Book It

I just read that a proposal was made in the Tennessee state legislature for the Bible to be made the “official book” of Tennessee.

Fortunately it ran in to immediate opposition.  Not because I dislike the Bible, but because I dislike the idea of making a book sacred to a larger faith the representative book for a particular state or place.  According to the author of the bill, “This does not establish any form of religion, and any move to denounce it, I think, is to silence those of us who would like to see reverence given to a book that has played a role in all of our lives.”

Interesting idea.  Proposing that the Bible, the book for the Christian faith, does not establish any form of religion (presumably here he means a state sanctioned or sponsored religion) is a pretty lame argument because the book is a religious item.  Would he feel the same if someone proposed the Tanak, the Rig Veda or the Quran? Would he argue that picking one of those sacred texts does not establish any form of religion?  I seriously doubt it.  The idea may not establish a form of state sponsored religion, but it certainly would show particular preference towards one.

Then, of course, comes the question of which version of the Bible.  I presume the individual is not a Roman Catholic.  I might be wrong, but would he propose a Bible with the Apocrypha or without?  And would he propose the KJV, the NIV, or some other translation (God help us if he nominated “The Voice”)?

The second half of his statement – that those who oppose the idea are trying to squash free speech for Christians is pretty bold too, especially if it isn't trying to establish a state sponsored religious claim.  The logic seems to be that he isn't trying to propose a state sponsored faith, but if you oppose the bill, you are opposing the faith of Christians from being expressed?  That sounds more like a rhetorical device designed to castigate persons who don’t share his particular point of view towards the Bible as well as demonizing (perhaps literally) those who don’t share his ‘religious’ reverence.

The Representative went on to say that the purpose of this bill was to "memorialize the role the Bible has played in Tennessee's history" in terms of its historical, cultural and economic impact.  Does that include lynching?  Does that include the division of race and the divided churches that existed over how to interpret the scriptures regarding slavery?  I somehow doubt it.

I mean, if we wanted to talk about a book that really got our state on the map (figuratively), wouldn't Darwin’s Origin of the Species be the one to go to?  Not that I would want that as a state book, but it certainly had an impact in terms of “historical, cultural and economic impact.”

The issue is going to be brought up again next week, or so the Associated Press reported.  Oh boy. 

Sometimes I wonder why our legislature is so bogged down rather than working to provide or respond to issues of insurance legislation, funding education, or issues of infrastructure.  Perhaps I have found my answer.  We want to make the Bible our state book before we get to work governing the state.

Perhaps if the Bible was taken to heart by these folks, the need to have it a state book wouldn't be such a big deal.  Then again, perhaps not.