Kentucky Senate committee advances bill to teach Bible classes in public schools

[uscitizen]

Kentucky Senate committee advances bill to teach Bible classes in public schools

6:29 PM, Feb. 3, 2011
Written by
Associated Press
FRANKFORT, Ky. — Public schools would be allowed to teach Bible classes under a bill making its way through the Kentucky legislature.

The Senate Education Committee approved the measure on Thursday, sending it to the full Senate for consideration.
A similar measure overwhelmingly passed in the Senate last year but died in the House.
Under the Kentucky proposal, Bible courses would be offered as electives, meaning students could decide whether to take them.
The legislation is Senate Bill 56


Kentucky Senate committee advances bill to teach Bible classes in public schools | The Courier-Journal | courier-journal.com

 

[Coloradomtnman]

this is a case where this is not that big of a deal in all reality - however using tax dollars to pay teachers to teach bible class is somehow very unAmerican. Churches have enough money and drive to teach anyone who wants to learn about the bible.

 

[Intense]

They Should Teach this First.


Memorial and Remonstrance
Against Religious Assessments

James Madison

[1785]




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------








To the Honorable the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia
A Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments


We the subscribers , citizens of the said Commonwealth, having taken into serious consideration, a Bill printed by order of the last Session of General Assembly, entitled "A Bill establishing a provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion," and conceiving that the same if finally armed with the sanctions of a law, will be a dangerous abuse of power, are bound as faithful members of a free State to remonstrate against it, and to declare the reasons by which we are determined. We remonstrate against the said Bill,
Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considerd as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign. We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority.

Because Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: it is limited with regard to the co-ordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free Government requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are slaves.......

Religious Freedom Page: Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, James Madison (1785)

 

[uscitizen]

Yep an unfunded mandate courtesy of the Republicans?
And they are talking of cutting education funds.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right...

... is so' dey'll know `bout Jesus...

... an' dey won't get left behind...

... when the Rapture comes."

 

[blu]

such stupidity. they should offer extra math & science electives instead.

 

[IanC]

such stupidity. they should offer extra math & science electives instead.

the problem with public schools is that they already have enough courses that teachers can't teach and students can't learn. I don't blame them for wanting a few more babysitting classes where everyone is happy give and receive 'free marks'.

 

[Madeline]

I would be willing to consider a federal law that makes it a civil tort for any state lawmaker to vote to pass a blatantly unconstitutional bill. I'm sure Kentucky voters did not elect these posers to play bullshit reindeer games.

 

[IanC]

I would be willing to consider a federal law that makes it a civil tort for any state lawmaker to vote to pass a blatantly unconstitutional bill. I'm sure Kentucky voters did not elect these posers to play bullshit reindeer games.

Why is it unconstitutional to have an elective subject offered in schools on a topic that many are interested in? surely the framers meant that religious institutions could not have a direct say in the running of govt, not that religion was a taboo subject.

 

[Madeline]

I would be willing to consider a federal law that makes it a civil tort for any state lawmaker to vote to pass a blatantly unconstitutional bill. I'm sure Kentucky voters did not elect these posers to play bullshit reindeer games.

Why is it unconstitutional to have an elective subject offered in schools on a topic that many are interested in? surely the framers meant that religious institutions could not have a direct say in the running of govt, not that religion was a taboo subject.

I'm tired, Ian. I think you ask a good question -- I was relying on my memory, and it may not be correct. I'll look at some SCOTUS opinions ASAP, I promise.

Meanwhile, I still like my idea....do you?

 

[DiveCon]

11RS SB56

 

[goldcatt]

Whenever a public school offers a Bible course it's a tricky line to maneuver between the literature and history and teaching religion. There's too much controversy even among Christians of different flavors let alone non-Christians to have the public schools entering into the realm of interpretation and belief.

I'd want to know a LOT about the teacher in charge and his or her views and track record before signing off on my kids taking it. If taught correctly it could be fine. If taught by someone with an agenda to push, it's trouble waiting to happen.

That said, I have to agree with those who have pointed out the problem with priorities here. Students in public schools often struggle with the basics and come out with substandard understanding of the core math, science, literacy and even our own history and civics.

Sounds like it probably won't pass, but if it does watch out for challenges when some schools cross that line.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Does the law "establish a religion"?

If not then studying the bible or any religious text in school is not unconstitutional.

I think a class on world religions would be an excellent elective and in that class I would think reading a religious text would be required.

 

[HUGGY]

Kentucky Senate committee advances bill to teach Bible classes in public schools

6:29 PM, Feb. 3, 2011
Written by
Associated Press
FRANKFORT, Ky. — Public schools would be allowed to teach Bible classes under a bill making its way through the Kentucky legislature.

The Senate Education Committee approved the measure on Thursday, sending it to the full Senate for consideration.
A similar measure overwhelmingly passed in the Senate last year but died in the House.
Under the Kentucky proposal, Bible courses would be offered as electives, meaning students could decide whether to take them.
The legislation is Senate Bill 56


Kentucky Senate committee advances bill to teach Bible classes in public schools | The Courier-Journal | courier-journal.com

I thank the Lord I do not live in Kentucky.

 

[Ravi]

I don't have a problem with this but why must it be a law of the state? Individual school districts should be able to decide what they wish to teach.

Also, does this mean the Koran could also be taught in Kentucky schools?

 

[California Girl]

Whenever a public school offers a Bible course it's a tricky line to maneuver between the literature and history and teaching religion. There's too much controversy even among Christians of different flavors let alone non-Christians to have the public schools entering into the realm of interpretation and belief.

I'd want to know a LOT about the teacher in charge and his or her views and track record before signing off on my kids taking it. If taught correctly it could be fine. If taught by someone with an agenda to push, it's trouble waiting to happen.

That said, I have to agree with those who have pointed out the problem with priorities here. Students in public schools often struggle with the basics and come out with substandard understanding of the core math, science, literacy and even our own history and civics.

Sounds like it probably won't pass, but if it does watch out for challenges when some schools cross that line.

^^^^ What she said.

 

[Ravi]

What I do find odd about this though is that teaching the bible amounts to teaching the history and literature of Christians. And there is nothing wrong with that. But I've noticed that people that applaud this sort of class are against teaching black history and hispanic history.

 

[NYcarbineer]

such stupidity. they should offer extra math & science electives instead.

Hey, this is the right's way of countering America's falling behind in science around the world,

we're going to kick ass in Creation Science.

 

[Granny]

Granny says, "Dat's right...

... is so' dey'll know `bout Jesus...

... an' dey won't get left behind...

... when the Rapture comes."

!! I said nothing of the kind! And your poor interpretation of how blacks and/or other Southerners talk is not particularly amusing.

But as an afterthought, we've tried secularism in the schools for decades and look where we are as a people. There has never been a national religion declared for or in this country and to deny the right of anyone to practice their religion of choice is unconstitutional. If California can offer classes in Islam at taxpayer expense, why shouldn't Kentucky be allowed to offer general religious history classes?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Granny says, "Dat's right...

... is so' dey'll know `bout Jesus...

... an' dey won't get left behind...

... when the Rapture comes."

!! I said nothing of the kind! And your poor interpretation of how blacks and/or other Southerners talk is not particularly amusing.

But as an afterthought, we've tried secularism in the schools for decades and look where we are as a people. There has never been a national religion declared for or in this country and to deny the right of anyone to practice their religion of choice is unconstitutional. If California can offer classes in Islam at taxpayer expense, why shouldn't Kentucky be allowed to offer general religious history classes?

Just wondering can you point to a class in California dedicated to teaching Islam? (Not to a class that taught some aspect of Islam as part of the Middle School Social Studies Curriculum which requires teaching about the historical context of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, etc... as apart of religious impact on world history.)


Read the law, the bill in Kentucky is not to offer a "general religious history class", it is to offer a Bible class. I don't see the inclusion of religious texts which are the foundation for non-Christian religions.



>>>>