Public school students in Tennessee may soon have the option of taking non-denominational, elective courses on the Bible.
A bill, which is currently waiting for the governor’s signature, coasted easily through the state legislature following a series of unanimous votes on the house floor.
Democratic Sen. Roy Herron, the bill’s sponsor, argues that the bill is necessary to give greater biblical literacy and understanding of the crucial importance of the Bible to students.
“I want students to study the greatest and most popular book in history,” Herron told CNN News.
“I want young people to understand how the Bible has enormously impacted literature, art, music, culture, history and politics. A Bible course will help students understand our culture and our highest and best values,” he added.
While the bill raises concerns among opponents that the measure would throw open school doors to proselytizing and breach the separation of church and state, Herron argues that the bill is constitutional.
“Our government school teachers cannot constitutionally preach the Bible, but they can teach the Bible,” Herron said.
Herron emphasized that the measure would not force schools throughout the state to offer Bible classes. Instead, the bill would protect schools that already offer Bible classes, while making the classes an option for schools that wish to participate.
Currently, 78 of Tennessee’s 95 counties feature elective courses on the Bible in their schools.
“There are school systems all over the state that are afraid to offer a course about the Bible because they’re afraid of being sued,” Herron said.
“But the First Amendment does not require students to leave their Bibles at home, and the First Amendment does not require hostility to the Bible or faith,” he concluded.
Public school students in over 35 states currently have the option of enrolling in non-denominational biblical literacy classes, according to the Bible Literacy Project.
Comments
Servant,
Could you please explain what you mean when you say the establishment clause is designed to prevent a "STATE RUN GOVERNMENT". That sentence seems inherently nonsensical. The clause actually states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" It is clear that the plain reading of this was the intent that the government should not dictate to the people what their religion should be. This is a fundamental heritage of the European settlers of the land that would one day become the United States of America. It is the free excercise clause reather than the establishment that I find most attendant on this issue. You mention the "atheist regime in china, islam in iran, syria, turkey etc." So it is ironic that you do not support the ACLU's efforts to protect your right to free excercise of your religion. It is the free excercise clause that guaruntees the right of students to pray in school and to be free from school officials attempting to direct or steer their religious excercise. It is tragically ironic that you object to the theocratic states of Iran etc. and yet you want to begin down the path of creating one here. Underneath the only real difference between those who promote this kind of behavior by schools, courthouses, etc. here and the Ayotollahs of Iran is that those here think those there have the wrong religion.
aha, ERV pulls out the liberalist/atheist's "trump card", the infamous establishment clause. Hey ERV, maybe you should go read it before you start spouting off at the mouth. The establishment clause is only so there is no STATE RUN GOVERNMENT, much like the atheist regime in china, islam in iran, syria, turkey etc.
the EC says nothing about learning religion, or a particular regligous book for that matter.
it's been through ignorance on both sides of the coin that has allowed people like you to bully Christians. your side, well b/c you just don't know the facts. my side b/c we haven't studied to find the truth, we just take the ACLU's word for it (WHICH IS WRONG)
may God bless you and lead you to salvation in Christ Jesus and him crucified
ERVs,
I don't flag anyone but myself, but if I did, I might start with your childish name-calling. We've had mature dialogue in the past; why not try to stay on that level?
"So where exactly in the bill of rights does it say they shouldn't?"
servent, Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Respect it or get out of my country.
HyperionOverseer, some hick flagged me. Was that you?
I believe that the Bible can be taught as literature, It is a book. But when my school has an Islamic speaker what are people who read this site going to say? They freak out. If my school did the same thing and tried to read the Qu'ran as literature I believe people would freak out. Christians need to realize the government of the USA cannot discriminate against religions.
The tenor of the comments on this blog demonstrate why schools are leery of offering a course on the Bible as literature. In my state of Maine it has long been understood that the study of the "Bible" in public schools in either comparative relifion, western culture, literature, or its use as a reference tool in a wide range of literature, humanities, philosophy, history, and drama classes is fully permitted. Yet such use is not widespread. This is not because of fears of secular persons complaining of the use of the "Bible" in this way but rather fear of complaint, pressure or legal action from members of the Christian faith community. When the Bible or the OT in particular is taught as a series of Allegorical stories or when the truth of the history of the bible as an developed and often modified document with multiple versions through history is taught there can be a strong backlash from fundamental literalists. This is the primary reason for its abscence as a text for understanding our historical roots and foundations of western literature not as is often supposed secularist objections.
Chicago,
maybe perhaps it is the fact that the Quran is a defiled and butchered version of the bible? THIS IS FACT, and i am not going to prove myself on the matter again.
If these schools are truly wanting to educate students, why don't they teach a course on the Qu'ran and other religious texts? After all, most students in the U.S. are already pretty familiar with the Bible but know so little about comparitive religion.
Also, it would show that they are truly wanting to educate and not preach.
im both glad AND angry at this bill
glad it has finally come to pass
and ANGRY because i graduated 4 years ago, so im left out!
WHY TENNESSEE DO YOU BETRAY ME??????!!! lol
----------
and ERV
i dont know anyone more ridiculous than you on this matter, i lived in TN all my life, and i am by far the most "north" oriented of my area, youdare call me a hick? I hope the burning pit teaches you the grand difference between hick and yank when you go there, you'll have all eternity to get it through your thick skull.
you godless people amuse me to the point of using EncyclopediaDramatica.com to exploit your lulz for the comedy element.
i may be a child of God first and foremost, but i am not above exposing frauds and fools alike to the world using abusively satirical means, it;s already plagued me, but ive brushed it off and laughed about it!
this hick here knows how to make his enemies suffer! *laughs*
God bless the State of Tennessee for taking a bold stand to bring back Bible to the educational
system. Let the gun and drug make an exit through the back door while Bible enters the
class rooms. God will bless a Nation or State, which will honor His word.
erv, no one has thrown out the Bill of Rights, these Bible classes are taught as Literature classes and not Religion and even if they were the Bill of Rights talks to the establishment of a state religion not to the teaching of religion in public schools. Plus it is an elective Literature class so no one can or will be forced to take the class.
interesting sentiments ERV,
So where exactly in the bill of rights does it say they shouldn't? Just curious if you can truly back up your retheoric
btw, I'm from West Virginia. I'm a "hick" as you put it. But I also have one bachelor's degree, 3 courses from a second bachelor, an associates, I've worked for the federal government as an IT specialist for 8 years, I worked 45-50 hours a week while taking 20-22 hrs. of course work a semester and graduated with a 3.1. But I guess all "hicks" are dum, rn't we?