Tennessee Banning teaching of Religious Doctrine in Public Schools until 10th Grade

[Xisa]

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A state Republican lawmaker is proposing legislation that would ban teaching Tennessee public school students “religious doctrine” until they’re in high school.

The Tennessean reports the proposal from Rep. Sheila Butt of Columbia would prohibit the teaching of anything deemed religious doctrine unless the course is taught in 10th, 11th or 12th grade.

The measure comes on the heels of complaints from some parents in several communities as to what their children are learning in middle school about Islam.

The concept of “religious doctrine” is never defined in Tennessee law. There is a reference to the concept in a portion of the law related to using the Bible in school.

The law says the Bible may be used in class, as long as the course doesn’t include “teaching of religious doctrine or sectarian interpretation of the Bible or of texts from other religious or cultural traditions.”

- See more at: http://clarksvillenow.com/local/bill....DZzycc12.dpuf

This whole thing actually got started within 20 miles of where I currently live. Bear in mind this isn't a redneck backwater. Williamson County, in particular, is one of the wealthiest places in the entire United States. In a State where the average household income is just above $44,000 a year, the average income in this county is $120,000 a year.

It sourced from 7th grade Middle Schoolers being taught the Pillars of Islam, and memorizing Islamic prayers (Down to having them recite "There is no other God but Allah" and things of that sort) as part of the curriculum. There was, predictably, some backlash about this. People in the area felt that schools aren't supposed to be teaching their kids religion (I will absolutely grant a good portion of them were upset there Christian children were being taught Islamic Prayers. I don't personally have an issue with them being upset, as were this situation inverted, we'd be seeing a similar backlash in the Islamic community).

I was surprised that this was handled as evenly as it has been. I think leaving faith out of public curriculum is...kind of important, actually. Religion is taught at home, and in places of worship. Using a public square like the school system to teach the religious aspects of any faith is sticky at best. 10th grade seems like a good point - The kids are mentally developed enough to make their own choices based on what they're learning, as opposed to just drinking what the teacher said or spouting off whatever their parents told them to say.

Teaching kids the history of any religion is one thing. Making them memorize and recite prayers of any religion is another entirely, in my personal opinion.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations feels this is a bigoted law, designed out of fear.

I guess the question I want to ask is, if the law applies equally to all faiths, how is it bigotry?

[aviger]

I guess the question I want to ask is, if the law applies equally to all faiths, how is it bigotry?

Because in your article it even states its ok to use the bible, that makes it bigotry.
Frankly I don't want my kids to be taught any religion, but I doubt I can stop them from being tough the bible. I'll just have to unbrainwash them at home ;P

[Xisa]

Because in your article it even states its ok to use the bible, that makes it bigotry.
Frankly I don't want my kids to be taught any religion, but I doubt I can stop them from being tough the bible. I'll just have to unbrainwash them at home ;P

I can post a different article, this one is a bit unclear on it.

The wording of the law states that any religious text can be used for historical and / or referential purposes, as long as it isn't used to teach the indoctrination aspects of the faith. This includes the Qu'ran.

[buck008]

Religious doctrine should never be taught in schools period. You can learn about religions, their history, and the basics of what they believe. There is no need to teach dogma in a secular school.

[Merkava]

Because in your article it even states its ok to use the bible, that makes it bigotry.
Frankly I don't want my kids to be taught any religion, but I doubt I can stop them from being tough the bible. I'll just have to unbrainwash them at home ;P

Why would you not want them to be biblically literate? If that's what you were objecting to.

[Xisa]

Religious doctrine should never be taught in schools period. You can learn about religions, their history, and the basics of what they believe. There is no need to teach dogma in a secular school.

I think it has a place, for the sake of understanding the perspectives of the people who devote their lives to it.

The whole purpose of this law is to do this later in the kids mental development, so that they can learn it without being unduly compelled to obey it (i.e. Indoctrination).

[Endus]

Religious doctrine should never be taught in schools period. You can learn about religions, their history, and the basics of what they believe. There is no need to teach dogma in a secular school.

The Pillars of Islam are the "basics", so if that's what they're trying to prevent, then what they want is to prevent kids being given any information on other religions, at all, until grade 10+.

As long as it's being taught in a "this is what people of X faith believe" rather than a "this is God's truth" way, I really don't see anything untoward about educating kids about religion.

[Xisa]

The Pillars of Islam are the "basics", so if that's what they're trying to prevent, then what they want is to prevent kids being given any information on other religions, at all, until grade 10+.

As long as it's being taught in a "this is what people of X faith believe" rather than a "this is God's truth" way, I really don't see anything untoward about educating kids about religion.

As long as they're consistent in their application, I agree.

[aviger]

Why would you not want them to be biblically literate? If that's what you were objecting to.

I guess i should have been more clear, i def don't mind them to learn the historical context of religions (any religions) and thus the problems they cause but not to be taught one is the "right one" which here in the US means Christianity.

Unless its the http://unitedchurchofbacon.org/

[Super Kami Dende]

How about not teaching ANY religious doctrine in school and leave that stupid shit for idiot parents to push on their children instead.

[Merkava]

I guess i should have been more clear, i def don't mind them to learn the historical context of religions (any religions) and thus the problems they cause but not to be taught one is the "right one" which here in the US means Christianity.

Unless its the http://unitedchurchofbacon.org/

I was speaking to having a knowledge of the bible as literature, mainly as a vehicle for having a greater understanding of say, Shakespeare, Milton, Steinbeck, etc. That's all. Thanks for the reply.

[ttak82]

The Council on American-Islamic Relations feels this is a bigoted law, designed out of fear.

I guess the question I want to ask is, if the law applies equally to all faiths, how is it bigotry?

@OP I feel your question was rhetoric. . It is a good idea to keep studies on religious doctrine for senior students. It's also less of a burden on the teachers responsible for such courses.

I would be surprised that children were being taught actual prayers in a public school where there are children belonging to different faiths. By prayers I mean by full prayers as opposed to statements like "There is no other God but Allah" (That is not a full prayer). That would be a bit extreme, even if there are classes segregated by religion. [The news item is vague, so I'm going by OP's statement].

I agree that religion should be taught by parents/guardians at home. For those parents who do this at home, properly, the law does not matter. The lazy people who want the schools to do their jobs will be the ones who complain about the new law.

[Xisa]

@OP I feel your question was rhetoric. . It is a good idea to keep studies on religious doctrine for senior students. It's also less of a burden on the teachers responsible for such courses.

I would be surprised that children were being taught actual prayers in a public school where there are children belonging to different faiths. By prayers I mean by full prayers as opposed to statements like "There is no other God but Allah" (That is not a full prayer). That would be a bit extreme, even if there are classes segregated by religion. [The news item is vague, so I'm going by OP's statement].

I agree that religion should be taught by parents/guardians at home. For those parents who do this at home, properly, the law does not matter. The lazy people who want the schools to do their jobs will be the ones who complain about the new law.

This article has a better write-up

[Wells]

I guess the question I want to ask is, if the law applies equally to all faiths, how is it bigotry?

The very reasonable question is, how certain can we reasonably be that this will be applied equally?

[spinner981]

Doctrine shouldn't be taught in schools (well, at least public schools), be it religious or secular. Teaching history is fine, even if its history that you don't believe was 'good' or 'right'. I see no reason why people can't be educated on what Islam is. In fact, unless there truly is indoctrination going on, everyone should support it, even opponents of Islam, because our children should know what it is.

[ttak82]

Religious doctrine should never be taught in schools period. You can learn about religions, their history, and the basics of what they believe. There is no need to teach dogma in a secular school.

As some have already pointed out, there is nothing wrong with teaching kids about religion in schools as long as there is no bias.

As for your point on imparting secularism, for that, it is important to tell students about the separation of religious affairs and state affairs and to do that , students should be informed about both issues so that they can make this distinction

[Merkava]

The very reasonable question is, how certain can we reasonably be that this will be applied equally?

Why should it be applied equally?

[Chromeshellking]

As long as they're consistent in their application, I agree.

And that is the problem we cannot ensure that consistency.

[Wells]

Why should it be applied equally?

Why should the way we teach about religions in school apply equally to all religions?

[Xisa]

The very reasonable question is, how certain can we reasonably be that this will be applied equally?

I don't disagree, but that logic can literally be applied to every law ever written.

The swing side to this is now that this law is being tossed up (and with a Republican Governor and Super-majority legislature, it will pass), the schools will be under a microscope with its implementation.

My guess? Rural schools will be in violation for the near future.