Abigail Richards

The Bible Bill Causes Controversy



Posted: Friday, May 22, 2009

by Abigail Richards

A Bill introduced in Congress is ruffling the feathers of several fellow Congressmen. It is a bill that would declare 2010 as the year of the Bible.

Republic Representative Paul Broun introduced the Bill ruffling many feathers across the net as well as in Washington.

"Republican lawmakers with apparently too much time on their hands and no solutions to offer the country are pushing a resolution that will not address the nation's problems or advance prosperity or even untangle their previous governing mistakes," blogged New York Democrat Representative Jerrold Nadler.

Maybe, the Bible is Broun's solution. I am not saying it is right to mix it into Congress. No matter how you feel on that situation, what if Broun is just saying that we have exhausted all other solutions to solving our problems? What if he is trying to remind people of the only solution to our problems?

It bothers me at time that people fail to realize that the principles our country was founded on were the same principles found in the Bible. Abraham Lincoln had no problem quoting the Bible and even declaring the first National Day of Prayer. Not to bring this up, but Obama ignored the National Day refusing to acknowledge it.

Maybe Broun just wants to remind people that these fundamentals found in the Bible is what started our country to begin with and maybe it is time to return to our roots to rebuild this country.

Broun said so himself in an interview with POLITICO, "This doesn't have anything to do with Christianity. It seeks to recognize that the Bible played an integral role in the building of the United States, including providing the basis for our freedom of religion that allows Muslims, Hindus and even atheists to vocalize their own beliefs."

Usually Bills such as these are ceremonial at best. Most times, it is just a gesture. One critic asked if the year of the Quran would be next? What is wrong with that? Let people study the books written in the past. It might do some good to have a country reading again. As for this being a controversy, I think those making it one might have a little too much time on their hands.

This Article has been viewed 372 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
No comments yet.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.