Will Learning Or Ignorance Win Out In HB Tonight?
Posted by: Jubal | 06/24/2008 5:21 PM
Tonight, the Huntington Beach Union High School District Board of Trustees will take up the matter of offering a "Bible as Literature" course to its students. This has been sought by Trustee Matt Harper on behalf of a group of constituents.
This shouldn't be controversial, but it is.
The matter of belief or disbelief aside, the Bible is the single most influential work of literature in human history. It exists in every country and in every language. The language of our Western Civilization is so replete with biblical references that most people are unaware that is the case. According to this article, there are more than a thousand biblical references in Shakespeare alone.
Yet, there are still those vocal elements, driven by a distorted understanding of separation of church and state, hostility to religion -- or both -- who complain that offering high school student the chance to study one of the most significant books of all time somehow imposes religion on them. To propose that even the merely scholastic study an historic religious work through the lens of literature is equivalent to government-mandated worship is extremist; almost tantamount to making it school district policy to pretend the Bible does not exist.
One might as well omit all mention of Jerusalem from geography and history courses, since its significance stems from being a leading holy city to the Earth's great monotheistic faiths.
Given the woeful cultural illiteracy of our youth, does it make sense that students should be deliberately blocked from a course of study that will enrich their understanding of their civilization (let alone just the country) in which they live, for fear that someday, one of the students in that course might derives something other than literary inspiration from exposure to the Bible?
As this article points out:
This shouldn't be controversial, but it is.
The matter of belief or disbelief aside, the Bible is the single most influential work of literature in human history. It exists in every country and in every language. The language of our Western Civilization is so replete with biblical references that most people are unaware that is the case. According to this article, there are more than a thousand biblical references in Shakespeare alone.
Yet, there are still those vocal elements, driven by a distorted understanding of separation of church and state, hostility to religion -- or both -- who complain that offering high school student the chance to study one of the most significant books of all time somehow imposes religion on them. To propose that even the merely scholastic study an historic religious work through the lens of literature is equivalent to government-mandated worship is extremist; almost tantamount to making it school district policy to pretend the Bible does not exist.
One might as well omit all mention of Jerusalem from geography and history courses, since its significance stems from being a leading holy city to the Earth's great monotheistic faiths.
Given the woeful cultural illiteracy of our youth, does it make sense that students should be deliberately blocked from a course of study that will enrich their understanding of their civilization (let alone just the country) in which they live, for fear that someday, one of the students in that course might derives something other than literary inspiration from exposure to the Bible?
As this article points out:
"Trying to understand American literature and history without some knowledge of the Bible is like trying to make sense of the ocean despite a complete ignorance of fish."Here's hoping the Huntington Beach Union High School District Board of Trustees embraces learning over willful ignorance and votes to include "The Bible As Literature" in its curriculum.
CATEGORY:
Politics Behind the Orange Curtain
"Bible as literature" is a great idea. The Bible (and the Koran and Flying Spaghetti Monster) do not belong in the biology curriculum, but is a wonderful source material for the humanities in its own right. Try explaining Manifest Density or Martin Luther King Jr. without any reference to Christian ideas.
Just out of curiosity, who exactly is opposing this? In my experience, Fundamentalists can be much more opposed to this kind of course than Secular Humanist types. If one believes that the Bible is the inerrant, inviolable word of God, treating the Bible as literature and therefore subject criticism is threatening.
Then again, there are whacked-out clueless parents from across the spectrum, so God knows who is kicking up this ruckus.
One of the best courses I took was Bible as Literature at Orange Coast College. Professor was a self-avowed conservative evangelical, but that didn't stop him from treating the Good Book as...well, a book. No religious overtones. As long as it's not one of those Bible-study-on-wheels deals, the HB case is fine.
May God, Laxmi, Buddha, Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Amitābha, Bhaisajyaguru, Maitreya, Vairocana, the Moon (Tetzahuiltl), The Earth (Texitli), Coatlicue, The Sun, the Wind, the Fire, Zeus, Apolo, or any other god out there, bless the US of O!
Mahatma Gandhi and The United States of Obama
June 24, 2008
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, commonly known as Mahatma Gandhi, was not only a major political and spiritual leader of India, but also the Indian independence movement, and can be viewed as India’s Founder.
Ganhdi was a pioneer of Satyagraha—resistance to tyranny through mass civil disobedience, firmly founded upon total non-violence, and widely emulated by Dr. Martin Luther King and Cesar Chavez. In India, Ganhdi is officially accorded the title Father of the Nation. On June 15 2007, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution declaring October 2 2007 to be the "International Day of Non-Violence".
Senator Obama, echoing Gandhi’s non-violence proclamation “I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.” insists that if elected as president of the United States, he will unilateraly withdraw immediately from Iraq, and wil meet with Iran’s holocaust denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as well as any other anti-west dictator, wihtout any pre-conditions. Of course, Gandhi also said, “I cannot teach you violence, as I do not myself believe in it. I can only teach you not to bow your heads before any one even at the cost of your life”.
Naturally, just like there is some concern for the Senator’s dark side, there is a dark side to the great Mahatma Gandhi, including charges that he used to beat his wife up routinely, that he was an adulterer and had a spiritual marriage with two British women, for example. Additional incidents are described in the Ruppe News website.
Last week, the Barack Obama campaign unveiled a new campaign symbol mimicking the US presidential seal. Instead of the presidential seal's "E pluribus unum" which means "Out of many, one" the Obama sign says "Vero possumus," a rough translation for "Yes, we can."
Seven principles widely attributed to Mahatma Gandhi areWealth without work,
Pleasure without conscience,
Knowledge without character,
Commerce without morality,
Science without humanity,
Worship without sacrifice,
Politics without principle.
Whereas the United States of Obama described by Steven Huron in the Hill’s Briefing Room might look something like:Access to abortion on demand, anytime, anyplace, anywhereAbortion paid for by new Socialist Health Care system, run for by big government.
You could even have an abortion after the baby is 90 % born
Prepare to pay more in taxes
You hate the Iraqi War, so elect a liberal democrat, withdraw from Iraq and talk to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about wiping Israel from the face of the earth – after all the Holocaust never happened.
Smear a presidential candidate trying to contain pork
If you think gas prices are high now, just wait until the democrats shut down every option for drilling in America,
Welcome to the New United States of Obama, where all illegal immigration is legal and where intolerance is not tolerated, all religions are not only welcome, but are foundational, and in fact, there is really no right and no wrong!
Long live the Founder of India, Long live the Founder of the US of Obama and may God, Laxmi, Buddha, Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Amitābha, Bhaisajyaguru, Maitreya, Vairocana, the Moon (Tetzahuiltl), The Earth (Texitli), Coatlicue, The Sun, the Wind, the Fire, Zeus, Apolo, or any other god out there, bless the US of O!
I agree with Jubal, this shouldn't be controvesial, but it is.The controversy is caused, not by the use of the Bible as a literary teaching aid, but from the (high)probability that the course will be used to promote Christianity, and a narrow version of Christianity at that. Recent attempts to ban the teaching of evolution, etc lend credence to concerns about proselyting in the classroom. That's why this is controversial.
I took this class as an elective in high school in New York 30 years ago. It was fascinating and should be taught in high schools today. It treats the Bible as literature making Bible readings almost as secular as Mark Twain.
Assuming that there is the demand in the schools for this elective, HBUSD should certainly approve the course. The first amendment state that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion" (Souter). Just because something deals with a religious subject matter is frankly an unconsitutional reason for opposition.
I earned my BA in Comparative Religion from UCSB, the first state school to establish such a program after if was permitted by the Supreme Court. The courses always dealt with a religious subject matter in a secular manner, making observations and not value judgments. This is the exact this the class would have to do.
If there is anything different I would do, it would be to propose a class in comparative religious texts. Reading the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Qur'an, Hindu, Buddhist, and other religious texts side by side would, I think, foster an understanding of differences and appreciation of pluralism that forms the foundation of our civil society.
The funny thing with Bible as Literature for Christians is that it is a double edged sword.
Fritz seems to think that it will be used to teach Christianity but I think Dan is more on track. Teaching the bible as literature dereligionizes the Bible.
I like the idea of the Bible as literature because so much of our society is grounded in Bible verses that it is interesting to see where so much of it has come from. Atheists should really see the Bible as the greatest work of literature ever created. This assumption essentially throws out the notion that the Bible is the word of God and that it is a work of fiction. How can they not agree with that and any atheist that does not believe the Bible is the greatest work of literature is so blinded with hatred for Christianity (it is possible to be an atheist and not hate Christianity) that he/she is unable to appreciate the influence that this work has had.