Critical thought and the new proselytizing

We all know that the religious right has been trying to jam Christianity into public schools for years, whether it be under the guise of introducing morality into our "morally deprived secular" schools, or some scriptural interpretation about the evangelizing of the masses. The language has gotten old, the courts have ruled, and yet the right still won't lay down.

As The New York Times reported today, the Georgia State Senate recently passed a bill that would provide funding and guidelines for teaching two different credit courses on the bible in Georgia high schools. This bill mandates that the bible course must use the Bible as the primary text. If this proposal is accepted by the board of education, it would be the first course that primarily teaches from the Bible.

Of course, specifically requiring that the Bible be taught makes the bill somewhat suspect, and will probably be the main thrust behind the courts decision to declare the class unconsitutional. More interesting is the argument for the class:

The Christian Coalition of Georgia has strongly supported the legislation. The group's chairwoman, Sadie Fields, said the courses were "another way to help students think critically."

Ehem, bull. Here's the strategy: we all agree that we want to teach our high school students to think critically about the world, and especially about our specific culture and society. Since religion is such a large part of our society (some would claim the basis for it, although we at The League don't listen to gerrymandered evidence), it seems to follow that we should have some sort of discussion on religion in our schools. In addition, hundreds of scholarly books take critical looks at the Bible.*

But Georgia already has a course on comparitive religion, which is reported to be unpopular among students. We at The League can't help but think that "thinking critically" for the Christians in Georgia (we doubt many non-christians are in favor of the course) doesn't mean questioning the basis and legitimacy of the bible. Rather, they're hoping that converting a few to the right-wing of Christianity will help students to be even more critical of secular culture.

If we want to take the "critical thinking" claim seriously, why don't they have a course called "be critical of your religion"? Unfortunately this is not a Bible course, but a scripture class that is publically funded. Instead, the Georgia State Senate should focus on raising its educational standards (A recent study ranked Georgia 40th best school system). Lernin' pupils that there Bible don't do nothin' ta fix dem problems with y'all's edumakational system.

from The League: Reassembled

* For informative scholarly works on the Bible, check out The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision or Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacret Texts (Finkelstein and Silberman) and Who Wrote the Bible (Friedman)

from The League: Reassembled

Comments

[The League]

Its not so often anti-Semetic rants begin with criticism of stereotyping.

[bernie]

I think The League is making a great point, and what is happening in GA evokes the Intelligent Design arguments--or rather the disingenuousness of the claim by ID backers that they weren't religiously motivated. the religious right attempted to force religion into the science classroom by claiming "equal time" for the teaching of a non-scientific idea--"Intelligent Design," also known as "Creationism." Now they're trying to force into the wider curriculum a likely opportunity for proselytizing by citing "critical thinking."

Actually, The League's one observation that there is already a comparative religion class says it all! an opportunity for critical evaluation of the Hebrew scriptures, the New Testament, the Koran, and perhaps other sacred texts ALREADY EXISTS. so, it begs the question: why to these GA legislators want this new class? it must be for reasons other than what they cite (i.e., enhancing "critical thinking"), since--again--a comparative religion class ALREADY EXISTS.