Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 02:28 PM Jun 2019

BACK TO SCHOOL WITH "BIBLE LITERACY" COURSES: ACLU REMINDS KENTUCKY STUDENTS OF THEIR RIGHTS

Apparently, the ACLU and religionists in Kentucky aren't on the same page at all, as some seem to claim. Here's a page from the ACLU's website that explains the huge chasm between the ACLU's understanding of how the Bible can be used in schools and Kentucky's understanding of the same. Rather than rely on reports from religiously-biased online sources like religionnews.com, here is information directly from the ACLU in Kentucky. Clearly there is no real common ground between the ACLU and what is actually happening in schools in some states:

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/back-school-bible-literacy-courses-aclu-reminds-kentucky-students-their-rights

BACK TO SCHOOL WITH “BIBLE LITERACY” COURSES: ACLU REMINDS KENTUCKY STUDENTS OF THEIR RIGHTS

Last school year, an ACLU-KY Open Records Act Investigation uncovered public school teachers using the Bible to impart religious life lessons (Barren, McCracken, and Letcher Counties), the use of online Sunday School lessons and worksheets for course source material (Letcher and Wayne Counties), and assignments and rote memorization of Biblical text (Letcher, Wayne, Whitley, and Lewis Counties), practices which fall far short of constitutionally-permissive academic and objective study of the Bible and its historical context or literary value.

The Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) has since released draft academic standards for these elective courses. The document points out, “The standards address what is to be learned but do not address how learning experiences are to be designed or what resources should be used.” It remains the responsibility of local school districts to implement courses that fall within constitutional strictures, which require any use of religious text in the classroom to be secular, objective, nondevotional, and must not promote any specific religious view.

“Our investigation of ‘Bible Literacy’ courses demonstrated the need for clear, concise, and controlled guidance for teachers in addition to a plan for monitoring these courses,” said ACLU-KY attorney Heather Gatnarek. “Unfortunately, the draft standards from KDE fall short of what is needed to help districts with the difficult task of implementing a constitutionally sound course focused on one religious text. Without more specific guidance, we fear some classrooms will once again be filled with preaching, not teaching.”

The ACLU-KY reminds students and parents that “Bible Literacy” courses may not promote religion or a particular religious viewpoint, test students on matters of religious faith, nor be designed to instill religious life lessons. Religious education is best left to parents and churches, not school or government. Families that believe their rights may have been violated are encouraged to keep copies of questionable course materials and assignments and to file a request for legal assistance with the ACLU of Kentucky.
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
BACK TO SCHOOL WITH "BIBLE LITERACY" COURSES: ACLU REMINDS KENTUCKY STUDENTS OF THEIR RIGHTS (Original Post) MineralMan Jun 2019 OP
GOOD orangecrush Jun 2019 #1
Or vice-versa. Either way, it's indoctrination. MineralMan Jun 2019 #2
Which Bible is the officially approved one? The Protestant or Catholic, or other? keithbvadu2 Jun 2019 #3
KJV-Only! MineralMan Jun 2019 #4
The Gideons version onetexan Jun 2019 #5
Exactly what saidsimplesimon Jun 2019 #6
"Religious education is best left to parents and churches, not school or government." trotsky Jun 2019 #7
Well, that just wasn't true, was it? MineralMan Jun 2019 #8
And if you read the joint statement from my post, guillaumeb Jun 2019 #10
Did you write what was in your post? MineralMan Jun 2019 #13
A joint statement. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #14
Did you write it? MineralMan Jun 2019 #15
LMAO trotsky Jun 2019 #16
All caps for visibility. guillaumeb Jun 2019 #9
As it was at the link, M. B. MineralMan Jun 2019 #11
I did not attempt to or actually call you a liar. MineralMan Jun 2019 #12
Actually, the quote used in that article MineralMan Jun 2019 #17
Seeing that Jesus said his truths were hidden, I see no point in teaching the literal level. Karadeniz Jun 2019 #18
Oh my. Voltaire2 Jun 2019 #19

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
2. Or vice-versa. Either way, it's indoctrination.
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 02:40 PM
Jun 2019

Kentucky is a hotbed of right-wing Southern Baptist preachers, each of whom seeks to stuff children's heads full of Jesus.

In such states, "religion education" will never be objective, nor will it simply describe a broad range of religious beliefs to inform, rather than indoctrinate. Instead, the schools will pretend to do so, while bringing Southern Baptist Sunday School into public school classrooms.

The ACLU knows this and is vigilant, but the problem persists on a perpetual basis.

Believing that religionists and the ACLU have any common goals is a fallacy, regardless of what some writer for religionnews.com has to say. There is no common ground between the two. Just a gaping chasm.

keithbvadu2

(40,531 posts)
3. Which Bible is the officially approved one? The Protestant or Catholic, or other?
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 02:57 PM
Jun 2019

Which Bible is the officially approved one? The Protestant or Catholic, or other?

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
7. "Religious education is best left to parents and churches, not school or government."
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 03:33 PM
Jun 2019

But... but... but... someone just spent the better part of another thread scolding everyone that the ACLU *wants* schools to teach religion.

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
8. Well, that just wasn't true, was it?
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:01 PM
Jun 2019

Dissembling for Jesus is standard practice for some. Truth is secondary when religion is the topic.

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
13. Did you write what was in your post?
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:29 PM
Jun 2019

Do you accept the excerpt from religionnews.com as complete and factual? It is neither. That website has a heavy religious bias. You knew that, right?

guillaumeb

(42,649 posts)
14. A joint statement.
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:30 PM
Jun 2019

Do you understand that?

Assuming so, there is no reason for further discussion.

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
15. Did you write it?
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:32 PM
Jun 2019

It is a second-hand reference from a biased publication. I quoted from an original source. Do you not see the difference?

guillaumeb

(42,649 posts)
9. All caps for visibility.
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:07 PM
Jun 2019

In site of this attempt to call me a liar, there was this from my post:

Intriguingly, much of this crisis may be rooted in a myth. School districts and state boards of education fear recriminations if they deal with matters of faith in the classroom. Yet even the American Civil Liberties Union — dreaded in many American school districts for its lawsuits against religion in public education — urges objective teaching of the world’s religions. In its Joint Statement on Current Law and Religion in the Public Schools, the organization declared, “It is both permissible and desirable to teach objectively about the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries.”


Note that the bolded portion is from the ACLU itself.

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
11. As it was at the link, M. B.
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:13 PM
Jun 2019

My entire quote is from the ACLU. My words appear above the excerpt. Religionnews.com is a biased source. It chooses things to quote, selectively and out of context. Yet you trust their second-hand interpretation.

We do not, necessarily. I did a little research at an actual, first-hand source instead.

Bye, now...

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
12. I did not attempt to or actually call you a liar.
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 04:20 PM
Jun 2019

Your post had no comment in it from you. It was nothing but an excerpt from religionnews.com. If anyone was lying, it was the author of that article. That was not you, right?

MineralMan

(148,008 posts)
17. Actually, the quote used in that article
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 05:15 PM
Jun 2019

came from a book written in 1995. You can find the reference here:

https://books.google.com/books?id=1cnTel1o59YC&pg=PA249&lpg=PA249

Go look it up! Scroll down to the Consensus section.

The author lied or did not look it up.

Karadeniz

(23,555 posts)
18. Seeing that Jesus said his truths were hidden, I see no point in teaching the literal level.
Tue Jun 11, 2019, 05:56 PM
Jun 2019

Voltaire2

(14,880 posts)
19. Oh my.
Wed Jun 12, 2019, 04:52 AM
Jun 2019

Such a massive disconnect between what the ACLU’s actual position is and what was posted in that other thread.

I would be shocked, except this was just ssdd.

Another train another wreck.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»BACK TO SCHOOL WITH "BIBL...