Texas State Ed Board Approves Curriculum That Emphasizes Biblical Teachings
Critics say the curriculum borders on outright proselytization.

Could Texas public elementary school classrooms soon be teaching lessons on the Bible? This week, the Texas education board voted 8–7 to approve a new curriculum that frequently incorporates religious teachings into typical lessons. While supporters claim that the curriculum doesn't proselytize to children—and covers multiple religions, not just Christianity—critics argue that the curriculum amounts to unconstitutional religious instruction.
The Texas State Board of Education approved the state-developed curriculum, which will be optional, in a preliminary vote on Tuesday. The curriculum, called Bluebonnet Learning, contains largely typical elementary-level lessons. However, the smattering of religious references in the curriculum is far from subtle, and tends to focus on Christian teaching while leaving education about other religions in the background.
In one kindergarten lesson about the Golden Rule, for example, students learn about the Sermon on the Mount and are even given a quote from scripture. "Beyond the Sermon on the Mount, there are many lessons included throughout the Bible," the lesson states. "Jesus said the Golden Rule sums up all the important teachings from scripture. 'So in everything, do unto others as you would have done unto you.'"
In one fifth-grade lesson on Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper, students get an extended description of Christian theology: "The ceremony is central to Christian belief that the blood of Jesus was shed as the last sacrifice that would be needed to live in connection with God," reads the curriculum. "A painting about the story of the ceremony's origin would be widely recognized by Leonardo's audience."
While stories from many different religions are included in the curriculum, stories from and about Christianity take center stage. For example, one report on the curriculum from Rice University Professor David Brockman notes that the curriculum's "Kindergarten art appreciation unit in [Bluebonnet] still includes lengthy quotes from and discussions of the Genesis creation and flood stories, and still includes the 'Sequencing Activity' asking students to identify the order of creation—material far more appropriate to Sunday School than public schools."
This is far from the first time Republican-led state governments have attempted to infuse classrooms with Christian messages. In June, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed a bill that mandates that all public school classrooms in the state display a poster of the Ten Commandments, though that law has been blocked in federal court. That month, Oklahoma's State Superintendent Ryan Walters announced that public school classrooms in the state would be required to stock Bibles. Walters came under particular fire after it was revealed that the only two Bibles to meet proposed regulations were expensive volumes endorsed by Donald Trump.
For now, Texas seems to be pushing forward with a curriculum that, according to Brockman, "verges on Christian proselytism insofar as its extensive, lopsided coverage of Christianity and the Bible suggests that this is the only religious tradition of any importance."
"That is not a message that Texas public schools, which are called to serve a religiously diverse population, have any business conveying," Brockman adds.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Everything that was just fine when grooming kids for perverse sex is now not just fine.
Got it.
And the democrats truly wonder why the lunatic fringe want to get rid of the department of education.
If the Dept of Education existed with the sole purpose of preventing Texas, Louisiana and Oklahoma (among others) from trying to violate the 1st amendment, it would be worth it.
But of course it does more than that. Like make sure poor districts have teachers who can teach special education. So Texas, Lousiana, Oklahoma among others.
If only the people offered more thoughts and prayers, the profoundly disabled wouldn't need federal help. /s
Of what 1st amendment violation do you speak?
Abjectly retarded that after all the "We need to hide gender conversions from parents.", "'Don't Say Gay' means math teachers won't be able to counsel queer kids in their sexuality.", and DOJ keeping tabs on parents at board meetings, the two primary examples of "outright proselytization" don't instruct anyone to do convert to any particular particular faith or belief system.
End public education, and you end this controversy.
Oh, wait.
That makes sense.
What was I thinking?
If we’re going hard on the separation of Church and State, we also need to repeal “Protection For ‘Good Samaritan’ Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material” that violates the 1A and ‘Church and State’ along several lines, prima facie.
No one should have a problem with the Golden Rule being taught. It is not religion-specific.
It’s better than teaching little kids about blowjobs and ass sex and gender nonsense. And this is the predictable response to the establishment sneaking all that in over the years.
It's a predictable response for red states to violate the constitution because of woke instruction in their state? Are you implying that teachers in Texas are presently teaching "little kids" about ass sex, blowjobs and 'gender non-sense?'
Yes, definitely in Austin
https://www.austinisd.org/sites/default/files/dre-surveys/rb/17.32RB_Transgender_students_school_perceptions_and_experiences_0.pdf
Austin is an alien world compared to the rest of the state.
Muahahah!
Like you give a shit about the Constitution. Claiming to have a law degree stapled to your thirteen inch dick would be more believable.
I am not sure about the windy city, but in free America, a private letter from Thomas Jefferson to a friend is not included in the US Constitution.
“No one should have a problem with the Golden Rule being taught”
You can teach the concept perfectly well without ever mentioning Jesus or quoting the Bible. It’s not about what’s being taught, but how it’s being taught, that’s the problem.
“It’s better than teaching …”
What does stuff that you don’t like have to do with the teaching of religion in public schools?
Nothing wrong with teaching about religion. Except to a democrat.
Everything wrong with mixing government and religion. Teaching religion in private schools and churches is a good thing. Non-critical teaching of religion (never mind the evangelical language and tone used) in public schools is not.
Wait, we can’t MENTION the Bible or Jesus? How exactly do we teach history?
No, but you can’t shoehorn Christian doctrine into unrelated topics. Critical analysis of various religions is valuable. Contextualizing historical events is fine. Talking about the blood of Jesus is not.
The problem is the content and the tone, which sounds like a sermon on Sunday rather than a comparative religion class.
I understand that the constant decline in religious observance and beliefs is traumatizing to conservatives, but trying to proselytize to people who don’t want to go to church by forcing it on them in school is not the answer. Nor is it acceptable.
Well said.
This is the third state to so blatantly violate separation of Christian religion and state.
How many states violated separation of woke religion and state? How much did Reason cover this?
I recall many articles about the stupidity of woke symptoms and effects, but none about the religious aspects of wokism, DEI, CRT, transgender mutilation. There are at least two states which make it criminal child abuse, probably felonies, to NOT surgically or chemically mutilate young children simply because their woke teachers convince them to repeat brainwashing. These same young children who are too young to be allowed to smoke, drink, or do drugs, are perfectly capable of deciding on irreversible genital mutilation on the word of a teacher, who is allowed to keep this all a secret from the parents.
And did Reason cover any of this as separation of church and state?
It used to be dogma that African tribal female genital mutilation was the scourge of the earth, an unimaginable evil. Reason even mentioned this, once upon a time.
https://reason.com/2009/11/30/one-last-minaret-swiss-voters/
... In Sweden, a proposal by the integration minister (herself an immigrant) to check all girls for evidence of female genital mutilation. ...
Nowadays, the absence of female genital mutilation would be the horror.
It used to be dogma that homosexuality was genetically determined, not a choice, not something that could be reversed. This was the basis for banning gay conversion therapy.
It used to be dogma that chemical castration was too evil for even voluntary use by convicted rapists and pedophiles.
Now it's dogma that it is woke teachers' duty to "encourage" their kindergarten kids to want to change their gender with puberty blockers, chemical castration, and gender mutilation surgery, all without the parents' knowledge. Washington and California have actually made it illegal child abuse for parents to stop their children's "gender affirmation" surgery and will take their children away.
It is no more moral to "affirm" children's gender confusion with genital mutilation surgery and chemical castration than it is to "affirm" their infatuation with Superman by pushing them off a roof, amputating an arm to "affirm" their fascination with "The Fugitive", or giving them a Tommy gun to "affirm" their infatuation with Bonny and Clyde.
It used to be dogma that women needed their own sports leagues and events, with equal support as men's leagues and events.
Now it's dogma that third-rate male athletes can identify as women and enter and dominate women's events.
Why do so many drag queens feel the need to read to kids, especially while dressed up as oversexualized parodies of women? I have never heard of any strippers demanding performances with kids, or straight women dressed like drag queens.
You can be neutral about Hawaiian pizza, Democrat vs Republican, even abortion. You cannot be neutral about child abuse. When the state threatens to jail parents who misgender their children or do not affirm their 57 gender fluidenty of the week with child mutilation surgery or puberty blockers, refusing to condemn that is child abuse.
I looked up some numbers on the treatment for gender dysphoria and found this. Data is from 2017-2021.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/
Over the last five years, there were at least 4,780 adolescents who started on puberty blockers and had a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis.
That’s out of 74,000,000 children in the country.
Did a little math and that comes out to 6.45945946 × 10^-6% or 0.0000006%.
While an argument can be made over whether it should be zero instead, statistically speaking it’s pretty close already.
It's definitely not an epidemic.
Well I screwed that math up. And I should have taken just 2021 numbers. More like 0.0018%.
Still, not something to freak out about, but certainly worth reasonable discussion. As in, without freaking out.
Let's stop worrying about murder too, shall we?
I said reasonable.
Child mutilation is reasonable?
Puberty blockers aren’t child mutilation.
Oh really? Placebos?
Either they do something, which is mutilation, or they don't, which is fraud.
Puberty blockers are short-acting medications. You stop taking them and they stop doing anything. So no, it isn’t at all like mutilation.
Using your logic, alcohol is mutilation. Or body paint. Or a new haircut. Or any other temporary, completely reversible, short-acting substance.
Do you really believe this nonsense, or are you just that comfortable looking stupid?
That is a lie. Please kill your pedofile self
Puberty blockers delay some aspects of sexual maturity, but the body and brain do continue to grow and develop while the poison is in the body, so that when they are discontinued, the resulting development is permanently distorted and not the same as it would have been without the poisoning (not to mention the effects of the delay itself on physical, mental and social development). Because kids who go on puberty blockers almost always proceed to further medical "transitioning" with hormones and surgeries, there is only a tiny population of young people who have discontinued blockers and proceeded to what's left of their normal development. That makes claims that the blockers have no long-term ill effects after they're stopped specious—there is no significant population to study who have done that, and as far as I've been able to determine, no such long-term studies have been done.
“so that when they are discontinued, the resulting development is permanently distorted and not the same as it would have been without the poisoning”
That’s using a lot of scary words to say “it changes the timing, but not the outcome”
The resulting development is exactly the same as it would have been without puberty blockers. Literally nothing changes in the end. By the end of puberty those who used puberty blockers and stopped are exactly the same, developmentally, as those who didn’t.
“Because kids who go on puberty blockers almost always proceed to further medical “transitioning” with hormones and surgeries”
Not only is that inaccurate, it’s irrelevant. The data set includes those who had surgery, so you’re trying to say that those who haven’t chosen surgery should be treated as having surgery, regardless of reality.
And puberty blockers are hormones, idiot. They cause no permanent changes or adverse effects to those who take them.
If you are referring to hormones that would change the developmental processes during puberty, that’s why these kids are taking puberty blockers in the first place. If they wanted to transition, they wouldn’t take puberty blockers.
“there is only a tiny population of young people who have discontinued blockers and proceeded to what’s left of their normal development”
Really? How tiny? Out of the 1000 children each year that go on puberty blockers, how many move on to actually transition as children? The anti-trans panic folks like to make broad, unsupported generalizations and lie about outcomes and effects. Would you like to put some data behind your assertions?
“no such long-term studies have been done”
Really? So how can you claim they do permanent damage if there aren’t any studies?
You are completely full of shit on this. Fuck off and die.
The fence-sitters deserve a better response.
You may think the difference between surgery and chemicals means chemicals aren't mutilation in some technical sense. You could be a surgeon for all I know.
But most people think a vial of acid thrown at someone's face is mutilation.
Forcing someone to swallow that same acid is mutilation.
Chemical castration was once so horrible that it was banned even for voluntary use by pedophiles who wanted to curb their appetites. It is my understanding that they are the same under a new and improved name. Maybe there are small changes so they can get a new patent. Maybe there are big changes.
But both do the same thing, in the end. They both irreversibly mutilate genitals. That is child abuse. Children are minors, incapable of signing contracts, smoking, drinking, using drugs, and statutory rape exists for the same reasoning, that minors are not adults and not mentally capable of making life-altering irreversible decisions.
This idea that teachers can help minors "discover" they are in the wrong body is hogwash. You can tell a lot about policies by the ancillary legislation necessary to implement it. No one in favor of close borders likes to talk about the immense invasion of privacy necessary to identify citizens, tourists, legal immigrants, and illegal immigrants. No one in favor of open borders likes to talk about the consequences of welfare, refugee invitations, and other consequences.
And transgender "rights" nuts like you don't like to talk about the consequences of children changing their minds five dozen times a day and letting nuts like you latch on to one of those as an excuse for transgender mutilation against the parents' wishes.
What next, talk kids into jumping off roofs because they identify as Superman?
“ But most people think a vial of acid thrown at someone’s face is mutilation.”
That’s because the effect of acid on the face is irreversible. Puberty blockers stop doing anything as soon as you stop taking them. They are literally temporary.
“ Forcing someone to swallow that same acid is mutilation.”
Doubling down on the acid (which causes permanent change) comparison to puberty blockers (which cause no permanent change) doesn’t make it any less false a comparison.
“ It is my understanding that they are the same under a new and improved name”
You think puberty blockers and chemical castration are the same drugs? Are you insane?
“ They both irreversibly mutilate genitals”
They absolutely do not.
“ This idea that teachers can help minors “discover” they are in the wrong body is hogwash”
You’re right. Which is why that isn’t happening (and has nothing to do with puberty blockers).
Do you actually believe that puberty blockers make any lasting changes to the body if you stop taking them? If so, you should get better sources of information.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/in-depth/pubertal-blockers/art-20459075
If you don’t like to read medical information, here’s the money wuote: “GnRH analogues don't cause permanent physical changes. Instead, they pause puberty”.
But hey, that’s just the Mayo Clinic. What do they know about medicine.
Puberty blockers stop doing anything as soon as you stop taking them. They are literally temporary.
Bullshit.
You think puberty blockers and chemical castration are the same drugs?
They are.
What do they know about medicine.
These perverts know exactly what they are doing. That's why they belong in prison.
“Bullshit”
No, that’s 100% true. When you stop taking the hormone, it clears your system with no long-term effects.
“They are”
Unexpectedly, you are right. Chemical castration, used to treat cancers like breast and prostate cancer, suppresses sex hormones. That’s why it works.
I thought chemical castration was permanent, but it isn’t. When it’s permanent it’s called sterilization, when it’s temporary it’s called castration. I learned something new.
“These perverts know exactly what they are doing. That’s why they belong in prison.”
The doctors at the Mayo Clinic are perverts who belong in prison because they accurately state that puberty blockers are temporary?
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
From the Mayo Clinic sales pitch you linked to:
What are the possible side effects and complications?
Possible side effects of GnRH analogue treatment include:
Swelling at the site of the shot.
Weight gain.
Hot flashes.
Headaches.
Mood changes.
Use of GnRH analogues also might have long-term effects on:
Growth spurts.
Bone growth.
Bone density.
Fertility, depending on when the medicine is started.
If individuals assigned male at birth begin using GnRH analogues early in puberty, they might not develop enough skin on the penis and scrotum to be able to have some types of gender-affirming surgeries later in life. But other surgery approaches usually are available.
Those who take GnRH analogues typically have their height checked every few months. Yearly bone density and bone age tests may be advised. To support bone health, youth taking puberty blockers may need to take calcium and vitamin D supplements.
It's important to stay on schedule with all medical appointments. Between appointments, contact a member of the health care team if any changes cause concern.
The doctors at the Mayo Clinic are perverts who belong in prison because they accurately state that puberty blockers are temporary?
They belong in prison for intentionally causing harm to mentally ill children.
The fuck they aren’t. They permanently alter the child. In life changing and often in debilitating.
Educate yourself.
“Educate yourself.”
I have. You should join me. I learned something new just today about the difference between chemical castration (temporary) and chemical sterilization (permanent). I thought they were the same thing and were both permanent.
Puberty blockers temporarily stop puberty. When they are discontinued, puberty resumes with no ill effects and ends in the same developmental place that those who didn’t take puberty blockers end. They do no damage at all.
“They permanently alter the child. In life changing and often in debilitating.”
Are they changed? Perhaps. Debilitating? No more than those with late or delayed puberty. So not at all, physically.
Also not something to create a national priority about, right? And for a political movement to demand a societal remake?
You're omitting California and Washington's laws regarding trans kids in schools and the state does not have to report to parents.
This can get a motherfucker killed.
When did I become Reuters?
Even so the numbers are statistically small. Like really small. So small that a reasonable person, as opposed to a reactionary one, might wonder if this is a rare medical diagnosis by actual doctors, not a devious leftist/homosexual/religious conspiracy by charlatans against all the children in the United States, and then the world.
And the numbers for more controversial treatments are even smaller.
This is the third state to so blatantly violate separation of Christian religion and state.
Under current caselaw, yes, but Texas is gambling that SCOTUS wants to revisit that caselaw.
I have no doubt this majority would love to usher in a theocratic America. I just refuse to believe that they are so far gone as to ignore the separation of Church and State. Cultural conservatives like to pretend it isn’t a real thing, but serious people like SCOTUS Justices know it is.
There is no ‘separation of church and state’. It isn’t in the constitution.
I would argue that freedom of religion assumes the separation if church and state. Never mind the overt and explicit references by the Founders about the dangers of the two commingling. The phrase “separation of church and state” came from Thomas Jefferson and resistance to theocracy was common among the Founding Fathers, even though they were all Christians.
Separation of church and state is a good thing. Theocracy is a very, very bad thing.
Do you bitch about Minnisota and Michigan ringing the Muslim call to prayer?
It’s amazing that all the states ignores this for 180 years, and no one noticed.
It’s almost like your bullshit interpretation of never mentioning Jesus or the Bible is a recent legal fiction
No one said never mention them. But there’s a huge difference in content and tone between academic discussion of religion and proselytizing. For a start, not saying “Christians believe …”, but instead presenting religious mythology as fact is a giveaway.
It's not happening.
Okay it's happening but it's vanishingly rare.
Yeah it's happening but it's mostly a good thing.
It's called gender affirming care. What do you have against affirmation? Transphobe.
Reason: We will publish the CATO statistics when available.
It’s still vanishingly rare and likely to stay that way.
You yourself admit 4790. Murders not counting gangs are in the same ballpark (2017: 15,000 total, 2/3 being criminals killing each other). That's not vanishingly rare.
You reveal yourself as a Jesse sock with your first sentence.
What, you didn’t admit 4790?
Yes, you are right, I lied. It was 4780. Off by ten. Film at eleven.
“You yourself admit 4790”
4790 kids went on puberty blockers, not had surgery. That’s over five years, not one.
And puberty blockers are placebos with no effect, so what are they actually blocking?
No, they are short-acting medications that cause no long-term changes. When you stop taking them, they clear your system with no permanent effects. You understand that drugs like that exist, right? That there aren’t just drugs that make permanent changes and placebos, nothing else?
They absolutely cause long term changes. You should watch interviews with some of the detransitioners whose lives were ruined by people like you.
You democrats have an ocean of blood on your hands.
“They absolutely cause long term changes.”
How? What changes?
“You should watch interviews with some of the detransitioners whose lives were ruined by people like you.”
I have nothing to do with their life choices. I, like most small-government libertarians, don’t think it’s anything that concerns me. That doesn’t make me responsible for the sadness of the small percentage who transition and regret it, any more than it makes me responsible for the happiness of the vast majority of people who transition and don’t regret it.
Puberty blockers are temporary. Transitioning, if someone chooses it, is overwhelmingly viewed by recipients as positive. Are there cases of regret? Of course. People make terrible decisions all the time. But the effects of puberty blockers are easy to change: just stop taking them and puberty resumes as normal.
For the record, I think anything beyond puberty blockers and social transitioning in children is a terrible idea. But I’m also not so self-impressed and self-righteous as to think my largely uninformed opinion should overrule the choices someone else wants to make for their life.
To me this isn’t a medical issue, although the facts seem to indicate it’s generally good for the person involved. It’s a personal liberty issue. The government shouldn’t micromanage people’s lives. I reject the nanny state in all its guises. The fact that sometimes people choose things they later regret doesn’t justify government intervention. Ever.
Using drugs and surgery in a doomed attempt to "transition" to the opposite sex is a medical atrocity at any age. Government has a legitimate role in preventing medical fraud and the harms caused by deliberate medical malpractice.
When you stop taking them, they clear your system with no permanent effects.
That is false.
No, that is 100% true. Puberty blockers have no long-term effects on the human body. When they are cleared by the body, their effects disappear forever.
You still haven't linked to the long-term studies of young people who were on puberty blockers but did not proceed to hormonal or surgical sex change procedures, which might show any long-term effects. And, you're still not acknowledging that the disruption of normal development from puberty blockers is itself a harm. The idea that taking puberty blockers "pauses" all development, which then resumes unaffected when they're stopped, is not just false but ludicrous. These drugs do NOT just flip a switch that makes you stay 11 years old until they're stopped, with maturation occurring afterwards as if the drugs had never been used. The victims continue to age, grow, and develop while on the blockers, just not in a normal way.
You are an absolute embicile. Consistently on every topic, I’ll give you that
In what way? I back up my claims with medical support. You don’t. Who’s the imbecile?
Yes, please back up your claims by linking to the long-term studies of young people who were on puberty blockers but did not proceed to hormonal or surgical sex change procedures. And show us the science that shows that young people on blockers cease all growth and development while on them, and resume maturation unaffected when the drug is withdrawn. Take you time. I'll check back here tomorrow for your citations.
This was inevitable once we started asking schools to teach morality. If you don't like it (and there are good reasons to be suspicious), then get schools out of the business of morality and "socialization" and put those responsibilities back on parents. Return schools to the 3 Rs.
Tell you what, Emma. I will join you in keeping Jesus out of schools if you also commit to expelling Gaia, Rainbows, and Marx.
^THIS +1000000000.
Marx
For all the criticisms of a perfect Sky Daddy who callously and logically inconsistently allows people to die, only offering an untestable promise of redemption in return, a lot of people seem hell bent on worshiping this white guy with a beard and gray hair as a prophet of the divine will of the universe. Worshiping without even the promise of eternal life after death and, callously and logically inconsistently, no matter how many cities… nations… continents… have to be turned into rubble and ash to realize his beliefs.
@EmmaCamp...Emma, Emma, Emma...really? You name means 'whole' or 'complete' and I feel like you left out a lot of important context here.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
-- What is inherently religious about this quote?
Next, what is inherently religious about discussing artwork that has a background rooted in Christianity. To understand and appreciate the artwork, you need to understand the cultural framework in which it was created. What is inherently religious about an objective description of a ceremony, and it's meaning to a religious sect?
The School Board is elected. They're accountable to the people.
BTW, is this worse than schools facilitating the transition of children's sex without parental consent?
It's the Appleyard approach. Bryan Appleyard effectively dismissed all intellectual enterprises, arts or sciences, not influenced by the (Catholic) church as inferior without explicitly saying so and presented as though there were secular criteria for his dismissal, and then argued that this proved the importance and value of the church.
Is the Enlightenment to be ignored and we pretend that the USA is somehow a Christian religious project?
If you have lots of good things you could present, but present only those things which can be linked with Christianity, the things are not inherently Christian but your selection bias is. And fwiw I note that Berlioz, who was at best an agnostic, happily set the Requiem text because he understood how religious texts affect people. Was he inspired by Christianity or an understanding of people? Those artists who painted religious works - were they all inspired by Christianity, or were they doing it for the money for someone else who themselves may not have been inspired by the Church, but by the ego - "look what I have commissioned for the local chapel!" You're not going to get that from Texas.
And consider a specific instance - the Golden Rule is not original to Jesus - so why quote him specifically? It's misleading at best.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule
Texas Jews Say State’s New Bible-Influenced Curriculum Is ‘Wildly Problematic’
a second grade lesson on Queen Esther in which Haman, an official of the Persian king, cast lots to decide when to kill the Jews. The lesson includes students playing a game of dice.
Another speaker pointed to how fourth graders are asked to highlight positive aspects of the Crusades.
Let's hear arguments in favour of pogroms...
Uh...pogroms could help abolish the Federal Reserve?
The crusades were good.
The rag heads came in and started raping murdering and destroying all of civilization. The crusaders went to stop them.
The Muslims have always been animals.
Launch The Tenth Crusade.
Make Istanbul Constantinople Again.
“What is inherently religious about this quote?”
It’s the whole “Jesus said” and the insinuation that it is somehow a uniquely Jesus idea. The concept existed before Jesus, he just has the most famous quote about it. Or, rather, decades after he died his fan club claimed he made a quote about it. And wrote about it in the central religious text of the Christian faith. None of that is necessary to understand that the painting depicts the Last Supper. The parroting of Christian doctrine about the blood of Christ isn’t actually necessary to teach anything except Christian doctrine.
“What is inherently religious about an objective description of a ceremony, and its meaning to a religious sect?”
Saying “Christians believe …” is objective. The way it’s presented? That’s not.
“The School Board is elected. They’re accountable to the people.“
And no school board can ignore the Constitution. Religion doesn’t belong in public schools. Period. Quoting religious texts, except to examine it in a critical way, has no business in public education.
Religion is a personal, individual thing that belongs solely in the private realm.
“BTW, is this worse than schools facilitating the transition of children’s sex without parental consent?“
First, that isn’t even close to what is happening anywhere in America. It’s pure hyperbole to pretend that protecting a student’s privacy will ever lead to a child secretly transitioning without their parent’s knowledge or consent.
Second, yes. It’s much, much worse.
“And no school board can ignore the Constitution. Religion doesn’t belong in public schools. Period”
Cite? The constitution only says that the state cannot establish a religion. The founders never intended for religion to be banished from the public square. As much as you would prefer.
“The founders never intended for religion to be banished from the public square”
But they did intend religion to be banished from the government. As much as you would prefer otherwise.
Religion in the public square is good. Religion in government is bad. It’s not that hard to grasp.
A child has no right to "privacy" that excludes their parents from knowing about the child's state of mental health. Parents have a right and a need to know virtually everything about their child. School employees who conceal health information about a child from parents are violating the parents' rights, and should be fired, sued, and prosecuted.
“A child has no right to “privacy” that excludes their parents from knowing about the child’s state of mental health”
Except it isn’t a mental health issue. Should schools document and report to parents on every thing their children say in school? If not, where is the line?
“ School employees who conceal health information about a child from parents are violating the parents’ rights”
What health information? That right now their child is wondering about their sexuality or gender identity? That’s about as normal as teen angst gets. I’ve worked with thousands of teenagers over the years. It’s a non-stop parade of issues like this. They usually resolve things all by themselves in a few months.
Suffering from the delusion that one is a member of the opposite sex absolutely is a mental health issue.
Should schools document and report to parents on every thing their children say in school? If not, where is the line?
That’s not necessary, but school employees must not conceal anything a child says if it raises concern about their well-being, such as voicing the delusion that they are the opposite sex. The line is somewhere in between conversations about sports, games, or fashion and talking about wanting your balls cut off. Teachers should err on the side of caution when judging where the line is in individual cases.
There is nothing “normal” about wondering which sex you are.
I’ve worked with thousands of teenagers over the years.
If true, that's very disturbing. I hope you've been stopped.
It is a uniquely Christian thing, as that concept was unheard of through most of human history
“Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, “Don’t do it!” He said, “But nobody loves me.” I said, “God loves you. Do you believe in God?” He said, “Yes.” I said, “Are you a Christian or a Jew?” He said, “A Christian.” I said, “Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?” He said, “Protestant.” I said, “Me, too! What denomination?” He said, “Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?” He said, “Northern Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879 or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912.” I said, “Die, heretic!” And I pushed him off the bridge.”
This is the future of school board meetings once the preachers get a hold of the public school curricula. Death by a million no true scotsman cuts.
Well, maybe THIS (below) is the future of Biblical Literalism!!!
God COMMANDS us to kill EVERYONE!
Our that them thar VALUES of society outta come from that them thar HOLY BIBLE, and if ya read it right, it actually says that God wants us to KILL EVERYBODY!!! Follow me through now: No one is righteous, NONE (Romans 3:10). Therefore, ALL must have done at least one thing bad, since they’d be righteous, had they never done anything bad. Well, maybe they haven’t actually DONE evil, maybe they THOUGHT something bad (Matt. 5:28, thoughts can be sins). In any case, they must’ve broken SOME commandment, in thinking or acting, or else they'd be righteous. James 2:10 tells us that if we've broken ANY commandment, we broke them ALL. Now we can’t weasel out of this by saying that the New Testament has replaced the Old Testament, because Christ said that he’s come to fulfill the old law, not to destroy it (Matt. 5:17). So we MUST conclude that all are guilty of everything. And the Old Testament lists many capital offenses! There’s working on Sunday. There’s also making sacrifices to, or worshipping, the wrong God (Exodus 22:20, Deut. 17:2-5), or even showing contempt for the Lord’s priests or judges (Deut. 17:12). All are guilty of everything, including the capital offenses. OK, so now we’re finally there... God’s Word COMMANDS us such that we’ve got to kill EVERYBODY!!!
(I am still looking for that special exception clause for me & my friends & family… I am sure that I will find it soon!)
Don’t forget… The above ALSO applies to Sacred Fartilized Egg Smells!!!
The entry point to the above-listed Deep Biblical Analysis is…
No one is righteous, NONE (Romans 3:10).
That means that NOT EVEN THE SACRED FARTILIZED EGG SMELLS are righteous! NO exception was listed for egg smells, fartuses, etc.! And if you follow the rest of the Biblical-literalness LOGICAL argument laid out above, then the Bible actually commands us to KILL said Sacred Fartilized Egg Smells!!!
WHERE are the Biblical literalists when we desperately NEED them?!?!
"The sky is falling!"
--windycityattorney
That first, long part of your post that you copy-and-pasted is quite funny. But not nearly as funny as the part where you pretend to be a libertarian.
I am very socially libertarian. I don’t proclaim to be fiscally libertarian. Not that it matters because this website’s comment board is chock full of MAGA-tarians and these chuckle-fucks are as far from libertarian as the bleeding heart liberals and commies they proclaim to hate. They are, in point of fact, some odd mix of christian nationalist/authoritarian social conservatives so long as their guy is in charge types.
Which is to say, also not libertarian. But the difference between them and me is I don’t push for nor would I ever condone enshrining culture war bullshit into legislation and force other people to believe like I do and that goes doubly so for violating the principles of separation of church and state. That is a level of danger and creeping fascism that needs to be stopped at its inception.
So I don’t really give a shit if I don't meet some nebulous libertarian standard...90% of the commenters aren't libertarian either. *shrug*
Scrapping incorporation (the BoR applies to the states) one case at a time.
God bless Texas.
Right. Because Constitutional rights are assured for all Americans … unless your state disagrees, then go fuck yourself.
Welcome to the post-United States.
This was inevitable, all empires disintegrate.
We aren’t going anywhere. We’ll still be going strong when your country has been kicked out of Ukraine and crumbled to dust. Again.
Are there better examples than these? I don't see anything egregious here. It's basic philosophy and morality filtered through one form of historic perspective. I'm curious to see how other religions are included.
I honestly have zero problem with teaching the basics of different religions. I don't have much problem with referencing back to the religious basis of a principle.
"I don’t have much problem with referencing back to the religious basis of a principle."
In most cases where it's claimed that a principle has a religious basis, the claims are baseless, but persist after falsification.
So if you're talking about a principle that is actually based in religion, sure. But, uh, that's a pretty low bar that not much meets.
Are there better examples than these? I don’t see anything egregious here.
Yeah, I took this as a sign of Emma's hack naivete/complicity. We got article after article about how "Don't Say Gay" was going to stop 3rd grade math teachers from helping pre-teens fulfill their sexual destinies but the worst examples of "religious conversion indoctrination" Emma can come up with are pretty clearly recognition of historical artifact and without commandment or even suggestion to adopt and practice the topic of the artifacts?
Emma is the reason people feel this to be necessary. If she wants less of it, she should stop with her own deception and proselytization.
We can, and should separate church from state. But we can't separate religion from history. I am not even slightly religious but it's obvious that religion and Christianity in particular are inextricably woven into American culture. Don't know how you teach one without the other.
Again, the very idea of “The West” is the division of The Western Holy Roman Empire from the Byzantine Empire (and the historical pathway(s) that led up to the division).
The Enlightenment put an end to the (lack of) distinction of recognizing something as an artifact without recognizing it as a living commandment. Emma’s idiocy is specifically to undo all of the above.
As I continue to say, she doesn’t care about religion or Church and State or The Enlightenment. At best she’s a useful idiot who will whip out “Good Samaritan!” with no understanding of what it means whenever it suits her.
Your issue isn’t the issue. Their issue isn’t the issue. Their issue is to distract you from their need to consolidate power and control.
They are trying to proseltyze. If you look at the suggested curriculum it really "verges on Christian proselytism insofar as its extensive, lopsided coverage of Christianity and the Bible suggests that this is the only religious tradition of any importance."
They'll teach about 'Sermon on the Mont' but conveniently forget to mention the Inquisition, witch burnings, etc..
You don't teach little kids about Christian religion in public school. That's just and excuse to either create more Christians of your sect, or make non-Christians uncomfortable enough to leave the school. If you want to teach about religion, have a comparative religion class in high school.
More cretinous whataboutism. Yeah, there were woke excesses rightly criticised.
Now address this issue - though we can assume that all of you who reacted with a whatabout actually approve of Texas's proposed curriculum, the Constitution be damned.
>>”The ceremony is central to Christian belief that the blood of Jesus was shed as the last sacrifice that would be needed to live in connection with God,” reads the curriculum.
you prefer less factual curriculum?
Is any of that necessary to analyze The Last Supper? No, it isn’t. “This was the last meal Jesus had with his disciples before he was executed” works just fine.
still gonna get a hand raised and a question from that, but okay
I would argue that the answer to the hand raised should be, "Ask you parents about that," just as that should be the answer to a raised hand about what makes people LGBT.
I don't want a teacher delving into theology or sexuality with his/her/zer young students in public school.
But the best answer is, as you point out below, the "obligatory call for closing of [government] conformity factories."
{insert here obligatory call for closing of conformity factories}
Public ed is child abuse, no matter what the curriculum. It's forced and not free, taxation is theft. Home schoolers pay twice, and still get a forced (regulated) curriculum.
The founders of govt. ed were honest about the goal of producing "good citizens", i.e., obedient, subservient. They succeeded as seen by adherence to "The Most Dangerous Superstition" by L. Rose.
It being one chief project of that old deluder, Satan, to keep men from the knowledge of the Scriptures, as in former times keeping them in an unknown tongue, so in these later times by persuading from the use of tongues, that so at least the true sense and meaning of the Originall might be clowded by false glosses of Saint-seeming deceivers; and that Learning may not be buried in the graves of our fore-fathers in Church and Commonwealth, the Lord assisting our indeavors: it is therefore ordered by this Court and Authoritie therof;
That every Township in this Jurisdiction, after the Lord hath increased them to the number of fifty Housholders, shall then forthwith appoint one within their town to teach all such children as shall resort to him to write and read, whose wages shall be paid either by the Parents or Masters of such children, or by the Inhabitants in general, by way of supply, as the major part of those that order the prudentials of the Town shall appoint. Provided that those which send their children be not oppressed by paying much more then they can have them taught for in other towns.
2 And it is further ordered, that where any town shall increase to the number of one hundred Families or Housholders, they shall set up a Grammar-School, the Masters thereof being able to instruct youth so far as they may be fitted for the Universitie. And if any town neglect the performance hereof above one year then everie such town shall pay five pounds per annum to the next such School, till they shall perform this Order. [1647 - Massachusetts]
Now that the Texas public schools are becoming all theocratic and stuff, I suppose there will be more support for school choice, a subject on the legislative front burner now?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/texas-may-finally-pass-school-choice-in-2025/ar-AA1u9prH
Let the Unitarians, Jews, etc. promote school choice as a way for parents to rescue their children from Christian indoctrination.
As long as public money isn’t going to religious groups, I think that’s a great idea. Some people have a rather large “yeah, but” to their support for school choice. They seem to be more “pro pay for my kids to go to religious school” than “pro school choice”. If they want their kid to learn religion, that’s what Sunday (or Saturday) is for.
It’s not like only non-religious people think that such a separation is a good thing. Many religious leaders agree.
There is no separation of church and state.
Of course there is. As the Founders intended. Zealots have been trying to change that for over 200 years, without success. Here’s hoping they continue to fail for over 200 more.
No, we can’t have school choice because then parents might decide that the money they get should go to an icky parochial school instead of those bastions of learning where *checks notes* high schoolers are graduating without being able to read, write, or do basic math.
Not even in Alabama or Tennessee. High school students in America graduate knowing all of those things. The Southeast does it worse than most, but even they get those things handled.
Sorry, I should have been more precise and said they can’t do those things at grade level.
https://www.illinoispolicy.org/most-chicago-students-still-read-perform-math-below-grade-level/
(Obviously this isn’t every single graduate in America, but let’s not pretend that our public school system isn’t failing, despite all the money we throw at it.)
We just haven't thrown EnOuGh MoNeY at it yet. You'll see. Once we quadruple spending on education, and increase the number of administrators ten-fold, every student will be a genius who aces the SAT.
“Obviously this isn’t every single graduate in America, but let’s not pretend that our public school system isn’t failing, despite all the money we throw at it.)”
Your assumption is that another system would be able to achieve the universality of public education with a better outcome. Because the system requires everyone to participate, the failure rate will be higher than a system that eliminates the less skilled. It’s why magnet, charter, and private schools show out better. They are choosing their constituencies from only those motivated to go to (and succeed at) education. I’ve seen nothing to indicate that another system would get better results unless they eliminated the poor performers. While it isn’t perfect, public education provides every child with the opportunity to be educated.
I have a question. Will the curriculum emphasize the entire Bible, including the bits about slavery, stoning, multiple wives (but not multiple husbands, natch), the attainder and destruction of entire cities and populaces, the drowning of millions (perhaps billions) of children and babies in the womb, the theft and occupation of other people’s lands, the retaliatory justice of removing eyes and teeth, the celebrated extermination of everyone not counted among the 440,000? Probably not, but that would be to disregard the God-given word of the Old Testament, wouldn’t it? Or is God OK with leaving out the bits that nauseate most people? Does He, against all probability, now feel remorse about the despicable things He did Himself or ordered us miserable humans to do?
Obviously there is material in the Bible that is not appropriate for young children. But you can say that about any source material for lessons on history and culture.
Clearly haven't read the Bible, have you.
That’s a pretty accurate (if incomplete) list of the various atrocities lauded by the Bible.
You hate Christianity, got it.
Not Christianity. Humanity. Rational thinking. Some of what he cited is derided in The Bible. Some is just historical artifact named or described but not endorsed. Most (all if you believe the science and not his retardation about 'billions') is nowhere near as far-reaching and deadly as parts of 20th century atheistic statism that the school system selectively omits in its current worship.
Through that, it's obvious that Daddyhill doesn't actually care how many people die or how wrongheaded and misinformed they are about any given fact or history. All that matters is that people conform to his own idiotic delusions.
Oh, huh, when I go to look at Texas' 4th and 8th grade scores on the 'national report card' it turns out that they're better than, e.g., California, New York, or Washington D.C. when it comes to Math and Science and on par with them when it comes to Reading and Writing.
And when I go to look at education spending it turns out that NY is virtually always at the top of the list and places like CA are always above the national average while TX is considerably below it.
It's almost like TX is getting a better than average education for their money than most of the rest of the nation and Emma should stop her hand wringing and pull the Koch out of her mouth before she chokes to death on her "OMG! What if Americans learn that democratic republics progressed right alongside Christianity in Western/European history?!?" stupidity.
So why screw it up by shoving mythology into everything?
You hate Christianity, got it. Not a surprise, anything extolling virtue and spirituality is anathema to you Marxists.
No, I find Christianity lacking as a logical and moral system. I don’t particularly care if people are Christians (or Muslims or Buddhists or Taoists or whatever). I just don’t think it belongs in government. That has never ended well, historically.
And I’m an ardent and vocal capitalist. I’m not sure what that has to do with theocracy, but you do you.
While stories from many different religions are included in the curriculum, stories from and about Christianity take center stage.
And why shouldn't it? Aside from being the correct religion (in which case it should focus on Catholicism) it's also far and away the largest, the one most indisputably on pace with the historical record, the one in which our own society is clearly based upon, the one that does the most good for the people of the world, and is centered around the single most important and world-changing person who ever existed.
The State isn't establishing a State religion by teaching Christianity. I guarantee not one lick of this material will force a person to go get baptized and attend church. And, honestly, I don't see how anyone can understand American society and history, let alone hope to be a good and functioning American citizen, without a clear understanding of Christianity. (But then maybe that's the real reason certain people don't want it being taught.)
“…lopsided coverage of Christianity and the Bible suggests that this is the only religious tradition of any importance."
In the context of the Enlightenment, Western Civilization, etc, it kinda is.
Strike "kinda" and I am in complete agreement.
So can we have equal time for each religion? For every Christian quote or explanation of Christian doctrine, have one of Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. to explain historical concepts?
Don’t forget about the Satanists, too.
No, we don’t need that. And I’m certain you would be giddy to include satanism.
I’d prefer a large section on agnosticism and skepticism. Satanists are just Christians with anger issues. Like the Johnny Depp of Christianity.
Why?
Sorry, Emma. The cultural left, which includes 99% of Reason staff, have engaged in or condoned proselytization in school for my entire life. Now that red states want in on the action, too, it’s suddenly a problem. Go fuck yourself in the mouth.
I’d rather schools taught, you know, math and fucking reading. But you broke that. Don’t get your atheist twat in a knot now.
Don’t get your atheist twat in a knot now.
The textbook term is 'front hole'.
Religion, conservative wokeness
Evangelical atheism: The world's least tolerable (and tolerant) religion.
Atheism (lack of a belief in a god or gods) is a religion as much as not collecting stamps is a hobby and abstinence is a sexual position.
Convinced that the state had no business coercing religious conformity, Jefferson made defense of liberty the hallmark of his career. In 1776, he wrote the Declaration of Independence. The following year, he introduced a Bill Concerning Religious Freedom to the Virginia Legislature. In 1787, he urged his friend and colleague James Madison to amend the Constitution to include a written guarantee of religious liberty.
Jefferson's campaign to end state support of religion fueled doubts about his personal religious beliefs. These doubts, which had swirled around him for years, emerged as a critical issue in the bitter presidential campaign of 1800. His Federalist opponents vilified him as an atheist and libertine. Jefferson fumed at the harassment coming from what he referred to as an "irritable tribe of priests" and even compared his persecution at the hands of the New England clergy to the crucifixion of Christ.
Jefferson won the election, beating his friend and rival John Adams. On New Year's Day 1802, he welcomed to the White House the dissident Baptist preacher John Leland. That same day, Jefferson replied to a letter sent by Baptists in Danbury, Conn., who chafed under the authority of the established Congregational Church. In his reply Jefferson invoked the famous metaphor of a "wall of separation" between church and state.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/godinamerica/people/thomas-jefferson.html
People should really read the whole thing, but its too long to put here.