An Idaho bill would force public schools to read from the King James Bible every day
The Republican-backed bill is blatantly illegal. So naturally, they're pretending there's historical precedent for it.
This newsletter is free, but it’s only able to sustain itself due to the support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. Would you please consider becoming one of those supporters? You can use the button below to subscribe to Substack or use my usual Patreon page!
An Idaho Republican has filed a bill that would force public schools to read from the King James Bible every day.
In 1925, then again in 1963, the state actually passed a law requiring the same thing, but in 1963, it was deemed irrelevant after the Supreme Court decided, in Abington School District v. Schempp, that government-sponsored Bible readings were a violation of the First Amendment. The archaic law remains on the books, however, even if it can’t be enforced.
HB 162, sponsored by State Rep. Jordan Redman, would repeal that vestigial law (good start!) but replace it with one that goes even further than before. He calls it the “School-Sponsored Bible Reading Act.” a title that appears to be taunting Supreme Court precedent as well as anyone who supports church/state separation.
If it passes, the new law would declare that the Bible “is the most important book in the world, molds public morality, impacts history, and contains unequaled literary value.” (No citation provided.) It bizarrely claims the KJV is “nonsectarian” (even though many Christian denominations don’t use it), then highlights a series of conservative court victories before finally getting to the point:
Selections from the King James version, the new King James version, or the revised standard version of the Bible shall be read each morning of each instructional day in each occupied classroom in all public school districts. Such reading shall be without comment or interpretation. Each school district shall organize the daily selections in such a way that the entire Bible is read sequentially and completed over ten (10) school years. Any question by any pupil relating to the Bible reading shall be referred to the pupil's parent or guardian.
(That’s virtually identical to the 1963 law, except this specifies which versions of the Bible are permitted and says that the entire book must be completed over the course of 10 years… including, I guess, all the passages full of rape, incest, and genocide.)
What if you don’t want to participate? The bill says teachers have the option of not reading it… in which case someone else will take their place. But students don’t get the same luxury. If they don’t want to participate in this charade, they need a note from their parents. Without that note, students will be forced to listen to the Bible against their will. (Similar requirements to avoid saying the Pledge of Allegiance have repeatedly be struck down by judges. The bottom line is you can’t force public school students to say or listen to religious indoctrination.)
Obviously, none of those caveats make this blatantly unconstitutional bill legal.
The goal is obvious: Use the schools to promote Christian Nationalism while wasting time that could actually be spent educating kids. There’s literally no reason for this bill to exist and it creates far more drama for everyone involved than whatever the status quo is now. It’s a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. It’s also something educators weren’t asking for—which becomes extremely apparently when you see how it was promoted during a Education Committee hearing. At no point did supporters mention how teachers are clamoring for this time-suck.
Even besides the legal problems with the bill, there are all kinds of other questions regarding why it’s even needed.
Why do kids need time at school to read the Bible? Why can’t they do it at home?
The opt-out request is meant to give lawmakers a way to say they’re not forcing kids to listen to this. But let’s face it: If both the student and parents are okay with Bible readings, they could do it at home. And if students are not okay with it, then there’s a good chance they’re unable to say that to their parents. This bill is meant to shove the Bible in the face of students who have no desire to listen to it.
How much time will be spent doing these readings? The bill doesn’t specify.
What’s the penalty for students or teachers who protest this illegal charade and refuse to allow this to happen?
What will be the repercussions for the kids who aren’t Christian or don’t participate in this, even if they follow all the rules? If everyone else is reading the Bible during school, will they be ostracized? Does Redman give a damn about the inevitable rise in bullying his bill would create?
If a goal of this bill is to improve “public morality,” why waste time reading sections of the Bible that have absolutely nothing to do with basic decency?
Students are already allowed to pray on their own and read the Bible. They can do it in groups. They can form clubs that meet before or after school. Idaho students do not need less time getting educated and more time getting indoctrinated.
Here’s another reason we know this is a Christian Nationalism bill: Even though Redman sponsored it, he’s not the one who spoke about it to the House Education Committee.
Rep. Jordan Redman, R-Coeur d'Alene, sponsored the bill, but it was largely presented to the committee by the Christian-centered Idaho Family Policy Center’s president, Blaine Conzatti.
…
Conzatti said that because Idaho has a historical precedent for reading the Bible in school, he thought it would be deemed constitutional and would not then require the reading of any other religious text.
“State legislatures have the primary authority for shaping school curriculum and education standards, and there is no need to give equal time to every competing religious historical or literary text,” Conzatti said.
Idaho has a historical precedent for doing something illegal, yes. Just because the state passed a law to force Christianity upon children in the past doesn’t magically make it okay today, even under the guise of history.
At least one Democrat noted the problem during the committee hearing:
Rep. Chris Mathias, D-Boise, on Thursday said of the “history and tradition test” that was mentioned, “I can’t speak for all Black people, but ‘history and tradition’ tests just really make me nervous.”
No kidding. Even though this bill doesn’t involve race, Mathias’ point shouldn’t be ignored. If your best argument for legislation is that your state was fine with this long before there was actual religious diversity in the country—and when the state was even more monolithic than it is now—then you have a shitty argument. These guys are positively giddy about the possibility of taking the state backwards a full century.
The Idaho Press points out that there was another law passed in 1925 alongside the Bible reading law that ought to give lawmakers pause when it comes to adopting things they used to be okay with:
In addition to the Bible-reading law, the Idaho Legislature in 1925 also created a now-defunct “Board of Eugenics,” which had the authority to decide if people determined to be “feeble-minded, insane, epileptic, habitual criminals, moral degenerates, and sexual perverts,” should be sterilized. Sterilizations in Idaho continued until 1963, according to a report published by the University of Vermont.
For what it’s worth, Idaho’s Constitution already prohibits everything this bill hopes to accomplish. It says very bluntly: “No sectarian or religious tenets or doctrines shall ever be taught in the public schools.” It goes on to say that “No books, papers, tracts or documents of a political, sectarian or denominational character shall be used or introduced in any schools.”
So if this bill passes, it could be challenged in state courts and struck down using existing state law. Consider that a decade ago, when Idaho was considering a different bill to permit the use of the Bible in schools, the attorney general at the time said the bill “would invite constitutional challenge and almost certainly be held unconstitutional.” This bill is even more extreme than the one he was talking about at the time.
No one needs this bill. But Republicans will do anything they can to shove their ideology in everyone’s faces because they know damn well it’s becoming harder to persuade people to accept it voluntarily.
(Portions of this article were published earlier)
Obscenely unconstitutional, and naturally it came from a Republican. He's out of his mind if he thinks this law would result in better people. He may be familiar with the Bible, but like far too many of his fellow believers, does not appear to know anything about the history of Christianity. Christianity is the most factionalized religion on the planet, and nothing else even comes close. Attempting to sort out who was, or was not, a TRUE Christian has spilled a river of blood. The Thirty Years War being a prime example of it. Religion and morality do not exclude each other but they are very far from the same thing. I'm beyond sick of the people who keep trying to force their religion into the public schools.
It's always the King Jimmy. That shows it's a super conservative movement that wants to interpret the Bible for people. It's why they don't want to use modern versions. I thought they wanted books with sexual immorality in them out of schools. It was never about that.