A bill making its way through the Kentucky legislature would add religion classes to the state’s public school curriculum.
__________________
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency........... Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
Sounds great on the surface..but could cause magor problems..
Problems...what if the teacher was a Jehovah's Witness...their Bible is quite a bit different...or the teacher a Muslim ......or even a Mormon..they have an extra book
So, not only are there different Bibles but then you have the various teachers with their various slants..too many clitches
What could work though...is the way they did it back in the early 60s when I was in school. We would open each day with the student or teacher reading a portion of the Word..there was no discussion ..just simply reading the Word..This is actually all that needs to be done..for the Word alone is powerful...When I was saved I read the entire New Testament straight through without understanding any of it...it did not matter..the Word is like yeast..it worketh. Hebrews 4:12 says,"The Word is alive and active."
The article was a little confusing. It isn't clear whether the classes would be classes on religion or classes on the Bible. That would, I think, make a difference.
On the face of it, as an elective, it seems reasonable. Our culture and even our legal system owes a substantial debt to the Judeo/Christian tradition. But something here doesn't quite pass the smell test. I'm a little suspicious of the motives here.
What happens when a demand is made for a class on Buddhism, or Islam, or Shinto? Who is going to be considered qualified to teach it?
I predict a chorus of cheers for this here on HNI. But there is a difference between teaching about religion and teaching religion. So I'm inclined to think it will get shot down based on failure to adhere to that distinction.
__________________
Proud parents of our own "Daddy's Little Girls"
I heard Jesus He drank wine and I bet we'd get along just fine.
OK, I don't think having the classes is as important as the battle if any that will happen over it. People will in due course declare just what is what and who is who. In the mean time the real target will suffer the greatest strain, freedom and bound to lose again taking power one step closer to absolute.
Many of you think keeping religion out is freedom, it's not and was never intended to be, but then againg neither were public schools or the billion other public institutions that came along due to the publics disregard for his neighbor. Since he didn't want to live by the rule to love his neighbor he is now forced to pay to keep himself and his neighbor in the dark. I don't doubt history will in some way call our times the dark ages.
People abuse each others freedom (no religion is limiting) and the government is about to grow in it's authority. Did ya see the report on red light camera's making the streets safer? What people refuse to understand is freedom doesn't allow it, if it did their would be camera's in the home. After all a lot of domestic crimes are commited in the home and if your not guilty what do you have to fear.
Religion is already taught in schools, it's secular humanism. Other religions are excluded.
Sounds great on the surface..but could cause magor problems..
Problems...what if the teacher was a Jehovah's Witness...their Bible is quite a bit different...or the teacher a Muslim ......or even a Mormon..they have an extra book
So, not only are there different Bibles but then you have the various teachers with their various slants..too many clitches
What could work though...is the way they did it back in the early 60s when I was in school. We would open each day with the student or teacher reading a portion of the Word..there was no discussion ..just simply reading the Word..This is actually all that needs to be done..for the Word alone is powerful...When I was saved I read the entire New Testament straight through without understanding any of it...it did not matter..the Word is like yeast..it worketh. Hebrews 4:12 says,"The Word is alive and active."
I have no problem with it as I believe God enlightens and can use rocks to do it. Some times a push in the wrong direction can cause a person to fight back. In the fight they become stronger. Freedom demands these religions be allow just like the one that has full control over it now has.
I don’t want a secular teacher teaching a spiritual curriculum. Here in the Dallas Ft. Worth Metro mess they are talking about teaching Arabic, and making it mandatory. If we need to teach them another language, it should at least be English..lol
Leave the Bible at home and should be taught by the parents or their local church!
Religion classes have never been banned, as long as they are not required and appear as electives.
Prayer has never been banned by individual students as long as the faculty doesn't endorse it from a state-sponsored platform, classroom, intercom-system etc.
Students at school can pray to themselves silently anytime they want, as long as they don't disrupt the learning environment when doing so or attempt to coerce others into participating.
These things have never been banned in those forms that I mention.
This (KY legs.) is political grandstanding at its worst, using religion as a political wedge.
Very un-religious IMO.
Last edited by TexasGulf3; 02-09-2011 at 05:18 AM.
Comparative religion as a study is valuable, I think -- taken purely as an academic exercise. A survey of several major religions, without proselytizing for any one, has its place in school. IMO, middle school to junior high seems about right. A couple chapters, or units of study within social studies would be adequate -- would help make a well rounded education, without threatening a student's personal convictions.
Comparative religion as a study is valuable, I think -- taken purely as an academic exercise. A survey of several major religions, without proselytizing for any one, has its place in school. IMO, middle school to junior high seems about right. A couple chapters, or units of study within social studies would be adequate -- would help make a well rounded education, without threatening a student's personal convictions.
I don’t want a secular teacher teaching a spiritual curriculum. Here in the Dallas Ft. Worth Metro mess they are talking about teaching Arabic, and making it mandatory. If we need to teach them another language, it should at least be English..lol
Leave the Bible at home and should be taught by the parents or their local church!
Trouble is doing so is a violation of the book. It is to be every where. Trouble also is in man believing his will can make it so. God is the only guest that decides when He leaves and if He does things go bad for the host who stood up in front of everybody and told Him to leave. The same will have to stand up and boldly admit guilt and humbly ask Him to return, in front of everybody. He ain't sneaking in the back door like nothing ever happened.
Kentucky considers bible curriculum
I'm a little suspicious of the motives here.
