It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Christian right aims to change history lessons in Texas schools

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
AHA!
There would have been no USA if people didn't BELIEVE in God. That's true.

But there would be no kids putting teeth under their pillows if people didn't BELIEVE in the tooth fairy.

Doesn't mean either is real.

It's a true statement. But God's still probably not real.


Edit- They have to teach that. Otherwise kids wouldn't know how the USA came to be. "One group of stupid people thought their religion was better than another so they came here, even though it was really the same religion, but their belief in God was what made the difference. Sort of."

You can't just tell kids that they came over here so eventually people could tote guns and drink and eat burgers and apple pie.

"One of the panel, David Barton, founder of a Christian heritage group called WallBuilders, argues that the curriculum should reflect the fact that the US Constitution was written with God in mind including that "there is a fixed moral law derived from God and nature", that "there is a creator" and "government exists primarily to protect God-given rights to every individual"."

It's true. I mean, look at our country. If religion didn't exist, we wouldn't be who we are. Probably for the better. But we're "united under God" apparently, even though I don't believe in that sort of thing. We're united in the idea of him. Like it or not. I happen not to.

[edit on 7/23/2009 by ravenshadow13]




posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogerstigers


Honestly, this ticks me off. A while ago, there was a discussion on one thread about lines in the sand that we all have. This is one of them. If they want to start blatently teaching revisionist history to support the Christian cause I will take action.

Heh, as I am writing this, my daughter is telling me about the staff at her school giving her flack for not saying the pledge of allegiance. I told her next time they give her trouble, have them talk to me.

What the hell is this country coming to...*sigh*

www.facebook.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


I agree completely. This is rediculous. I personally think no religion of any kind should be in public schools.

Peace

[edit on 23-7-2009 by jeasahtheseer]



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
This is from Facebook, and is therefore more of a blog than a news report. Blogs are notorious for giving one (sometimes slanted) side of an argument.

That said, I am firmly against the teaching of religion in schools. Religious studies are the realm of the parents and the respective religious leaders. Not the realm of a public school system. However, on a closer inspection, there may be more to this story than meets the eye. From the article, I find this:

Members of a panel of experts appointed by the board to revise the state's history curriculum, who include a Christian fundamentalist preacher who says he is fighting a war for America's moral soul, want lessons to emphasise the part played by Christianity in the founding of the US and that religion is a civic virtue.

Well, guess what? While not all immigrants in the days of colonization were Christian, an appreciable number definitely were, and founded their colonies in the search for religious freedom. In that respect, Christianity did indeed play a part in the founding of the country, and that fact should indeed be taught. Anything less is itself 'revisionist' history.

Farther down, things turn a tad troubling, however. Again, from the article:

One of the panel, David Barton, founder of a Christian heritage group called WallBuilders, argues that the curriculum should reflect the fact that the US Constitution was written with God in mind including that "there is a fixed moral law derived from God and nature", that "there is a creator" and "government exists primarily to protect God-given rights to every individual".

This is troubling to me because it indicates a potential focus on religious values rather than religious circumstance. Furthermore, it seems to me personally to indicate some preference to the God of Abraham by implication. But wait, there's more:

Another of the experts is Reverend Peter Marshall, who heads his own Christian ministry and preaches that Hurricane Katrina and defeat in the Vietnam war were God's punishment for sexual promiscuity and tolerance of homosexuals. Marshall recommended that children be taught about the "motivational role" of the Bible and Christianity in establishing the original colonies that later became the US.

Now we may have a serious problem, as this indicates the interjection of specific (incorrect IMO) religious fundamentalist ideals into a curriculum that by definition is concerned with factual history rather than present-day interpretation of historical events.

In short, as far as I see, this could swing either way. If the article is factual and accurately represents the situation, then I would agree that this is over the top and should be thrown out (and no doubt will be by the applicable court systems). But if this article, as with most Facebook blogs I have seen, is a one-sided misrepresentation of the case, then it is completely possible that this is an attempt to correct already-revised history taught in the name of Political Correctness.

Yes, religious beliefs played a large part in the founding of the nation. Yes, religious beliefs have and continue to have a large part in the operation of our nation. Yes, these facts should be taught in schools as much as any historical fact. But no, religious teachings themselves have no place in public school. I think we should differentiate that difference clearly when having such a debate.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
There is more to this than teaching that our country was founded on Judeao-Christian ethics. This is revisonist history that concentrates on the Progressive movement, skips over the Korean war, and minimizes the 50 year cold war, all of which influences our government, our attitudes and our decisions today. Like it or not our government is founded on these ethics, yet the authors that are writing these books want to emphasize Islam over Christianity and Judism.
In other words, the liberals want to revise American history. If your child doesn't want to say the words "under God" in the Pledge, that's fine. However, if you don't believe in God, what's the difference. If you don't believe, then they are just two words that have no meaning to you whatsover.
Let's teach history the way it happened. Let's teach the lessons learned from our mistakes as well as our victories. But we must not ignore our past lest we be doomed to repeat it.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
I come from Quebec where a little over 10 years ago, the Montreal school system was still Catholic.

When I was still in high school, in order to obtain our high school diploma, religious classes were an obligation, if one failed religion, one didn't get their high school diploma... how messed up is that?

What did I learn from all of this? I learn I could memorize line for line and parrot what was asked from me on the next religion exam, didn't mean that it gave me a greater sense of moral ethics knowing that Jesus changed water to wine, multiplied bread and fish, was crucified and resurrected.

Moral and ethics classes is a good thing but to impose one's religion in the classroom is just plain wrong. For me, the way I saw those religious classes was just just one big pain in the arse like mathematics and chemistry. If there were to be religion teaching in public schools, it should be about teaching all religions out there in the world to promote a better understanding between humans on the big blue ball we live on



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikerussellus
And not to get off topic, but abortions would probably decrease if we started teaching morals and values. Respect for life, any and all life.


This isn't addressed solely to you, it just was a convenient place to quote:

Firstly: whose morals and values?
Yours or mine?

Secondly I am a hypocrite as I agree with that respect for all life yet I eat meat wantonly and even waste a lot of it. I contest that most of us here are like this.
Intensive farming practices quite often shew no respect for animal welfare, putting $$ before welfare (pig stalls, warehousing and battery farms etc).

I really don't think religion has much to do with the perceived decline in values. I think our access to information has become greater and with that our knowledge about things that previously we wouldn't have known. I consider religion to be an inhibitor, so I reiterate: Whose morals and values, yours or mine?


Originally posted by mikerussellusI'd better get off my soapbox, my bad. . . -



Ditto


[edit on 23-7-2009 by aorAki]



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 
You state God is probably not real. Can you state the proof of your probablity that God does not exist?



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
It is my opinion that god(s) is/are not real.

I have neither seen nor experienced anything that has made me even think it matters.

[edit on 23-7-2009 by aorAki]



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 
Agree! There is no need to teach revisionist history. Teach the plain truth. (If they teach the real truth about FDR, they will see that he was a traitor to his class, believing that socialism was better that democracy. See the parallel?)
I don't want to see fundamentalist christianity taught in schools. Neither do I want fundamentalist Islam taught. I want to see the basic morality on which this country was founded taught, in the context of the time. Christiantiy and Deism were the primary forms of thought when the Declaration and the Constitution were written. In my opinion, those are the two most perfect documents that have ever been written, and I have studied both extensively.
I simply want American History to be taught accurately. Things changed in the 60's, the 70's and things, in my never to be humble opinion, have been going down hill ever since.
Let's teach it the way it happened, not the way we wish it had happened.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by infolurker


Cough... OK, I am NOT for teaching religion in schools but the pledge of allegiance your against!

Yeah, what is this country coming to...


"Under God' was not in the original pledge anyway.
"I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Everything was else was added in 1953.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   

One of the panel, David Barton, founder of a Christian heritage group called WallBuilders, argues that the curriculum should reflect the fact that the US Constitution was written with God in mind including that "there is a fixed moral law derived from God and nature", that "there is a creator" and "government exists primarily to protect God-given rights to every individual".

www.guardian.co.uk...


This much is absolutely true.

See for yourselves.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

www.earlyamerica.com...



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Ministries Of Truth

Controversies like these amount to nothing more nor less than people with one set of beliefs challenging people with different beliefs.

The argument that only one set of beliefs should be officially recognized and taught to children is the underlying moral hazard of public schools, and a ready foundation for the imposition of "official truth" sanctioned by government.

George Orwell was a prophet.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Please try clicking on the link before making a judgement on it. I admit, I incorectly pasted the lik. It was referenced on facebook, but the link actually redirects to a British newspaper. I will fix the link as soon as I submit this.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by kettlebellysmith
There is more to this than teaching that our country was founded on Judeao-Christian ethics. This is revisonist history that concentrates on the Progressive movement, skips over the Korean war, and minimizes the 50 year cold war, all of which influences our government, our attitudes and our decisions today. Like it or not our government is founded on these ethics, yet the authors that are writing these books want to emphasize Islam over Christianity and Judism.
In other words, the liberals want to revise American history. If your child doesn't want to say the words "under God" in the Pledge, that's fine. However, if you don't believe in God, what's the difference. If you don't believe, then they are just two words that have no meaning to you whatsover.
Let's teach history the way it happened. Let's teach the lessons learned from our mistakes as well as our victories. But we must not ignore our past lest we be doomed to repeat it.


I feel a rant coming on...

[rant]
You know I just love how the conservatives blame everything on the liberals and the liberals blame everything on the conservatives. It's both sides of the camp and they are both just as guilty of making history read whatever the hell they want it to read just as soon as they have enough votes.

You want to tell the truth about history and remove the revisions? I am 100% for that.

Let's remove the part where the USA was a innocent actor in the events leading up to Pearl Harbor. We issues economic sanctions against Japan because of their invasion of China. Pearl Harbor was retaliation. Maybe the sanctions were valid, who knows, but they certainly don't explain that to kids in high school.

Let's start explaining to kids about the AMERICAN concentration camps on US soil where we rounded up people of Japanese ancestry during WWII and "detained" them until the end of the war. They don't teach that in history class.

I could go on and on. People try to white wash history. It's been that way ever since apes started talking. I guess I should be relieved to see that people are trying to do it openly instead of through backdoor shenanigans.

As for morality, well, take a close look all you Christians. Our leading founding fathers were DIESTS! They believed in A god, not YOUR god. In fact many of them were totally disgusted with Christianity and thought of it as a despicable slave religion that caused much more harm than good throughout history.

G O D does not spell Christianity.

[/rant]

Ok, that's out of my system. Actually thanks to all of ya'll for participating in this thread. It's good to see people of all religions have a healthy respect for the sanctity of knowledge without theological slants.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Honestly I haven't heard much about this down here. But remember, down here in Texas its set up so that if you have something to say then you can do it. This group is going to be heard by the education board, but that doesn't mean this will come to pass.

I would be highly surprised to see it pass at least...

[edit on 23-7-2009 by XTexan]



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by kettlebellysmith
 


You can go check out the numerous religious threads where I've explained my belief system. Er, logic system. Whichever.


But this thread isn't about that. Neither is the article or the debate. Religion doesn't matter in this case, this country was just founded on it.

As long as it's a historical context is fine. I'm not about the flood this thread with my personal beliefs and I'd be disappointed to see that happen to it from other members.



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by kettlebellysmith
 


As long as it's a historical context is fine. I'm not about the flood this thread with my personal beliefs and I'd be disappointed to see that happen to it from other members.


Good point well taken. I was actually irked about other things and I think I took it out on the thread..lol

The only challenge with allowing a "christian take" on history is that it historically has never stopped there. I guess it's really just trepidition about giving and inch and losing a mile that drives these debates.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by mikerussellus
 


By "moral decay" what do you mean, and how in the world do you think denying a child information and instead filling their heads with mystic superstition will make them more to your liking?

Apparently humanity has been in a state of "moral decay" for as long as humanity has existed, because the old farts of one generation are never happy with the young punks of the next one.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
This is nothing new as you can see here.

Help Chris Rodda Fight Fake History

There is more on the front page at www.talk2action.org...



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by DaisyAnne
 


Are you crazy? Why would we do that? Then everyone would learn the awful truth..No religion is better than the other..we can't have that!

Bah imagine that, people, Americans thinking for themselves rather than saying "I wonder what my pastor says". Preposterous i say!



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join