Texas schools board rewrites US history

Remy13

Texas schools board rewrites US history with lessons promoting God and guns.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/16/texas-schools-rewrites-us-history


this is crazy. people are entitled to their own opinions but not to their own facts. its all a little too ministry of truth for my liking.

sceptre

The education board has dropped references to the slave trade in favour of calling it the more innocuous "Atlantic triangular trade"

That's cute, almost as though all those ships going to and from Africa were capturing three cornered, three edge polygons and bringing them home to go cotton pickin'. And then they bred with the squares and gave birth to jazz.

Overheal

Two years ago, she published a book, One Nation Under God, in which she argued that the United States was ultimately governed by the scriptures.

"The only accurate method of ascertaining the intent of the founding fathers at the time of our government's inception comes from a biblical worldview," she wrote. "We as a nation were intended by God to be a light set on a hill to serve as a beacon of hope and Christian charity to a lost and dying world."

What utter rot.

It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion. In fact, the original Constitution bars any religious test to hold any federal office in the United States.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#af

Black Swan

No surprise that the Bush-State of Texas moves toward theocracy in their school curriculum.

"In the past four years, Christian conservatives have won almost half the seats on the Texas education board and can rely on other Republicans for support on most issues."

Overheal

My biggest worry is if they actually succeed, and tear this country down and replace it with their own bastardized version of something I don't even want to think about. The Christian version of Saudi Arabia.

Overheal

Wow...Wow...Wow.

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055914452

m@cc@

Overheal wrote: »

Wow...Wow...Wow.

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055914452

American free speech and all that, eh?

Memnoch

This is what I've been arguing about in at least two separate threads the past few months....

It starts... with teaching creationism to school kids as an alternate viable theory to evolution.

southsiderosie

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

No surprise that the Bush-State of Texas moves toward theocracy in their school curriculum.

"In the past four years, Christian conservatives have won almost half the seats on the Texas education board and can rely on other Republicans for support on most issues."

The think I find so insidious about the whole thing is that most of the books produced in Texas are used outside of the state, so waaaay too many of the rest of us are held hostage to the stupid decisions of one school board that has no mandate anywhere else.

I hope other states follow California's lead in looking for alternative book publishers. If I still lived in my home state, I would certainly push my representatives to do so.

Overheal

Memnoch wrote: »

This is what I've been arguing about in at least two separate threads the past few months....

It starts... with teaching creationism to school kids as an alternate viable theory to evolution.

The difference being that people can homeschool however they bloody well like. But now Texas is systematically preparing to do something far worse.

Memnoch

Overheal wrote: »

The difference being that people can homeschool however they bloody well like. But now Texas is systematically preparing to do something far worse.

That's how it works. First you have to individually brainwash/indoctrinate enough people in smaller environments, then when you have enough strength of numbers, you take it to the next step.

sceptre

southsiderosie wrote: »

The think I find so insidious about the whole thing is that most of the books produced in Texas are used outside of the state, so waaaay too many of the rest of us are held hostage to the stupid decisions of one school board that has no mandate anywhere else.

That's a significant point (and one I should have made myself - the BBC covered this several weeks ago)

Overheal

I wouldnt be shocked in the least if California became the next big textbook publisher out of this. Cant hurt their bottom line either.

Amerika

So who is holding a gun to the heads of school boards across the nation saying “You better use Texas school books or else!”

Remy13

Amerika wrote: »

So who is holding a gun to the heads of school boards across the nation saying “You better use Texas school books or else!”

because Texas is such a huge market for textbooks the changes made to accommodate their changes will make it very difficult for many other states to obtain regular textbooks at a reasonable price.

only larger states such as California or highly populous ones such as New York would have the same clout with the printers.

California has already moved to block these changes.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15098236

Amerika

Remy13 wrote: »

because Texas is such a huge market for textbooks the changes made to accommodate their changes will make it very difficult for many other states to obtain regular textbooks at a reasonable price.http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15098236

So I guess when it comes to education, money trumps values? There of course seems to be no problems with money when it comes to teacher pay, teacher provided healthcare and teacher provided pensions.

Looks like the Texas School Book Depository keeps haunting America.
(relax, I know it is now just a landmark)

illuminati

What makes me sick is the use of words like "liberty" and "democracy". These people clearly couldn't care less about either of these, although they may think they do. This is just another example of a small group of people looking to force their particular religious beliefs on everyone. This is religious dictatorship!

smurgen

i dont think american institutions in general have much appreciation for history,maby because they have such a short history themselves.A great example of this is the building of Camp Alpha on the ancient site of Babylon. The destruction of Iraqi historical sites post invasion was nothing short of criminal negligence

Amerika

smurgen wrote: »

i dont think american institutions in general have much appreciation for history,maby because they have such a short history themselves.A great example of this is the building of Camp Alpha on the ancient site of Babylon. The destruction of Iraqi historical sites post invasion was nothing short of criminal negligence

Hmmm, And now the rest of the story :

Wasn’t Camp Alpha built in part with the intention of protecting the ruins from looting, especially after the museums in Babylon and Kufa were robbed of their entire contents? The site was only occupied from September 2003 until December 2004 when the area became somewhat stabilized, and given to the Poles, right? In addition, didn’t the US pay $800,000 to help rehabilitate the Babylon site? And I believe the damage was pretty minimal by standards.

Strange, but with all the cultural respect so many Europeans claim to have, you’d think the Babylon artifacts which were hauled away by archaeologists in colonial times, which are sitting in European museums, would have been returned to Iraq by now.

There’s also this

The U.N. report noted that U.S. troops were not solely responsible for ruining the 4,000-year-old city. Before their arrival, local residents had contributed to the damage, mostly through development, the report said.

"The features of the western side of the city of Babylon disappeared many years ago due to encroachment by agriculture and development on the archaeological zone," the report said.

Sure doesn’t quite sound like criminal negligence to me. And the destruction would have been far worse had it not been for Camp Alpha.

Although short, our history is rich and successful, thank you very much. :cool:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/31/iraq.babylon.damage/index.html

Overheal

Still, the fact that they're basically trying to plug in a religious agenda that never existed in the foundation of america is cause for due concern. Like interpreting the Mayflower Compact in such a way that the Pilgrims sought to establish a Christian state, not at all underlining the role of basic Freedom of Religion.

I dont know, maybe it is open to interpretation: Did they found Cape Cod to a) gain religious freedom from the English Church or b) establish a New Chrisitan Powerbase?

Either way, over 100 years later in the Constitution and Establishment of the Country, the Founding Fathers clearly presumed the Former.

Lockstep

I like this

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2009/07/subsubminimal.html

Overheal

kickoutthejams wrote: »

I like this

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2009/07/subsubminimal.html

I also like that.

(in short: A job application never implies or screens subminimal requirements, eg. "Soldier. Must be physically fit, take orders" but may not say "Must not be homocidal maniac" though this is implied.

Similarly people are making it onto school boards who fit all the minimum standards but fail at the subminimums, like "Must not be seeking to systematically replace the USA with the United States of Jesus")

jank

Amerika wrote: »

So I guess when it comes to education, money trumps values? There of course seems to be no problems with money when it comes to teacher pay, teacher provided healthcare and teacher provided pensions.

Looks like the Texas School Book Depository keeps haunting America.
(relax, I know it is now just a landmark)

I find it funny that you talk about money over values when we just had the health care debate. Flip-flip anyone? What are your views on this subject other than taking another pot against the "liberal" establishment.

Do you agree with rewritting history?

Amerika

jank wrote: »

I find it funny that you talk about money over values when we just had the health care debate. Flip-flip anyone? What are your views on this subject other than taking another pot against the "liberal" establishment.

Do you agree with rewritting history?

Obviously you didn’t get the fact that I was making fun of Remey13’s post about other states’ education organizations wanting to impose their viewpoints upon the Texas school board. And that the Texas school board should comply, because to do otherwise “will make it very difficult for many other states to obtain regular textbooks at a reasonable price.” I followed it up with the snarky comment that affordability never seems to come into the picture when education organizations demand higher pay and more benefits. Sorry, my mistake for not making it more clear (lost in translation I guess).

lonestargirl

I subscribe to a magazine called Texas Monthly, in the May editorial they warned that the most important vote Texans could cast in that month's election was for the state board of education. Mayors etc come and go but changes in the curriculum can have effects for entire an entire generation of schoolgoers.

Manic Moran

I need to find a list of the actual specifics: The ones listed here as 'passed' actually don't seem that bad.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37271857/ns/us_news-life/?GT1=43001

In final edits leading up to the vote, conservatives rejected language to modernize the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D. They also required that public school students in Texas evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty.

Seriously, who uses Before Common Era in regular conversation? (Or whatever the hell BCE is?). And the thing about sovereignty isn't actually that far out of whack: Just look at how Ireland is now subordinate to the EU. It is a valid topic for discussion: Note it says that the students should do the evaluating, not that they should be taught that it's true, good, or bad.

The standards will refer to the U.S. government as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic," and students will be required to study the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.

Does anyone have an issue with either of these?

All the other stuff about slavery, church and state and so on just says they've been moved a little to the 'right', but doesn't give a start reference or an example of actually what they will now say. (Indeed, the use of the word 'attempted' implies that the church and state thing didn't actually get changed)

Hence I'm curious to see the actual changes before offering comment on how insane they are.

NTM

Mjollnir

lonestargirl wrote: »

I subscribe to a magazine called Texas Monthly, in the May editorial they warned that the most important vote Texans could cast in that month's election was for the state board of education. Mayors etc come and go but changes in the curriculum can have effects for entire an entire generation of schoolgoers.

As do I. The latest edition, ironically enough, has Laura "Stepford Zombie" Bush on the cover.

HQvhs

Manic Moran wrote: »

In final edits leading up to the vote, conservatives rejected language to modernize the classification of historic periods to B.C.E. and C.E. from the traditional B.C. and A.D. They also required that public school students in Texas evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty.

And the thing about sovereignty isn't actually that far out of whack: Just look at how Ireland is now subordinate to the EU. It is a valid topic for discussion: Note it says that the students should do the evaluating, not that they should be taught that it's true, good, or bad.

NTM

To be fair, it's a bit of a leading question. It isn't asking the students to "evaluate the effects membership of the UN has had on US soveriegnity". Instead, it's asking them to "evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty."

You know as well as I know that how a statement or question is worded makes all the difference, and to say that this has no element of bias is facetious. The statement clearly implies that the UN has undermines US sovereignty, not that students are to evaluate if if has. Big difference. And you know it.

Memnoch

Yup, it's imperative that American students learn all about the pesky UN and how it makes it just a tad more inconvenient for the US of A to invade whoever they want or you know, kidnap, torture and murder people at their pleasure and discretion.

I don't suppose these changes include a section on how the UN is actually quite powerless to stop such flagrant abuses of human rights and international law by the United states and other major powers, including the criminal government of the state of Israel.

Manic Moran

The statement clearly implies that the UN has undermines US sovereignty, not that students are to evaluate if if has. Big difference. And you know it.

No, it implies that international organisations would like to undermine US sovereignty, not that they have.

The effect of both international organisations and international treaties on the domestic situation is still a pretty hotly debated issue. Take, for example, the ruling in the Supreme Court a couple of years ago on the execution of a Mexican in controvention of the policies laid out in an international treaty signed by the US, which ruled that US law overrides the signing. And that was an issue wherein the President was actually in favour of the treaty and the US government argued in favour of the treaty requirements.

Then when you come to issues where multinational organisations expect the US to comply with their decrees regardless of if the US agrees with them or not, be it the cluster munitions ban or the proposed resolution on small arms trade in the UN, then it very much becomes a question of if these organisations believe their positions to require changes in domestic US position. Even the issue of if Mexican-registered trucks should be allowed to operate in the US under NAFTA is an item of no small discussion.

Under both current law, and I believe domestic opinion, I don't think the US will currently abide a relationship to multi-national organisations such as Ireland has with the EU.

NTM

Remy13

well....they passed it :-(

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/DN-sboe_22tex.ART0.State.Edition2.140f306f.html