kittie wrote:
What about literature, which is ripe with references to the bible? To properly understand western literature the bible is unavoidable. What about traditions that are in mainstream society today (such as marriage)? What about american politics, where religion is a key component in a president getting elected? Why shouldn't a text of one of the major religions be viewed with interest?
In religious ed I definitely think religious texts of the major religions should be lightly studied. Studied as a text and the impact of the text, not taught "this is correct, believe in this religion". I think shunning the Bible would simply make matters worse and closes a lot of doors intellectually. The destructive thing IMO is taking the bible literally, not the bible itself.
I can understand your concerns, the issue is that the highly negative view is taken more in regard to a present viewpoint that is considered deleterious and something to be dismissed. So, I think Tallyman did actually understand your concerns, but he did not consider them central at the present.(I could be misinterpreting though)
The problem with a religious ed class in the US is that we are likely to have people who say "This is correct, believe this religion", which is why efforts to teach the Bible in high school are something worth opposing, even though many atheists(including Richard Dawkins) are in favor of reading the Bible. It gets messy, and I think most people who are dismissive are probably ok with religious studies if practiced in a manner that is fair to each religion. However, the religion of the Bible is what is being dismissed, as is the theology.