Texas education leaders unveil Bible-infused elementary school curriculum

Texas, Bringing God back into the Public Classroom!!!

Good for them!

Michael Newdow said to be trembling with rage! Good!

Look for Michigan and Minnesota to pass laws adding the study of the Koran to high school curriculum. Muslims are growing in numbers and power in those states.

😎👍

Thank you for referencing that article Texan4Life.

"Texas education leaders unveil Bible-infused elementary school curriculum"

The Bible is more important than the Constitution. But I hope that Texas and other states are likewise teaching students the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as the drafters had intended for those powers to be understood.

Also, I still question if Christians who have been harassed by state actors for their convictions are aware of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (14A) for example.

"14th Amendment, Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Democratic and Republican patriots need to support hopeful Trump 47 with a new patriot Congress in November, not only so that he won't be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will also support Trump to quickly finish draining the swamp, including doing its 14A duty to protect citizens from abridgment of constitutionally enumerated protections by renegade states.

Good first step. Next, bring the 3 R’s and civics back.

I have strong doubts the article is accurate. More likely the legislation allows for the Bible to be used as literature or in comparative religion classes. Requiring the Bible be taught as if it were a textbook would be a clear 1st Amendment violation.

Made it 3/4 of the way through the article and didn’t find one example of how the Bible was “infused” in the curriculum.

“Muslims are growing in numbers and power in those states.”

... and breeding like field rats ...

if it keeps liberals from moving here, I’m all for it. Realistically, it will be challenged and over turned by the SCOTUS eventually. Provided the education twits approve the books to be released into the class rooms and teachers willing to teach it.

This is the Obama/Biden mantra!!

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2024/05/american-muslims-for-palestine-top-dog-we-are-going-to-change-this-country-forever

The Bible already can be taught as Literature in Texas. What we have is school boards and others that have no backbone. They shy away from the inevitable lawsuits that would come. Plus, the methods of teaching would vary from teacher to teacher. You would find Catholic teachers would withhold certain parts of history to make Catholics look less damaging and Baptists would emphasize other parts of history so they wouldn't feel bad.

The thing that always eludes religious people is the Bible teaches a form of Judaism. They hide the fact that Jesus was Jewish and lived and died as a Jew and kept all the Leviticus 23 Feasts and is at the right hand of the Father as the Lion of Judah. For a Gentile to receive an inheritance in the Promised Land, Said Gentiles must be adopted into the family of Jacob per Genesis 48. The Apostles were Jews and observed all the Leviticus 23 Feast Days. Jesus never observed Easter and Christmas as they are pagan days introduced in the 4th Century A.D. You could have devout Christian teachers that would emphasize certain teachings and leave out others to save embarrassment from their own decisions to stay in their denomination. Denominations are "Traditions of men". Many times what is instructed in the Bible is ignored in church. Jesus didn't come to start a new religion. He came to fulfill the Old Testament.

Having said all this, teaching the 10 Commandments and the life and death of Jesus are pretty straight forward. If it is taught as Literature, will it be taught as fact or fiction? Did God create everything in 6 days or did a big ball of matter explode millions of years ago. Did a dead man rise from the grave in 3 days? Did a virgin become pregnant and give birth? Teaching all this the wrong way can cause more damage than having a witch as a teacher. Will a teacher be required to call it all a myth before they ever start teaching?

Maybe students should have the option of learning an elective rather than mandatory curriculum.

No, not a good idea. It is a reversal of and a repeat of the Left’s acts of enforcing its secular humanist religion in public schools. I believe the bible can have a place in PUBLIC school as an elective course the children’s parents can opt in or opt out of, but no, schools not offering it should not get less funding. AND, under state control, WHOSE biblical views will be taught? Catholics’, Protestants’, Evangelicals’, 7th Day Adventists? You see the problem of putting religious teaching under state sponsorship, don’t you? We have that now from the Left and its wrong because it is the state doing it instead of leaving it to parents, families, churches and other social organizations.

However, I am all in favor of vouchers equal to 100% of public funding per student per district, given to parents twice a year and where they can turn in the vouchers to any K-12 school of their choice - public, private, secular or religious based, or to go for home schooling costs. At least in that form parents are in control of the manner of their child’s religious education, if any, not the state.

“Look for Michigan and Minnesota to pass laws adding the study of the Koran to high school curriculum. Muslims are growing in numbers and power in those states.”

Thanks for helping to demonstrate why the idea is not a good one. The real question is being missed - why in the hell do I want the state involved in my kid’s religious education? We have that now with the state enforcing the Left’s secular humanism religion in our schools. That is wrong and so is the state running any religious education in K-12 schools. Which biblical view will the state present? You know Christians have different opinions on that.

<>privileges or immunities<>

Like "habeas corpus," privileges or immunities is a term of art, a specialize language particular to a profession.

"Privileges or immunities" is in the Articles of Confederation, the original Constitution and the 14th Amendment.

As such, its meaning from the 18th century applies today.

And that meaning is the right to acquire property, the right to come and go at pleasure, the right to enforce rights in the courts, and to make contracts.

My source is pg 46 of Raoul Berger's Government by Judiciary, the Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Feminists will want women to be given equal attention.

That might be hard in the Bible, but apart from the books of Ruth and Esther, both centered on a woman, you have a number of stories involving women: Eve and the snake, Tamar seducing Judah, Potiphar's wife falsely accusing Joseph, Rahab the prostitute in Jericho, Samson and Delilah, David and Bathsheba, the other Tamar who was raped by her half-brother Amnon, Jezebel, etc. If they use a Catholic Bible there is also the story of Susannah and the elders.

Thank you for replying Jacquerie.

""Privileges or immunities" is in the Articles of Confederation, the original Constitution and the 14th Amendment."

First consider Thomas Jefferson's uncommon common sense writing regarding the intentions of lawmakers with respect to interpreting a law.

"The true key for the construction of everything doubtful in a law is the intention of the law-makers. This is most safely gathered from the words, but may be sought also in extraneous circumstances provided they do not contradict the express words of the law." —Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 1808.

With Jefferson's wisdom about lawmakers' intensions in mind, consider that the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of 14th Amendment (14A) had clarified the meaning of "privileges or immunities" in the context of Section 1.

"14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

More specifically not, only did Bingham evidently read the Bill of Rights as main examples of enumerated privileges and immunities that 14A applies to the states, but he reasonably indicated that 14A applies ALL constitutional privileges and immunities to the states, not just those in BoR.

"Mr. Speaker, that the scope and meaning of the limitations imposed by the first section, fourteenth amendment of the Constitution may be more fully understood, permit me to say that the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as contradistinguished from citizens of a State, are chiefly [emphasis added] defined in the first eight amendments to the Constitution of the United States." —John Bingham, Appendix to the Congressional Globe (See top half of 2nd column.)

Given Bingham's clarification of scope of enumerated constitutional privileges and immunities that 14A applies to the states, I'm confident that the Supreme Court Doctrine of Incorporation got the scope of 14A wrong, initially arguing that 14A did not apply 1st and 2nd Amendments to the states.

"Even years after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank (1876) still held that the First and Second Amendment did not apply to state governments [emphasis added]." —Incorporation of the Bill of Rights

Finally, Democratic and Republican patriots need to support hopeful Trump 47 with a new patriot Congress in November, not only so that he won't be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will also support Trump to quickly finish draining the swamp, including doing its 14A duty to protect citizens from abridgment of constitutionally enumerated protections by renegade states.