EDITORIAL: Let schools teach and churches preach
One would think that during this time of austerity, the Barrow County Board of Education would be intently focused on some very critical financial and academic issues.
Instead, the board has jumped the tracks and gotten off on a religious crusade designed to put elective bible classes in its two high schools.
But last week’s BOE vote to support such classes doesn’t mean those classes will ever happen. There probably isn’t the money or time to add more electives to the schools’ existing curriculum. Even if there were, what teacher would want to put himself in the middle of a class that is bound to be a flashpoint for controversy?
Although supporters of this idea no doubt have good intentions, they are misguided in thinking this class is an important issue for the Barrow County School System.
These classes, approved by the Georgia Legislature a couple of years ago, purport to teach the bible as literature, an idea that appears reasonable on its surface.
But it’s very clear that what supporters of these classes really want is for public schools to sponsor Sunday School type teaching using the bible as a religious book, not just as a book of literature. That, of course, is illegal even with elective classes in public schools.
Those who defend these classes want to believe there is no controversy and that it would be easy to teach the class so that it wouldn’t offend anyone.
But that’s naïve. The class could well be taught by an atheist, or the follower of another religion. Is that what supporters have in mind? (Remember, there can’t be a religious litmus test for teachers.)
At the other extreme, the class could be taught by a religious zealot who uses the classroom to proselytize, an action that could result in expensive litigation.
Although the passion that supporters of these classes show is admirable, that passion should be focused on the academic concerns facing Barrow County students and the financial issues of the school system, not on religious controversies that serve only as a distraction.
Let schools teach, let churches preach.
Each has a role in our society.
Let’s don’t confuse the two.
But last week’s BOE vote to support such classes doesn’t mean those classes will ever happen. There probably isn’t the money or time to add more electives to the schools’ existing curriculum. Even if there were, what teacher would want to put himself in the middle of a class that is bound to be a flashpoint for controversy?
Although supporters of this idea no doubt have good intentions, they are misguided in thinking this class is an important issue for the Barrow County School System.
These classes, approved by the Georgia Legislature a couple of years ago, purport to teach the bible as literature, an idea that appears reasonable on its surface.
But it’s very clear that what supporters of these classes really want is for public schools to sponsor Sunday School type teaching using the bible as a religious book, not just as a book of literature. That, of course, is illegal even with elective classes in public schools.
Those who defend these classes want to believe there is no controversy and that it would be easy to teach the class so that it wouldn’t offend anyone.
But that’s naïve. The class could well be taught by an atheist, or the follower of another religion. Is that what supporters have in mind? (Remember, there can’t be a religious litmus test for teachers.)
At the other extreme, the class could be taught by a religious zealot who uses the classroom to proselytize, an action that could result in expensive litigation.
Although the passion that supporters of these classes show is admirable, that passion should be focused on the academic concerns facing Barrow County students and the financial issues of the school system, not on religious controversies that serve only as a distraction.
Let schools teach, let churches preach.
Each has a role in our society.
Let’s don’t confuse the two.
In saying this proposed course is an "elective" and aims to teach the Good Book as literature, they lie. Ironic that the plain truth escapes all these Good Christians. This stripe of sophistry is more in line with Satan than Godamighty.
Morals and character are 2 things that should be derived from the parents. The schools can only teach, "how." Parents must teach, "why," and "why not."
My belief also is that "proper" moral character is seeded by parents but it is the child's responsibility/obligation to define their own sense of right and wrong. If that were not the case, we'd have no hope of abolishing practices such as racism, misogyny, etc.
I sincerely hope these classes are not offered; but if they are, I will once again explain to my children why this country was founded with the separation of church and state as one of its guiding principals.
I would note however that if one is ignorant of the Christian Bible, even in a non-sectarian sense, one is uneducated thus it is not unreasonable to offer an elective such as this to high school students with the right policies in place. An honest atheist, Buddist or whatever could teach such a course satisfactorialy. The devil is in the details.
I am happy to see that Bible is being offered in the public school system. If religion is offered in our colleges, then why not public school?
The students don't have to take the class! :P What are they really afraid of?
1. Money goes to this class when we need more books in the library, another Music/History/Gym teacher, new carpet.
2. Students being ostracized if they don't take this class.
3. The class being taught by a teacher with a bias towards preaching rather than teaching.
I would absolutely not have any problems with these classes if they focused on religions, religious history etc. I think students would absolutely benefit from a class that touched on many religions, ranging from Mayan sun worshippers to Benjamin Franklin's version of Deism.
I myself would be interested in a class that described the similarities between Christianity, Islam, Rastafari, and Judaism compared to (Far) Eastern religions. Let's not forget our Native Americans and their Shamanism.
Where do I sign up for THAT class?
The groups seem to overlap. A lot.
I bet if this was over sports instead of Christianity, the situation would be totally different. If AMERICA and the WHITE HOUSE would turn back to GOD and not rely on themselves, we would have a better place. The crime rate would go down, poverty and bankrupcy would decline, there would be less child abuse, less drug abuse...America would be a MUCH better place.
For those who don't want religion in schools...as long as religious kids are allowed in public schools, there will be religion in schools. I stand up for Him and show that I am a Christian. In art, in what I wear, in what I say, and in who I hang around. I show my religion in school.
"You can take the commandments off the wall,
tell me not to display my faith at all,
but you'll never take away the joy I feel inside.
They may tell me I can't pray outloud, and hide God's name from the crowd,
but they can erase the blood that has been applied.
Let the world do what it may,
God will have the final say.
For He is the Author and Finisher of my Faith!!!"
Coincidence?
There's nothing wrong with religious fervor, but it does not belong in primary and secondary educational curriculum.
The reason this class has been brought to the fore front is clear, Mr. Ballard ran on this issue and this is the reason it got brought up in the first place.
We should not hide this under the gaze of being a Lit class. The reason this was brought up is strictly religious.
Do not be fooled!!
While your opinion has some interesting possibilities, it is clear to me that you are simply creating additional controversy over this issue to drum up some additional sales with this hot topic.
You have made it a point to pick ONLY NEGATIVE possibilities relating to this optional elective class, to stir debate over the Bible.
I would point out that many colleges and universities in this country already offer elective classes relating to religious studies, and have no fear of any litigation from the ACLU or anyone else for that matter.
The main reason there is no litigation is simple. It is not mandatory. No one is being forced to take the class. No civil rights are being violated, because a parent or student can take it or leave it depending on their personal views. No harm, no foul.
As far as this tactic of "ACLU will sue" mentality, being used to scare everybody in our county, I am very disappointed that folks have nothing better to do, than to sit around dreaming up various negative scenarios, of what if's to further their own
personal/political agendas. If you are against the Bible being offered because you don't personally believe in it, then just say that.
Stop dreaming up futuristic legal fantasy episodes,to bolster your points.
While I defend your right to disagree with the Board decision, I wish you would be a little less dramatic. You will still sell papers, don't worry.
Sincerely,
DuWayne R. Anderson
Winder, GA
You argue that simply because a class isn't mandatory, it should be taught. Would you feel the same way if the proposed elective class were entitled, "A history of pornography in America?" I suspect that controversial topic would not get a similar view from you or many others.
In addition, there are some real concerns about how such a class would be taught and by whom. If this were a comparitive religion class, then perhaps it could be taught with minimal controversy. But to teach only one religious text under the guise of "literature" does raise a number of problems.
And there is an issue of time and money. Schools do not have unlimited resources — time, teachers, money — to teach every class that board members, teachers, or students might like.
Based on the public comments surrounding this class, it is very apparent that the only reason it's being discussed is because some people perceive this to be something like a Sunday School class in public schools. That is both a legal and religious quandry.
I ask you this: Do you really want public schools to interpret the bible for your children? Frankly, I'd think most people would rather that be done in the home or at church.