I’ve always been wary of teaching “religious studies” below the college level, and for two reasons. First, as in the case discussed below, it’s too often an excuse to proselytize religion in public schools—a violation of the First Amendment. Second, even if you’re doing it to give children a sense of history and culture, there will be huge disputes about what history and culture should be taught. Ideally, you’d want to acquaint kids with not only Christianity and Judaism, but also the religions of the world, now amply represented in the U.S.: Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and so on. But who decides what will be taught? If Islam, can you fairly represent Shia and Sunni? And of course there are the Mormons (with their completely bogus founding) as well as about 30,000 sects of Christianity, not to mention Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox church. How do you give kids an overview of Western and Eastern faiths without stinting some of them.
It’s just a mess, and I’d prefer to leave it to the college level.
One example of the trouble at issue is the new legislative push for bills allowing Bible studies in public schools as part of the regular curriculum. One has already passed in Kentucky, and, as this Washington Post article reports (click on screenshot below for e-reader version), laws are pending in 10 states. Georgia and Arkansas have already passed such bills, which are awaiting the signature of the governor to become law. All this is the result of Project Blitz: a right-wing, evangelical Christian initiative which lobbies for these laws as a way to get Jesus into the classroom. Given who’s pushing this, there’s not much doubt that “general education about religion” is not the goal.

The Supreme Court, as the article notes, has said that it’s okay to teach Bible classes in public schools so long as it’s “part of a secular program of education.” But this isn’t what’s happening, at least in Kentucky where the program is underway. Instead, teachers are imparting moral lessons from the Old and New Testaments, which constitutes Biblical exegesis and theology, and they’re also using it to diss evolution—a way around the legal prohibition of teaching creationism in public schools. The ACLU has informed the states engaged in this legislation that they need to provide oversight of the classes, but no lawsuits appear to be pending.
A few bits of the article tells you what’s happening. Here’s the main anecdotal story used in the piece: Todd Steenbergen’s class at Barren County High School in Glasgow, Kentucky. Here he is teaching it:

Students describe Steenbergen’s Bible class as a chance to do something they enjoy during the school day — Cole Wilson, who took the class in a previous semester, likened reading the Bible in school to getting the chance to shoot hoops during gym class.
“I like studying the Bible anyway,” agreed Mattie Coomer, who also took the class. “As a Christian, I believe the Bible, it’s a living book — if God is a living God, he’s going to speak through his word every time you open up the Bible. It’s more important than any other book I could be reading.”
Coomer said she just finished reading the Bible, from Genesis through Revelation, outside of school, and then started all over again. But that’s not what happens in the classroom. In Steenbergen’s Bible class, the students hardly read the Bible at all.
There is no classroom set of Bibles for every student, no encouragement to download a Bible app on their smartphones. He never assigns chapters or verses to read. Instead, he said, he summarizes biblical stories for them and focuses class time on highlighting connections between the Bible and modern life.
During one class this spring, he spent most of the hour-and-a-half period on a game in which students guessed which theme from the Gospel of Matthew or which blessing from the Beatitudes that Steenbergen meant to connect to when he played clips from country songs and Disney movies.
His consistent message throughout the game was that students should draw moral lessons from the Gospels.
“‘Pure in spirit’ is a good word to equate to humility, humble,” he said. “We see humility, a wise thing that could be applicable for us today. How many of us would like to be more humble about something?” And later: “Was there a time you helped provide some cheer for someone and it made you aware how good it was? . . . We can use wisdom and apply it in new ways today and help people be comforted.”
The drawing of moral lessons from such classes is clearly a violation of the First Amendment, because of course those lessons are always positive, and this is a promotion of Christianity over other faiths. Do you think they teach the genocide approved by Yahweh, or the stoning of the guy who collected sticks on the Sabbath, or Lot’s offer to the mob to let them rape his daughters? I doubt it. This is teaching “civilization and ethics” using the Bible as a framework.
But to me as a scientist, the worst part is how they’re using these laws in Kentucky to do an end-run around the prohibition of teaching creationism (a religious and not a scientific view):
Maggie Dowdy said she picked this course because she thought it would be easy. After all, she already knew the Bible from church.
When the class started with the very first Bible story — the story of creation — she was glad she had chosen it. Here at last was the story of human origins that she believed in — not the facts of evolution that she had been taught in her high school science class.
“When I started learning about [evolution], I thought: ‘That’s not true. Here’s what I believe,’ ” Dowdy said. “I just kind of push it aside now. I know what I believe in. It’s just something the teachers have to teach us, but, no, I believe in creation.”
Other students echoed her. “We’ve always in science learned that perspective, evolution and the big bang,” Morgan Guess said. “This is the class that allows us the other perspective.”
“Allows us the other perspective”? Well, yes, they can take whatever perspective she wants, but it’s a dereliction of duty for professor teaching this stuff to pretend that it’s real, rather than saying that science doesn’t support it. And note how the class is serving to buttress the children’s Christian faith: a sort of Confirmation Bias 101 class.
Lest you get depressed at this point, and you should be given the obdurate religiosity of the American South (there’s also a bill in North Dakota), there are still a few freethinkers. Here’s one:
Only Katie King, 17, expressed doubts about the Bible in a discussion one morning. “I took this class to see for myself if this is what I wanted to follow and believe,” she told classmates. “My parents are so religious. They push it a lot.”
“The Bible per se, some things I’m just like — I don’t know,” said King, who acknowledged that she is often an outlier among her peers because she supports abortion rights and likes reading New York Times articles about politics. “Like one thing — I don’t get that people who are good people, genuinely good, nice people, have good intentions, but because they don’t believe in God, they’re doomed to hell. I can’t accept that. I cannot accept that.”
I hope Katie leaves for college soon, as she’ll be demonized by her peers in Kentucky for saying something like this in the Washington Post. Imagine—she admits she supports abortion choice and reads the New York Times! Satan is licking his chops.
h/t: Bruce