Texas Board of Education at it again Banning textbooks

[Angst]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

Originally Posted by MJK2111
Sorry, but in the USA, we don't "got to censor it." The fact that we allow and encourage contrary ideas is what makes this country great.

don't bother, he's banned

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

And it was Christians who tortured and executed women for "witchcraft" based on unsupported claims by their neighbors in order to grab their property, Christians who slaughtered the residents of this land with warfare and disease, stole their homes, desecrated their holy sites, Christians who enslaved the residents of Africa and brought them here to treat like animals, Christians who insisted that a husband can't possibly rape his wife, Christians who declared that skin color decided who you could marry (and later, that gender decided it), and Christians who created Sundown Towns.

By all means, let's make sure Western Civ covers the impact of Christianity on history.

Just a gentle reminder....The killing fields of Cambodia were run by Secular Humanists...

Shouldn't we put that in those textbooks as well?

[nguirado]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

And it was Christians who tortured and executed women for "witchcraft" based on unsupported claims by their neighbors in order to grab their property, Christians who slaughtered the residents of this land with warfare and disease, stole their homes, desecrated their holy sites, Christians who enslaved the residents of Africa and brought them here to treat like animals, Christians who insisted that a husband can't possibly rape his wife, Christians who declared that skin color decided who you could marry (and later, that gender decided it), and Christians who created Sundown Towns.

By all means, let's make sure Western Civ covers the impact of Christianity on history.

1. Witchcraft: I think most of that violence was popular, meaning that the Church didn't go looking for witches, but the local yahoos who thought people were weird. Like in Africa today, it's the Church protecting people so accused. Like you said, much of it was for ulterior motives.

2. America. Disease happens. I don't think you're going to hold a grudge against Mongolians for bringing the plague. Some Americans were slaughtered, but it was the Church who prevented their enslavement. People get conquered all the time, from the very first people, far before Christianity.

3. Slavery. Yes. I agree that slavery as practiced in the US was especially bad because it was of the chattel type, meaning that they had no human rights.

Slavery was a universal condition. You know that a healthy percentage (maybe the majority) of ancient Greeks were slaves. It was Christians since the earliest times who advocated for the slaves, eventually eliminating it in Europe and, later on, here in the US. Slavery still exists in communist countries. Communists are usually atheists.

4. Racism is definitely against Christianity and from the earliest times, even examples in the Bible (Moses married an African woman), racism is condemned. However, the kind of scientific racism which saw some races as naturally superior is an Enlightenment invention, where people sought to classify people according to perceived abilities and advancement rather than by the fact that they had a soul (read Voltaire, Linnaeus, Kant, and, later, Darwin's views on race). American racism is kind of unique, tied up as it was with the Enlightenment idea, Southern economics, and slavery. I wouldn't use it as an example of the Christian view of race. Or, I don't know of any miscegenation laws in Europe.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by nguirado

4. Racism is definitely against Christianity and from the earliest times, even examples in the Bible (Moses married an African woman), racism is condemned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Just a gentle reminder....The killing fields of Cambodia were run by Secular Humanists...

Shouldn't we put that in those textbooks as well?

Really? What is your source for this very strange claim?

And in what way is it relevant for Texas? Or do you mean that because the US kind of let that genocide continue on purpose it is relevant? (source: Samatha Power: 'A Problem from Hell': America and the Age of Genocide).

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

thank goodness you are not in charge

I wonder if kindlekitten realizes that an ad hominem attack is a reflection of the weakness of one's argument.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

I wonder if kindlekitten realizes that an ad hominem attack is a reflection of the weakness of one's argument.

That is not an ad hominem attack. An ad hominem attack is attacking one's person on an issue unrelated to their stance. Saying "I'm glad that your stances aren't public policy" in no way attacks your person. kk's argument is doing fine, thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[GA Russell]

Res ipsa loquitur.

[ardeegee]

A 15 question sample of the Pew survey mentioned earlier.

http://features.pewforum.org/quiz/us...ous-knowledge/

Got 15 out of 15, but the last one was purely a guess between 2 choices.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Res ipsa loquitur.

Ipso facto sic semper tyrannis quid pro quo, Clarice.

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

A 15 question sample of the Pew survey mentioned earlier.

http://features.pewforum.org/quiz/us...ous-knowledge/

Got 15 out of 15, but the last one was purely a guess between 2 choices.

I got them all right as well, but had to guess a couple times.

Interesting that Atheists/Agnostics scored higher on their sample than any group other than Jewish.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by GlennD

I got them all right as well, but had to guess a couple times.

Interesting that Atheists/Agnostics scored higher on their sample than any group other than Jewish.

I think it is because anyone who has questioned, explored and possibly embraced religions other than the primary christian influenced religions has self educated as and while they questioned all aspects of the religion. many of us have not turned our backs lightly on formalized organized religions.

Jewish schools do a damn fine job in educating their students and exposing them to many different aspects of life. I always regretted not having a Jewish school close enough to send my kids to. they have a superior education reputation

[GlenBarrington]

All these posts and no one has touched what I consider the central issue of the debate. Everyone gets so bogged down in presenting their own prejudices as 'fact', when they've really just presented another form of 'truthieness'. And I find Liberal truthieness to be every bit as offensive as Conservative. Both sides tend to wrap themselves in the smug assumption of their own natural goodness and moral superiority.

Yeah, I'm talkin' about you. But back on my point

Considering how influential the State of Texas is in determining the tenor and tone of textbook publishing in the USA, is it appropriate for non-Texans (or Texans for that matter) to try to influence the direction of Texas' texbook standards? When you toss in the accellerant of incredibly lazy reporters tossing in 15 second sound bites devoid of all context, is it any wonder we have these conflagrations every 2 years?

Why does no one question WHY Texas has so much influence? Population wise, it's a large(ish) state, but certainly not the largest. I simply don't get it.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Just a gentle reminder....The killing fields of Cambodia were run by Secular Humanists...

Shouldn't we put that in those textbooks as well?

The Khmer Rouge was a communist government and suppressed all religions (often by murdering the religious). They were certainly atheists.

But I don't think it's fair to say they were Secular Humanists.

And I don't think their atheism had any influence on their policies, except that it meant they persecuted all religions, instead of just all religions bar one.

[Joebill]

Originally Posted by GlenBarrington

All these posts and no one has touched what I consider the central issue of the debate. Everyone gets so bogged down in presenting their own prejudices as 'fact', when they've really just presented another form of 'truthieness'. And I find Liberal truthieness to be every bit as offensive as Conservative. Both sides tend to wrap themselves in the smug assumption of their own natural goodness and moral superiority.

Yeah, I'm talkin' about you. But back on my point

Considering how influential the State of Texas is in determining the tenor and tone of textbook publishing in the USA, is it appropriate for non-Texans (or Texans for that matter) to try to influence the direction of Texas' texbook standards? When you toss in the accellerant of incredibly lazy reporters tossing in 15 second sound bites devoid of all context, is it any wonder we have these conflagrations every 2 years?

Why does no one question WHY Texas has so much influence? Population wise, it's a large(ish) state, but certainly not the largest. I simply don't get it.

Interesting question. I think it has to do with many southern states simply not wanting to go through the text book selection process, and deciding that they would accept wahtever Texas school board decided and buy those books.

I think many of their standards are more sub-standards. Ignoring uncomfortable facts is not a good standard.

I had to take a school year long Texas History class in high school when I lived there. Years later, I find that much of the 'facts' presented were either myths, lies, our propaganda lies to make Texas look good.

Of course, high school American history classes throughout the US do the same. Particularly our colonial past. When I took American history at university, many students were upset to learn the same class they took in High school was full of outright nonsense.