Bible Curriculum in Schools
· Purpose – to help students understand history and culture, and great works of art and literature. See the following examples:
o Literary works - Shakespeare, John Milton, Canterbury Tales
They presuppose that one has some knowledge of the Bible and that knowledge will assist in a greater understanding of such literature.
o Arts - Painting of the Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci (considered “one of the most widely appreciated masterpieces in the world).
· The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy -“No one in the English-speaking world can be considered literate without a basic knowledge of the Bible…The Bible is also essential for understanding many of the moral and spiritual values of our culture, whatever our religious beliefs.”
· The American School Board Journal reported in 1998 that 80% of the respondents to its poll favor teaching the Bible in public schools.
· Constitutional: The United States Supreme Court has stated –
“[I]t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization. It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment,” School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225 (1963)(June 17, 1963) The “study of religions and of the Bible from a literary and historic viewpoint, presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, need not collide with the First Amendment's prohibition…” Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97, 106 (1968)(November 12, 1968)
Resources On Bible Courses in Public Schools
Austin American Statesman, "Saenz: Don't Restrict Academic Freeedom by Opposing Elective Bible Courses," April 4, 2008.
TIME Magazine, The Case for Teaching the Bible, March 22, 2007.
Considering the growing popularity of Bible courses in public schools, as well as strong arguments for the educational value these courses hold, the Texas legislature weighed in on the issue during the 80th legislative session. Rep. Warren Chisum authored HB 1287 requiring public schools to offer academic courses relating to the Bible. The bill passed in the Texas House with a vote of 139-1, 3 members not voting, passed the Senate with a vote of 28-2, and finally was signed into law by Gov. Perry on June 15, 2007.
HB 1287: Relating to Public School Elective Courses Providing Academic Study of the Bible.
Legal Challenge To Bible Courses in Texas
David v Goliath in West Texas: ACLU Attacks Bible Elective in Odessa
Just after the Texas legislature successfully passed a law encouraging academic courses on the Bible, opponents resorted to a legal challenge. On May 16, 2007, the ACLU filed suit against an Odessa school district challenging their Bible elective courses. Although hundreds of school districts across the nation offer similar courses using the same curriculum, it seemed that the ACLU thought a small west Texas town would be an easy win with few resources drowned under legal paperwork. Little did they know.
Since 2006, the Ector County Independent School District (ECISD) has offered a Bible elective in each of the district’s two high schools. Odessa is not alone in this practice. More than 50 school districts in Texas offered similar classes in the 2005-2006 school year. For the most part, schools use one of two national Bible curriculums: one published by the Bible Literacy Project (BLP) and another by the National Center for Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (NCBCPS). Ector County has implemented the program from NCBCPS and understandably. The curriculum aligns with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) standards. Sadly, the school board’s efforts to follow policy and provide the best education landed them a lawsuit.
The challenge was brought by eight families whose students attend or will attend high school in ECISD, albeit none have attended the Bible courses. These eight families are being represented by the ACLU in their lawsuit against the Superintendent, School Board, and individual school board members. After the ACLU held a media blitz attacking ECISD without any warning, Liberty Legal got involved. In the interest of religious freedom, the legal affiliate of Free Market is representing the school district pro bono with the support of individual givers. That means taxpayer dollars going to students’ education don’t have to be leaked on affidavits, depositions and legal fees. With the help of local counsel Randy Rouse and the volunteer work of Randy Kucera and his Akin Gump law firm, David’s army actually has Goliath looking pretty small.
Is Teaching the Bible Constitutional?
“There is no question that these Bible electives are constitutional, said Kelly Shackelford, Chief Counsel of the Liberty Legal Institute. “The United States Supreme Court has stated more than once that teaching about the Bible is not only constitutional, but essential to a quality education. This lawsuit is a loser.”
“This is a ridiculous and frivolous lawsuit against a school district simply complying with the Constitution and the United States Supreme Court decisions,” said Hiram Sasser, Director of Litigation for the Liberty Legal Institute. “While everyone understands the ACLU’s penchant for attacking the Bible, it is a shame they are now stooping to advocating for censorship and against education.”
Legal Resources on the Odessa Bible Case
ACLU Complaint
Ector County Independent School District Answer
Media on the Odessa Bible Case
ABC: School District Responds to ACLU Attack
CBS: School District Responds to ACLU Attack
NBC: School District Responds to ACLU Attack
|