Brayton points out that this will probably result in a lot of lawsuits.
As one commenter points out:
No, the real trouble with this is that it forces the local school boards into a very difficult position. They have already handed the local boards a suitcase bomb by issuing a curriculum mandate in a highly politically charged field with no attendant guidelines. This latest move handcuffs that bomb to the boards’ collective wrists. They must come up with a Bible course, and responsibility for its content falls entirely on their heads.
They know that if the course isn’t objective and scholarly, they will immediately be sued and lose. If it is, a large block of their constituency will be outraged. Given that it isn’t their personal money that will be at risk in any lawsuit, how many board members do you think will be willing to stand on principle and tell the proselytizers where to go?
My question is this: Granted that it is certainly possible to have a curriculum that includes the Bible as subject matter taught in such a way as to be non-religious. But is it possible that there is an establishment clause problem in that the original law singles out the Bible for such treatment and does not require such treatment about any other subject matter (Q’ran, Talmud, or even Art or Music for that matter)?
Separate from that, of course, are questions about how much taxpayer money will be wasted in lawsuits that could have been avoided were it not for a vocal minority with a religious agenda.
would be the key. The Bible As (or In) Literature is an elective offered by a variety of high schools around the nation but not as often around here. To the extent that the course doesn’t proselytize, it couldn’t be construed as “establishing” a religion. That would not preclude examination, however, as to why the course singles out the Bible to the exclusion of other holy texts. One could infer, then, by default, that the course establishes a religion nonetheless by virtue of the fact that it excludes similar study other religious texts. Then, could a course only in the Quran or the Talmud be reasonably construed as having the same “establishing” effect?
<
p>Oy. Best to take out provisions that mandate courses be offered purely on student request.
<
p>The Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks do include a standard that acknowledges the importance of understanding biblical references, but that’s about it.
… that the course could be taught effectively in a secular way that isn’t a problem for establishment and that, as a separate matter, it is troubling that this law singles out the Bible and that may be a problem for establishment (although I’m not sure).
<
p>I wonder how many other laws are out there that single out the Bible for special treatment?
we stuck mostly to books within the bible that could be found in the koran and torah. I think that nixes most of the problems you have with it, especially if other courses were offerred that looked into other texts from other world religions. There’s only so much time an elective has if it’s going to be anything other than a survey course, even by high school standards. In a half-year elective, you really good dig deep into the old testament. Not so much every other major religious book across the world…
so long as it’s made inherently clear that it’s not religious in nature. When I was in high school, we had a class entitled “bible as literature” that I took. The discription of it made it very clear that it wasn’t a religious class and would take a look at the bible from various perspectives. I actually found the class exceptionally interesting – we had a diverse group of people in it (jews, catholics, protestants – including mormom – a muslim and plenty agnostic/athiests), so we could talk about things coming from various perspectives.
<
p>We mostly looked at metaphors, literary devices and tried to have a better understanding of the perspective of those who actually wrote the various books contained within. We also looked at the bible’s influence on literature, reading books that had borrowed on biblical ideas, etc.
<
p>All that said, this class really isn’t for everyone – especially those who are actually religious and evangelical in the sense of wanting to ‘spread the Word.’ If anyone would be interested in the class because of words like faith or belief – wrong class. If someone were interested to teach the class because they could teach about the way things are – or something like that – wrong class. My best advice for anyone who’s interested in the bible for inspiration or guidance or or rules or faith would be to take a bible class at their local church or synogogue, or join a bible group.
<
p>If they’re interested to learn who and how it was written, its impacts on literature and society and many of the rich metaphors contained within the book… then consider looking at it as a work of literature, from a secular point of view.
<
p>It’s a tight rope to walk on – certainly possible, just tough. It really isn’t for every student – and I’d question if it were for every school or part of the country.