Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Remember Warren Chisum, the clueless Texas legislator who circulated the memo to his colleagues from an even more clueless Arkansas legislator claiming that heliocentricity and evolution were part of a Jewish conspiracy to destroy Christianity? Well now he's submitted a bill to require that all schools in Texas offer a course in the Bible as history and literature. That's a ruse, of course, because what they really want is the NCBCPS curriculum, which teaches the Bible as religious truth, not in an objective, scholarly manner.
JewsOnFirst has an excellent article on this legislation and the Texas Freedom Network has a press release about it. The NCBCPS curriculum is riddled with errors, fake quotes and religious claims without a hint of scholarly analysis. SMU religious studies professor Mark Chancey did a full analysis of the curriculum and found that it is little more than a sectarian Bible study course, nothing like the objective, scholarly course that the Supreme Court has said could be taught in public schools. This is an absurdly transparent effort to have the government teach religion to children in public schools.
Comments
Believe it or not, Chisum is the grandfather-in-law of a guy here at work. What with elected officials like this, the Young Earth Creationist in the office who wants to "punch Darwin in the nose", and the guy here who wants states in the South to secede from the Union ("It wasn't about slavery, it was all state rights, I tell ya, and the Bible says slavery is ok, too, so nyah!"), I sometimes wonder what century I'm living in.
Posted by: Jeff Hebert | April 10, 2007 11:11 AM
Hey, it could be a good thing. Let's say the bill gets passed and the NCBCPS curriculum starts getting taught statewide. Then a lawsuit is filed and easily won. At that point a couple of things might happen:
1.) School districts start teaching the course constitutionally, as per, say, the guidelines of the National Bible Association and First Amendment Center.
2.) The schools drop the subject altogether.
It it's 2.), then all that's lost is a short period in which kids get taught the sort of hogwash most of them probably believe anyway. (Such teaching would not ever occur at all if a suitable preliminary injunction prevailed in court.) But if it's 1.), then we've got the schools opening the minds of an awful lot of ignorant kids.
My thinking is that a bit of exposure to the NCBCPS would make little difference, because so many "Christian" kids already believe it and so few secular kids are going to buy it. But teaching the course constitutionally is going to expose lots of fundie kids to many, many facts and perspectives that otherwise they'd never encounter. This has certainly been my experience in teaching Bible as Lit courses at the college level.
To Chisum I can only say, be careful what you wish for!
Posted by: eveningsun | April 10, 2007 12:11 PM
Texas is not the only state with a bill to promote Bible courses in public schools. Oklahoma Senate Bill 1348 by Wade Rousselot, Wagoner, OK is quoted below. The bill was assigned to the House Common Education Committee on 5 February, where it remains. Perhaps it will die there?
Although as such bills go, this one has several important requirements that make it somewhat acceptable. But the danger will always be that some teachers will use the opportunity to push their own religious views and school administrators may not supervise the teaching adequately.
Some public schools already offer elective courses in the Bible as literature and religions of the World. I believe that courses such as the latter could be useful to all students, but only if taught carefully by a qualified instructor.
-----------------------
"BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 11-103.11 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
A. The State Board of Education shall adopt curricular standards for an elective course or courses that may be offered to students in the public schools of this state consisting of a nonsectarian, nonreligious academic study of the Bible and its influence on literature, art, music, culture and politics. The curriculum standards shall meet the academic rigor and standards of other elective courses approved by the Board and shall meet the requirements of the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Oklahoma.
B. A public school district that elects to offer an academic study of the Bible course shall implement the course in accordance with the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Oklahoma, including the manner in which the course is taught in the classroom and the assignment of school district personnel teaching the course. Personnel assigned to teach the course shall meet all certification requirements. In addition, no person shall be assigned to teach the course based in whole or in part on any religious test, profession of faith or lack of faith, prior or present religious affiliation or lack of affiliation, or criteria involving particular beliefs or lack of beliefs about the Bible.
C. An academic study of the Bible course offered by a public school district shall:
1. Be taught in an objective and nondevotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students as to either the truth or falsity of the biblical materials or texts from other religious or cultural traditions;
2. Not include teaching of religious doctrine or sectarian interpretation of the Bible or of texts from other religious or cultural traditions; and
3. Not disparage or encourage a commitment to a set of religious beliefs.
D. When adopting textbooks for academic study of the Bible courses, the State Textbook Committee shall incorporate the conditions set forth in this section into the criteria used to evaluate textbooks for the courses.
SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1,2007.
-----------------------
Although as such bills go, this one has several important requirements that make it somewhat acceptable. But the danger will always be that some teachers will use the opportunity to push their own religious views and school administrators may not supervise the teaching adequately.
Some public schools already offer elective courses in the Bible as literature and religions of the World. I believe that courses such as the latter could be useful to all students, but only if taught carefully by a qualified instructor."
----------------------------
Posted by: vhutchison | April 10, 2007 12:45 PM
How do you objectively teach about the bible without at a minimum pointing out that much of it can only be allegorical in nature? Wouldn't that amount to saying that things in the bible are false?
Posted by: Jason I. | April 10, 2007 1:38 PM
How do you objectively teach about the bible without at a minimum pointing out that much of it can only be allegorical in nature?
Do you think teaching about the bible objectively is the point?
Posted by: Coin | April 10, 2007 2:35 PM
Thanks for your post about this! I'm a Texan, so I wrote my representative right away! I'm very against this "class" in our public schools. C'mon, Texas! You're better than this!
Posted by: Susan Barnum | April 10, 2007 5:20 PM
At this point in my life, I have had three classes that taught the Bible in a non-religious context. Two high school english classes where we evaluated the Bible as literature, like epic poetry such as the Odyssey (which we also read in that class) and to supplement Paradise Lost. At my college, everyone takes a class called Western Traditions. In that one, the Bible is included with various epic poems, novels, films etc that represent or inspired something about western culture. We read the Bible as literature,(examining writing style, narrative etc) and as historical primary source. When we read the Bible as a primary source we treat acts of god as something that the writers could not understand and we may or not have had time for. When we wrote about the Bible, my teachers wanted the authors of the Old Testament books to be given as "Hebrew Scribes." I go to Colgate, btw.
Posted by: Flying Fox | April 10, 2007 5:20 PM
Actually, it was a Georgia legislator, not an Arkansas legislator.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-evolution_14tex.ART.State.Edition1.298e1cb.html
Posted by: Wes | April 10, 2007 8:04 PM
A similar push (by the same group, probably) is being made in Georgia.
News article: http://www.11alive.com/news/education/article_education.aspx?storyid=95059
One of the better quotes from the story (warning, turn your irony meters off!):
In Columbus, some members of the school board have expressed concern that the courses could be taught by teachers who don't believe in the Bible.
At a September meeting, board member Joseph Roberson questioned whether a teacher could be held accountable for the biblical teachings, saying "atheists, agnostics, Satanists or so-called humanists" could teach the courses with the possibility of "some liberalized version of the Bible to be taught."
The board could also create a citizens advisory committee to review curriculum guidelines. Board member Naomi Buckner said until the curriculum is available, the board should be open-minded.
"I want it taught by a person who believes in the Bible and who thinks of the Bible as a holy book. However, as a board member, I should try to be more objective and wait for the curriculum to come," she said. "We can review that curriculum and adopt it if we think it is objective."
I've put this story in my saved files, it will be good ammunition for when the lawsuits come.
Who thinks that any board minutes will be scrubbed to eliminate the references, any tapes made of the board meeting will mysteriously be erased, and the board members will later claim that the news article quoted them out of context?? Just like Dover....
Cheers.
Posted by: Fastlane | April 11, 2007 11:19 AM