Letters to the editor
Our nation is in need of truth tellers
Missing the chance to respond to Delbert A. Gabaldon’s letter of Oct. 5, is just too good to pass up.
Even with setting aside whatever the degree of insanity and disillusionments suffered by Texas Gov. Rick Perry with his secessionist talk and other wacky comments made during a Tea Party rally and a radio interview — and the last debate.
Gabaldon used this comment and quote: “Michelle (Bachmann) and Sarah (Palin) are doing exactly what we want them to do. Go after Obama. It is often said here in Texas ‘you can always tell a Democrat, but you can’t tell them much.’”
These words reminded me of the litany of idiotic statements, direct lies/false witness, and Outer Limit-type made-up stories (American history, etc.) publically spoken by Michelle and Sarah during the past three years, with so much of the rhetorical manure regularly wrapped in the ancient ignorance of dark age religion speak.
So much so that as a small (i) political independent I can offer these words: It is often said here in New Mexico “you can always tell a Tea Party Republican from Texas by the number of Michelle/Sarah/etc. wacky artificial hooks and sinkers, eagerly swallowed whole, hanging from their mouths while being extremely proud of the absence of any critical examination in determining the artificial from the real.”
Oh yeah, Mr. Gabaldon, do your words “Michelle and Sarah are doing exactly what we want them to do” mean that the two are the witless tools of whomever the “we,” Gabaldon plus the other Orwellian masters, happen to be?
This nation is in perhaps its deepest trouble in history, and is in a desperate need for truth tellers living in the reality of planet Earth, not those deranged Tea Party con artists and fiction/mixed storytellers sent from the outer limits of some far away parallel universe, arriving in dire need of anti-psychotic medication (psychosis — any severe mental disorder in which contact with reality is lost or highly distorted).
Bible or religious class would be moral benefit
I would like to respond to Ms. Gale’s letter published in the Oct. 1 edition of the News-Bulletin, in which she argues against teaching a Bible course in public schools.
She states that, “If we choose to teach the literature and history of a single religion, then we must be prepared to teach the same for all religions, faiths and philosophies that have affected history.”
This is not only impractical, but I see it as unnecessary. Why should it be necessary to teach all religions that have affected history if some religions have affected a greater portion of relevant history than others have? For example, surely Sikhism has affected history, yet it has had almost no affect on American history, so it is almost never mentioned in our schools.
In addition, the requirement that all religions be taught equally is already being violated. At many schools, including at Belen High School where I attended, a Myths and Legends course is taught in which, among other things, Greek mythology is taught.
Few, if any, believe in the ancient Greek religion anymore; however, it seems clear to me that Greek myths are essentially religious texts. No one would argue that such a class endorses this religion: the fact that the myths are read for their cultural and literary value.
I see no reason not to apply the same logic to the Bible simply because it is practiced by many people and has arguably more cultural significance.
However, if people are so afraid of a class spending a year studying the Bible, why not construct a religious text class to include the Bible, the Qur’an and possibly the Vedas? I, for one, would be interested in such a class.
Ms. Gale also states, “Our school system have proven lack of capability to teach basic fundamentals of math, science, language, etc. … How can anyone expect that this failing system could possibly address such issues?”
This is essentially irrelevant. A large part of the problem behind the lack of fundamental skills at the high-school level is the lack of caring on the part of students.
A Bible course would be an elective in which only those interested, with possible exception, would be involved in the class. The increased interest would cause an increase in the effectiveness of the class.
In addition, Ms. Gale does not, in any way, mention that I believe to be the greatest failing of our school system; that is that there is practically zero moral education taught in our school system.
Although related to religion, I don’t see why teaching morals of different religions endorses them or why the issue is so ignored and in many ways feared.
A Bible or religious class would be the moral benefit of students, and I would argue that it would make them better citizens.
Finally, Ms. Gale argues that the Bible should be taught in the home, not school.
However, it is so inconceivable to believe that some parents might have trouble finding time to teach their children the Bible, or even that some students not familiar with Christianity in the home would be interested in a Bible course.
I believe that the Bible has enough literary, historical, cultural and moral significance to justify being taught in school if students choose to learn about it as an elective.
The Bible should be taught in public schools
In response to Ms. Gale’s letter to the editor published Oct. 1, I agree with her charge that it is the parents’ and pastors’ responsibility to teach religion to their children.
However, I strongly disagree with her position that the Bible should not be taught in public schools.
How can we teach a complete or accurate history of our culture by silencing the first source documentation that inspired it’s development?
Every one of the founding fathers honored and drew from the Bible. Consider the following quotes:
“By removing the Bible from schools, we would be wasting so much time and money in punishing criminals and so little pains to prevent crime. Take the Bible out of our schools and there would be an explosion in crime.” Benjamin Rush
“Education is useless without the Bible.” Noah Webster
“It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” George Washington
“I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man.” Abraham Lincoln
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people…so great is my veneration of the Bible that the earlier my children begin to read, the more confident will be my hope that they will prove useful citizens in their country and respectful members of society.” John Adams
“The Bible is the cornerstone of liberty…students’ perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands.” Thomas Jefferson
Why would we withhold from our students the book that motivated the discovery of our continent, inspired the charter of the first settlements and quoted by every one of our presidents?
The Supreme Court has stated “It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities.”
How do we teach our students a complete or accurate understanding of math and science when we silence the tome which sparked the scientific method itself?
The men that ushered in the modern scientific age honored the Bible as their inspiration! Giants such as Lister, Pasteur, Copernicus, Descartes, Bacon, Newton, Kepler, Boyle, Faraday, Kelvin, Mendel, DaVinci, Pascal, Joule, Morris, and Linneus (and this is just a partial list!)
How do we teach our students a complete or accurate understanding of literature when we censor the volume that kindled the works of writers such as Dante, Kempis, Milton, Bunyan, Dickens, Dostoyevsky, Tolkien, Lewis, Blake, Chesterton and Eliot?
How do we explain the Biblical elements that have permeated our vernacular such as Judas kiss, doubting Thomas, good Samaritan, David and Goliath, walls of Jericho, Babbling, scape-goat, apple of the eye just to name a few?
I don’t have room to touch on music, law, government, economics or philosophy. There is no volume of work in the history of the world, secular or religious, that holds a candle to the Bible regarding impact on culture, philosophy or the sciences.
We must resist the mistake of taking a socialistic mindset that we must teach all or nothing. We do not teach all languages, we do not offer all sports, we do not teach every state’s history, we do not offer all musical styles, we do not teach all sciences, so we do not have to offer all options for every elective.
I would also put forth that we would consider it a gross oversight if we did not offer Spanish, or New Mexico history, or football or marching band.
Why? These subjects are representative of our immediate culture. So why would we prohibit a secular investigation of the Bible?
Calvary Chapel Rio Grande Valley
There are still honest people
I’m so glad there are honest people out there in the ever-so-changing world.
I’m glad that an honest person was at Walmart the day I lost my credit card holder and turned it in.
The person didn’t leave a name, but I hope they read this and know I’m forever grateful.
Many, many thanks to them.