Christianity because the State isn't allowed to endorse one religion over another. Are there electives teaching Judaism? Islam? Hinduism? Buddhism?
They aren't endorsing anything. They're not oking a class on Christianity and rejecting a class on buddhism. If Buddhists want their own class, they can ask for it.
 
jillian said:
They shouldn't teach Christianity because the State isn't allowed to endorse one religion over another. Are there electives teaching Judaism? Islam? Hinduism? Buddhism?
The state can ENDORSE religion; it is actually in its best interest to do so. Adherence to religion can preempt many social problems. What the government can't do is MANDATE religion. It's an elective class, so the gov't isn't mandating.

This is GA. Bible belt. The majority of the people probably believe in some form of Christianity. The rest are free to opt out of the class.
 
jillian said:
If they're teaching a comparative religion class encompassing many beliefs, then nothing is wrong with it. If they're teaching Christianity, or some brand of it, it's clearly not Constitutional.

And, a question, if I may: why is it the same people who say they have enormous trouble with the concept of schools teaching "morals", have no problem with them teaching "religion"? I'm not trying to be disrespectful. I'm trying to ascertain how those two views are reconciled.

Easily--how can the government ban religion from schools and then proceed to turn right around and begin to preach another brand of "morality"? Religions aren't asking for special priviledges. They just want to be included in the teaching of morals--not excluded.
 
mom4 said:
The state can ENDORSE religion; it is actually in its best interest to do so. Adherence to religion can preempt many social problems. What the government can't do is MANDATE religion. It's an elective class, so the gov't isn't mandating.

The Constitution says nothing about "mandating" religion. It says "respecting" religion...which means there is a line between Church and State. The First Amendment says:

"Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

As for it being in the State's interest to "endorse" religion, there is simply no Constitutional basis for it, much as you may wish otherwise.

This is GA. Bible belt. The majority of the people probably believe in some form of Christianity. The rest are free to opt out of the class.

So the minorities should be ostracized when attention is drawn to their "opting out".

Sorry...that's EXACTLY what government isn't allowed to do to people.
 

Forum List

Back
Top