Ariz. Governor Signs Bill to Allow Bible Classes in Public Schools

[cleanhippie]

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has signed into law a bill that allows the establishing of elective classes that focus on the Bible and its influence on western civilization. Sponsored by State Representative Terri Proud, House Bill 2563 was passed by a 21 to 9 vote in the state Senate last Thursday and signed by Brewer on Tuesday. According to HB 2563, "A school district or charter school may offer an elective course pertaining to how the Bible has influenced western culture for pupils in grades nine through twelve." "A teacher who instructs a course offered under this section in its appropriate historical context and in good faith shall be immune from civil liability and disciplinary action," reads the bill.

The Bible class elective would teach students, among other things, "the contents of the Old Testament and the New Testament," "the history recorded by the Old Testament and the New Testament," and the "influence of the Old Testament and the New Testament on laws, history, government, literature, art, music, customs, morals, values and culture."

--snip--

"This bill is not about improving academic achievement; it's about introducing religious indoctrination into the schools and currying favor with conservative religious voters," said Conn. "I think most public schools will decide not to offer Bible courses. They are already strapped for funds, so I doubt if they'll want to use scarce resources to intervene in such a controversial topic."

While Conn believes that the "Bible obviously played an important role in history," he also felt that having a social studies class about it would be difficult given the many Bible translations and interpretations. "Many…denominations use different versions of the Bible and come to dramatically different theological understandings about what it means," said Conn.

"It is very difficult for a public school to teach about the Bible without wandering into constitutional and religious difficulties."

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/ariz-governor-signs-bill-to-allow-bible-classes-in-public-schools-73485/#wrCZDrJpTZdBdGso.99

Is anyone here under the impression that this is NOT just another attempt to promote christianity in the public school system?

[rug]

1. That article is nearly five months old.

"Arizona passed HB 2563 in April, which allows public schools to teach elective Bible classes, presenting the text as foundational to Western literature and art. Rolat acknowledged that the Bible can be a useful instructional tool if taught carefully, but expressed concern about this bill."

http://www.au.org/church-state/julyaugust-2012-church-state/au-bulletin/bible-class-must-be-objective-au-tells-ariz-ed

Do you have any updates?

[cleanhippie]

2. Nope. Just came across this today.

[rug]

4. Here's the text.

https://votesmart.org/static/billtext/38314.pdf

It's part of a larger education bill.

Sec. 4. Title 15, chapter 7, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is
33 amended by adding section 15-717.01, to read:
34 15-717.01. Bible influence; elective course
35 A. THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SHALL PRESCRIBE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A
36 COURSE DESIGNATED AS "THE BIBLE AND ITS INFLUENCE ON WESTERN CULTURE" FOR
37 PUPILS IN GRADES NINE THROUGH TWELVE THAT ENABLES PUPILS TO EARN CREDIT
38 TOWARD A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA. THE COURSE REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED BY THE
39 STATE BOARD SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
40 1. THE HISTORY AND LITERATURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT ERA.
41 2. THE HISTORY AND LITERATURE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ERA.
42 3. A COMBINATION OF THE SUBJECTS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 2 OF
43 THIS SUBSECTION.
44 B. A COURSE OFFERED UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE DESIGNED TO:
1 1. FAMILIARIZE PUPILS WITH THE CONTENTS, CHARACTERS, POETRY AND
2 NARRATIVES THAT ARE PREREQUISITES TO UNDERSTANDING SOCIETY AND CULTURE,
3 INCLUDING LITERATURE, ART, MUSIC, MORES, ORATORY AND PUBLIC POLICY.
4 2. FAMILIARIZE PUPILS WITH THE FOLLOWING:
5 (a) THE CONTENTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW TESTAMENT.
6 (b) THE HISTORY RECORDED BY THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW TESTAMENT.
7 (c) THE LITERARY STYLE AND STRUCTURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW
8 TESTAMENT.
9 (d) THE INFLUENCE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW TESTAMENT ON LAWS,
10 HISTORY, GOVERNMENT, LITERATURE, ART, MUSIC, CUSTOMS, MORALS, VALUES AND
11 CULTURE.
12 C. A SCHOOL OR CHARTER SCHOOL MAY OFFER THE COURSE PRESCRIBED IN THIS
13 SECTION AS AN ELECTIVE COURSE. A SCHOOL MAY OFFER THIS COURSE AS AN ONLINE
14 COURSE.
15 D. A PUPIL SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO USE A SPECIFIC TRANSLATION AS THE
16 SOLE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OR THE NEW TESTAMENT AND MAY USE AS THE BASIC
17 TEXTBOOK A DIFFERENT TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OR THE NEW TESTAMENT
18 FROM THAT CHOSEN BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD, THE CHARTER SCHOOL
19 GOVERNING BODY OR THE PUPIL'S TEACHER.
20 E. A COURSE OFFERED UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL FOLLOW APPLICABLE LAW AND
21 ALL FEDERAL AND STATE GUIDELINES IN MAINTAINING RELIGIOUS NEUTRALITY AND
22 ACCOMMODATING THE DIVERSE RELIGIOUS VIEWS, TRADITIONS AND PERSPECTIVES OF
23 PUPILS. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO VIOLATE ANY PROVISION OF THE
24 UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, THE CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA OR STATE LAW OR ANY
25 RULES, GUIDELINES OR REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
26 EDUCATION, THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION OR THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
27 EDUCATION.
28 F. BEFORE ADOPTING RULES IDENTIFYING THE STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR A
29 COURSE OFFERED UNDER THIS SECTION, THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SHALL SUBMIT
30 THE PROPOSED STATE REQUIREMENTS TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. THE ATTORNEY
31 GENERAL SHALL REVIEW THE PROPOSED STATE REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THE
32 COURSE COMPLIES WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
33 THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MAY NOT ADOPT RULES IDENTIFYING THE STATE
34 REQUIREMENTS FOR A COURSE OFFERED UNDER THIS SECTION WITHOUT THE ATTORNEY
35 GENERAL'S APPROVAL PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION.
36 G. A TEACHER OF A COURSE OFFERED BY A SCHOOL UNDER THIS SECTION WHO
37 PROVIDES INSTRUCTION TO PUPILS IN LANGUAGE ARTS, SOCIAL STUDIES OR HISTORY,
38 IF PRACTICAL, SHALL HAVE COMPLETED POSTSECONDARY COURSES IN RELIGION OR
39 BIBLICAL STUDIES. A TEACHER SELECTED TO TEACH A COURSE OFFERED BY A SCHOOL
40 UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE STAFF DEVELOPMENT TRAINING AS
41 SPECIFIED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. PERSONNEL SHALL NOT BE ASSIGNED
42 TO TEACH THE COURSE BASED ON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
43 1. A RELIGIOUS TEST.
44 2. A PROFESSION OF FAITH OR LACK OF FAITH.
1 3. PRIOR OR CURRENT RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION OR A LACK OF RELIGIOUS
2 AFFILIATION.
3 H. THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SHALL PRESCRIBE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
4 THE COURSE TO COUNT TOWARD GRADUATION FROM HIGH SCHOOL. FOR THE PURPOSE OF
5 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION, A SCHOOL SHALL GRANT ONE-HALF OF AN ACADEMIC ELECTIVE
6 CREDIT FOR SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF A COURSE ON THE OLD TESTAMENT, ONE-HALF
7 OF AN ACADEMIC ELECTIVE CREDIT FOR SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF A COURSE ON THE
8 NEW TESTAMENT AND ONE-HALF OF AN ACADEMIC ELECTIVE CREDIT FOR SATISFACTORY
9 COMPLETION OF A COMBINED COURSE ON BOTH THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE NEW
10 TESTAMENT. THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES ONLY TO A COURSE THAT IS TAUGHT IN STRICT
11 COMPLIANCE WITH THIS SECTION.

Interestingly, it also contains this language:

4 15-341. General powers and duties; immunity; delegation
5 A. The governing board shall:
6 1. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures for the governance of
7 the schools, not inconsistent with law or rules prescribed by the state board
8 of education.
9 2. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 15-717.01, exclude from schools all
10 books, publications, papers or audiovisual materials of a sectarian, partisan
11 or denominational character.

[cleanhippie]

6. So, you are the lawyer. How does this look?

Is it, ahem, a legitimate comparative religion class, or just another attempt to inject christianity into public schools?

[rug]

7. It can be both.

On paper, it's a history course. You can't study the history of Europe - and its world empires - without studying western Christianity. And you can't study Christianity without studying the Bible any more than you can understand the Middle East without understanding the Koran.

On the other hand, we both know what comes from the maw of republican legislators. While the statute doesn't require it, this is fertile ground for Chritian triumphalism to grow.

The implementation of the statute will determine which one this turns out to be. Teachers, parents and students have to keep their eyes and mouths open.

I think the AU take on it is most likely correct.

[cleanhippie]

8. I would agree

What concerns me the most is how one can "study the bible" without having anothers personal (be it an individual or groups) interpretation as the context for the "study."

I'm weary of using the bible, or any other religious "holy" text, as a text book. Used as a reference book is one thing, but using it as a text book... not so much.

On edit: as enlightenment points out below...

A TEACHER OF A COURSE OFFERED BY A SCHOOL UNDER THIS SECTION WHO
37 PROVIDES INSTRUCTION TO PUPILS IN LANGUAGE ARTS, SOCIAL STUDIES OR HISTORY,
38 IF PRACTICAL, SHALL HAVE COMPLETED POSTSECONDARY COURSES IN RELIGION OR
39 BIBLICAL STUDIES.

[enlightenment]

9. I'm not a lawyer

but this part makes me go with "attempt to inject christianity into public schools":

G. A TEACHER OF A COURSE OFFERED BY A SCHOOL UNDER THIS SECTION WHO
37 PROVIDES INSTRUCTION TO PUPILS IN LANGUAGE ARTS, SOCIAL STUDIES OR HISTORY,
38 IF PRACTICAL, SHALL HAVE COMPLETED POSTSECONDARY COURSES IN RELIGION OR
39 BIBLICAL STUDIES. A TEACHER SELECTED TO TEACH A COURSE OFFERED BY A SCHOOL
40 UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE STAFF DEVELOPMENT TRAINING AS
41 SPECIFIED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. PERSONNEL SHALL NOT BE ASSIGNED
42 TO TEACH THE COURSE BASED ON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
43 1. A RELIGIOUS TEST.
44 2. A PROFESSION OF FAITH OR LACK OF FAITH.
1 3. PRIOR OR CURRENT RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION OR A LACK OF RELIGIOUS
2 AFFILIATION.

Why would they prefer to have teachers who had background in religion and bible studies if they weren't trying to put a religious spin on it - and why would a teacher need to complete additional 'staff development training' before teaching this course? What is it, exactly, that they need to be taught before they step into the classroom? If this is such a hot potato that they need to teach the teachers how to avoid running afoul of the law, maybe they should let churches teach religion . . .

[cleanhippie]

10. By specifically mentioning "biblical studies" as a requisite...

it certainly makes it seem less and less a "comparative religion" class.

[Igel]

16. But it's not a comparative relgions class.

It's a "here's how the text and interpretations of the Bible have affected" various things.

It's like having a course on how the Qur'aan and the Sunnah have affected music, literature, architecture, etc., etc., in the Middle East. The effect's been profound in the economy, as well. But it's one thing to be able to say 'the effect's been profound' and it's another to say that this chapter/verse banning representations of living forms made it necessary to find out modes of artistic expression, some of which was expressed as calligraphy and some of which found expression in tiling patterns. The better you know the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, the more influence you'll find.

Of course, as a Westerner I'd also have to have studied ME music, architecture, literature, etc. But educated in the West, I already know a fair amount about these things. What's lacking on the part of many is the influence of large scale cultural structures on them, and one of the biggest is religion.

My Indian history teacher (S. Asian) took pains to point out differences in cultural expression and social structure depending if the dominant culture was rooted in Vedic or Islamic sources. Native American philosophy and art is rooted in religion. Same for Western thought. (The only problem is that it exposes kids to something many would prefer they not be exposed to, and might even allow some prestige to be conferred upon the Bible. Qur'aan, Vedas, The Tao ... not so bad for many.)

You can't understand, for example, Tolstoy or Dostoevsky without understanding a great deal about Orthodoxy. Even with Pushkin and Lermontov you have to know not just politics but also a fair amount about Orthodoxy and even how the Orthodoxy interpreted Islam. Every one of their readers when they wrote would have known the sacred texts and their exegesis. Every one would catch with a word an allusion that shifts the meaning of what's said or makes the sense piquant. It worked the same in Soviet times--you needed to know Pravda- and Izvestiya-speak, you needed to know about the "politically correct" interpretations of social events to understand a lot of low-key dissident writers.

Otherwise all literature is just about yourself, the true object of study is one's self, and, well, you can find that out just as well by day dreaming at the beach as by getting a PhD in literature or history. Some apparently like being freed of the strictures imposed by close reading and sociological or historical approaches to literature. Of course, rather then being tied down by the shifting views of dozens of writers and shifting cultural constraints over hundreds of years, having the ability to choose and pick which to be subject to, they're tied down by their own personal views and opinions 24/7. I like the former.

[cleanhippie]

17. Really good points.

You have given me something to think about.

[rug]

11. I suspect that's because they want teachers who have at least college level courses on religion.

It's not necessarily ominous. There are many disciplines to study religion and scripture academicaaly.

The reason for the staff development requirement is probably the same reason as sex edcation: it's a sensitive subject.

It's a slyly crafted law. What people do with it is another thing altogether.

[enlightenment]

15. True, not necessarily ominous -

but definitely leaning toward it. There is no reason to prefer that someone have religious training at the post-graduate level to teach what is, essentially, a literature course.

I teach history at the college level. If I chose to have a portion of my European Civilization class devoted to the development of Christianity, I wouldn't need additional coursework in biblical studies to do it justice (and I have taken a couple in the past - they were, unsurprisingly, sad echoes of Sunday school rather than the "bible as literature" that they purported to be).

Bottom line is that this is a slippery slope and one that shouldn't be given headway. If someone wants to study the bible, they can do it elsewhere. They don't need an 'elective' course in the public school.

[exboyfil]

3. I wonder if they will include

the passages where the Bible was used to justify genocide and slavery?

[xfundy]

5. And antisemitism, segregation, subjugation of women,

anti-environmentalism, witch burnings, anti-science, anti-education, blaming victims for diseases, anti-poor, etc., etc., etc.?

[pinto]

12. As always, the devil is in the details. Though it's presented as an historical class,

sure looks to be essentially a bible class. And why the inclusion of an immunity clause?

[rug]

13. A class like this is ripe for lawsuits from all sides.

It's a narrow path they've made.

[pinto]

14. Yep. The clause implies an expectation of challenge(s).

[dimbear]

18. Turn to the chapter on St. Augustine, class, and let's explore why torture is OK. n/t