Labels

60 Minutes (1) 9/11 (3) abortion (1) acting (5) activism (4) adaptation (1) advertizing (2) age (1) amendment (1) america (6) American Dream (4) american people (5) articles (1) arts funding (2) assassination (2) banking system (3) Banks (1) beach (1) beliefs (13) Bible (6) big government (5) big money (7) big oil (3) billionaires (3) bin Laden (1) budget battle (1) business (8) capitalism (10) Catholic Church (1) Cell Phones (1) chain reaction (1) child abuse (1) childbearing (2) childhood (4) children (4) china (2) choice (3) Christianity (6) christmas (1) Church (1) Cincinnati Ohio (1) Class (2) clean energy (1) climate change (3) coal (1) Cointelpro (1) college (1) comedy (3) Communication (1) conflict of interest (2) congress (6) conservative (2) conservative policies (7) conservatives (5) Constitution (5) corporate america (5) corporations (3) corruption (3) creative process (8) creative puersuits (1) creative pursuits (3) creativity (10) crowdfunding (2) death tax (1) democratic party (2) democrats (2) denial (4) depression (1) disasters (2) disasters. 9/11 (1) dying (2) earthquake (1) ecological issues (5) ecology (3) education (3) elderly/disabled issues (3) elections (1) energy resources (1) entitlements (1) environment (4) environment legislation (1) epa (1) family (4) far right wing (10) fiction (4) film (2) fine art (3) fire arms (1) flat tax (1) fossil fuels (2) founding fathers (1) fox news (2) freedom of speech (3) Fundamentalists (1) gas (1) gay rights (2) george bush (4) George Herbert Walker Bush (1) global warming (4) god (2) government subsidies (2) gratitude (2) health (2) health care (2) heritage foundation (1) Herman Cain (1) hitchhiking (1) holiday season (1) hollywood (3) Homeland Security (2) homosexuality (1) hypocracy (4) ideological viewpoints (4) income (4) Indiegogo (2) investigative reporting (1) investing (1) Islamic Terrorists (1) japan (3) jesus (7) jobs (3) joe Biden (1) Judaism (3) judgements (2) killings in az. (1) King John (1) koch brothers (2) kock brothers (1) la times (1) liberals (1) los angeles (3) love (4) magical realism (3) Martial Law (1) medicaid (1) mental illness (3) middle age (1) Middle America (2) middle class (1) miscarriage (1) monsanto (1) mortgage crisis (1) murder (1) national endowments for the arts (1) National Security (2) nazis (1) new years resolutions (3) news reports (1) newspapers (1) Newt Gingrich (1) novelist (1) novels (2) npr (2) Nuclear Power (3) Obama (2) occupy movement (1) Patriot Act (2) PBS (1) Pearl Harbor (1) peter pan syndrome (1) photos (2) politics (6) pollution (2) poor (2) Portable Devices (1) power (1) President (1) private industry (1) Progressives (1) Prop 23 (1) propaganda (3) quantum physics (1) real estate (1) reform (2) regulation (2) relationships (2) religion (4) religious extremism (5) religious intolerance (4) remembering (1) Republican Candidates (1) repubulican party (2) responsibility (2) revolutionary war (1) rich (1) risk (1) san fransisco (1) sarah palin (3) sarahpac (1) scholarship (1) Science (2) Science Fiction (1) screenplays (1) screenwriter (1) screeplays (3) self-employed (1) self-publishing (3) sexual attraction (2) short stories (4) snow (1) Socialism (1) Star Trek (1) states rights (1) suicide (1) super committee (1) support (1) supreme court (1) surveillance (1) taxes (6) tea party (11) technology (2) term limits (1) Terrorists (1) texting (1) the beatles (1) the big bang (1) the Constitution (2) the democratic party (1) the left (1) the military (1) the new economy (1) The Occupy Movement (2) The Rich (3) Theater (1) time (1) Titannic (1) tucson az. (1) tv (1) Twin Towers (2) u.s. (2) Un-Indicted Conspirators (1) us budget (1) us government (1) Wall Streets (1) wealth (2) weather (3) weathy (1) Welfare (1) wisconsin (1) women (2) work (3) writer (3) writing (5)

Monday, September 3, 2012

"Should Bible Classes be allowed in public schools?"


This was posted by the novelist Anne Rice on her Facebook Page asking for opinions. This below is my response (expanded, of course).

Ms. Rice I'm sorry, but there's a very great distance between what this Governor is advocating (proselytizing Bible 'studies') and what you're advocating (the history of and discerning what/where/how the 'Bible' has influenced 'Western civilization'). This State Official is advocating the opinions of the most radically Reich in her state to influence any and all students about Das Book (which is really all "The Bible" means since for centuries it was the ONLY Book that was allowed to be 'read' [mostly taught, since only the most powerful could even read]).

This would be simple indoctrination and not anything approaching 'study' at all. This is not Constitutionally valid and therefore should not even be considered and should be struck down with all speed (if possible) by the Supreme Court (not that that's going to happen).

From the article in question: Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has signed into law a bill that allows the establishing of elective classes that focus on the Bible and its influence on western civilization.
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/ariz-governor-signs-bill-to-allow-bible-classes-in-public-schools-73485/#2Rmb6bAVQOzeFMpi.99

"A teacher who instructs a course offered under this section in its [blogger emphasis added] appropriate historical context and in good faith shall be immune from civil liability and disciplinary action," reads the bill.

Ah, and here's the rub. "...in good faith..." There are so many small points of darkness in this potential 'teaching' that boggle the imagination. In bringing in this seemingly benign 'educational opportunity' a gaping hole is being introduced into the Constitutional fabric of the nation. Born-agains are shouting about 'Christian pursecution' while striving to back-door their particular brand of 'Christianity' into the Law of the land.

Never mind that most of the students who would be subject to whatever material that such a 'course' might bring are already 'of The Faith.'  So why can't they receive such information from their Church? Because that is not the intent of this 'bill.'

The insidiousness of this 'bill' would be the means of opening similar 'legislation' in other states. It would be a seemingly innocuous teaching of 'history' to any and all who 'wished to partake.' For now. 

For those of  us whose ideas and beliefs are different from those of the Far Reich, now is the time to speak out against this 'legal means' of 'teaching about "The Bible." ' I am not opposed to the ideas of The Man who they (think they) believe in, but I do oppose any means of further indoctrination in a country that is increasingly non-Christian. Even for those of us who consider ourselves "Christian" (and I count myself [in a qualified way] among those believers), this seems like a non-issue. But I assure you, it isn't.

No comments:

Post a Comment