It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Arizona Bible Course Bill To Teach Elective In Public Schools Passes Senate

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


I encourage education of all topics. If a kid wants to learn about woodworking, painting, mythology, cooking, farming, or a freakin bible class.... I say let them. There should be resources in an education district to ensure kids are learning the things they want to learn along with the things they have to learn.




posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


I'll agree that education on all topics should be encouraged, but there just isn't time or money to cover everything, and do you really think that schools will allow equal time for something like Wicca as they would the Bible?

My other concern is that most schools can't seem to even teach basics without screwing things up. You should see some of the homework my daughter brings home. It's sad to think that this is how they think our children need to learn....If they can't teach something simple without problems, how can they ever be expected to teach something as complex as the bible without constant errors and biased personal opinion?



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Don't they already study fiction in English class, art class and drama class?
IMHO better off teaching something productive....
Like how to apply for food stamps because you don't have an adequate education to get a job.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


Yes. I can remember elective Bible-as-literature classes in the public schools in the 1970s. Back then the class could be truly taught without religious overtones, open to ANYONE interested, without judgement as to personal spiritual/religious relevance.

The 1980s to present backlash by political rightwing evangelists against perceived threats as secular humanism and New Age thinking would, IMO, lead to teaching the Bible as a way to encourage religious belief. The particular bent, of many of those who would favor such classes now, would lead to damning the non-believing student or the student whose belief is not "correct", if not by the instructor then by fellow students.



Starting in the mid-20th century, religious fundamentalists and the religious right began using the term "secular humanism" in hostile fashion. Francis A. Schaeffer, an American theologian based in Switzerland, seizing upon the exclusion of the divine from most humanist writings, argued that rampant secular humanism would lead to moral relativism and ethical bankruptcy in his book How Should We Then Live: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture (1976). Schaeffer portrayed secular humanism as pernicious and diabolical, and warned it would undermine the moral and spiritual tablet of America. His themes have been very widely repeated in Fundamentalist preaching in North America.[27] Toumey (1993) found that Secular Humanism is typically portrayed as a vast evil conspiracy, deceitful and immoral, responsible for feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality, and New Age spirituality.[28] In certain areas of the world, Humanism finds itself in conflict with religious fundamentalism, especially over the issue of the separation of church and state. Many Humanists see religions as superstitious, repressive and closed-minded, while religious fundamentalists may see Humanists as a threat to the values set out in their sacred texts.[29]

source

Personally, I am more worried about my country when voters state that a Christian President is a Muslim, and I don't think a Bible class in public school can change that.


edit on 14-4-2012 by desert because: add source



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Interesting. At the state level and as an elective I see no issue but as with all issues, there is always potential for abuse. Such laws or actions though are a consequence for the intense push back that some areas, individuals and groups seek though when they are constantly told they cannot engage in actions as a group upon campus (though most can form such groups after fighting very hard for it).

When I was a senior, many years ago, we read from the Bible in California; but not for religious purposes. It is the most widely read literary work, so that value is pertinent and was not read as a work of non-fiction or fiction; rather for the poetic nature of many of the verses.

Understandably this bill serves to teach the Bible for its values and not its style. Should be interesting to discuss and debate this.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Katharos62191

I attended a High School in the South where Bible, Bible Literature and Bible History were all mandatory classes. Upon failure you could be suspended or asked to leave.


Well I can tell ya - - - parts of Arizona could be transplanted to the deep south - - and no one would notice the difference.

There are a lot of older people in Arizona. The next generation of Arizonians will be interesting to watch.

I think only Comparative Religion should be allowed.
edit on 14-4-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Evil_Santa
As long as it's an elective course, then who cares.

The moment it becomes mandatory, then it becomes a problem.


don't be so sure about that.

Some times you are kind of forced between electives...

Especially when said elective is "the easy class" in a given high school, will get more kids to want to take it because it's an easy A.

It's like they want to turn it into a private school , minus the really good education.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
Some times you are kind of forced between electives...

Especially when said elective is "the easy class" in a given high school, will get more kids to want to take it because it's an easy A.


In your scenario the class is still elective though. Just because a student choose between two electives, the class that will produce the "easy A", doesn't make the elective mandatory. This would mean that in my hay-days of high school, Graphic Arts would have been the "mandatory" class because it was a sure-fire A. Yet I had a multitude of electives to choose from. Your scenario becomes even weaker when we think that some students are great at art -- thus their "easy" class would be something akin to their abilities. Others may have a penacht for running, giving them an "easy" class in track (in the school I went to, extracurricular sport activities and clubs approved by the school board were considered electives).

Electives are meant to broaden the educational experience outside of the basics (though that could be argued that basics now are hardly any good) and to provide the widest exposure of the world to students.




top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join