The Texas Freedom Network released a report yesterday on the Bible
study curriculum offered by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in
Public Schools and used in some 37 states, written by Mark Chancey, a
Biblical studies professor at Southern Methodist University. This
report makes quite
I wrote an analysis of this curriculum that appeared in the Journal of Law and Education
Paterson, F. R. A. (2003). Anatomy of a Bible course curriculum. Journal of Law and Education, 32(1), 41-65.
Frances R. A. Paterson, J.D., Ed.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Educational Leadership
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wrote an analysis of this curriculum
that appeared in the Journal of Law and Education
Paterson, F. R. A. (2003). Anatomy of a Bible course curriculum.
Journal of Law and Education, 32(1), 41-65.
Would you agree with Chancey's assessment of the curriculum?
Ed
Yes. I lacked his training and expertise in theology and archaeology and so focused on the constitutional infirmities of the curriculum and how to avoid those infirmities. Frances Paterson
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To
In a message dated 8/2/2005 9:47:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For a
more thorough analysis, see my
essay about it or the full report
itself. I have a hard time believing that this curriculum could survive a
court challenge. Even without the obvious
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 8/2/2005 9:47:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For a more thorough analysis, see my
essay about it or the full report
itself. I have a hard time believing that this curriculum could survive
a court
In a message dated 8/2/2005 11:26:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think
you missed my point, Jim. Why on earth does the American Center for Law and
Justice, an organization for whom you are senior counsel, endorse a curriculum
that is A) obviously sectarian
I oppose teaching creationism, including intelligent design, in science courses. However, I think this topic should be an appropriate subject for an elective in HS, especially if taught from the historical or sociological or political perspective. I don't even get very exorcised about biology
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:05:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My main
problem with the ID folk is that they are pushing it as an alternative to
evolution and claiming that evolution is simply wrong rather than admitting
evolution has happened and is
Evolution is hardly a "hypothesis" and while the age of the earth may
not be certain, anyone who insists it is only about 6,000 years old
(using modern 365 day, 24 hour a day) years is simply not dealing with
reality or truth.
The US used to lead the world in science and engineering advances.
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:07:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, if
appropriately written and taught, I not only agree that it could pass
constitutional muster, I think it would be an excellent course to offer. But
this curriculum is clearly not
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:33:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The US
used to lead the world in science and engineering advances. If we insist
on going down the road of anti-science and pseudo-science, we will continue to
undermine one of the most
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:07:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yet it's
trumpeted as proof of the bible's accuracy in the very curriculum that the
ACLU endorses.
Art, are you there? Has the ACLU finally been freed from the dark
side?
Jim Henderson
Senior
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:07:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If teh
course is about the history of false ideas that have long been disproven, I
suppose one might do that.
You have a harsh distemper for Young Earth Creationists.
Yet you seem not to realize
will be in the long run, and the more
productive the discussion will be.
Eugene
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 10:42 AM
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Elective Bible Classes
Well, I'm looking but not seeing it. How nice of him to let me know he
had
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:07:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, if appropriately written and taught, I not only agree
that it could pass constitutional muster, I think it would be an
excellent course to offer. But this
In a message dated 8/2/05 1:34:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 8/2/2005 12:07:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yet it's trumpeted as proof of the bible's accuracy in the very curriculum that the ACLU endorses.
Art, are you there? Has the ACLU
In a message dated 8/2/2005 2:16:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is
an illogical conclusion. How does it follow that because I think that young
earth creationISM has been disproven that therefore I have a "harsh distemper"
for young earth creationISTS?
Well, I see a Bradley letter (a pdf linked from the legality section of the web site) but it is dated 1999 and since my article did not appear until 2003 it can hardly be a response to it. Frances one-T Paterson
___
To post, send message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 8/2/2005 1:57:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This curriculum is so bad that it wouldn't pass muster in a
church sunday school where the pastor was even decently educated.
Of course, decent education is
In a message dated 8/2/2005 2:30:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So your
answer to my question of whether you just don't care that your organization is
endorsing a curriculum packed with lies and banalities and presenting the work
of frauds and cranks as
Very interesting. Frances "Polemic Author" Paterson
I would suggest that list members read my article (available on Westlaw and Lexis) and judge for themselves whether Professor Bradley remarks are fair and objective. And I have a funny feeling I already know who will conclude that they are.
In a message dated 8/2/2005 2:45:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Very interesting. Frances "Polemic Author"
PatersonI would suggest that list members read my article (available
on Westlaw and Lexis) and judge for themselves whether Professor Bradley
remarks
Samuel V wrote:
I'd like to address the issue more generally, rather than focus on a
specific curriculum which I have not seen.
I would agree with Professor Brayton that any curriculum what was
designed to give scientific support for a specific religious
tradition, whether it be Joshua
Mr. Bradley's analysis in 1999 said: "The specific texts selected for this Course fall well within the range of objectivity, and steerwell clear of appearing either to promote or disparage the truth of the Bible. The selections are representative of the Bible as a whole. They pertain to the better
25 matches
Mail list logo
