Recently, the Georgia State Legislature proposed a popular bill (expected to pass any day now) that will allow for the teaching of two religion classes in its public schools: History and Literature of the Old Testament and History and Literature of the New Testament. The catch is that the bill requires, not merely suggests but flat out mandates, that these classes use the Bible as their textbook. While backers of the bill claim that it is not contrary to the First Amendment, I am of the opinion, shared by some in Georgia, that this bill is attempting something drastic: the transformation of one class period, Monday through Friday, into Sunday school.
The troubling titles of these courses, along with the mandate that the Good Book serve as a textbook, first led me to this notion . Perhaps I am just taking the titles too literally, but something about the inclusion of literature of the Old or New Testament makes this class sound an awful lot like a state-funded and state-supported Bible study. Notice too that these titles do not include the word "period," as most academic pursuits require. It is one thing to study the cultural milieu of Jerusalem during the reign of King David from an objective and historical perspective based primarily on archeology. It is quite another to use only Exodus as a history book.
Then there are teachers, many of whom have expressed hesitation and even unwillingness about the teaching of this class. Why? Look at it. If a teacher is a Christian, he or she will have to walk a fine line between teaching a syllabus based on their faith's central work and preaching to their students. If a teacher is not a Christian, however, he or she must teach a class to students who may or may not hold the work as sacred. Talk about trying to handle a hot potato!
Further, what happens when a student, who may or may not be Christian, gets confused and asks a teacher, who may or may not be Christian, a difficult question. And I'm not talking about easy Bible trivia like "What are the twelve tribes of Israel?" I'm talking about a meaty question such as "Did God really create the entire world in six days?" or worse, "What if I don't believe in God? How am I to understand the Bible?" In my opinion, these are questions that no public school teacher should ever have to answer or, for that matter, is qualified to answer for public school students in a state-funded classroom. Instead, these are best left to professional religious educators in religious facilities funded by religious organizations. If young Luke's parents want him to be exposed to the Bible's teachings, they should enroll him in such classes. Though the parents may not realize it, this arrangement works out better for all parties. Students learn about their faith in faith-based communities where open discourse and meaty questions can be entertained. Students also have the religious support network of their community to guide them down the road to a fuller, more informed faith.
Then there's the flip side of the coin -- the students. When we talk about the potential student population of these classes, we must be aware that it is mainly young adults between 14 and 18 years old who are certainly at varying levels of maturity in regards to, among other things, their own and others' religious viewpoints. To a certain extent, many have yet to carve out ideas that are truly their own and often wind up parrotting the voices and prejudices of their communities. The consequences of such circumstances could be disastrous.
For example, imagine an atheistic student decides to take either one of the classes created by the proposed bill. Imagine, too, that this student is a bit of a rabble rouser who, on the first day of class, makes it quite clear that he or she does not believe in the Bible, God or any of it and is merely in the class to challenge those who do. What would happen then? Would the atheist be ostracized in the classroom by his or her Christian peers? Would the atheist be kicked out of the class because he or she does not reflect its true spirit? Would he or she be proselytized to no end until he or she was forced to move to a state where Christianity was not the state religion?
That's right. I said it and I'll say it again. By implementing this measure, Georgia runs dangerously close to establishing Christianity as a state religion. This would clearly place it directly in conflict with the First Amendment, which prohibits state-established religion. Further, the First Amendment guarantees freedom of religious expression, which a state-sanctioned religion would obviously hinder.
Christianity may be this country's dominant religion, and the dominant religion in the state of Georgia. But there are many non-Christians in this country, inclusive of Georgia, who are protected by law from having the dominant religion force its agenda into any arena that is publicly funded. In light of the Georgia bill, which is buttressed by the argument that courses are needed because "kids are illiterate of the Bible," this First Amendment freedom must be vigorously defended by those who hold it sacred.
