"A Utah bill that originally would have required all of the state’s public schools to post the Ten Commandments but has since been changed to allow the biblical principles to be taught as part of school curricula cleared a major legislative hurdle on Thursday evening. The Utah House voted 49-16 to pass HB269. It now goes to the Senate for consideration, with about one week left in the 2024 Legislative session."

https://utahnewsdispatch.com/2024/02/23/utah-ten-commandments-religion-bill-schools/

Once again, state legislators fail to realize that public school educators teach every child, both the religious and the non-religious. The only scenario where I can see the Ten Commandments being taught would be a high school course on comparative religions. And then it would be a part of the curriculum, and thus allowable. The rule is that the public schools can teach *about* religion in an informative and impartial manner (i.e. a unit about Japan might cover the basic beliefs of Buddhism and Shinto,) but cannot teach religion as truth (meaning, proselytize.) Some determined legislators keep trying to find ways around this.

The next fight will be over which version of the Bible or the Ten Commandments.

##########

https://news.utexas.edu/2019/02/04/ten-commandments-in-texas-classrooms-but-what-version/#:~:text=First%2C%20if%20we%20take%20the,Exodus%2020%20and%20Deuteronomy%205.


Here’s what the bill’s proponents should argue: What we call the Ten Commandments — our own version and understanding of them — has evolved to the point that it is no longer the same as the Ten Commandments of the Bible.

How so? First, if we take the Bible just as it is, without splitting up its texts or rearranging them in a different order as some scholars do (including me, at times), we find three versions of the Ten Commandments. The two best known are in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. They are not identical but contain the famous rules we normally associate with the Ten Commandments.

The third comes in Exodus 34 with rules like these: “you shall keep the feast of unleavened bread,” “you shall redeem every firstborn son,” and “you shall not boil a goat in its mother’s milk.” Interestingly enough, this list of rules is specifically designated as “the Ten Commandments” (in verse 28), whereas the other two lists are not.

So, which list counts as the Ten Commandments? “We” — the readers of the Bible — are the ones who have decided this. Almost every plaque or monument that you see follows (never quite exactly) the list in Exodus 20, but this is a decision that we made. What we call the Ten Commandments is our own distillation of these biblical passages. We decided to ignore the list in Exodus 34, follow the list in Exodus 20, and even abbreviate the wording of some rules.



##########

No words on a piece of paper, bronze plaque, or marble slab are going to magically erase the last seventy five years.


############

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/26/opinions/ten-commandments-school-prayer-texas-hemmer/index.html

Within conservative lore, one of the original sins of modern liberalism can be found in Engel v. Vitale, the 1962 Supreme Court ruling that declared unconstitutional the promotion of prayer in public schools. In the case before the Court, the New York Board of Regents had composed a short prayer to “Almighty God” that would be recited at the state’s public schools (though students could opt out if they did not wish to participate).

The Court determined, in a 6-1 ruling, that even though the prayer was voluntary, its promotion by the school violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which barred the government from establishing a religion. When the Court ruled the following year that state-sponsored Bible readings and prayers were unconstitutional, the right declared a war on Christians.

For many conservatives, the ruling to eliminate prayer from public schools was a pivotal moment in what they see as a war on Christianity, one that set the country on the path of moral decadence and decay. Given that, they decided the ruling was illegitimate.

In wide swaths of the country, particularly in the American South, school administrators and state legislators simply ignored the decision.] “I don’t care what they say in Washington,” George Wallace, the segregationist governor of Alabama said in 1963, “we are going to keep right on praying and reading the Bible in the public schools of Alabama.” And they did. In 1997, the New York Times reported that in parts of Alabama, “prayer has remained as common as pop quizzes in many schools.”


##########

What class do you flunk if you fail to learn the 10 commando-ments?

Can you fail to graduate for not knowing them?

Will failing to honor your father and your mother get you expelled?

So does this mean teachers need to explain to the children all about coveting the neighbor's wife and the petty jealousness of the Christian God? Why are we putting teachers in that situation? Kids who are Christian can get that crap drilled into their heads all the time at home and church.

The only purpose of this must be to screw with non-Christian kids.

The 10 commandments right off the bat say not to have other gods before the Christian one. How is this remotely useful at school UNLESS your goal is...ahem...forcing Christianity everywhere?

I have had it with the Christian attacks on public schools. They've already figured out a way to siphon off public money to Christian schools. Public schools do not need to be about religion! That's why there are churches.

I have to wonder about a person who can't go 5 minutes without God-bothering everywhere.

Catholic children who do not go to Catholic schools get religious instruction once a week. Or at least that's how things were done when I was growing up. And even the nun who was teaching my class had a difficult time explaining "Thall shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" to a bunch of eight year olds. Your average public school teacher does not want to go there.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2024 12:36PM by summer.

This nothing more than trying to legislate morality.

Obviously they will use Exodus 20, and use bigly shortened versions as well. Consider the 10th (v. 17): "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's."

They will condense it to "Thou shalt not covet" because otherwise, all the kids will make jokes about coveting their neighbor's ass.

First, the proposed addition adds the ten commandments and the Magna Carta to a laundry list of "historical" documents that "shall" be included in school curricula. Here is the whole list with relevant text:
__________________________________________

"[(3)] (4) School curricula and activities shall include a thorough study of historical documents and principles such as:
(a) the Declaration of Independence;
(b) the United States Constitution;
(c) the national motto;
(d) the pledge of allegiance;
(e) the national anthem;
(f) the Mayflower Compact;
(g) the writings, speeches, documents, and proclamations of the Founders and the Presidents of the United States;
(h) organic documents from the pre-Colonial, Colonial, Revolutionary, Federalist, and post Federalist eras;
(i) United States Supreme Court decisions;
(j) the Ten Commandments; [ADDED]
(k) the Magna Carta; [ADDED]
[(j)] (l) Acts of the United States Congress, including the published text of the Congressional Record; and
[(k)] (m) United States treaties.

[(4)] (5) To increase student understanding of, and familiarity with, American historical documents, public schools may display historically important excerpts from, or copies of, those documents in school classrooms and common areas as appropriate.

[(5)] (6) There shall be no content-based censorship of American history and heritage documents referred to in this section due to their religious or cultural nature.

[(6)] (7) Public schools shall display "In God we trust," which is declared in 36 U.S.C. 302 to be the national motto of the United States, in one or more prominent places within each
school building.

Note again the introductory language stating that school curriculum "SHALL" include . . ., suggesting that it is in some sense mandatory. Also note the provision: "There shall be no content-based censorship of American history and heritage documents referred to in this section due to their religious or cultural nature."
__________________________________________

Now, as you (summer) state:

"Once again, state legislators fail to realize that public school educators teach every child, both the religious and the non-religious. The only scenario where I can see the Ten Commandments being taught would be a high school course on comparative religions."

COMMENT: Yes, that is what one would expect. But the language here clearly does not restrict the teaching of the ten commandments to this "comparative religion" context. Teachers so inclined -- no doubt with pressure from Utah parents, school boards, etc.-- are free to post the ten commandments and discuss its content, without restriction, and while also posting the same in the classroom. Remarkably, teachers might otherwise be so inclined to teach the ten commandments as archaic: without current religious significance.

In short, it appears to me that the discretion (thankfully) remains with the teacher. Clearly the legislature assumes that Utah teachers will in general be religiously motivated in the classroom. I am not so sure that is correct, even in Utah. In fact, this statute arguably provides license for a teacher to discount the value of the ten commandments in the context of modern society, as part of the "thorough" study of the topic.
_______________________________________

"And then it would be a part of the curriculum, and thus allowable. The rule is that the public schools can teach *about* religion in an informative and impartial manner (i.e. a unit about Japan might cover the basic beliefs of Buddhism and Shinto,) but cannot teach religion as truth (meaning, proselytize.) Some determined legislators keep trying to find ways around this."

COMMENT: There are no Buddhist or Shinto documents on the list. As such, they are presumably beyond the protection of the statute, and thus such instruction would presumably be restricted to a "comparative religion" context. With respect to the list, however, the legislature is lifting that restriction.

Finally, keep in mind that you cannot have a "no content-based censorship" policy with respect to a religious text without opening the door to content-based religious teaching. Thus, the "content" of the ten commandments expressly encompasses moral mandates from God. You cannot teach the ten commandments "historically" or "comparatively" without raising and addressing this content and its context. (Particularly when the statute says such teaching must be "thorough."

It seems to me that the religion-obsessed Utah legislature would have been far better off leaving this alone, and letting teachers use their own intuitive judgment as to the proper place of religion, if any, in the public classroom.

Thank you for this interesting post.

I didn't see "Collected Wisdom of the Penthouse Forum" on the list so I have my doubts regarding how serious they are about equipping youngsters with a broad education.

"United States treaties"

Native Americans say the United States never made a treaty that it didn't break.

Who thinks the United States would take the Ten Commandments any more seriously than a treaty?

I wish I could say/think 'Only In Utah', but thi6 will Shirley spread

DON'T CALLL ME SHIRLEY!

I hope that a second grade teacher has to answer the question: “Mrs. Young…what’s adultery?”

Maybe we should all sign a petition to force the adding of a disclaimer.

-Thou shalt remember that the 10 commandments are a good policy when applied with intelligence and not with religious zealotry. And thou must keep in mind that the 10 commandments could very well be man made and have nothing to do with a God that has yet to show up and have lunch with you to prove he\she\it is the source.

>> ...good policy when applied with intelligence...

I would say that only applies to about 4 or 5 of them. The first ones shouldn't be considered good policy at all, IMO.

The first ones especially have no relevance except maybe in the same way Thor's ego has relevance in mythology and comparative religion contexts.

It will quickly morph from "can" to Must" teach the 10 Commandments. And they will stop at #1. And they will think they have fulfilled their obligation to student education.

I hope God grades on a curve.

won't change kids' behavior.

This is about dominance and turf.

Truth.