Law, the Bible, and High School Kids
April 5th, 2007
There’s a bill floating about in the Texas House that would require school districts to offer high school electives on the Bible; the idea, allegedly, is that it would allow students to investigate links between the Bible and the US legal system.
Sigh. Where do I start?
I don’t really have a problem with electives of a religious nature being offered at public schools. While I would never want my child to be forced to participate in any religious ceremony or activity, and while I would certainly not want my children being taught religious beliefs that I myself hadn’t consented to, I don’t see much of a problem with making that information available for children that want to participate.
I do have some problems with the bill, though. For one, I don’t want any school to be required to offer religious electives. Whenever a new program is instituted, it’s likely that something else will have to go. I don’t know what electives would fall by the wayside with the implementation of this course, and unless I know that, I can’t support requiring schools to add this curriculum.
But my real complaint is even more serious: while it is certainly true that the Bible serves as the moral authority against which mores, ethics and ultimately laws are formed in this country, and while it is true that understanding the Bible can help students understand how ethics and law relate, I am very concerned about normalizing Abrahamic values as the basis for Western culture and law, specifically as it relates to personal relationships. I am concerned that introducing Biblical ethics in a high school class of this sort would only serve to legitimize certain religious agendas: to keep gay marriage illegal, to repeal abortion laws, etc. I worry that bringing the Bible into a high school setting under the pretense, genuine or not, of studying law will re-enforce the appropriateness of Biblcal ethics as basis for law when perhaps the question the students should be investigating is whether or not any one religious perspective should be the foundation for a legal system of a nation of 300 million people.
On the morning show I listen to, one of the hosts made the argument that teaching the Bible as a moral authority is fine because it contains “good tools” for ethical development. “What about the ten commandments?” she asserted. “Those are good rules! Thou shalt not kill? That’s a good rule!”
“…According to you,” another host pointed out. And that, right there, is the crux of the problem. The first host is a Christian: she’s bought into the supremacy of Abrahamic ethics hook, line, and sinker, so much so that she can’t even understand how those ethics might not be good for everyone. Good for me is one thing: good for an entire society of people who may or not may think like I do is another.
“Thou shalt not kill” is a very worthy commandment, except for all those times it isn’t. Thou shalt not kill….unless it is for survival. Thou shalt not kill….unless it is the betterment of an existing family. Thou shalt not kill….unless the life of the murdered has been deemed harmful to society.
I recognize that law is borne of morality, and in this country morality has traditionally come from Protestant interpretations of the Bible. I don’t have a problem with that: the fact that I am not a Christian doesn’t prevent me from seeing how using one’s religion to form the basis of a moral society is a normal activity. But I do think there has to be dialogue about what is best for a large society of people given that they don’t all have the same worldviews, don’t all have the same inclinations, and require different parameters in order to live fulfilling lives. While having a central moral authority is a good place to start, a society of 300 million people can’t just stop there: we have to ask questions, overturn assumptions, put ourselves in other people’s shoes. We have to consider all the exceptions to the many rules we write, because those exceptions are where we, as individuals, actually live.
So I remain unconvinced that such a course at the high school level is as benignant as certain representatives want us to believe it is. I’m not sure high school programs are going to be willing or able to open the kind of conversation amongst the students that is necessary to approach the subject of Biblical ethics and US law without great bias. If the subject is to be broached, I want the legitimacy of Biblical ethics as the basis for US law to be questioned, not normalized. I want students to think about what it means to use transcendent values of an unseen God as the guidelines for how we interact with real, tangible people here and now. I want people to talk about how the legal system could be, not merely gazing over what it actually is. And if the class isn’t going to do any of that, and I suspect it won’t, then perhaps it’s not such a brilliant idea after all.
Usually, I make comments just to shamelessly plug my latest post (like the upcoming controversial exhibit in “Art for Christ’s Sake” on my blog - “Necessary Therapy”.) In this case, I actually read your article and will briefly respond.
Schools should be encouraged to teach the Bible “in” Literature, not the Bible “as” literature. They would not use the Bible as the primary text, but only examine how it is used in other historical documents. This exposes them to a key part of our culture and prevents revisionist history.
Did anyone on that show mention that our legal system is based on English Common Law which is based on Viking law, not Christianity? There’s this delusion in the US that the country’s founders were devout Christians. The writings they left behind prove otherwise. James Madison, who architected the separation of church and state, was an aetheist. Jefferson was a diest who denied the divinity of Jesus — going so far as to make his own version of the Bible with all the supernatural stuff removed.
And if that’s not enough, they should read Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli to clarify the matter: “…the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion…”
Regardless of what religion our founding fathers were, or on what doctrines of examples our legal system was originally based, I think you’d be hard pressed to argue that Abrahamic ethics and norms don’t heavily influence the way laws are made today. I absolutely think there is validity in studying the Bible against the US legal system; I just can’t approve of it in this way, in this venue, at this time.
This is off topic, but I love the look of your blog. It’s really beautiful.
Wow, thank you very much :)
I’ve got to say, I see the Bible as having astoundingly little to do with our legal system. If it contributed at all, it was in a way that is so attenuated, it’s not much more than a footnote.
Prohibitions against killing and stealing are fairly universal. Sure, Christianity has influenced norms which have then helped Americans decide what laws to pass in some limited instances, but that has very little to do with “the legal system” or “how laws are made.” That has a lot more to do with politics and policy than the legal system.
I’m no legal expert, mind you, but I am a law student. And the suggestion that the Bible or the Abrahamic tradition is even close to being directly linked to our legal system strikes me as a joke at best, most probably simple lay ignorance, and counterfactual religious ethnocentrism at worst.
Don’t confuse the Constitution with Our Legal System. And even if you do, there’s very little in the Constitution that has any kind of Biblical source or parallel.
Also don’t confuse laws with Our Legal System.
In any case, I doubt very much that a high school will have a teacher who is qualified to teach something as specialized as the interplay (if indeed there is any) between the Bible and the Anglo-American legal tradition.
I don’t disagree with you. Your point is very well made. I know precious little about “the legal system”, but I would agree that it isn’t based on Biblical morals. I do think, however, that American morals are founded in Biblical morals, and that American laws are founded in our morals (more or less, sometimes less than i’d like)…you know where I”m headed with this. Where law relates to morals and cultural values and ethics, law in America relates to the Bible.
What the hell man, excuse me for my language but that a load of bull in my opinion. The Ten commandment law though shall not kill should be interpreted though shalt not murder in other words don’t kill cold bloodedly. Second if the right interpretation is taught of the bible it would be an immense moral tool. if you read the bible it does say that homosexuality is a sin yes, but it also says that we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God. that we should accept everyone because we all sin and no sin is any greater than the other. As for the electives we have been teaching anti bible for so long in our school system with no other choice why not have just one probible course in the system. Even at the expensive of one of the other electives. No i will say that i am a christian i and don’t live in texas i live in colorado, but i think that this law schould go forward.
What is your problem? This country’s youth need to know that there is a God out there that loves them. They need to know the truth to be able to go to heaven that Jesus died on a cross for our sins(everyone has sinned), we need to ask for forgivenness, and except Jesus into our hearts and ask Him to be our savior. For Jesus is the way the truth and the light and no one can get to the Father without Him. The Bible and classes about the Bible should be taught in schools because it is the truth, and they teach all the other junk in schools like evolution. Why not creation? This law should be passed forward.