Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Loathing and Loathing in North Austin Previous entry: Surreal Netroots Nation moments starring Bob Barr

Don’t Post Up Jesus

EducationFundiesReligion

imageLast year, the Texas state legislature passed a law allowing for Bible classes to be taught in public schools.  The classes are allegedly supposed to be non-denominational and focused on the history and literature of the Bible without any focus on preaching or proselytization.

The Texas state legislature also passed a law declaring that I was a cowboy rocketman on Friday.  Thank you and your wonderful delusions, state legislature!

The adopted rule follows broad guidelines used for English and social studies classes. It says courses should follow applicable law and “all federal and state guidelines in maintaining religious neutrality and accommodating the diverse religious views, traditions, and perspectives of students in their school district.”

Courses shall not “endorse, favor, or promote, or disfavor or show hostility toward, any particular religion or nonreligious faith or religious perspective,” the rule says.

“I think that’s pretty specific,” said Jonathan Saenz of the conservative Free Market Foundation. “The constitutional safeguards are there.”

Kind of like how the Fourth Amendment keeps our government from spying on us, or all the laws saying “don’t kill motherfuckers” have reduced the murder rate to nearly zero.
There is, of course, one small problem with Texas’ plan to provide America its future theologians, versed in the high-minded dialectic of academic study and incisive commentary on Biblical texts: they keep accidentally slipping in religious worship.  It’s a circumstance that was wildly unpredictable, honestly - it’s like when I open a pack of M&Ms and have no idea what color will come out.  Well, it would probably help if I didn’t keep buying single-color packs.

Mark Chancey, associate professor in religious studies at Southern Methodist University, has studied Bible classes already offered in about 25 districts for the Texas Freedom Network.

The study found most of the courses were explicitly devotional with almost exclusively Christian, usually Protestant, perspectives.

It also found that most were taught by teachers with no academic training in biblical, religious or theological studies and who were not familiar with the issues of separation of church and state.

“Some classes promote creation science. Some classes denigrate Judaism. Some classes explicitly encourage students to convert to Christianity or to adopt Christian devotional practices,” Chancey said. “This is all well documented, and the board knows it.”

I am SHOCKED.  And APPALLED.  And MILDLY PECKISH. 

The fact that such blatantly dishonest cockbaggery exists isn’t surprising, but this exact thing happens every single time.  There is no body of theologically-trained high-school level teachers who are ready and waiting to teach 17-year-olds about nondevotional theological interpretation for 50 minutes a day.  Simple supply and demand dictates that when you’re trying to fill those spots, they’re going to be filled with those who are available - the brain-hungry proselytizers who believe in the mission of some good old-fashioned Jesus in lieu of study hall. 

Ah, well.  I’ve got to head to Dallas and pick up my laser lasso. 

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Jesse Taylor on 05:40 PM • (43) Comments

Why did Jesus take the ball away?

Oh that’s right… suffer the little children. Got it.

Comment #1: louise  on  07/19  at  06:30 PM

There is no body of theologically-trained high-school level teachers who are ready and waiting to teach 17-year-olds about nondevotional theological interpretation for 50 minutes a day.

Well, to be fair, the magnet school I graduated from offered both a World Religions course and a course on scriptural texts as literature.  However, the courses definitely covered a large variety of religions, and were taught by a Nepali Hindu with a theology degree and a Palestinian Orthodox Christian English teacher.  And I went to an incredibly diverse high school where at least half of any course covering religion in any meaningful way was pretty much guaranteed not to be Christian, let alone Protestant.  The fundie kids who took those classes thinking they’d be easy A’s pretty much shat themselves. 

However, most high schools are not my high school.  So I feel conflicted on whether schools should be allowed to offer such courses.  On the one hand, the scripture-as-lit class rocked my world and had a lot of influence on the kinds of beliefs I hold today (and in completely different ways than the atheist contingent here at Pandagon would expect).  On the other hand, my situation was a very exceptional situation, and there’s no reason why states should regulate curricula that favors my kind of high school at the expense of religious freedom in ordinary public high schools which the vast majority of Americans attend.

Comment #2: The Opoponax  on  07/19  at  06:31 PM

Wow, I am so stupidly wordy these days…  Anyway, sorry for the novel up there, and in like every other thread I’ve commented on lately.

Comment #3: The Opoponax  on  07/19  at  06:32 PM

The Bible of course is the greatest fantasy novel ever written—even better than the Lord of the Rings.  Nothing wrong with people reading either of them, as long as they don’t come away with the notion that elves or angels are real.

Comment #4: rea  on  07/19  at  06:47 PM

“However, the courses definitely covered a large variety of religions, and were taught by a Nepali Hindu with a theology degree and a Palestinian Orthodox Christian English teacher.  And I went to an incredibly diverse high school where at least half of any course covering religion in any meaningful way was pretty much guaranteed not to be Christian, let alone Protestant.”

Well there’s your problem.  Too much of that gay librul “multicultural” “diversity” and “tolerance” crap that’s brought America to her knees.

If we were meant to “know” and “understand” other cultures and other religions, why bother to be Americans?  Our interactions with non-Americans should only involve bombs and bullets…

Besides, Jesus is an American!  Sure I have proof!  It’s right here, somewhere…

Hoorah!...

Comment #5: MikeEss  on  07/19  at  08:02 PM

Heh, the bible as literature? Which translation?

Comment #6: jed  on  07/19  at  08:17 PM

My high school in Illinois offered “The Bible as Literature” back in the 1980s, so it’s not like it can’t be done.  What’s suspicious to me here is that they had to pass a special law in order to have the class.  Because, what, Texas teachers are so stupid that they can’t teach the Bible as literature and stay within the law even though my high school teachers managed to do it almost 30 years ago?

Comment #7: Mnemosyne  on  07/19  at  08:21 PM

Heh, the bible as literature? Which translation?

That’s the thing—when you teach a real Bible-as-literature class, you should be comparing the various translations, not just picking the one your preacher told you was the Real Bible (unlike the Bible that the Catholics use, which has different books in it and stuff).

Comment #8: Mnemosyne  on  07/19  at  08:23 PM

In my school, the fundies actually got rid of the Bible-as-literature class because it “did’t show proper respect for Christianity”.  It was funny.

Comment #9: Antigone  on  07/19  at  08:26 PM

As a resident and taxpayer in one of those liberal eastern blue states, it boggles my mind when Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Alabama and any other cracker barrell states want to fog their HS students’ minds with creationism, Bible as science or astrology as physics.  It just means less competition for college and good jobs for students from my state and others like us.

Is “can I supersize that for you” written in the Bible?  Local taxpayers who let their school districts get away with this kind of crap will end up with a bunch of poorly educated, uncompetitive kids - further reason for corporations to outsource to India, China, Vietnam - where the curriculum is not wasted on nonsense like this.

Comment #10: CParis  on  07/19  at  08:33 PM

Astrology as physics?  Huh?  I’m from “one of those states”, and I’ve never heard of such a thing.  Most fundie Christians I know who would be interesting in having creationism and the like taught in schools think astrology is satanism.

In re which version of the bible, our bible section used the King James, mainly because it’s A) one of the first bibles in recognizable English, and B) it’s got a lot of interesting literary flourishes.  Because we didn’t talk about the theology aspect much at all, and certainly not from a This Is What The Bible Teaches perspective, that particular version held the most interest.  Though I guess it wouldn’t have mattered, because, again, it wasn’t a course about What The Bible Teaches Us.  If we’d wanted to do a literary analysis of The Message, there would have been nothing stopping us. 

Interesting note: I’m not entirely sure that I was aware there actually were different translations of the Bible, with their various pros and cons, until I took scripture as lit.

Comment #11: The Opoponax  on  07/19  at  09:03 PM

Hell, I went to a religious high school, and even their bible courses didn’t proselytize that hard.

So how putting together a model affidavit quoting the statute and affirming that the bible course in [insert name of school here] is being taught according to the requirements of the statute? Send it to a bunch of principals and ask them and the teachers in question to sign, on penalty of perjury. When they refuse, you have a nice powers-that-be as scofflaws peg.

Comment #12: paul  on  07/19  at  09:48 PM

The Bible of course is the greatest fantasy novel ever written—even better than the Lord of the Rings.

Hmm… plot holes, poor character development, various inconsistencies.  I have to say the bible makes a pretty lousy read as “literature”.

I had a World Cultures class in high school, we covered the basics of a very large variety of religions, it wasn’t even restricted to the “big three” and the teacher was very good but with any social science class bias can become a problem, add something as divisional as religion and it’s hard not to have problems even in the best of circumstances.

Comment #13: hypatia  on  07/19  at  11:23 PM

plot holes, poor character development, various inconsistencies.  I have to say the bible makes a pretty lousy read as “literature”.

*eyeroll*

Funny, before the mid 19th century, the conventional wisdom would have been that the reverse is true.  That novels, with their facile little plots and cut and dry character development, are shallow pulp that makes bright young minds feeble and flabby, unable to understand the complexities of real literature, i.e. scripture and classical texts.  A literary scholar of the 18th century would be shocked to read the syllabus of the average Intro Lit course.  And it would have nothing to do with religious indoctrination, either.

Comment #14: The Opoponax  on  07/19  at  11:41 PM

I honestly believe a course that taught the Bible objectively would show hordes of fundamentalist kids all the flaws in it. Consequently, this country will change for the better. The problem is, any course on religion in a predominately fundamentalist school will have proselytizing slipped in. Rock & a hard place, I guess.

Comment #15: Skwee  on  07/20  at  12:00 AM

The Bible of course is the greatest fantasy novel ever written—even better than the Lord of the Rings.  Nothing wrong with people reading either of them, as long as they don’t come away with the notion that elves or angels are real.

I’m amusing myself by thinking of a possible future, a few centuries from now, where people simply assume that LOTR is one of the books of the Bible.  That would be awesome. 

Although what really makes me sad is that I’m not going to be around millions of years hence to see a warming Antarctica emerging from beneath the ice as it slowly drifts into the South Pacific, setting off a massive adaptive radiation of penguins as they evolve to fill a whole continent’s worth of ecological niches. 

Although granted, with global warming . . .

Comment #16: Dan S.  on  07/20  at  12:02 AM

Unless my memory is failing me, that Jesus statuette came from a catalogue once featured for laughs on Late Night with Conan O’Brien.  What was so funny about the catalog was that in every piece in which Jesus is playing a sport, he’s hogging the ball/puck or otherwise being a showboat and a jerk to the kids he won’t let have a chance to actually play the sport.

Which makes a pretty decent representation of the religion, doesn’t it?

Comment #17: Aerik  on  07/20  at  12:05 AM

Jesus’ passing game is superb.

Comment #18: Eric, Rejector of Memes  on  07/20  at  01:09 AM

cockbaggery.

Only 39 googlits.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cockbaggery


Excellent work, Jesse. Excellent work.

Comment #19: mario  on  07/20  at  01:21 AM

I think Bible classes in TX may be just the thing. They will distract fundie teachers from teaching as many other classes. Imagine if that fundie teacher in NJ had a chance to teach a Bible class? And I think the Bible classes will not be the GPA boosting “K-level”, “AP level”. or “IB level” that the most ambitious students like to take. Looks to me like Bible classes in Texas are gonna be a great way to seperate the wheat from the chaff and major TX Universities and employers will catch on to that pretty quick.

Can we has unindened consequences?

Comment #20: Bacopa  on  07/20  at  02:32 AM

Personally, I would prefer Jesus in the situation depicted in the photo saying, “Son, don’t bring that Kool-Aid to a gin party.”  But I’m weird that way.

Comment #21: Linnaeus  on  07/20  at  02:46 AM

Hmm… plot holes, poor character development, various inconsistencies.  I have to say the bible makes a pretty lousy read as “literature”.

Puts it one over the Inheritance Cycle. I loved Eragon when it was called Star Wars.

I was going to take a jab at Harry Potter, but having not read the series out of redundancy (learned plenty by osmosis, thanks) I didn’t think a “WIZARD NEEDS <s>FOOD</s> EDITOR BADLY” joke was fair.

Comment #22: karpad  on  07/20  at  03:57 AM

In re which version of the bible, our bible section used the King James, mainly because it’s A) one of the first bibles in recognizable English, and B) it’s got a lot of interesting literary flourishes.

I <3 me some King James linguistically as well, but King James leaves out Judith, and she’s hardcore.

Incidentally, we had a religions class in my public high school where nearly half the students came from a Catholic elementary school.  The high school solved the problem of religious bias by having the only openly atheist teacher at the school teach the course.  The final project for the class was that the students were split into two halves and they held a mock trial: lawsuit of the Jews against God for breach of contact and neglect.

Comment #23: Arianna  on  07/20  at  09:36 AM

That’s the thing—when you teach a real Bible-as-literature class, you should be comparing the various translations, not just picking the one your preacher told you was the Real Bible (unlike the Bible that the Catholics use, which has different books in it and stuff).

This reminds me of one of my first classes at Stanford.  We were studying the Bible (along with other books) as an important and influential text, and the prof. made a point of telling the class they needed the version sold in the bookstore b/c we weren’t discussing theology.  Don’t bring your favorite family Bible to class!

If they footnoted the Bible the way they do Shakespeare, it would be nothing but footnotes.  I always get a kick out of Biblical Literalists who use the KJV of the Bible.  Nothing like a translated text that was then put into verse to get the feeling for the original intent!

I think that was the class where someone, utterly shocked, exclaimed “Jews don’t believe Jesus is the Savior?!?!11!”

“Well, no.  If they did, they’d be Christians.” was the matter of fact reply that blew her away. 


It still makes me giggle.

Comment #24: Caren, Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  07/20  at  10:00 AM

If they footnoted the Bible the way they do Shakespeare, it would be nothing but footnotes.
they do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchor_Bible 
Of course, no one actually reads these books, because they are incredibly long and boring, and yes, full of footnotes.  But still.  Nice to know they exist, I guess.

I had a bible-as-lit unit in my sophomore year of high school.  I don’t remember much about it, so it must have been boring and inoffensive.

Comment #25: LauraB  on  07/20  at  11:30 AM

I <3 me some King James linguistically as well, but King James leaves out Judith, and she’s hardcore.

Well we didn’t exactly read the whole bible.  We read the scriptures of an incredibly wide variety of religions, so we only did like 2 or 3 books of the bible.  Job, Ecclesiastes, and the Gospel of John, if I recall correctly?  I think we spent more time on the Ramayana, actually.

Comment #26: The Opoponax  on  07/20  at  11:38 AM

Oh, and re Footnoting Teh Bible Like Shakespeare:  one of my way great grandfathers (8, 9 generations back?) is the author of one of those annotated monstrosities.  I’m not sure it was as gargantuan as the Anchor Bible (120 volumes? Nothing should be longer than the OED, sorry), but it took him 40 years to write.

Comment #27: The Opoponax  on  07/20  at  11:43 AM

I prefer the companion statue, where Jesus goes into the stands after a fan who said something derogatory towards Mary Magdalene…

Comment #28: Dweeze  on  07/20  at  11:49 AM

Nothing should be longer than the OED

amen!

Comment #29: LauraB  on  07/20  at  12:27 PM

I mean, the more you know about the Bible, the better you often are at western literature and art - it’s a pretty important foundational text, and which ought to be noted, especially if you’re teaching Paradise Lost or Dante’s Inferno or something like that.

Still, it’s humiliating to our country that that can’t exist without shameless proselytizing.

Comment #30: Mikey  on  07/20  at  12:46 PM

Nothing should be longer than the OED

I disagree

Comment #31: Marcel Proust  on  07/20  at  12:52 PM

OMG, Proust wins Teh Ceres uv Toobs! 

Madeleines for everyone!

Comment #32: The Opoponax  on  07/20  at  01:27 PM

In re which version of the bible, our bible section used the King James, mainly because it’s A) one of the first bibles in recognizable English, and B) it’s got a lot of interesting literary flourishes.  Because we didn’t talk about the theology aspect much at all, and certainly not from a This Is What The Bible Teaches perspective, that particular version held the most interest.

Linguistically, the KJV is really the worst English translation available, first because it had to struggle with a more limited number of manuscripts and less complete knowledge of ancient languages than any version since (obviously). Second (and perhaps more importantly), James took personal control over the translation and overruled the expertise of the translators to insert his own prejudices and paranoia into the text. (Why does that sound so familiar, I wonder?)

The other issue (as someone already mentioned) is that the book was forced into English verse, which didn’t just cause changes in translation but also destroyed any residue of the tone and style of the original texts, removing all sense of different authors and traditions (particularly of the Old Testament). Basically, they took a collection of 5 loosely-related novels and tried to pretend they were one coherent narrative. That’s where the plot holes and character inconsistencies all come from.

Comment #33: Dorothy  on  07/20  at  02:35 PM

To repeat myself:

1.  It was a fricking high school class.  10-11 years ago.  For all I know we were really using the KJV because it’s public domain, or because our school already owned a pile of copies, or because of the particular prejudices of the teacher, who was a scholar of 15th century English lit. 

2.  NOT A THEOLOGY COURSE.  The theological prejudices of King James didn’t really matter to us.  We were reading it as literature, and our teacher determined the KJV as the most appropriate for us to use in that context.  Again, probably with other criteria like availability, coincidence with her area of study, etc etc.

3.  Faithfulness to the original was also probably not much of a priority, since, again, we weren’t AT ALL talking about issues of “what the bible teaches us” or any other devotional topic.  This is the same reason high school teachers are probably going with Seaumus Heaney’s translation of Beowulf, which also favors the poetics of modern English over exact translation.  Or not, as affordability, text availability, English Department politics, the teacher’s level and area of expertise, etc.  This is an issue faced by any translator of verse, and again, I would guess that our teacher had a variety of reasons for going with this particular version over others, just as she would have had a variety of reasons for going with the particular translation of the Quran, the Analects of Confucius, and the aforementioned Ramayana (for instance, I later took a college course on Hinduism, where our go-to Ramayana was R. K. Narayan’s retelling).

Comment #34: The Opoponax  on  07/20  at  03:12 PM

My high school in Illinois offered “The Bible as Literature” back in the 1980s, so it’s not like it can’t be done.  What’s suspicious to me here is that they had to pass a special law in order to have the class.  Because, what, Texas teachers are so stupid that they can’t teach the Bible as literature and stay within the law even though my high school teachers managed to do it almost 30 years ago?
I had a semester in high school on the Bible as/in Literature (in of all places, Florida). It was offered at a v. high level (lots of homework and written assignments) and focused on specific stories that come up again and again in Western literature. We saw Cool Hand Luke as part of that class (great movie, but totally ruined by being able to pick out all of the christ-analogies). We did not use the bible as a text. Rather we used a textbook.

I know that the general tendency is to poo-poo teaching the bible in public school—and it is clear that the religious right will use it as a way to proselytize to the young. But, if we’re at all interested in preserving and transmitting our shared culture to young adults, we do a disservice by ignoring it in the classroom altogether (n.b.: fwiw I am an atheist).

Comment #35: sdh  on  07/20  at  03:55 PM

In re which version of the bible, our bible section used the King James, mainly because it’s A) one of the first bibles in recognizable English, and B) it’s got a lot of interesting literary flourishes.
The KJB was the dominant version in use when I attended church as a child (my mother never attended, and after a while my father decided to let me make up my own mind about it). It has an interesting literary style that has influenced generations of writers since. Faulkner’s writing style was said to be heavily influenced by the KJB.

I actually think the most interesting KJB-inspired work is the Holy Piby—the, if you will, Bible of Rastafarianism. Well worth a read. Another famous KJB-inspired work is, obviously, The Book of Mormon… which I actually haven’t ever looked at.

Comment #36: sdh  on  07/20  at  04:06 PM

KJV is also believed by some people to have divine inspiration, so the errors that crept into the source texts over the centuries are corrected in the KJV, making it more accurate than the extant greek and latin texts.

Comment #37: togolosh  on  07/20  at  05:24 PM

The Bible of course is the greatest fantasy novel ever written—even better than the Lord of the Rings.  Nothing wrong with people reading either of them, as long as they don’t come away with the notion that elves or angels are real.

Except, the Bible was explicitly written to convince people that angels are real (unlike LOTR).

Comment #38: Notorious P.A.T.  on  07/20  at  06:22 PM

Well, not exactly, P.A.T.  More accurately, the Old Testament end of the Bible is a written record of people who already believed in angels, committed to parchment (or papyrus, or tablets, or whatever people back then committed things to) in an era of cultural diaspora, when suddenly oral tradition couldn’t be relied on anymore and Yahweh only knows what kinds of crazy Babylonian ideas these kids are going to end up with if we’re not careful.  The New Testament, which doesn’t talk much about angels, is a group of letters and evangelical pamphlets attempting to convince various groups of people that Christ was the long awaited Messiah, that Christ was divine, that Christ fulfilled X, Y, and Z ancient Hebrew prophecies, and/or that Christianity is the best way to salvation (above any of the myriad other messianic and salvationist cults that were popular in the late Roman era). 

This is why there are so many inconsistencies, plot holes, etc—it’s kind of like taking 10,000 years of different kinds of historical, mythological, cultural, and religious literature and shoving it into one binding, with no particular editorial annotation to tell people, “OK, so this is Genesis, it’s the mythological origin story of the pastoral tribes that would ultimately unite to become the Hebrews…” 

It’s kind of like an anthology, really, more than it’s like a novel. 

*note: I have spent most of the afternoon enjoying all day 2-for-1 air conditioned happy hour, so all this should be understood through a lens of, well, err, divine influence, as it were…*

Comment #39: The Opoponax  on  07/20  at  07:21 PM

Yet these same people would explode if it was even suggested that a class be taught about the Qur’an or the Vedas or the Talmud. Even were it taught the way the Bible class is supposed to be instead of the way it is.

Comment #40: Rebecca  on  07/20  at  07:46 PM

Cowboy Rocketman Jesse, congratulations on your official declaration!

Comment #41: Dr. Psycho, Atomic Brain Surgeon  on  07/21  at  09:48 AM

Rebecca,

I lived on the left coast, and we were actually taught about hinduism, budhism, judaism, and islam more so than christianity.  We were taught the basic religious doctrine of the first four in history, and just learned about the power-struggles between catholics and protestants (and Martin Luther’s bulls, etc.).

I think it can be done, but it should be a world religions class, not just a christian class.

Comment #42: Ismone  on  07/21  at  12:11 PM

I’m in New York and we also learned more about the doctrine of non-Judeo-Christian religions as part of our history classes. I think the teachers figured we already knew about Christianity, and Jewish doctrine (speaking as a Jew here) isn’t historically important enough to cover in a short course, IMHO. I was referring to the crazies, not to sensible teachers and parents. smile

Comment #43: Rebecca  on  07/22  at  12:14 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.