Should religion be taught in a public school classroom? In an article from The Roanoke Times, out of Virginia, a school district recently banned a course that was heavily opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union because of the religious promotion in the course objective. Now, there has been a new class chosen that deals more with how the Bible has influenced people all over the world. Although the subjects taught in the course are still somewhat controversial, the course tries to explain other points of view of the Bible—staying as objective and secular as possible.
The main issue that the article brings about is where is the line drawn between promoting a faith by teaching a religion in a public school (maybe as truth) or teaching the historical and literary aspect of a religion.
No one can argue that Christianity has played an enormous historical role in the world. However, when is it appropriate to teach the Bible in a public school? Through court cases such as McCollum v. Board of Education, we know that teaching religion during school hours is unconstitutional. The main different, though, between this course in Virginia and the teachings in McCollum is that teachings in this case are voluntary and offer opposing viewpoints to the teachings in the Bible. There is much controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution and the need for another theory to be taught alongside it—let’s say intelligent design. This, I believe is different in this case. Here, it’s teaching the Bible in a literature and historical sense, whereas in the science classes, intelligent design is not based in fact. Now, there are arguments that say that evolution is not fact, but a theory. This is true. However, there is proven science within the theory. For a class to be taught about Christianity and the Bible, I believe (1) the course should be voluntary and (2) the class should be a world history or literature class. In the end, when considering a course on the Bible, it must meet these criteria in order for it not to infringe on the Establishment Clause or the Free Exercise Clause. In my opinion, and I would like to see more on the course, the class would be okay to teach if the teacher taught it not as truth, but took the Bible as what it secularly should be taken—as a history and religious text for one particular part of society.
The question is still begged: should religion be taught at all in the public school system? If not, shouldn’t we recognize the historical and sociological significance of the Bible. And if yes, isn’t this creating an established faith in the public school system? And finally, if the schools were to teach only about Christianity, shouldn’t they teach other major religions to the children? And if they do, where do they draw the line on what should or shouldn’t be taught?
Posts
1 comment:
The Bible is an important text that should not be ignored in the education of our children. It can be seen as a historical reference, as most American laws are based in Judeo-Christian values. The Bible is also a great piece of literature, as it is the most widely distributed book in the world. We cannot glance past the Bible simply because it is religious in nature. With that said, we cannot ignore other religious texts such as the Koran or other significant religious texts.
Public school classes should use religious texts in the classroom. The Bible should be looked at from a sociological perspective, rather than a religious one. I think it is appropriate to examine the beliefs, history, and influences of a particular religious group or text. It must be taught in a manner that affirms the religion as a belief system, rather than fact. As Matt pointed out, however, by allowing one religion to be taught is preference, and could be construed as establishment. Any religious text with a significant influence on society should be given attention in the classroom.
Post a Comment