|
Tell Us What You Think
name: Samuel Chasinov
email: PapaSam@webtv.net
Monday, 22-Nov-1999 22:16 PST
The bible should be looked at objectively and its statements compared with
scientific facts.
For example, where did the writers of the creation get their information,
did 'god' dictate it to them? There are two versions
of Eve's creation- she was created at the same time as Adam, and she was
made out of Adam's rib. Where did their children get
their wives? These and many other
inconistencies should be cleared
up by the creationists before
even attempting to refute the
mythology by scientific methods.
name: Z
email: Sybermancer@hotmail.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 02:45 PST
If followers of the Bible want to expose America's youth to their book so badly, perhaps they can form after-school Bible study groups. To introduce the Bible into our educational system as a textbook would be nothing short of an invasion into our homes, where we are free to think and believe what we please. We do not send our children to school so that they can find religion. We send them to school so that they can recieve an education that will enable them to become productive members of society. America is NOT a thoecratic nation. Separation of Church and State (and yes, public schools do fall under the category of the State) is paramount to keeping ours a country in which its citizens are allowed the freedom to choose their own religious beliefs.
name: Margie Wait
email: mdwait@mindspring.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 03:34 PST
The guidelines for teaching the bible in public schools are obviously biased towards promoting the Judeo-Christian religion. As one might expect from a document written by religious leaders, who are desperate to spread the "word" to young adolescents in order to fill their pews, objectivity seems to have been thrown out the door. Under the new guidelines, the true role that the bible has "played" in social issues, such as slavery and abolition, or the quest for civil rights of minorities, will most likely be shielded from students.
Besides, if we allow teaching the bible in public schools according to the new guidelines, how shall we distinguish public school classes from parochial school classes?
name: Christopher Pearsoll
email: chrisgp@cc.usu.edu
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 07:25 PST
If all the world superstitions could be given a fair shake at the same time, then I say 'fine, go ahead and compare them in a school room setting'. I actually saw it done at Salt Lake Community College in SLC, Utah of all places. They didn't mention the atheist view on things (Like they would let reality infringe in a discussion of fantasy views)until I brought it up in an open forum discussion at the end of the semester, and the discussion lasted less then ten minutes. I suggest that any class that proposes to examine the world superstitions be evaluated independently to be sure that it is indeed unbiased. Discussion of reality (atheism) doesn't need to be manditory, but it would help in one of these classes.
name: D. Kelly
email: ruiner_9@hotmail.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 10:10 PST
The Christian bible (or for that matter, any predominantly religious text that its adherants claim is divinely inspired or infalliable)would be extremely problematic to incorporate in an ostensibly secular school system that floats on top of the American 'sea of faith' so to speak.
For example, does anyone really believe that if the true historical origins of the bible were discussed in the so called bible-belt's schools, that all the good Baptists and Pentacostals would tolerate this as 'just another viewpoint'? No, they would demand that the history teachers refrain from 'trashing' their faith that the Bible was the inspired word of god and that it was it its final form around 100 CE. They would be aghast to hear that agents of education purporting the notion that the Bible was the work of human authors who drew from various sources such as Babylonian, Egyptian, and Greek mythology in compiling a religious text. They would balk at the idea that descriptions of events in the bible possibly never took place or were greatly exaggerated (for example, battles involving 500,000 people; even military battles today hardly ever grow this large.)
And what would they suggest as a remedy for this 'humanist attack on their sacred faith'? What else, but so called "equal time". They would say that now since the historians had their say, it would only be fair that they did as well, as would use this opertunity as a way to sneak christian prostheletizing back in state supported education. Primarily for this reason I find it impossible to fairly incorporate the bible into classes where the validity of its origins or veracity would come into question.
name: Bart Meltzer
email: bartman99@iname.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 12:10 PST
I served 20 years in the Navy to protect our freedom. The first ammendment of the constitution provides for freedom of religon. Which also means freedom from religon. I am an Atheist and am raising my children that way. Therefore, I am against any attempts at circumventing the first ammendment by providing any form of bible study. I teach my children the bible is a complete fabrication, and that no form of religon is neccessary to be good moral citizens. I also teach them tolerance, respect, and the diversity of other peoples beliefs.
Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion.
name: Carletta Sims
email: csims@atheists.org
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 15:27 PST
Any and all scientific and medical breakthroughs, industrial and technological advances have made human existence more pleasant, increased longevity, and given freedoms abundant--all without help from studies of the Bible.
There is no empirical evidence that any correlation between these human accomplishments and religion are intertwined. To the contrary, these were done in spite of religion's tight reins.
Teaching the Bible in school would mean some students would have to endure the incorrectness, discrepancies, etc. and force them into deciphering fact from fiction. It's apparent that this idea is to get children indoctrinated against their will, since they don't voluntarily attend a religious venue elsewhere. Teachers would ultimately lean toward their personal religious influence, thereby boldly overstepping rules of state/church separation. No Bible in school, period.
name: Paul J. Morris
email: MorrisDO@aol.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 19:15 PST
Although I have no problem with the comparative study of the world's religions, and their impact on world history (both positively and negatively), we should draw the line on actual study of the Bible, Koran, or other religious tracts at the public school level. They are, after all, works of fiction, and their importance to many of the world's people can be stressed without their actual use as study aids or texts. The fine line between studying the Bible and espousing its views is too easily breached.
name: Eve Rawley
email: fluxion@hotmail.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 19:25 PST
I didn't vote because I thought the question was too broad: it asked about teaching the Bible as history _and_ literature.
I believe that the Bible can indeed be taught as literature, but certainly not as history.
The second question also was too ambiguous in my opinion, as there was no clear indication of what was meant by "teaching the Bible."
name: Samuel Rivier
email: HUMEanist@aol.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 19:42 PST
I really think my vote was a little inaccurate, because I don't think the bible can be taught completely objectively if by teaching the bible you mean covering some of the major stories in it. Therefor, I oppose teaching the bible to this degree. I think it should be mentioned that it is the primary text of the christian religion, but its historical accuracy is questionable. Along with that, the same should be said about greko-roman mythology, the koran, and a general govering of the major eastern and pagan religions should be taught. This should all be fairly equal in length, and no downgrading of one religion over another or promotion in the same fashion.
name: Jared Blackburn
email: blackjar@infidels.org
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 20:15 PST
This is too simplistic a way of phrasing the question, so I can give no blacket opinion. My view is as follows:
For teaching the Bible as history, the answer is a resounding "NO!" To call the Bible "History" is to imply that it is fact.
Teaching the Bible as "Literiture" is more complex. Small samples (e.g., a psalm), in a certain context, if done without ascerting it as accurate, and with fair repressentation of similar works (e.g., the Koran) may be valid. However, any extensive teaching of the Bible would not be acceptable in apublic school -- especially if done in a require class, such as English.
Note, that this is a purest (and perhaps idealist) view. I am aware that there are plenty of people who would use it as a way to teach religion directly.
(Also not that mentioning historical peope were influence by the Bible (without reading the Bible) would obvioulsy be OK -- Dr. O'Haire herself often did this, as many stupid things were done in the name of the Bible.)
name: Vance Vagell
email: vagell001@wcsu.ctstateu.edu
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 20:24 PST
If we include the bible in school study,
why would we not also include the koran,
or even ATH 101, "Introduction to Atheist
principles"; maybe ATH 201 "Moral systems
in atheism". I don't think that the
school boards in these towns would be up
to that! - Vance
PS
I'm a college freshman
name: Stacy Irwin
email: stirwin@bayou.uh.edu
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 20:53 PST
Good day, I took the poll of 2 questions answering no and yes, respectively. But I was more puzzled by the questions than by anything else.
"Should public schools use the Bible as an instructional tool in courses on history and literature?"
The nature of this question leans toward a self-righteous sense of morality. I feel that if I answer yes to this question (which is possibly a more moral answer) that I will be endorsing the forced use of Bibles as teaching tools in in ALL public schools. The question would be far better-intentioned and meaningful (and more relevant to the preceding article) if it were phrased "Can public schools use..." or "Should public schools be able to use..." I also think that everyone should realize that it is more likely upto the instructor of a course in a public school whether or not to use the Bible to supplement the current curriculum. If a public school ALLOWS it, then the instructor may USE it. This is quite different from a school actually using it.
Question 2 was equally dubious:
"Do you think that teaching the Bible 'objectively as part of a secular program of education' in public schools can be done?"
Here again, the wording is misleading. Many polls are biased, report incorrect distributions and opinions, or taint the poll-takers' answers simply from the wording of the question. A pro-lifer might ask "Are you against murder?" And, of course, 99% of the people polled would answer yes, they ARE against murder. But the pro-lifer may use these inflated statistics to show that the majority of the American population is against abortion since it is obviously murder. Now, this is an exagerated example, but American Atheists does itself a great disservice by coloring its own polls so effectively as to suggest that the average atheist or secularist would be wrong if they answered a certain way. In this way, AA is no better than CBN, the Christian Coalition, or other religious dogmatic pollers who use statistics and so-called polls to taint people's very opinions.
For this question, what exactly is meant by "teaching the Bible"? This should be more clearly worded, because the first interpretation may lead to an incorrect portrayal of that person's choice.
Should instructors read from the Bible in class?
No. Nor should they be ABLE to.
Can they cite generalizations about the Bible that lend credability to academic/social concepts?
Sure.
Should they?
I, personally, don't think so.
There are several other ways the question could be read, and I would be happy to supply anyone with more interpretaions, as well as more differing answers to those questions.
Once American Atheists ceases taking a moralistic stance on an academic issue, the results of the poll will be both more reaistic and more accurate. Otherwise, the questions themselves will prevent the reporting of the answers.
Sincerely,
Stacy Irwin
President, Freethinkers Union
(and yes, I am a secular atheist)
name: Merilyn Brunner
email: miladymib@aol.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 21:35 PST
I think that information about the Bible needs to be taught to people of all ages. For instance, who really wrote the book, the methods used by Christians to eliminate other religions, the fallacy of those who determined what should be included or excluded and how things were incorrectly interpreted, how the Church kept knowledge and information completely hidden from the public; and teach people to look at the Bible critically: exactly what DOES it say? Do people (of all ages) really believe most concepts without urging or brainwashing on the part of the community? This is something that should be minutely examined, discussed, and brought to light. Also, part of studying the Bible would be to study previous religious concepts, beliefs, rituals, and myths. How original is Christianity? These things should absolutely be brought to light and people should be informed.
Thank you.
name: John A Baumgartner
email: JohnInHollister@webtv.net
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 22:11 PST
Once again they (Religionists) are trying to enter thru the public school door with yet another beguilement. It's past
time for the Supreme Court to
finally say "separation of church
and state" prevails. Religion
belongs solely in church and homes.
name: Richard A. Angorn
email: angorn@ufl.edu
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 22:27 PST
When I was in school in Boston in the late '30s
and early '40s an elective course in "Ancient
History" was offered.Included were Greek and Roman
mythology. We all understood that their gods were
mythological characters and the teachers treated
them as such. I think that today most teachers do
not recognize the Bible as mythology and could not
teach an unbiased course.
name: Robert Klusener
email: klusener@jps.net
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 22:42 PST
The Christian Bible is too filled with violence and incest and human sacrifice to have any place in the schools. When the extermination of all life on the planet except one boatload is taught as a reasonable response to misbehavior, our children can only be warped and confused by the lesson. I strongly believe that teaching ought to be confined to the traditional sciences and language and arts.
name: Charles Sommers
email: csommers@chorus.net
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 23:16 PST
In the opinion of many (of us) most of the
events described in the bible are NOT "history"
in that they didn't really happen, but rather
are folk-lore, and mythology . Those parts which
did happen are embelished with mythological
causes, reasons and results.
Teaching any implication that the events were true
would be proselytization, and even so little as suggesting some parts did not actually happen would would be greated with charges of "anti-religion" from the community's religious factions.
Teaching about its origins would be extremely
controversial with some sect constantly
complaining.
Religion's role in history could perhaps
be taught more objectively - such as the
wars of religion, the role of religion in
influencing public policy etc. as these are
somewhat more "factual", and many are more current
and documented. This too, of course, would
lead to endless controversies.
I think the religious community should think
twice before opening this can of worms.
I think they would learn that having teachers
not "teach" the bible is better than having
them teach it "incorrectly".
name: Stephen Krueger
email: ebolashock@yahoo.com
Tuesday, 23-Nov-1999 23:43 PST
I find it disturbing that they would even try to promote teaching the Bible in public schools. I might understand if you choose to read it as an optional book or something for a humanities type class, but otherwise keep that thing out of schools.
name: Obeah
email: obeah87@yahoo.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 00:02 PST
I think the Bible could be taught in a non-proselytizing way, but only by a courageous teacher with intellectual integrity.
I would support teaching about the Bible in literature classes, but probably not history. I'm an atheist, but I recognize that there is a great deal of allusion to Bible stories and symbolism in other works. Therefore, students should be familiar with the Bible on a literary level.
name: Arthur B. Waugh
email: abwaugh@sirius.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 00:38 PST
The only place for a discussion of the Bible would be in a class about Religions of the World.
Of course, a course called Christianity and its evil influence on the world could include some discussion of the Bible as a Terrorist Manual for True Believers.
name: Jim Dickison
email: jimd194666@aol.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 03:50 PST
If the Bible were to be taught in public schools...
Would they teach the inconsistencies in the Bible?
Would they teach the contradictions in the Bible?
Would they teach the scientific fallacies in the Bible?
Would they teach the origins of the Bible? How it was put together piecemeal with many parts omitted? How it has been edited by kings? How sections have attributed to various authors when they were actually written many years after those authors were long gone?
Would they teach how the Bible has been used for centuries to justify slavery, inquizitions, crusades, murders, witch hunts, and the suppression of the rights of minorities, homosexuals, women, and those of other religions?
Would they teach the part that says it's OK for daughters to sleep with their father?
Would they teach the part that says being mauled by bears is just punishment for children calling an old man "bald head?"
Would they teach the part that says you should let people have their way with your daughters to protect angels from being sodomized?
Somehow, I don't see the curriculum I just outlined being approved for use in public schools! So... what, exactly, WILL they teach if they succeed in bringing the Bible into public schools???
I really don't want to find out! Let's just keep religion out of the schools!
Jim Dickison
name: Robert Phillips
email: phillips.robert@usa.net
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 04:05 PST
While an understanding of religion, not just Christianity, could help students understand the underlying motivations of people and their actions, historically, it is certainly doubtful that such an education would be delivered in an unbiased, objective, or even honest! way. Instead, our nations dominant and most agressive theology would be loosed to brow beat our children and dilute their real education.
name: Robert
email: reform4@hotmail.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 06:25 PST
In my opinion the questions are too broad. #1
the bible could be used as a tool to teach literature
for literature is fiction based on story telling, were
as history is supposed to be based on fact and give
an accurate interpretation of the past (were the
bible fails). This question should be two parts.
name: Linda Garrette
email: lgarrette@yahoo.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 06:55 PST
The most comprehensive study of the Bible I've ever read "Is
it God's Word" by Joseph Wheless, could be used as the basis for teaching Bible history and literature. Whoever studies the Bible seriously will learn much about the culture of nomadic middle eastern tribes (still at war with each other after so many thousands of years) and how myths and superstitions were critical to people of that era.
name: Robin E. Cassidy
email: sciencebkfan@aol.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 09:15 PST
Once you allow the Bible in for any reason, someone somewhere will find a way to use it as a springboard to try to push a particular religious agenda. The Bible it one book that has no place in public school.
name: Matthew Weir
email: mweir@myna.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 09:20 PST
Teaching the Bible in public schools is a step in the wrong direction. If my child's public school began teaching the Bible, I would put them in a private school immediately. Public schools are funded by my tax money and my children have the right to an objective education. Public schools should give my children an objective education or I should get my taxes back. How can they possibly CUT music from the curriculum and ADD the Bible?
name: Dan M. Dunn
email: danmac@risecon.net
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 10:26 PST
All the world's great religions should be taught as an elective in our public high schools. Not as history or literature but as a comparison of different supernatural belief systems that have had such a great impact on the lives of human beings. I'm affraid the ACLJ would have a problem with that because they have an 'agenda'even though they claim they don't. They want christianity taught as the one and only true religion in the world with no mention of any the others. I believe that if a course in comparitive religion was taught, many of our intelligent children will see religion for what it really is; a lame attempt to answer the question of why we exist, and a way for a few people to have power over others.
name: Michael Easler
email: MIke_Easler@fc.broward.k12.fl.us
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 12:36 PST
Having been raised in the Baptist faith before becoming an Atheist,
I recognize this as but another disgusting attempt to proselytize America's
youths. It never dawns upon them that a sizable minority (i.e. the intelligensia) have
deliberately chosen to exclude the blather they are peddling from the lives of their family members.
name: Kay
email: kaysings@hotmail.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 12:58 PST
The whole idea of presenting the bible as either history or literature in a public school curriculum ranks with the most ridiculous and/or cheeky I've heard in a long time. As history, the bible is not just inaccurate; it's largely fictionalized. But as "literature"--puuh-leez. The dictionary has more literary value--and probably more insight. The fact is, this whole flap is just the christian fanatic establishment trying to sneak around church-state separation by yet another door. I wish I had as much gall.
Kay
name: Kristy
email: littlesky_star@hotmail.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 13:40 PST
As a child, I have been raised to respect other people and religion. Being an atheist has not changed that. But when schools who claim to be "public" and "free from religion" try to pressure students into learning history written by a fictitious novel, this is where I have to stand against religion. There is a reason why public schools are called "public". It means they are not supposed to be attached to religion of any form, or open up religious clubs or classes in order to stop kids from feeling pressured by religion. A history course on events that happened in the Bible is no different. Imagine how it would be if you were a child from a foreign country who worships a different god, and you are forced to be taught something against your preffered religion. This could hurt the child and its family. There is also this fact to keep in mind. The Bible was written by a human hand, therefore it is flawed in its opinion on what happened because its creator believed in a certain opnion and wrote from that certain opnion. The people who teach the class will be biased, too. So the point I have to say is to say NO to Christian history. If you think about it, it can create more harm than good.
name: Tim Sullivan
email: virgie@teleport.com
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 16:32 PST
This “bible club, etc.” stuff is a flagrant violation of the Separation of State and church.
First of all, the notion that a bound collection of verbiage consisting mainly of fairy tales could be consider historical would be laughable if it weren't so pathetic. There are special institutions designed almost entirely for the sole purpose of promulgating the "knowledge" or "history" of these bibles to the gullable, brow-beaten masses. These institutions are called churches--let these bible scholars go to them or the public libraries and the internet--better yet. The scholars can find almost anything they want there.
This bible-as-history is a thinly veiled trick for the unwary. This heinous virus christianity, as incarnated in the minds of its perpetrators, would love to infect the minds of the young and impressionable. This claim of non-proselytization is a code-word for *definite* proselytization and also a religious test to single out young Atheists for punishment and ostracization. Much of this happens by simple default: “We did not see you at the pole, today,” or “You haven’t made it to our bible club, yet.” This marks either the Atheist -or the student whose particular religion varies significantly with what the bible club is teaching-, as an outcast and possible scapegoat:
“If you do not love the Lord enough to come to our club,
maybe we will beat the love of Jesus into you, after school.”
When you think of christianity, think of a horrendous bacterium ready to spread its mangy fibrils and noxious exotoxins over the freshly-prepared agar medium of a petri dish--or captive mind. And, in the classroom, children are the captives of so many influences. There is so much peer pressure. There is the quest to succeed as imposed by their own will and the will of the instructor. There are the expectations of the community. These forces must beworkable and positive. They mustn’t be brought down by compromising the separation of state and church by including such a foul concept as christianity into the curriculum.
Tim Sullivan
name: Matthias Weiss
email: mweiss@math.niu.edu
Wednesday, 24-Nov-1999 17:34 PST
Public schools should be institutions of
scientific and scholarly learning. Bible
study serves no such purpose. The fact that
a certain culture considers these ancient
texts as "holy" does not qualify them as
scholarly works. Unlike, say, Euclid's "Elements",
the Bible's role in today's Western culture
is not founded on its own inherent merits, but
is based on the weight of subjective preference
it is given by its followers. In that sense, namely
in that it serves as foundation for a theistic
ideology, it is more alike to Hitler's "Mein
Kampf" or the "Communist Manifesto". From an
objective and unbiased point of view, even its
merits as piece of literature are doubtful because
of its numerous glorifications of moral perversion,
ethnic cleansing, genocide, and superstition in
the name of the Judeo-Christian deity.
name: Conrad Knauer
email: knauer@mindspring.com
Thursday, 25-Nov-1999 09:26 PST
While I definitely feel that "teaching the bible" (as literal truth) in public schools is wrong (and illegal), I do not have a problem with reading from it in a literature/comparative religion class where other religious texts are discussed impartially as well.
In fact, it was during High School (in New York City) that I had a class like this; we discussed the Bible (mostly the Old Testament), Gilgamesh epic and other culture's myths as literature. Thus stripped of claims to be "truth", one could see the Bible for what it really is: the mythology of a bygone culture. In that light, I began thinking about religious issues in general and over time, I came to the conclusion that there is no god.
Thus I feel that the Bible can have a place in public education, so long as it is treated like any other book and open to critical examination.
name: Joshua Ludtke
email: ikilldkosh@aol.com
Thursday, 25-Nov-1999 10:59 PST
America is a Western nation, and as such, it's culture, society, and government have, are, and will continue to be influenced by the Bible. As a historical document, the Bible has some extremely glaring faults, and it would be incredibly wrong to teach the book as Biblical fundamentalists would want it portrayed. However, which one of us would be willing to say that books like the Odyssey or Iliad shouldn't be in anyway mentioned in schools? They contain as much religious fluff as does the Bible, but they are also the greatest known literary achievements of the ancient Greek civilization. Should not the literary achievement of ancient Israel be treated with a similar dignity?
name: Betsy McCall
email: ejuliam@hotmail.com
Friday, 26-Nov-1999 00:02 PST
The only context I can see where the Bible MIGHT be good to "teach" in public school is in the context of a comparative religion course. A context where the differences between various religions, Christian sects, and atheism/agnosticism can all be looked at. But since the Christian fundamentalists pushing the whole Bible-in-public-school thing would never hear of a comparative religion course and have as much as said so, this doesn't seem likely to happen. One wonders, though, what they would say if they got their Bible-as-lit/hist thing passed if CATHOLICS were teaching their Protestant children (of course, it would not be a problem if it were the reverse)... Outside the context of a comparative religion course, though, the Bible is not much use, except perhaps as literature. It's certainly not very accurate history.
name: Peter Young
email: pyoung@provide.net
Friday, 26-Nov-1999 09:56 PST
It is unrealistic fantasy to pretend that the
Bible doesn't exist. Without reference to it,
much of the body of literature, Amercan and
World, cannot be properly interpreted.
Currently there are ongoing claims that the
United States is a Christian Nation; that the
founding fathers never intended a separation of
church and state; that our laws must be based
upon the religious laws outlined in the
Judaeo/Christian mythos. It is my opinion that
a good comparitive class, using Greco/Roman,
Teutonic, Hindu, and perhaps American myths could
do wonders to help dispel any wished for magical
connection between the creator of the universe
and the United States.
name: Kerry Lyseng
email: k_lyseng@hotmail.com
Friday, 26-Nov-1999 12:36 PST
Teaching the Bible in schools goes against every right we have as human beings. Our lives should not be chosen for us by some guy in a robe. I have lived to see, read, and hear many things, but this just makes me sick! Thank you.
name: Eric Breitenstein
email: ebreit@hotmail.com
Friday, 26-Nov-1999 17:21 PST
Because of the very nature of much of what the Bible is made up of, i.e. murder, rape, gang rape, genocide, and so on, teachers will either have to completely ingnore %75 percent of the content or they will have to risk threatening the religious beliefs of Christians.
name: heather
email: conechiwa7@aol.com
Friday, 26-Nov-1999 17:31 PST
There is no way that teaching about the Bible in school can be fair to anyone. The christians will use it as an excuse to attempt to spread their beliefs (as a rightful christian "should")and i'm sure it would anger many people and discourage some students from doing well because of it. So if there happens to be a discussion on biblical allegory -the atheist student probably won't be able to participate and may recieve a lower grade because of it.(happened to me)
name: Brook Warren
email: ledskof@bellsouth.net
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 00:31 PST
I have three points on this topic.
1)What outcome could teaching anything about the Christian Bible possibly bring about besides influencing kids into Christianity. If people want their kids to learn Christianity not only in the church, but also in the school, then send them to religious schools. That is what religious schools are for: The children of religious families who want their kids to be surrounded by religious education. Otherwise our schools should remain completely secular.
2) The bible has historical errors that do not coincide with the rest of history. If you tell kids that it is historical fact, then you also proselytize Christianity at them. No one besides Christians really have a reason to believe every historical error in the bible… Considering that the bible has historical errors which a healthy percentage of Christians acknowledge as errors, what parts of the bible are actually valid? If they are valid, they are valid because we have other history that validates them. And if we have other history that validates them, we have no reason to use the bible in the first place: We just use the other history texts. That way we don’t respect an establishment of religion in our public schools.
3) If Genesis is to be considered history, it is also to be considered correct science. If Christians get the bible into our schools, they will also be sneaking Creationism into our schools. We *do*not*want*that*. That could lead to the entire fictional Creation Science and logic being taught in schools.
Let’s not return to the dark ages please
name: Ed Kohler
email: ELK1937@aol.com
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 06:59 PST
We have a frist amendment for a good reason, bible teaching cant and wont be used objectivly.
name: Jonathan Bashor
email: BashorJR@hotmail.com
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 08:04 PST
There is something that should be taught, Biblical criticism and the history of
Christianity. If students are exposed to the
scholarship available in these areas, they will
better be able to judge the effect of
Christianity on civilization.
name: Joel Welty
email: jwelty@power-net.net
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 08:54 PST
The bible should be read in conjunction with other myths, such as the Greek myths, Celtic myths, African myths, Indian (both east & west) myths, etc. As history, the bible is flawed. As literature, the bible is crude and ill-written. Commentaries on the bible, such as Mark Twain's, should be included in the study. Those who do read the bible will find Jesus to be anti-family, harsh, threatening and intolerant. That is information I'd like all students to have. Those who study religious literature from many sources will see that Christians stole their best celebrations and stories from other myths. I'd like students to see that, too. Because I'd feel safer if there were more Humanists in the world, I'd like people to abandon supernatural religions in favor of human values and community ethics. Study of the bible in a historical and literary context would help achieve that goal. And study of the bible would stop demands for public group prayers, since Jesus says no one should pray that way, but should pray only in private. We should stop protecting religion from a critical examination. We should encourage students to examine religion just as they examine other historical movements, such as the industrial revolution with its horrors, such as the building of European empires with their atrocities and the growth of totalitarianism in our century with its raw injustice. Examine all these abominations -- including Christianity -- with the hope that knowing what they are, we will not be likely to perpetuate them.
name: Leon Tony Fulcher
email: frosty@coastalnet.com
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 10:00 PST
It's "here we go again" mentality.
They are already doing it! At what point will
the reactionary fanatics, and "all the good
religious people that just want to do what's
right" without putting in any effort to
discover any facts, ever stop?
name: John Kiel
email: liberal@tcon.net
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 13:04 PST
Ellen Johnson is correct---if theists would stick to "saving souls" and leave public education alone, this argument would never come up. Our public school children are already so far behind the other industrialized nations in science and math; we will fall even farther behind by wasting valuable instructional time on one of the many "holy" old, outdated, and useless books in the world.
name: Barb Reiland
email: bfreiland@cavemen.net
Saturday, 27-Nov-1999 17:55 PST
Religion and its accompanying books should be taught,
objectively, only as a part of history; not as history.
In literature I see no problem on teaching religious
influences in art & literature.
To actually accept that Bible courses would be objective
stretches my credulity.
name: Peregrin Walker
email: peregrin@yahoo.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 00:36 PST
Many religious-based works offer insights into literature and history. Exclusive use of the Bible is not acceptable in a public school forum. The schools would have to use so many different religious works in order to remain impartial that such a course would be completely unworkable in a public school setting.
Best to leave such courses of instruction to the college level. In this fashion, we can avoid the entire issue.
name: BoB Troth
email: bob@air0day.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 11:29 PST
if teaching the bible as history is not proselytizing, i'm afraid i don't know what is.
name: Nick J. Grip
email: spinachnjg@aol.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 14:01 PST
Religion has no place in the public school system because of it's diversity. Religions are believe systems that are mutually exclusive and creates division among students. It does not belong in any public function, The State should be totally neutral in this respect. But if you can get this trough these peoples heads I wish you good luck. I have given up on it long ago. (Thanks for your care)
name: Heather Rathjen
email: hrathjen@gladstone.uoregon.edu
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 14:25 PST
The Bible has no place in public schools. The Bible is pro-slavery, misogynistic, and completely useless. The bible is nothing more than hateful propaganda that no child should be exposed to--especially not public school children.
name: Chester Twarog
email: ctwarog@hotmail.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 14:27 PST
Only a religiously neutral or Atheist could teach the Bible in a secular manner.
When "God" of the Old Testament states that he is the "Lord God of Israel", it should immediately be apparent that this is just one of many gods. Unfortunately, the Bible can not be taught objectively because too much is overlooked or not taught even in religious Biblical studies.
name: Katy A.
email: xara@arcana.zzn.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 14:39 PST
Learning the Bible is a choice. It is not right to have it taught to children who might not choose it. Everyone should be able to choose their religion and religious beliefs. Religions following the Bible are not the only religions and it would be unfair for the other religion's followers to have that taught to their children if it is unwanted, and again, children have the same rights to choose what they believe without having the Bible shoved in their face.
name: Stephen Miller
email: maxomaggot@aol.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 15:42 PST
Why would these organizations only select the Bible to study if they were not promoting Christianity? They do not propose that we study the Vedas, or the Quran. As a student in high school, I can say safely that it is impossible to tell what the Bible says without insinuating that what the Bible says is truth, because the relgiion it advocates is alive and strong. The instructor would, no doubt, be Christian. However, kids do already learn about religion in schools. Think of all of the Greek and Roman mythology that students are required (yes, REQUIRED) to learn. Of course, no one believes in Greek myth (esp. the teachers), so it can be taught in an objective fashion. Still, I'd rather take a look at other religions as well. But I can do that on my own time, separate from school.
name: Sue Useem
email: Sue2001@aol.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 15:47 PST
As a high school student and an atheist, having a Bible in a public school is a direct contradiction to what the American government is about. If there were a course about the Bible, why isn't there one of the Torah or Koran? I have come into situations in school where you are expected to have a religion, and when I inform my teachers I am atheist, they usually back down from whatever religious activity or discussion they would want to do. As long as we keep our voices heard and never pretend to be religious, our rights will always be kept.
name: Shawn Browning
email: sjn_browning@yahoo.com
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 17:23 PST
With such a majority of Christians in this nation--and how quickly the power of the majority is abused--it is essential that religion or any of its disguises remain outside the public arena.
name: Ric Frambach
email: rjf@radiks.net
Sunday, 28-Nov-1999 17:57 PST
While I would trust an atheist to use a bible in teaching literature, perhaps, it would be a very poor tool to use as history. One must first ascertain its veracity. Being written by men, it does represent a collective view of a certain people, etc. However, the danger of its misuse is simply too high to even allow it in the public schools. VERY few teachers are able to separate the 'book' from its christian origins. Religious matters should be covered in churches, homes, etc. A public school teacher has so little time before the students that it would be a waste to attempt to study such a vacuous, contradiction-ridden, hodge-podge of writings.
Go to Poll/Results.
![[back]](../backarrow.gif) Back
to Top of Forum.
![[top]](/uparrow.gif)
Copyright
© 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 by American Atheists.
|
