Originally posted by jaguarsky
When in history class they teach that most of the founding fathers owned slaves are they teaching slavery in a positive light.
teach that accurately or in-depth, either. It's mentioned in passing, often with the conclusion being drawn that slave owners were white racists.
Mostly by the students, mind you, but the teachers don't correct it.
How about the massacre of Native American tribes to make the way west
It depends on which school system you're in--you've had to have notable Indians die/resist before it's more than a textbook
footnote. I was taught about Custer's last stand when in Iowa because it wasn't far from where we lived. Down in Louisiana, they give you tickets
to the after school powwow and say nothing.
Does that teach that genocide is a good thing?
Rarely get to Hitler, so I never got to see
how they were going to take overt Genocide.
Just because a subject is discussed does not make the exercise biased one way or the other. Its
How many classes read Huckleberry Fin anymore?
Really, I've been in Iowa and Louisiana school systems, as different as night and day, and what little of these issues are addressed, are minimal.
There is not enough in-depth study of anything, in all honesty, just a bunch of sound bites and the teacher's favorite passions. Oh--and teaching to
Banned book list
But hey, its Georgia. Sorry, I know all Georgians aren't' cretins, but hey, you guys keep letting the mouth breathers get all the press.
. Georgia's in the limelight right
now, but in all honesty, it goes on in every state, across all political, racial, and economic borders.
Originally posted by RedGod
More importantly though....what's so wrong with polygamy?
Those who keep dragging the issue back to this thought are making the issue too
simple. Is there anything about the merits or lack thereof in polygamy that is so imperative to teach a 7th grader? Not really. If we don't want
lifestyles forced on kids, we shouldn't even bring them up and let them figure out what they want. If we want certain lifestyles addressed as being
preferential, then we educate. The problem is that the law is preferential--don't make a corporation out of marriage. Could the purpose of this
paper have been accomplished without bringing up something that is illegal in the US? Absolutely. So, it's rather pointless to make this a 7th grade
Originally posted by FlyingSpaghettiMonster
reply to post by Afterthought
That's it really. This erroneous idea that Islam mentioned in isolation taints an argument, making it propaganda. That Islam automatically needs to
be 'balanced' with information about other faiths, lest our vulnerable children are brainwashed. Would the same be said of a document using an
example from the Bible? I doubt it. Not in the USA at least. Certainly it seems, not in Georgia.
Yet this same thing we MUST NOT DO to Islam
because it taints an argument is EXACTLY how other faith's ideology is treated.
The only counter to this is: "Well, Chriistianity (specifically) had it's turn. We're combating the Christian toehold!" We fine and dandy. The
problem is that if you don't give the same restrictions to 1 that you give to the other is that in the future, since Islam is taught unchecked, or
unbalanced, is that we're ensuring our future generations are not well-rounded in their education. There is nothing right about that. And this is
not even the end issue:
Not that I care if people are Muslims, but if you teach a whole generation that the things they believe are acceptable, culturally, then when it comes
time to question "Why am I here?" they'll have the scientific answer of "You're a cosmic accident; nothing planned you," and the equally
accepted "Allah Created you, and wants you!". In one, you're automatically acceptable and special because you were made acceptable and special.
The other? Doesn't care who you are, and doesn't care when you leave. We're a social creature with a need to belong, and we're impressionable.
People are going to pick up this faith, due to their exposure. Not all, and probably not even most.
Now. Did anyone notice that I gave the same reasoning that's given for keeping Christianity out of the schools? I'm a Christian, I want more in my
faith. I want to be seen as being in an acceptable faith--so why would I deny this of others?