• EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Surely this could backfire in so many hilarious ways?

    • Teach the parts that conservatives don’t do, and teach your class to call out injustice everywhere.
    • Teach the bible in Aramaic or Ancient Hebrew, and give the kids 30 mins of study time to learn whatever they want from it.
    • Use it as an exercise to teach that many parts were written thousands of years ago, and doesn’t have current medical or societal advancements, so that many parts might be up to interpretation.
    • Compare it to Islam, Judaism, and other sects of Christianity - and teach that they’re basically the same thing and that everyone should get along.
    • Reference that the pope said years ago that even nonbelievers that led a good life would be offered a seat in heaven, so be nice and it’ll all be fine.
  • SpiceDealer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Any of you remember Kitzmiller v. Dover? It was a case that essentially ruled that teaching ID/creationism was a theological doctrine and thus couldn’t be included in the biology curriculum of schools across the country. While the issues here at not the same (teaching creationsim vs mandatory bible studies), they have the same ideological underpinnings. Unless we’re talking about Sunday school*, schools must remain secular institutions where discussions of religions are from a neutral perspective in regards to the humanities. As to regards to a hypothetical Supreme Court case: considering how ultra-conservative the Supreme Court has become in recent years, I fear that they might side the theocrats.

    *Are those still a thing?

      • Railing5132@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I wonder if the thinking is that once the proverbial seal on that lid is broken, the next administration would just Uno-reverse it by adding more of its preferred justices?

        And, it’s not like (aside from the first two damn years when it should have been done) they had a trifecta; although you could be assured Manchin or Senema(?) would have fucked them over.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Setting aside the fact that this would require a Senate majority, that’s not even the worst outcome.

          A broader spectrum of conservative judges means they need to triangulate across their generational and niche personal views. There is legit some amount of political space between Gorduch, Roberts, ACB, Judge Likes Beer, Uncle Thomas, and Discount Scalia.

          Adding three more of them to match three more liberal judges means even more dissonance.

          And who knows? Maybe we even start getting judges who didn’t fall directly out of the Harvard pipeline.