Texas Schools Board Rewriting US History

From /.

http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/05...ing-US-History

suraj.sun picked up a Guardian (UK) piece on the Texas school board and their quest to remake US education in a pro-American, Christian, free enterprise mode. We've been keeping an eye on this story for some time, as it will have an impact far beyond Texas. From the Guardian: "The board is to vote on a sweeping purge of alleged liberal bias in Texas school textbooks in favor of what Dunbar says really matters: a belief in America as a nation chosen by God as a beacon to the world, and free enterprise as the cornerstone of liberty and democracy. ... Those corrections have prompted a blizzard of accusations of rewriting history and indoctrinating children by promoting rightwing views on religion, economics and guns while diminishing the science of evolution, the civil rights movement and the horrors of slavery. ... Several changes include sidelining Thomas Jefferson, who favored separation of church and state, while introducing a new focus on the 'significant contributions' of pro-slavery Confederate leaders during the civil war. ... Study of Sir Isaac Newton is dropped in favor of examining scientific advances through military technology."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...tes-us-history

Rewriting history ... make sure to read 1984 if you haven't in a while.

Brainwash them while they are young so they make good little soldiers.

a belief in America as a nation chosen by God as a beacon to the world

ROTFL. They cannot be serious! Back to The Dark Ages.

http://www.schoolprayerinamerica.inf...urchstate.html

"If actions speak stronger then words, it is interesting to note that 3 days after Jefferson wrote those words, he attended church in the largest congregation in North America at the time. This church held its weekly worship services on government property, in the House Chambers of the U.S. Capital Building. The wall of separation applies everywhere in the country even on government property , without government interference. This is how it is written in the Constitution, this is how Thomas Jefferson understood it from his letter and actions, and this is how the men who wrote the Constitution practiced it."

He probably went home and later that night introduced one of his female slaves to his bedchamber.

"The metaphor of a wall of separation is bad history and worse law. It has made a positive chaos out of court rulings. It should be explicitly abandoned."Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, William Rehnquist

Oh, I know that church and state are not separate, no matter how much anyone wants it to be, but the fact that they are rewriting it in such a way, or want to, that's what is scary to me. I guess if I ever have kids there is 0% chance of them going to regular school.

Originally Posted by brianL ROTFL. They cannot be serious! Back to The Dark Ages.

Unfortunately, they are EXTREMELY serious. How many other countries can you name that actually teach creationism in science classes (or at least have regular arguments about doing so)? And people wonder why the US has lost its technological edge.

The truly frightening thing about this is because of the size of the Texas school system, textbook publishers cater to them and California and the rest of us have to put up with the manure they churn out. If Texas wants to become a bastion of ignorance and intolerance, that is their choice, but leave the rest of us out of it.

I am glad to have finished elementary-high school when I did. Luckily colleges/universities are independent from all this, well probably except for the christian based unis. such as Dallas Baptist univ, Southern Methodist, etc.


If I ever have a kid, I had better consider either private school, or home school.

When I left my University after graduating, I heard they planned on making it mandatory to teach "alternative" theories to evolution along with evolution. I think we all know what that means. I thought that was the point of Church as a separate entity. It's true that in Texas especially when the school is a Christian University, you know they will include religion no matter what. I had the choice of going to one of these, but refused because they made a religion class mandatory. Besides, I probably wouldn't "fit in" ... that being the pleasant way to say it.

I went to a college that had a mandatory religion requirement, and to be honest, it probably was more of a good thing than a bad thing. It forced people to actually think about their religion instead of just buying whatever some random preacher had indoctrinated them with. Of course it also had the benefit of keeping "alternative" evolution theories out of the Science department and in the Religion department where they belonged.

The problem with the teaching of history is that the question is always: "History according to who?" One person's propaganda and brainwashing is another person's appropriately emphasized recital.

The same thing shows up in what is laughingly called "social discourse" - particularly in these polarized times. If you believe what I believe, then you are a Good Guy, and anything you do is Right. if you disagree with me, then you are a Bad Guy, and anything you do is Wrong.

There needs to be balance, in this as in all things. Problem is, my reading of recent history (the history over the course of my lifetime) shows me that what we presently are seeing out of the Christian Right is a reaction to what we have been seeing out of the Radical Left. After the Scopes trial, fundamentalist christianity in the US (which has always been very strongly present, with wide and deep roots in our culture) became politically quiescent for many years and, in fact, didn't stand up and start to become politically active again until subjected to many attacks from the Left.

Now we have a full-fledged cultural war in effect, and as a result everyone loses. This "wall of separation" stuff is crap. All of it...crap. The constitution forbids the establishment of a State religion; it doesn't say anything about the practice of religion by individuals, and the deployment of religious symbols on State property (translation: PUBLIC property) is certainly not the establishment of a State religion.

There is no balance, except a certain amount of balance in error and in insanity. For example, the creation vs evolution debate is simply nuts; there is only one legitimate side to it. But this doesn't matter; a significant portion of the group that is on the proper side of the debate falls into the exact same error as the entire group on the wrong side of the debate.

What do I mean? Quite simple. It is trivially an obvious logical fallacy to say that "this, which is not disproven, is therefore proven". And this is the exact error that the creationists make. And yet, what is so hilarious, is that atheists fall into the negative statement of the exact same error ("this, which is not proven, is therefore disproven"), and use IT to argue the other side - and, while doing it, falsely claim SCIENCE as their proof!!

Creationism is not science, period. Doesn't satisfy the tests of science. Doesn't belong in science class. Totally hinged on the above logical fallacy. But neither does science show, in any sense, that there is no creator. Science is mute on the subject, has no interest in the subject, and those who claim that science does anything else WRT a creator are guilty of the second logical fallacy.

Creation vs Evolution is an easy one to show...trivially easy...because the logic of the situation is not realistically disputable. History is a LOT harder; there is no avoiding perspective in history and it is hard to claim that this interpretation is "wrong" unless the explicit facts are either presented wrong or presented in such a slanted fashion and ignoring such obvious influences that the result must be wrong.

But how in the hell does anyone expect to see any balance in the teaching of history - a hard thing to find - when there is no balance in a far, far more trivially obvious circumstance such as evolution vs creationism?

I'm sorry to say that what is being deemed as science nowadays especially modern physics, has very little "science" in it. So, the argument that religion isn't science and science isn't religion doesn't really work anymore.

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H I'm sorry to say that what is being deemed as science nowadays especially modern physics, has very little "science" in it. So, the argument that religion isn't science and science isn't religion doesn't really work anymore.

We have had this discussion before, briefly. It is pretty clear that you do not accept science and the scientific method.

Your choice, but if you wish to retain your intensely solipsistic viewpoint, there is literally nothing to discuss.

Hi,

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H Oh, I know that church and state are not separate, no matter how much anyone wants it to be, but the fact that they are rewriting it in such a way, or want to, that's what is scary to me. I guess if I ever have kids there is 0% chance of them going to regular school.

No where in the U.S. Constitution is the wording of such; 'separation of church and State'. It is just modern interpretation of the separation of church & state.

Show me where it says anything of the sort for separation of church & state in the U.S. Constitution. Not a interpretation. Our modern 'SCOTUS' should read the U.S. Constitution for what it is. Much like the AG coming down on the Arizona SB1070 and then to find out he didn't even read the bill. Just like most of the current administrations status on the church. Sunday mourning attendee, unlike our fore fathers who would open each government session with a prayer and practiced what they preached.

What's the difference with the liberal's attempt to rewrite or present their interpretations of history? Sway the country by indoctrination of the youth to their ideals. I've always been interested with our history and will continue to challenge. Go to the source and don't take hearsay to defend a position. Sure it's difficult to get good reference material but our library system here in the U.S. is one of the best in the world, even then you must discern everything. I don't always rely on Google or the like since a lot is mixed fact and fiction. Reads good but not always factual. What ever happened to footnotes and references instead of the personal interpretation without factual representation?

Academia is one of the worst environments, especially for a true learning experience. Higher education is just a bed of people who call themselves open thinkers but have a closed mind when the facts are presented.

possible link ; Florida Court Sets Atheist Holy Day! Gotta love this Judge! [FLORIDA COURT SETS ATHEIST HOLY DAY] In Florida , an atheist created a case against the upcoming Easter and Passover Holy days. He hired an attorney to bring a discrimination case against Christians and Jews and observances of their holy days. The argument was that it was unfair that atheists had no such recognized days. The case was brought before a judge. After listening to the passionate presentation by the lawyer, the judge banged his gavel declaring, "Case dismissed!" The lawyer immediately stood objecting to the ruling saying, "Your honor, How can you possibly dismiss this case? The Christians have Christmas, Easter and others. The Jews have Passover, Yom Kippur and Hanukkah, yet my client and all other atheists have no such holidays." The judge leaned forward in his chair saying, "But you do. Your client, counsel, is woefully ignorant." The lawyer said, "Your Honor, we are unaware of any special observance or holiday for atheists." The judge said, "The calendar says April 1st is April Fool's Day. Psalm 14:1 states, 'The fool says in his heart, there is no God.' Thus, it is the opinion of this court, that, if your client says there is no God, then he is a fool. Therefore, April 1st is his day. Court is adjourned." You gotta love a Judge that knows his scripture!

Love this idea but not sure if valid. Just like the text in loads of schools there are multiple instances of information that is either made up or twisted so the reader thinks it's true therefore in their mind factual;

A college class was led by an atheist professor, and every day he'd stand in front of his class and say, "Have you ever seen God?" to which nobody would answer. Then he'd ask, "Have you ever felt God?" and nobody would answer. Finally he'd ask, "Have you ever heard God?" and, like the other times, nobody would answer. He then would say, "It is obvious that there is no God." One day a Christian student had been having an extremely bad day; her car broke down, her mother was sick, her boyfriend was out of town, and she'd gotten a bad grade on one of her exams. She had been fed up with her professor's little act every morning, so she decided to do something about it. While the professor stood up at the beginning of class and did his thing, the student had an idea. She got up and said, "Professor, would you mind if I said something?" He said, "Of course not. This is an expressive classroom, and I think it would be fine if you spoke your mind." The girl said to the class, "Have you ever seen our professor's brain?" and nobody answered. Then she asked, "Have you ever felt our professor's brain?" and nobody answered. Finally she asked, "Have you ever heard our professor's brain?" and, like the other times, nobody answered. She then said, "It is quite obvious that our professor has no brain."

Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H I'm sorry to say that what is being deemed as science nowadays especially modern physics, has very little "science" in it. So, the argument that religion isn't science and science isn't religion doesn't really work anymore.

Care to provide, you know, an example or two?

Science is very much alive and well, it is just that the media's ability to understand or report on it has evaporated. The general public is in even worse shape as they tend to take the word of celebrities over those of actual scientists. The internet just takes it farther by giving every drooling idiot out there a platform from which to proclaim their expertise. Nobody ever bothers to ask them for their credentials.

Originally Posted by onebuck Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is the wording of such; 'separation of church and State'. It is just modern interpretation of the separation of church & state.

We have all heard that position many times before. Kindly tell us what the First Amendment means and requires, if not the separation of church and state?