Bible stories should be included in reading curricula, argues Robert Pondiscio on The 74. Texas' proposed Bluebonnet Learning "isn’t the only thing that’s 'Bible-infused'," he writes. "So is English." Think of "Good Samaritan, prodigal son, forbidden fruit, pearls before swine and countless others."
If students aren't familiar with "words, phrases and ideas from history, literature, mythology" and the Bible, they'll "struggle to fully comprehend what they read, no matter how well they can decode the words on the page," Pondiscio writes.
Immigrants and minority students need this vocabulary and knowledge the most, he writes.
At a Texas Board of Education meeting, critics said Bluebonnet, which will be recommended but not required, crosses the line into promoting Christianity. The curriculum is "wildly problematic in its depictions of Jews and Judaism, said Sharyn Vane. In a second-grade lesson on Queen Esther, who saved Persian Jews from the evil Haman, students play dice to decide when to kill the Jews, she complained.
Having students play dice and pretend to be plotting a massacre is not essential to teaching the story of Esther. It's a suggestion -- a bad one -- not a mandate. (Esther replaces a queen who's banished for refusing to show her body to the king's drunken friends. Let's hope kids don't act that one out.)
I agree that students should have a knowledge of the Bible because it is so infused into Western culture (including the English sayings you pointed out). But what about Esther do 2nd graders need to know in order to be "culturally competent", to use the term currently in vogue?