Posted on 08/20/2014 7:56:07 AM PDT by Academiadotorg
Imagine an ancient record—by far the most published book in humanity—quoted by Shakespeare (1,200 times) and Abraham Lincoln—a book that has inspired political movements and religious reformations and has literally changed the world time and again; imagine that book being rejected and banished from schools across America. That book is the Bible. holy bible in hotel
The Bible and prayer in public schools were the topics of discussion at this week’s Family Research Council event. Dr. William Jeynes, a Senior Fellow at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton and a Professor of Education at California State University in Long Beach, shared his research about the price that the U.S. has paid for removing the Bible and prayer from public schools and he explained ways in which they can be constitutionally reincorporated into public education.
Jeynes asked how a student can graduate without any knowledge of the most published book in the world, explaining that knowledge of the Bible will make one understand the history of all six inhabited continents, and it will enlighten the student of literature, culture, and religion. In a world so obsessed with tolerance, the least that Bible study in schools could do is enhance one’s understanding of people of faith and cultivate tolerance for religious practices.
A Wall Street Journal article raised the following questions:
“Can you imagine students not reading the Constitution in a U.S. government class? School administrators not sharing the periodic table of the elements with their science classes? A driver’s ed course that expected young men and women to pass written and road tests without having access to a booklet enumerating the rules of the road? It would be the same thing, we believe, to deny America’s sons and daughters the benefits of an education that includes a study of the Bible.”
According to Jeynes, the Supreme Court has declared that teaching the Bible as literature and history in schools is constitutional as long as it is presented objectively as part of a secular program of education. The opinion of the court in School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania V. Schempp included the following analysis:
“It is insisted that, unless these religious exercises are permitted, a “religion of secularism” is established in the schools. We agree, of course, that the State may not establish a “religion of secularism” in the sense of affirmatively opposing or showing hostility to religion, thus “preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe.”
“In addition, it might well be said that one’s education is not complete without a study of comparative religion or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization. It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment.”
Along with a secular approach to Bible study in schools, Jeynes supports the idea that having a moment of silence in schools respects the non-religious while allowing those who desire to pray to do so.
These ideas are not without opposition. For example, the National Education Association (NEA), a U.S. labor union representing teachers, passed several resolutions at their2014 convention that, if enforced, may be controversial. According to Education Reporter, the newspaper of education rights, the NEA “opposes any federal legislation or mandate that would require school districts to schedule a moment of silence.” Other resolutions—questionable because of their ambiguity or unexplained intent—are that “The Association opposes any federal legislation, laws, or regulations that provide funds, goods, or services to sectarian schools” and they “condemn the philosophy and practices of extremist groups [not specifying what an extremist group is] and urge active opposition to all such movements that are inimical to the ideal of the Association.” These resolutions provide an opportunity for leaders to portray religious beliefs and practices as an enemy to education and a nuisance in the public sphere.
Bill Clinton said it best in 1996:
”Some families have been frustrated to see their children denied even the most private forms of religious expression in public schools. Here is where I stand: I believe the First Amendment does not require students to leave their religion at the schoolhouse door. Just as we wouldn’t want students to leave at home the values they learn from religion, we should not require them to refrain from religious expression. Reinforcing those values is an important part of every school’s mission.”
Made my day!
Bill Clinton said that? Are we talking about the same Bill Clinton?
Yes!
Must have been right after a Lewinsky and he was still happy.
I’m glad
Way back in the 1970s, I knew one dedicated high school teacher who taught a “The Bible as Literature” class. It had very strict rules, and students were expected to follow them to the letter. And every last chair was filled.
For his part, he had such a surfeit of background material that he had to limit digressions from the main topic, admitting that he could only scratch the surface, because the Bible permeated every facet of western culture.
The students were also very atypical. Some were already on their way to expertise with religious learning; others were generally well read; for some, almost everything was novel.
Unfortunately the class ended with his retirement, as no other teacher had the scholarly background, diplomacy, and dogged determination to teach it. Truthfully, I don’t blame them.
We should stop playing games with things like “studying the Bible as literature” or as part of “comparative religions” courses.
This is a Christian nation, founded upon the firm foundation Holy Bible and the Biblical worldview. We need to teach the Bible because of that. We need to use it explicitly to retain the Christian nature of our society and to Christianize youth. The First Amendment does not forbid any of that.
Schools/NEA banned The American Citizens Handbook (The American Creed, as it was known before the 60’s). NEA bought it from 4H in 1941 and published it until 1969, when they abruptly stopped production and reportedly buried the last 10,000 or so copies. Get one while you can. Full of great pro-American, pro-Christian, pro-morality pieces from various writers and orators.
Today’s NEA is a bastard child of what it once was.
Thousands of years ago God knew this was coming, and he wrote about it.
If you read yesterday’s and today’s first readings of the bible it is uncanny in its accuracy.
I feel sorry for them, but it’s right there
You are 100% right.
that’s a standard NEA trick. They use it on homeschoolers all the time.
Though I firmly believe in a Bible teaching class, you have to realize that this will open up a can of worms. You will then open the door to other religious texts to be studied as well.
What about a straight Bible Knowledge class? Even one that focuses on the Old Testament
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.