Texas Board of Education at it again Banning textbooks

[SameOldStory]

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by nguirado

Exactly how would Jesus Camp be relevant to broader American history? Should we mention all of the other thousands of religious retreats (marriage, etc.) that occur every day in America? Why not?

Now you are the one being deliberately obtuse-- that was a data point-- an illustration that what one person could conciser a positive others would conciser a negative. Before one can teach the "positives" and "negatives" of Christian influence on American society, first you must determine what "positive" and "negative" are. For instance, there are many people who would conciser California's Prop 8 (which very much is relevant to broader American history, and is largely based on Christian beliefs) a good thing, and some conciser to be a bad thing.

Rest assured that people wanting the teaching of (what they perceive to be) positives of Christian influence on society and the downplaying of (what they perceive to be) negative characterizations of Christianity aren't doing so because they want a neutral, objective education-- they want it because they want Christianity to be taught and perceived to be true, and the one right way. It isn't separable from the theology of the people pushing for it.

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

You say that even after the clip I just posted, when it should very clear that I'm talking about the theology? You have a preconception burned into your brain about what liberals are supposed to be thinking, and there is nothing that will be able to sway you from that preconception. I see no point in any further attempts to address you on this.

Thank goodness.

EDIT - HAY! I thought that you were going away?

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by SameOldStory

Thank goodness.

EDIT - HAY! I thought that you were going away?

No, I was just no longer going to debate that poster (a statement I failed at.) Sorry, but I'm here in this thread as long as it lasts.

[ardeegee]

On a related note (to the original post)

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...htm?csp=34news

[nguirado]

Most people agree what positive and negative effects are. If you say that Christians established extensive charity networks, built hospitals, and established great universities, most people would consider that a good effect of religious organizations. If people mention that religion motivated the abolitionist movement, most would consider that good. You can say how some Southerners used the Bible to justify slavery. Most would think that bad.

It's not like we have to reconstruct meaning from zero.

Those things are also more relevant to the American experience than a camp for a few kids.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

The problem being that "positive" and "negative" are subjective opinions. Ever see clips of the movie Jesus Camp? There are plenty of people who would nod along in agreement for the "positive" things being said and done in that documentary, and others who would recoil in horror at it. So, depending on your ideology, the same thing can represent the positive or the negative.



(Three guesses which of the two views I hold.)

The obese woman in that film who said that, "Had it been in the Old Testament, Harry Potter would have been put to death," would do well to read Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Gluttony is also a sin considered worthy of death penalty. Catholics have traditionally consider it the second of the Seven Deadly Sins.

[nguirado]

they want it because they want Christianity to be taught and perceived to be true, and the one right way

Whether a religion is true or not touches upon history (Was Jesus a historical person?), but is mostly theology and philosophy. I don't think anybody wants to turn a history class into an course on apologetics. What I'm talking about is the interaction of that philosophy with history. If we agree that a decent history class encompasses a broad human experience, then you include religion. The Texas board wants to focus more on the positive aspects of Christianity. Is that OK with you?

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by nguirado

Most people agree what positive and negative effects are.

But then again, you were (I think it was you, if I'm wrong, I apologize) earlier in this thread defending the Crusades, which I (and I would think more people than not) considered to be a bad thing. So it isn't as clear-cut as you might think.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by nguirado

I don't think anybody wants to turn a history class into an course on apologetics.

Then might I assume that you grew up in a liberal part of the country? Because I grew up in a conservative one (rural South Carolina) and I once had a history teacher, in her introduction to the class on the first day, list amongst the reasons that she thought history was important was that because "history is His Story."

[nguirado]

Yes, that's clearly an abuse. I also think most non-religious people wouldn't want to use a Hitchens (e, to stay relevant) book as a text.

My point about the Crusades is that all most people think is that the Muslims were there, minding their own business, and then a bunch of Christian fanatics went to kill them at the behest of the pope. People would be more circumspect if they saw the context of the story.

Bonus knowledge: If you read history before the sixties, the Crusades were mostly considered to be a good thing. I just finished an H.P. Lovecraft story where he mentions that people would brag that they ancestors were crusaders (My ancestors are Spanish and the Spanish Crusade lasted 800 years so I'm sure some Guirados got in there.).

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by nguirado

..

So, let's not pretend this argument is anything other than what it is, a battle for which narrative is supreme in schools.

Which truly is the point. It shouldn't be a battle. It should be about creating the best environment for our children to learn to think.

It becomes a battleground when one group attempts to push its agenda in an attempt to control what those children learn. This is the case with the situation linked to in the first posting in this thread.

[GA Russell]

ardeegee, when I was a boy in the 50s, there was a popular cartoon called Crusader Rabbit. The same people later made Rocky & Bullwinkle.

When I was in high school in New Orleans, one of our rivals was the St. Aloysius Crusaders.

So you see, this notion that the Crusades were bad is a recent phenomenon.

Kenny, my interpretation of what is going on in Texas is that the vast majority of the population is conservative; in the last (I'm guessing) twenty years liberals have intruded their views into the textbooks, and now the conservatives are fighting back, attempting to restore the viewpoint held by the vast Texas majority.

I definitely don't see this as a conservative minority attempting to impose its views on a liberal majority.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by nguirado

Let's not get obtuse. Most people think hospitals and universities are good things as are helping the poor and protecting human rights.

I do not really get how universities help the poor and protect human rights but that is not so important. Why do you claim hospitals and universities for a specific religion? What is the evidence that we would not have as good or better hospitals or universities without christianity for example?

And from what I remember medical research was held back by religion. For example it was hard to get access to bodies and so on.

[SameOldStory]

Originally Posted by kennyc

It becomes a battleground when one group attempts to push its agenda in an attempt to control what those children learn. This is the case with the situation linked to in the first posting in this thread.

But one side is looking at "you", and asking what right do "you" have it interfere with "our" textbooks. "You" are saying that "their" books are interfering with "your" choice of books because "you" don't like what they say in them. ("You", "Our", and "They" refer to people on this thread in general.)

Maybe ALL religion should be kept out of schools.

After all the First amendment to the US Constitution is about the freedom FROM religion.


This, however, IS history. And, maybe, this should be taught in every grade.




Perhaps not, tolerance does have it's limits. No need to put up with THAT trash.

Those that want to teach creationism say that evolution is just a theory. Evolutionists say that creationism is for fools, and that there is no evidence for it. And I don't care one way or the other.

In the end the majority will decide what is right for everyone. As some on this thread have implied Texas will be re-educated lose its federal school funding unless it joins with those who have a better understanding of how things should be.


It's funny. When I was in my late teens I was referred to as a long haired commie/hippy. Some people outgrow their teachings.