The Civil Rights Act wasn't all that great. The TX School Board has voted

[MSD]

The people who steer the future of textbooks for our country weren't satisfied with weaseling creationsim into the science curriculum, now they're engaging in outright historical revisionism, including removing Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the 18th and 19th century and portraying McCarthyism in a positive light.

Texas Conservatives Win Vote on Textbook Standards - NYTimes.com

AUSTIN, Tex. — After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.

The vote was 10 to 5 along party lines, with all the Republicans on the board voting for it.

The board, whose members are elected, has influence beyond Texas because the state is one of the largest buyers of textbooks. In the digital age, however, that influence has diminished as technological advances have made it possible for publishers to tailor books to individual states.

In recent years, board members have been locked in an ideological battle between a bloc of conservatives who question Darwin’s theory of evolution and believe the Founding Fathers were guided by Christian principles, and a handful of Democrats and moderate Republicans who have fought to preserve the teaching of Darwinism and the separation of church and state.

Since January, Republicans on the board have passed more than 100 amendments to the 120-page curriculum standards affecting history, sociology and economics courses from elementary to high school. The standards were proposed by a panel of teachers.

“We are adding balance,” said Dr. Don McLeroy, the leader of the conservative faction on the board, after the vote. “History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left.”

Battles over what to put in science and history books have taken place for years in the 20 states where state boards must adopt textbooks, most notably in California and Texas. But rarely in recent history has a group of conservative board members left such a mark on a social studies curriculum.

Efforts by Hispanic board members to include more Latino figures as role models for the state’s large Hispanic population were consistently defeated, prompting one member, Mary Helen Berlanga, to storm out of a meeting late Thursday night, saying, “They can just pretend this is a white America and Hispanics don’t exist.”

“They are going overboard, they are not experts, they are not historians,” she said. “They are rewriting history, not only of Texas but of the United States and the world.”

The curriculum standards will now be published in a state register, opening them up for 30 days of public comment. A final vote will be taken in May, but given the Republican dominance of the board, it is unlikely that many changes will be made.

The standards, reviewed every decade, serve as a template for textbook publishers, who must come before the board next year with drafts of their books. The board’s makeup will have changed by then because Dr. McLeroy lost in a primary this month to a more moderate Republican, and two others — one Democrat and one conservative Republican — announced they were not seeking re-election.

There are seven members of the conservative bloc on the board, but they are often joined by one of the other three Republicans on crucial votes. There were no historians, sociologists or economists consulted at the meetings, though some members of the conservative bloc held themselves out as experts on certain topics.

The conservative members maintain that they are trying to correct what they see as a liberal bias among the teachers who proposed the curriculum. To that end, they made dozens of minor changes aimed at calling into question, among other things, concepts like the separation of church and state and the secular nature of the American Revolution.

“I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state,” said David Bradley, a conservative from Beaumont who works in real estate. “I have $1,000 for the charity of your choice if you can find it in the Constitution.”

They also included a plank to ensure that students learn about “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.”

Dr. McLeroy, a dentist by training, pushed through a change to the teaching of the civil rights movement to ensure that students study the violent philosophy of the Black Panthers in addition to the nonviolent approach of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He also made sure that textbooks would mention the votes in Congress on civil rights legislation, which Republicans supported.

“Republicans need a little credit for that,” he said. “I think it’s going to surprise some students.”

Mr. Bradley won approval for an amendment saying students should study “the unintended consequences” of the Great Society legislation, affirmative action and Title IX legislation. He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians as well as Japanese were interned in the United States during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

Other changes seem aimed at tamping down criticism of the right. Conservatives passed one amendment, for instance, requiring that the history of McCarthyism include “how the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government.” The Venona papers were transcripts of some 3,000 communications between the Soviet Union and its agents in the United States.

Mavis B. Knight, a Democrat from Dallas, introduced an amendment requiring that students study the reasons “the founding fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring the government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion above all others.”

It was defeated on a party-line vote.

After the vote, Ms. Knight said, “The social conservatives have perverted accurate history to fulfill their own agenda.”

In economics, the revisions add Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek, two champions of free-market economic theory, among the usual list of economists to be studied, like Adam Smith, Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes. They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Terri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

In the field of sociology, another conservative member, Barbara Cargill, won passage of an amendment requiring the teaching of “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” in a section on teenage suicide, dating violence, sexuality, drug use and eating disorders.

“The topic of sociology tends to blame society for everything,” Ms. Cargill said.

Even the course on world history did not escape the board’s scalpel.

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

“The Enlightenment was not the only philosophy on which these revolutions were based,” Ms. Dunbar said.

This is Orwellian, to say the least.

I've heard statements from many people that amount to "when your faith is strong enough, facts don't matter." When those facts don't matter, you can emphasize how wonderful McCarthy's delusional witch hunts were. You can teach the downsides of the Civil Rights Act. You can refuse to acknowledge the founding fathers' dedication to religious freedom.

What can we really do when the elected officials who call the shots not only refuse to acknowledge, but actively try to cover up facts that are inconvenient to them?
Are we overdue for national textbook standards and guidelines set by qualified experts in each field of study?

[Jinn]

Miseducation is worse than rape and murder, to me. I can't abide people who deliberately misinform people, whether for religious, political or selfish reasons. Poor education is the first step towards controlling people.

So I'm having a hard time thinking of anything to say about these 'people' other than they really don't deserve the air they breathe.

[SecretMethod70]

Setting aside the fact that Jinn is right about miseducation - they're doing an incredible disservice to children - I'd be happy to allow Texas to raise ignorant kids if it weren't for how much sway they have on national text books.

I realize it won't happen, but it'd be really nice to see textbook publishers take a stand and refuse to participate in Texas' revisionism.

[Pearl Trade]

Why does it have to be an issue of politics and republicans and left wing unbalance, why can't the textbooks just give the straight up facts of what actually happened in history?

As a proud Texan, this is really embarrassing to me.

[ASU2003]

Originally Posted by Pearl Trade

Why does it have to be an issue of politics and republicans and left wing unbalance, why can't the textbooks just give the straight up facts of what actually happened in history?

Because what happened is different for different people.

I can't say it any better than what is here:
Slashdot Comments | Texas Approves Conservative Curriculum

[filtherton]

On a personal level, I don't really see this as a huge deal. Primary school curriculum has always seemed to be mostly propaganda to me. And I hope to never be in a position with my children where their teachers have more credibility with them than I do.

On a more general level, this does seem a bit problematic, but I suspect its effects will be mitigated by parental and 'liberal' teacher input.

[Hektore]

Anybody ever read the book "Lies my teacher told me"? It's well worth the read and shows that manipulating history textbooks is nothing new to the USA.

Go pick up a high school history text book it's nothing but the USA is the greatest country in the world, significant historical figures are demi-god heroes who accomplished unthinkable feats and never made mistakes and the government doesn't make mistakes. Ever.

[Daniel_]

This saddens, but doesn't really shock me.

[Ourcrazymodern?]

I feel obligated to preface this by affirming that I BELIEVE creationism is hogwash:

Prohibiting alternate viewpoints is offensive.
Trying to force others to believe as you do is useless.
Wasting kids' time = wasting their lives.

filtherton's spot-on regarding parental input.

I think the best we can hope for is to provide developing minds the freedom to decide for themselves.

[Cynthetiq]

Originally Posted by ASU2003

Because what happened is different for different people.

I can't say it any better than what is here:
Slashdot Comments | Texas Approves Conservative Curriculum

which comment because there are a lot of comments there.

Apparently, you're of no specific opinion since there are a number of them there.

In the future, I suggest you cut and paste it so that your opinion is better represented if not properly positioned.

[Canine]

There was a quote I read somewhere once: if we teach creationism as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach Storkism as an alternative to reproductive science.

There needs to be a national textbook curriculum established by a panel made up of credible PhD-carrying university professors, with a subpanel for each relevant subject, so the people who know the subjects best can decide what is and isn't part of required education. Invite every qualified person in the country to be a member, and give the curriculum a year or two to be worked out. Everything turns out peachy.

Why should the children in a state with a ridiculous curriculum be at an educational disadvantage versus those in other states?

"The the universe was created by Gohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhdddd." (ten cool points if you recognize the reference)

[MSD]

Originally Posted by Hektore

Anybody ever read the book "Lies my teacher told me"? It's well worth the read and shows that manipulating history textbooks is nothing new to the USA.

Go pick up a high school history text book it's nothing but the USA is the greatest country in the world, significant historical figures are demi-god heroes who accomplished unthinkable feats and never made mistakes and the government doesn't make mistakes. Ever.

That's an excellent book, and was recommended to me in high school by my Junior year history teacher. Great man, dedicated to engaging the students and making them want to learn. I'm sure that most kids in the US learn that the course of WWII was Germany did some stuff, then Pearl Harbor happened, then the Holocaust got bad, then we saved Europe's asses. It's right in there with Reagan worship and apologism that conveniently neglects his support of right-wing dictators and apartheid, plus the myth that he was primarily responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union

Originally Posted by Canine

There was a quote I read somewhere once: if we teach creationism as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach Storkism as an alternative to reproductive science.

The creationism debate is as rational as challenging the chemistry curriculum on the basis that the only true elements are earth, air, fire, and water. It's an outright denial of facts and is unacceptable in a modern education system.

[ASU2003]

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

which comment because there are a lot of comments there.

Apparently, you're of no specific opinion since there are a number of them there.

In the future, I suggest you cut and paste it so that your opinion is better represented if not properly positioned.

"He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future" -1984

I'll pick out some of the better points:

This might not be such a bad thing if it leads students to learn more. For example, in going over materials regarding the Panthers, they might learn that group exercised 2nd ammendment rights. It was the fear of Blacks with guns that led to some of the first (the first?) gun control measures in California. The law was, IIRC, signed into law by... Ronald Reagan!

I'd love to be there when a student raises his hand in class to ask the teacher why a Republican would sign gun control legislation, or presents this fact in an oral report about the Panthers.

Oh, and I wasn't taught this in school. I knew nothing of it until I moved to the Bay Area and learned more about the Panthers simply because I heard they got started in this area. That caused me to become curious and read up on their history. School certainly didn't teach it.

Hearing the adults argue about all this will probably teach the kids in ways that neither side anticipated.

The topic of sociology tends to blame society for everything, Ms. Cargill said.

Wow - are they going to stop blaming images, films, porn, rock music and computer games for these things too?

12:28 - Board member Mavis Knight offers the following amendment: "examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others." Knight points out that students should understand that the Founders believed religious freedom was so important that they insisted on separation of church and state.

12:32 - Board member Cynthia Dunbar argues that the Founders didn't intend for separation of church and state in America. And she's off on a long lecture about why the Founders intended to promote religion. She calls this amendment "not historically accurate."

12:35 - Knight's amendment fails on a straight party-line vote, 5-10. Republicans vote no, Democrats vote yes.

12:38 - Let the word go out here: The Texas State Board of Education today refused to require that students learn that the Constitution prevents the U.S. government from promoting one religion over all others. They voted to lie to students by omission.

As I have just pointed out, the new rules state that Thomas Jefferson's writings were not important to the Revolution. As everyone today knows, he was the primary author of the Deceleration of Independence. But school children taught under the new rules will NOT know that.

It is one thing to disagree with a belief or have a political view and want to support it. It is another thing entirely to re-write history with absolutely no regard for the truth. This is simply shameful.

[Spiritsoar]

Also, this is why I hope to be able to home-school my children.

[dippin]

The irony is that this is basically an extreme relativist position that is being taken by the same party that loves to accuse others of relativism.

[Charlatan]

I've said it before... America is a mess and needs to get its shit together.

[Idyllic]

Hope Ya'll are Ready for this.

All education is relevant; however, parental involvement is key in the development of a child. My kids attend one of the best schools in our state, it so happens this school is 90% African American and I can tell you they focus on black historical figures far more than white, I don’t think they are doing my white kids an injustice, I merely feel my boys are learning from a different angle and I can input and teach as much as I feel necessary to encourage them to study and discover other truths on their own, it’s called HIS STORY for a reason, everybody has a story of their own, respecting each other is the key to progressive knowledge and a progressive society.

I believe in Darwin’s evolution of the species, however, until somebody can prove to me which came first, the chicken or the egg, I will continue to believe that GOD created that which all evolution sprang from.

I understand teaching that the violence approved by and supported under Malcolm X and the Black Panther’s could help our children understand why there were so many violent images that have been used over and over again to show how badly we treated blacks, to continue the victim without cause is a true injustice, it helps to understand that not all blacks followed the passive MLK Jr..

In no way do I feel they are doing a disservice to the blessed Thomas Jefferson who said “I have swore upon the alter of GOD eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man” and this summer they will build across the tidal basin the LARGEST statue ever erected for any figure in the national monument area, that of Martin Luther King Jr. at 30 + feet tall it will be 10 feet taller that any other statue figure in the national monument area. Children will always be taught that Thomas Jefferson was one of the most important contributors’ of the Declaration of Independence, and you can bet as a Bush State, they will keep him close. Note God in his quote above.

As for Sociology, it’s about damn time they start teaching “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” DUH……. that’s all one can say about that.

I love how somebody will label you a social conservative if you do not drink the kool-aid their selling but yet don’t want to tell you what the ingredients are in their own poison. A Little learning is a dangerous thing….. I say learn from every angle, it doesn’t sound as though they are cutting off their noses, just maybe trying to clean out the snot noses of everyone who seems to whine about why it can’t be only their way.

I don’t think that’s what they are doing here. If it were true social conservatism, they would not talk of individual choice at all; it would be closed books, closed legs, closed minds. I’m sure we will here more of this as there is 30 days of public comment. I do believe if these changes are that objectionable by the public it will not be tolerated in our schools. I know I read my kids text books, how bout you all? It would not be the first time I had to go to the school and fight the system and I still Thank God for this great country.

[Martian]

Originally Posted by Idyllic

...until somebody can prove to me which came first, the chicken or the egg, I will continue to believe that GOD created that which all evolution sprang from...

First of all, let's clarify the question. It's not 'the chicken or the egg,' but rather 'the chicken or the chicken egg.' Perhaps a semantic distinction, but given that pretty much all reptiles, arthropods and a even a couple of mammals are oviparous, it's important.

That said, it's fairly simple to determine that the egg must've come first. If we had a perfect fossil record and were able to trace the genetic ancestry of the modern chicken back through time, we would eventually hit a point where we'd find what's called speciation. Things do get a bit hazy here, because evolution is a continual and gradual process; however, at some point along the ancestral chicken line we would be obliged to draw a line where we can say that everything after it is a chicken, and everything prior to it is not. Where this line falls is immaterial, because we're only really concerned with the mechanism. Once we've isolated that population that can be considered chickens from that other population that comprises the pre-chickens, we can then identify the group of individuals that we would consider the first chickens.

Once we've done that, it's very easy to answer your question. An entity is genetically distinct from it's parents from the moment of conception. Once that sperms meets that ovum and the DNA synthesis occurs, we have a zygote that carries DNA which shares common traits with both parents, but is distinct from either. And there's our egg. Now, the chicken has to have hatched from an egg much like this one, and the organisms on the other side of our line are by the definition we've established not chickens, since they're pre-chickens. Therefore, the egg that will hatch into a chicken necessarily predates the chicken itself (they're the same entity in two forms) and the organisms that made the egg are not chickens. The egg came first.

Hope atheism works out for you.

...

Taking my tongue back out of my cheek to address the topic at large...

I hate to be so acerbic about it, but I really agree with Charlatan. Who came up with the idea that facts can be decided by consensus?

[Hektore]

Originally Posted by Martian

First of all, let's clarify the question. It's not 'the chicken or the egg,' but rather 'the chicken or the chicken egg.' Perhaps a semantic distinction, but given that pretty much all reptiles, arthropods and a even a couple of mammals are oviparous, it's important.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Martian

That said, it's fairly simple to determine that the egg must've come first. If we had a perfect fossil record and were able to trace the genetic ancestry of the modern chicken back through time, we would eventually hit a point where we'd find what's called speciation. Things do get a bit hazy here, because evolution is a continual and gradual process; however, at some point along the ancestral chicken line we would be obliged to draw a line where we can say that everything after it is a chicken, and everything prior to it is not. Where this line falls is immaterial, because we're only really concerned with the mechanism. Once we've isolated that population that can be considered chickens from that other population that comprises the pre-chickens, we can then identify the group of individuals that we would consider the first chickens.

Once we've done that, it's very easy to answer your question. An entity is genetically distinct from it's parents from the moment of conception. Once that sperms meets that ovum and the DNA synthesis occurs, we have a zygote that carries DNA which shares common traits with both parents, but is distinct from either. And there's our egg. Now, the chicken has to have hatched from an egg much like this one, and the organisms on the other side of our line are by the definition we've established not chickens, since they're pre-chickens. Therefore, the egg that will hatch into a chicken necessarily predates the chicken itself (they're the same entity in two forms) and the organisms that made the egg are not chickens. The egg came first.

The only thing that makes it possible to draw lines between species are the gaps in the record. If we had a complete record speciation lines would be impossible to draw. Well, not impossible or hazy but completely arbitrary and meaningless. There won't be any speciation 'event' to draw a line at. Every individual progeny that has surviving descendants will have been sufficiently like it's parents to interbreed with the same population (and therefore be considered the same species). If it wasn't, then whom did it breed with? The point at which we have a complete record (or nearly complete) is the point at which we're obliged to stop drawing lines, not draw them arbitrarily.

-------------------------

“We are adding balance,” said Dr. Don McLeroy, the leader of the conservative faction on the board, after the vote. “History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left.”

This quote makes me chuckle - "Well, they put a bunch of bullshit in there that isn't quite true, so we have to as well. "You know, to make it more conservative." Like either property is something we should find in our educational system.

This is what happens when you put politicians, instead of historians, in charge of history.

[Idyllic]

O.k. this wanders off topic…. but you went there.

Martian, Dude, I hope that Kool-aid taste good..... I won't be drinking it, by the way before the zygote can form it does so within... the egg... wherein the sperm must reach, which resides within the female body, which makes me wonder… which came first the female, or the female egg, or the male, did he have an egg, or the sperm, and how did the sperm initially reach the egg, which would be needed to develop the zygote within the egg, which then is no longer an egg but conglomerate mass of cells, which would need to be protected within an environment able to sustain the zygote as it developed, wonder what that creature was, that carried the first evolutionary humanish thing…hmm. Either way you cannot show me physical or chemical science that proves the existence of “life” prior to evolution through the evolutionary process all the way back to, and beyond, when the first “cell” “ate” the first “mitochondria” which then allowed the cell to have an internal energy source for life and all creation or maybe the mitochondria made its own cell around itself…. mitochondrial egg shell, as opposed to oh, I don’t know, some other generator, maybe the chloroplast, but then we would all be green and make oxygen rather than use it.

By the way which of those came first the chloroplast or the mitochondria? I would think the mitochondria (only because they have found life in the deepest regions of the oceans where light does not penetrate, but heat and chemical compounds do and life thrives there) which eventually needed the chloroplast to developed inside its’ square shaped cell as opposed to the round “eggish” shaped cell of animals who need to “breathe” the chloroplasts’ waste product which in turn uses the mitochondrial waste to grow also, both of which required development to begin the "evolution" of life on earth in general. Hey you wouldn’t happen to know where the mitochondria come from would you, maybe like your hypothesis, it just created itself.

We all know life originated in the seas, we all know we came from the chemical goo of earth and its glorious mothering. We all know we developed within this solar system around this star in this galaxy floating in this great ocean of time and space slowly drifting from the central spark of existence. You believe what you may, I'll believe that God is, was, and will always be that spark. That spark of awareness of existence of time and space and all that gifts me with each day and I am thankful for these days, even the ones where I have to worry about what my kids are being taught in school.

I truly worry about what they are being taught outside of school more. I have some control as a parent, PTA, teachers, local government, etc… to make a difference for them within the educational system. It’s what they learn from their friends I have a hard time controlling. But life is that gift that keeps on giving through each proverbial “egg” and it’s proverbial “chicken”, I am simply grateful for KNOWING HOW I GOT HERE, and WHERE I AM GOING (No, not a box, I intend on being cremated, I don’t want to waste a perfectly good piece of the earth). It gives me peace, a kindness of heart, an acceptance of the inevitable with a smile on my face that with hope, all things do have a purpose and that mankind was basically “created” GOOD.

Good God Man, why did you get me started? Thank you though, I enjoyed that.

P.S. I’ll take Americas’ shit over anybody elses, and as a mother and care provider, and educated American, I know life and the worlds’ shit. Do you know why we have such a problem with immigration, it’s not because people want to leave here, it’s because people want to live here. We may stink sometimes, but it still smells like freedom to me.

---------- Post added at 11:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:46 AM ----------

Now back on topic, as for the Republicans and the Civil Right Acts….

Abraham Lincoln was the FIRST Republican President, he WON the Republican Party nomination on his outspoken OPPOSITION to slavery, he introduced measures that resulted in the abolition of slavery, issuing his Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 and promoting the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

Civil Rights Act of 1875, was Republican lead.

Civil Rights Act of 1957 and 1960, were signed into law by Eisenhower, Republican.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 as it passed through by Party
The original House version:
• Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
• Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:
• Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
• Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version:
• Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
• Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:
• Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
• Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
Note how the Republicans consistently voted affirmative by 80% + as where the Democrats voted at less than 70% in comparison.

I believe what they are trying to teach is that you don’t have to be a Democrat or a Republican to agree with change, especially when it’s progressive. I think we are losing the objectives of what we are fighting for in regards to freedom when we constantly label ones belief as Democratic or Republican. Teaching children that it was ALSO the Republicans who wanted and helped in the end of slavery and segregation allows them to understand that you can be Republican and that doesn’t mean you are some puritanical codger. If we continue separating Republicans and Democrats we are going to create a nasty new religion, that’s just what we need, another one of those things, religion, that is. Anyway, with the WWW, youth gets to read and evaluate and study all kinds of new thoughts and all kinds of old ones, the worlds’ biggest problems are how to get this wonderful education available to every child. I, as a Republican, don’t like that everyone thinks I don’t believe in Change, I just don’t believe that because you are not Republican your Change it any better.


democratic (comparative more democratic, superlative most democratic)
1. Pertaining to democracy; favoring democracy, or constructed upon the principle of government by the people.

republican (plural republicans)
1. Someone who favors a republic; an anti-monarchist.
2. (history, politics) Someone who favors social equality and opposes aristocracy and privilege. (I know, I know, you people don’t believe this one, but it is true!)

Aren’t they really saying the same thing, just from different angles, see, that way we can say, after you add the liberals and the independents and those who just don’t care, The Great US of A has got all Her angles covered. What really matters is teaching my kids to be good people and get along with other people and realize how privileged they are to live in this great nation, this great melting pot, founded by the great world of humanity (at least those who believe in freedom), and I’m good to go.

Thanks, this was fun. I really enjoyed researching some of this; I learned something new today, what a blessed day. I Love TFP, it really is a great place to learn, even about yourself.

[dippin]

You do understand that the issue is not that the Texas board of education is replacing democrats with republicans or anything like that, right? That the issue is that they are replacing leaders of the civil rights movement with republicans, right? Even the staunchest republican would recognize that there is a difference between voting for something in congress once it's become a foregone conclusion and leading a march down in the south before it.

Oh, and the semantics of republican vs democrat are kind of irrelevant.

[Martian]

Originally Posted by Hektore

The only thing that makes it possible to draw lines between species are the gaps in the record. If we had a complete record speciation lines would be impossible to draw. Well, not impossible or hazy but completely arbitrary and meaningless. There won't be any speciation 'event' to draw a line at. Every individual progeny that has surviving descendants will have been sufficiently like it's parents to interbreed with the same population (and therefore be considered the same species). If it wasn't, then whom did it breed with? The point at which we have a complete record (or nearly complete) is the point at which we're obliged to stop drawing lines, not draw them arbitrarily.

I really don't want to derail completely, so I promise I'll stop after this. I just thought I ought to address this.

There's an old joke that goes something like this:

An old man approaches an attractive young woman in a bar. "My dear," he says, "could I ask you a hypothetical question?"

"Sure," she replies.

And so the old man asks his question: "Would you have sexual relations with a man for ten million dollars?"

The young lady thinks hard before nodding and saying "yes, I think I would."

"Great!" exclaims the old man, "here's twenty bucks. Let's go out back and you can suck my dick."

The woman is aghast. "Just what type of girl do you think I am?" She stammers.

"My dear," says the old man, "we've already established what type of girl you are. Now we're just haggling on price."

...

The point of this yarn is to illustrate an aspect of thinking that's relevant. The young lady (and presumably the listener) was shocked at the old man's proposition because she's not a whore; this despite having just answered that yes, she would have sex for a sufficiently large amount of money. To the girl's way of thinking (be it right or wrong), having sex for an exorbitant amount of money is not prostitution -- in other words, a whore is really a woman who has sex for too little money. The precise amount that delineates the two, however, is arbitrary and meaningless.

What I'm getting at is that there can easily be drawn a line. Yes, interbreeding with the prior generation is always possible -- however, if we can point to an ancestor of the chicken that is demonstrably not a chicken, then we know that somewhere in between there has to be a divide between chicken and unchicken. The line is necessarily arbitrary, but it's also going to be there at some point, and anything prior to that generation is prechicken. All the gaps do is allow us to be vague about it.

Yeah, it is completely arbitrary. No, there's not a lot of physical basis for it. This is true of a surprising number of things in the world, where not everything lines up into tidy little categories.

So long as we can agree that there is an ancestor of the chicken that is not a chicken, and that the modern day chicken is a chicken, then all we're doing is haggling on price.

...

Idyllic, please don't misunderstand me. I intentionally misinterpreted your post because it was amusing to me to do so -- you posted a hyperbolic statement and I decided to take it literally.

I am not trying to 'convert' you to atheism. As I'm not an atheist myself, it would be a bizarre thing for me to do.

[Plan9]

But we've always been at war with [Iraq/Afghanistan], Winston...

Other than being thoroughly disgusted by this and ashamed that Texas is a part of the US right now... I'm really hoping they at least did a chapter on Paul Bunyan and his blue ox, Babe. Ya know, just to confirm our suspicions. War of Northern Aggression'd! MSD had it right with the 1984 comment.

I guess the thing that gets me is that people are fighting over percentages. Assuming that all the things mentioned in these history books are legit facts (ha! of course not), these guys are saying that their political leanings are underrepresented because the other guy's politically leanings are overrepresented. But nobody wants the more neutral balance that a third party just-the-facts historian might provide; it's a silly tug 'o war with what-happened-here and the people that lose the most are the kids that have to read it, graduate, and go to college. It becomes their symbolic reality.

I'm mostly just talking to myself. This is all very disturbing. Even more so than the delicious egg debate above.

[Idyllic]

Originally Posted by dippin

You do understand that the issue is not that the Texas board of education is replacing democrats with republicans or anything like that, right? That the issue is that they are replacing leaders of the civil rights movement with republicans, right? Even the staunchest republican would recognize that there is a difference between voting for something in congress once it's become a foregone conclusion and leading a march down in the south before it.

Oh, and the semantics of republican vs democrat are kind of irrelevant.

Huh, ok, most of the leaders of the “Civil Rights Acts” movements were Republicans. Prior to Abraham Lincoln and the Civil Rights Act of 1863, 90% of African Americans were slaves, had they tried to lead any form of revolt they would have been killed.

If you are referring to St. Strange but Influence and Important Aquinas, or Sir Intellectual William Blackstone, wow, or perhaps the Great Humanist Calvin, none of them were even Americans, let alone Republicans. They are not replacing anybody with “Republicans” they are merely showing how the “hated” Republicans were instrumental in the Civil Right Movements. As for my most admired Thomas Jefferson, whom I believe was one of the greatest men to grace this earth, he founded the Democratic Party in 1792 as a congressional caucus to fight for the Bill of Rights and against the elitist Federalist Party. In 1798, the "party of the common man" was officially named the Democratic-Republican Party and in 1800 elected Jefferson as the first Democratic President of the United States. “Democratic-Republican Party”. No One can replace Thomas Jefferson, He wrote the Declaration of Independence; He was our third President He is on the nickel for Gods sake. Maybe TX will stop letting their kids carry nickels too.

This entire ruckus started by some editor for The Atlantic and apparently the NY Times, who writes about culture, politics, and social issues. He cut and pieced, just like most people do, to fit his story and make a page zing, apparently it worked. I don’t buy it, I think he’s being indulgent, I want to read these revision myself before I make any negative remarks about what they are changing, and I seriously doubt they are doing our children any injustices, at least no more than the educational system has already done. Still the best in the world, just my opinion.


This was posted on Mensnewsdaily.com: Imaginary Frienders Cut Thomas Jefferson From Texas Curriculum
Sunday, March 14, 2010
By Amy Alkon
Imaginary Frienders Cut Thomas Jefferson From Texas Curriculum
James C. McKinley, Jr. writes for The New York Times about religious conservatives' rather disgusting influence on the Texas social studies curriculum. As a fiscal conservative who's socially libertarian and an atheist, I wish people wouldn't paint all conservatives with the same brush (as they do in the headline and as McKinley does in the piece). An excerpt about the Jefferson bit:
Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term "separation between church and state.")


Like I said, it’s all in what YOU want to believe, until YOU decide to do the research yourself and make your own collage of “facts.”

Replace historical leaders with republicans, Really? That’s what you got from what I posted, Ouch.

Enough with the EGG thing, you still haven't explained to me where Mitochondria came from other than prokaryotes, or better tell me where the archaea originated please, until then, I believe it was God....we can go deeper, atom, nucleus, proton, electron, they all started somewhere, somehow, who's to say it wasn't God, other than the atheists, ya'll are killin' me. I gotta meet the bus, the bus driver won't be happy. Make me laugh.

---------- Post added at 01:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 PM ----------

My husbands gonna kill me, I haven't even done the dishes, I need to turn this thing off and get back to my Wifely duties....... I'll be back! bus bus bus

[dippin]

Originally Posted by Idyllic

Huh, ok, most of the leaders of the “Civil Rights Acts” movements were Republicans. Prior to Abraham Lincoln and the Civil Rights Act of 1863, 90% of African Americans were slaves, had they tried to lead any form of revolt they would have been killed.

If you are referring to St. Strange but Influence and Important Aquinas, or Sir Intellectual William Blackstone, wow, or perhaps the Great Humanist Calvin, none of them were even Americans, let alone Republicans. They are not replacing anybody with “Republicans” they are merely showing how the “hated” Republicans were instrumental in the Civil Right Movements. As for my most admired Thomas Jefferson, whom I believe was one of the greatest men to grace this earth, he founded the Democratic Party in 1792 as a congressional caucus to fight for the Bill of Rights and against the elitist Federalist Party. In 1798, the "party of the common man" was officially named the Democratic-Republican Party and in 1800 elected Jefferson as the first Democratic President of the United States. “Democratic-Republican Party”. No One can replace Thomas Jefferson, He wrote the Declaration of Independence; He was our third President He is on the nickel for Gods sake. Maybe TX will stop letting their kids carry nickels too.

This entire ruckus started by some editor for The Atlantic and apparently the NY Times, who writes about culture, politics, and social issues. He cut and pieced, just like most people do, to fit his story and make a page zing, apparently it worked. I don’t buy it, I think he’s being indulgent, I want to read these revision myself before I make any negative remarks about what they are changing, and I seriously doubt they are doing our children any injustices, at least no more than the educational system has already done. Still the best in the world, just my opinion.


This was posted on Mensnewsdaily.com: Imaginary Frienders Cut Thomas Jefferson From Texas Curriculum
Sunday, March 14, 2010
By Amy Alkon
Imaginary Frienders Cut Thomas Jefferson From Texas Curriculum
James C. McKinley, Jr. writes for The New York Times about religious conservatives' rather disgusting influence on the Texas social studies curriculum. As a fiscal conservative who's socially libertarian and an atheist, I wish people wouldn't paint all conservatives with the same brush (as they do in the headline and as McKinley does in the piece). An excerpt about the Jefferson bit:
Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term "separation between church and state.")


Like I said, it’s all in what YOU want to believe, until YOU decide to do the research yourself and make your own collage of “facts.”

Replace historical leaders with republicans, Really? That’s what you got from what I posted, Ouch.

Enough with the EGG thing, you still haven't explained to me where Mitochondria came from other than prokaryotes, or better tell me where the archaea originated please, until then, I believe it was God....we can go deeper, atom, nucleus, proton, electron, they all started somewhere, somehow, who's to say it wasn't God, other than the atheists, ya'll are killin' me. I gotta meet the bus, the bus driver won't be happy. Make me laugh.

---------- Post added at 01:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 PM ----------

My husbands gonna kill me, I haven't even done the dishes, I need to turn this thing off and get back to my Wifely duties....... I'll be back! bus bus bus

Sure, if we broaden the "civil rights movement" to mean anyone at any time that fought for civil rights, you get plenty of latitude in determining who is and isn't part of it. The issue is what is covered under the specific civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s, where the members of the Texas school board want to remove both Cesar Chaves and Thurgood Marshall in order to play up the role of republican senators.

[Idyllic]

dippin.....
Just To Many Good People To Remember. Hell, I went to school, college even and half these people I had to google, God I love that word…..

[re: Cesar ChaveZ and Thurgood Marshall and don’t forget Neil Armstrong he almost got cut from science…. by: Katherine Haenschen, Sun Sep 20, 2009 at 05:47 PM CDT
remove Cesar Chavez and Thurgood Marshall from the history books, as the Dallas Morning News report Other famous folks potentially soon-to-be-stricken from the historical record, as taught by our Texas textbooks? Carl Sagan, Colin Powell, Nathan Hale, Eugene Debs, John Steinbeck and Mother Teresa. Well, not too many shockers there. Debs was an avowed Socialist, Mother Teresa ministered to the suffering, and Steinbeck wrote about the plight of the poor. Hale fought for American independence against the British, rather than Texan independence from America. Powell has three strikes against him: prominent African American, endorsed Barack Obama, and spoke out against the Bush administration. As for Sagan, his science fiction probably counts as religious blasphemy to some of the SBOE members. You’ll find this at Burnt Orange]

This sounds serious, I hope PTA members and Teachers stood up for what they believed to be right, otherwise there kids learned what they deserved….. (I am a little joking here). next

[Texas May Bar Students from Learning About Cesar Chavez, Thurgood Marshall, By Ben | July 20, 2009 - 4:04pm From the AFL-CIO's blog:
United Farmworkers founder César Chávez is an unfitting role model for students, and former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall is not an appropriate historical figure. So say “expert reviewers” in their report to the Texas State Board of Education, which recommends removing the two U.S. leaders from the social studies curriculum taught to its 4.7 million public school students.
The ranting of these extremists has the potential to turn into mass censorship—Texas is such a mega-purchaser of textbooks that the state’s required curricula drives the content of textbooks produced nationwide.]

What….. they can’t BAR my kids from learning anything, that’s my job, regardless though, I think BARRED is a bit indulgent….. listen at 5th grade you can GOOGLE, love that word, anything you want, how many kids you think care about this stuff. I think there trying to say focus on the Biggies, the ones that may catch their attention, Malcolm, MLK, etc. I’m not saying that Chavez and Marshall aren’t important, they really are, but how big do you want these text books to be. Next they will be complaining about how the weight of these entire books are hurting our kids backs, oh wait, they already have. We are talking about 5th graders, 10 and 11 year old, you’re lucky if you can get them to remember their multiples. Jiminy, save some of the good stuff for when they may be interested. If ever. No, I’m not saying they aren’t important, again; it really depends on what your interests and field of study are. At this age, teach the basics. They can barely see past their own hormones. Oh, and not ALL the “expert reviewers” said that Chavez and Thurgood should not be in the SS books. More...

[Texas Board of Education Wants to Change History, By Lauri Lebo, August 12, 2009
Texas is the second largest purchaser of textbooks in the country. If conservative Christians on the Texas Board of Ed panel prevail in their wish to leave Ann Hutchinson (trouble maker!), Cesar Chavez, and Thurgood Marshall out of the social studies curriculum, all US schools could be affected.
“It is appropriate to teach the right of free speech, but it is also incumbent to teach the responsibilities accompanying free speech; that of accuracy, civility, truth and good taste.” —David Barton
If any question remains about the religious and political motivations of certain members of the Texas Board of Education, one need only read the words of their social studies curriculum experts.]

O.kayyy…. first, love David Barton, second, this part next, it scares me…..

[Rev. Peter Marshall (one of their appointed academic experts), for example, wants to restore America, according to the Web site of his Massachusetts-based ministry, “to its Bible-based foundations through preaching, teaching, and writing on America’s Christian heritage and on Christian discipleship and revival.” He also believes that Hurricane Katrina, Watergate, and the Vietnam War are the result of divine wrath.]

Well, all the sudden, not real fond of the google….. and reallllly not liking the “Rev” eeewww, just icky. He gives people who believe in God a bad name. This is where I revert to the venerable George Washington Carver who said “The out of doors has been to me more and more a great cathedral in which God could be continuously spoken to and heard from." I don’t need anybody to tell me how wacko crazy that “REVEREND” (I use that term loosely) Marshall is, I just need to listen. That’s exactly what these parents are doing, and exactly what the PTA is for. See I can be convinced, a little. This is older news, last summer. Anybody have an update on what WAS accomplished in these books…. I am curious as to how the public debated this. It was big, a lot involved and it seems like some decent decision may have been made, as it is no longer current topic, nice tie in though. Onward we go, kinda.

[12:00 AM CDT on Thursday, July 9, 2009, By TERRENCE STUTZ / The Dallas Morning News: Anne Hutchinson, a New England pioneer and early advocate of women's rights and religious freedom, who was tried and banished from her Puritan colony in Massachusetts because of her nontraditional views. "She was certainly not a significant colonial leader, and didn't accomplish anything except getting herself exiled from the Massachusetts Bay Colony for making trouble," Marshall wrote. "Anne Hutchinson does not belong in the company of these eminent gentlemen," he said, referring to colonial leaders William Penn, Roger Williams and others. Williams later invited Hutchinson to help establish a colony in what became Rhode Island.]

Creepy Rev. Marshall alert, I feel like I need to hear alarms before that man talks! You see, I should be really pissed off that they don’t want to include Anne, I mean come on fellows, give us girls some love…..when do they start talking about the impact women had on the U.S., nevermind. If you think you can do a better job than do it. I still think, mostly (except that creepy Rev guy) they are just trying to keep the kids interested and not overwhelmed, life does that enough. Oh, want to know how I learned about George Washinton Carver, well, my first grader had to do a report for Black History Month. GW Carver is considered obscure and not necessarily taught in most school books today and yet this man was EXTRODINARY, why was he left out?

Weren’t we talking about something that happened, like, yesterday….this is just so fun….

[dippin]

Yes, there are other ways people can learn about things outside of school. However, that is absolutely beside the point.

On top of that, I don't see how this thread benefits from random snark about random news blurbs.

[Ice|Burn]

Can we vote Texas out of the union?

I'm sorry but when a state makes inane and utterly asinine decisions such as this that effect other states... someone some where needs to step in and say no. I'm not saying the Feds, I'm saying someone like the Texas state government. I read this story (from a different source) and was just stripped of my ability to articulate how monumentally stupid this is.


edit: Texas. It's like a whole other country.

[roachboy]

i have to say that i don't understand what the position or positions are that idyllic is arguing here. they seem a little...o what's the word....arbitrary.

help me understand something maybe: on what grounds is it ok for conservative southern baptists, who HAVE to know that their views are to say the least eccentric (literal interpretation of the bible? come on...) to impose those views on the entire school-aged population of the state of texas? is it just a prerogative of power, a kind of fuck you we won thing?

and can you explain to me what possible relation thomas aquinas has to the constitution of the united states?

[SecretMethod70]

Ice|Burn: Unfortunately, that wouldn't accomplish anything because the textbook publishers would still be selling to Texas and it would still represent a large chunk of revenue.

[Charlatan]

Originally Posted by Idyllic

P.S. I’ll take Americas’ shit over anybody elses, and as a mother and care provider, and educated American, I know life and the worlds’ shit. Do you know why we have such a problem with immigration, it’s not because people want to leave here, it’s because people want to live here. We may stink sometimes, but it still smells like freedom to me.

Who's drinking the kool-aid now?

[Idyllic]

response to roachboy, posted 9:24p, sorry guys, I'm still trying to figure this out....

[Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)]

You can find this in the original quote in the initial discussion of this topic.

My point also, how could they possibly replace any American with St. Aquinas, this was were I began to suspect arbitrary involvement, and not mine.

---------- Post added at 10:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:57 PM ----------

Originally Posted by dippin

Yes, there are other ways people can learn about things outside of school. However, that is absolutely beside the point.

On top of that, I don't see how this thread benefits from random snark about random news blurbs.

Isn't that where you found Chavez and Thurgood, random news blurbs. This debate is merely personal opinions. Unless you live in TX and have children enrolled in their school system, all of our responses are hypothetical, when do we discuss true actions. Just because I reference my opinions with information that discuss this issue doesn't change my desire to understand what has happened in TX, and it's relevance is obvious, remember you brought in Chavez and Thurgood.

BTW this topic was started on somebody’s (James C. McKinley, Jr.) snarky and arbitrary interpretation of the happenings recently. If you view my comments as sarcastic, I would say, you’re missing my point. I'm merely attempting to be witty in this discussion. I am not ranting; on the contrary, at times I agree that the situation seems pretty drastic. However, I do not feel all the facts have been properly exposed for me to make a hard decision. McKinley did exactly what you are digging me for, he piecemealed a paper together that supported what HE wanted to portrait, at least I wasn’t that one-sided.

My point was not about learning outside of school, although that's extraordinarily important. My point is that parental involvement is key in our children’s' educational development. I also understand you can't cram all the information you or I find pertinent down a 5th graders throat. These people have to pick and choose who and what they believe to be the most important people and issues for a student at their age, during their time in history, sounds daunting to me. If anything I think our educational system should be applauded, it's not perfect, nor will it ever, but I’ll take, and I think my kids are pretty damn smart.

I really have enjoyed this conversation/debate; I have found it both educational and spirited. I sincerely apologize if I have offended you, that was not my intent. In the end, the question was, “What can we do?” The answer is; get involved. You can make a difference in your child’s education both in and out of school, I have.

Now that I feel as though you have slapped me squarely on my hand for not conforming properly, are we done? Now, that was a snide remark.

---------- Post added at 10:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:05 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Who's drinking the kool-aid now?

If being an American, being proud of my country and grateful to live in this amazing nation means I’m drinking the kool-aid, just go ahead and pour me another cup. Tastes like Yuengling to me.

[SecretMethod70]

Originally Posted by Idyllic

If being an American, being proud of my country and grateful to live in this amazing nation means I’m drinking the kool-aid, just go ahead and pour me another cup. Tastes like Yuengling to me.

Being proud of your country is different from being nationalist. The fact is, there are a lot of places in the world that are just as nice to live in as America. Many of them are arguably better. Recognizing that and being proud of your country are not mutually exclusive. I think pretty highly of America, but I don't delude myself into thinking it's the best, or that the best can even be identified.

[dippin]

Originally Posted by Idyllic

response to roachboy, posted 9:24p, sorry guys, I'm still trying to figure this out....

[Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)]

You can find this in the original quote in the initial discussion of this topic.

My point also, how could they possibly replace any American with St. Aquinas, this was were I began to suspect arbitrary involvement, and not mine.

---------- Post added at 10:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:57 PM ----------




Isn't that where you found Chavez and Thurgood, random news blurbs. This debate is merely personal opinions. Unless you live in TX and have children enrolled in their school system, all of our responses are hypothetical, when do we discuss true actions. Just because I reference my opinions with information that discuss this issue doesn't change my desire to understand what has happened in TX, and it's relevance is obvious, remember you brought in Chavez and Thurgood.

BTW this topic was started on somebody’s (James C. McKinley, Jr.) snarky and arbitrary interpretation of the happenings recently. If you view my comments as sarcastic, I would say, you’re missing my point. I'm merely attempting to be witty in this discussion. I am not ranting; on the contrary, at times I agree that the situation seems pretty drastic. However, I do not feel all the facts have been properly exposed for me to make a hard decision. McKinley did exactly what you are digging me for, he piecemealed a paper together that supported what HE wanted to portrait, at least I wasn’t that one-sided.

My point was not about learning outside of school, although that's extraordinarily important. My point is that parental involvement is key in our children’s' educational development. I also understand you can't cram all the information you or I find pertinent down a 5th graders throat. These people have to pick and choose who and what they believe to be the most important people and issues for a student at their age, during their time in history, sounds daunting to me. If anything I think our educational system should be applauded, it's not perfect, nor will it ever, but I’ll take, and I think my kids are pretty damn smart.

I really have enjoyed this conversation/debate; I have found it both educational and spirited. I sincerely apologize if I have offended you, that was not my intent. In the end, the question was, “What can we do?” The answer is; get involved. You can make a difference in your child’s education both in and out of school, I have.

Now that I feel as though you have slapped me squarely on my hand for not conforming properly, are we done? Now, that was a snide remark.

---------- Post added at 10:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:05 PM ----------



If being an American, being proud of my country and grateful to live in this amazing nation means I’m drinking the kool-aid, just go ahead and pour me another cup. Tastes like Yuengling to me.

Sure, yeah, random news blurbs discussed the removal of Chaves and Marshall. The point was that you didn't actually address the issue, choosing instead to nitpick or criticize the ways these random news blurbs talked about the issue. It is not about conforming, but if we are discussing Chaves and Marshall and their exclusion from curricula, it is beside the point if random news blurb used "bar" or "remove" in their article.

And, again, the point is not to enforce conformity, but I've yet to understand the point you are trying to make or the position you are trying to defend. If you believe the text posted on the original post was snarky and arbitrary, you can always provide an altering viewpoint.

[Idyllic]

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

Being proud of your country is different from being nationalist. The fact is, there are a lot of places in the world that are just as nice to live in as America. Many of them are arguably better. Recognizing that and being proud of your country are not mutually exclusive. I think pretty highly of America, but I don't delude myself into thinking it's the best, or that the best can even be identified.

More of a patriot than a nationalist, never said I thought being an American was better just said I was proud to be one. I absolutely believe other nations are great, I would have to be pretty narrow not to recognize the value of our world. I'm just happy to be in America, to be an American, it really is that simply, I imply no superiority. I've always wonder why there is that assumption made when one says how proud they are to be American, that its a comparison to other nations. I've never lived outside of America, My husband has, 23 years in the USAF, retired, he lived all over, says there is no place he would rather live than in America, I wouldn't know. It would be unfair of me to judge the unknown.

---------- Post added at 12:12 AM ---------- Previous post was Yesterday at 11:12 PM ----------

Originally Posted by dippin

Sure, yeah, random news blurbs discussed the removal of Chaves and Marshall. The point was that you didn't actually address the issue, choosing instead to nitpick or criticize the ways these random news blurbs talked about the issue. It is not about conforming, but if we are discussing Chaves and Marshall and their exclusion from curricula, it is beside the point if random news blurb used "bar" or "remove" in their article.

And, again, the point is not to enforce conformity, but I've yet to understand the point you are trying to make or the position you are trying to defend. If you believe the text posted on the original post was snarky and arbitrary, you can always provide an altering viewpoint.

My point was, has been and will always be, truth is in perspective. Which side are you on, because that is the angle you will see the game from. The quote within the initial post was skewed to show only one side of the issues, those were the ones McKinley wanted you to believe, the ones he found to be the most inflammatory, the ones to make you think, How Awful TX must be.... I say that wasn't the entire reality of what was happening. I believe in humanity's basic good, but, if it is all true, then we must do something about it. It would be unamerican to allow our children a skewed view of their nation and of its glorious and painful past. So, when you ready to hear the other side:
tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=7660
Welcome to the Texas Education Agency
News Releases 2010[/url]

TEA News Releases 2010

Official press releases issued by the Texas Education Agency this year are listed below.

Social studies standards, educator preparation accreditation program win State Board's backing (3-12-2010)

Texas Permanent School Fund realizes 25 percent return in 2009 (3-12-2010)

Ninety-seven percent of Texas districts and charters receive full accreditation status (3-10-2010)

Fox inaccurately reporting State Board of Education action (3-10-2010)

Texas alone at the top; only state to meet all college and career readiness measures (3-1-2010)

Texas College and Career Readiness standards more comprehensive than national standards (2-23-2010)

Texas recognized for strong performance on AP exams (2-10-2010)

Associate commissioner to focus on rule review, school improvement, and federal programs (2-5-2010)

Texas student special guest at State of the Union (1-27-2010)

STAAR to replace TAKS tests (1-26-2010)

SBOE gives final approval to graduation plan changes (1-19-2010)

Race to the Top transcript (1-14-2010)

State's curriculum standards earn 'A' in national report (1-14-2010)

You may take and read this, join the committee, and still it will be skewed by the way you see it. It will be skewed by the way I see it. Nobody is one hundred percent happy with exactly what they get, it's all about give and take. Compromise for what is the best for our children. Everybody is screaming they haven't and yet they are not even done. Perspective, make up you own. I don't trust just McKinley to give me all the truths.

[Ice|Burn]

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

Ice|Burn: Unfortunately, that wouldn't accomplish anything because the textbook publishers would still be selling to Texas and it would still represent a large chunk of revenue.

This whole situation might be resolved by the Feds anyway. I just learned tonight that they are planning on having some kind of national criteria on education (math, science, hopefully history). If that's the case the publishers would have to create text books based upon that national standard as opposed to what one large district decides to do. *crosses fingers that this insanity is stopped*

[dippin]

I'm sorry, but when a series of changes are made and approved along along certain lines, with one group voting for something consistently over the others, this isn't about compromise. If you think that the news in the OP was biased, there's a number of alternative sources. And whatever the point of view of the author of the original post, the changes remain.

---------- Post added at 08:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:53 PM ----------

by the way

The List of Shame in Texas Texas Freedom Network

[SecretMethod70]

I'm on the fence regarding national standards. Would you have really wanted 8 years of the Bush administration in charge of national education standards? Standards - at whatever level - need to come from, by law, established experts in the field.

[Baraka_Guru]

It would seem that Texas is slowly becoming the mecca for the upcoming American neopuritan revolution. Of course, I hope I'm wrong.

[Bill O'Rights]

Originally Posted by Ice|Burn

Texas. It's like a whole other country.

It WAS.
Twice.
For 10 years, beginning in 1836, the Republic of Texas was an independent state bordering Mexico and the United States. From 1861 to 1865 Texas was part of the Confederate States of America, a “whole other country”.

Originally Posted by Ice|Burn

Can we vote Texas out of the union?

No. over 360,000 men fought and died to keep Texas in the United States. They won.

Originally Posted by Ice|Burn

I'm sorry but when a state makes inane and utterly asinine decisions such as this that effect other states... someone some where needs to step in and say no..

Other men thought the same thing once. Certain states in the south, felt that northern states were making inane and utterly asinine decisions that affected them. Over 258,000 of them died trying to step in and say no. They lost.