Texas Board of Education meeting -- Jesus Christ, why do we have to listen to these clowns?

There was only one real cause, and it’s dishonest to try to portray it any other way.

They also want to change the phrase “slave trade” to “Atlantic Triangular Trade.” It’s bullshit. They’re lying and hiding history. That’s what the Soviet Union did, what China does, what North Korea does, not what America does.

This was obviouly phrase facetiously, but in point of fact, they did try to add a clause saying that evolution was unp[rpven and that the wizard hypothesis should be taught along side it.

It is correct. It’s in the article I linked.

All are essentially correct. The attempt to whitewash slavery is especially troublesome in my mind.

I love the echo of Pastor Martin Niemoeller in that. :slight_smile: Thumbs up to you for doing so.

And maybe that answers the question. Figthing ignorance starts with combatting the spreading of falsehoods in the name of a perversian of Christianity to innocent Texas schoolkids. No wonder it’s taking longer than we thought!

I don’t believe that any public school textbooks teach that there was “only one real cause”, but I’m open to changing my mind about that if you’ve got a cite. I certainly learned the various causes when I was in school.

Facetious or not, it wasn’t even close to being correct.

The article says:

I don’t know how you derive “They changed the fact that McCarthy made stuff up and destroyed people’s careers for his own political gain” from that incredibly vague phrase.

Only if “essentially correct” means one is completely wrong, one is arguably wrong, and the other is unclear.

DtC: FYI, here in CA, grade 8 social studies is devoted to American History. Here’s what the state curriculum standards say about the Civil War:

Emphasis added.

Now, I’m not going to engage in another endless “debate” with you as defend any and all wild claims, whether correct or not, that support your OP. Suffice it to say that the changes they are contemplating in Texas are not good, but it doesn’t serve the effort of fighting ignorance to grossly mischaracterize them. It only serves to re-enforce the victims-of-the-liberals attitude that these conservative Texas project.

The state determines the textbook, the school district generally specifies the curriculum, and the teacher actually interprets and implements that curriculum.

I’m not so worried that the districts and teachers will blindly and stupidly go along with those retards on the Board of Education about this- sure, they’ll use that textbook but decent teachers (the vast majority, IMO) will point out, gloss over, or ignore the dipshit parts. Or just not use the book at all- I had plenty of teachers that did that in the social studies.

Not everyone in Texas who’s conservative is an idiot; there are a LOT of us who are getting pretty damned sick of Rick Perry, his imperial governorship, and his transparent political motivation and utter disregard for common sense when appointing people to various commissions and boards.

That aside, the board of education members are elected from single member districts; the problem is that we run into a situation where a lot of the less big-city districts are populated by very socially conservative people, and they tend to think that voting for a democrat is endorsing homosexuality, free love, abortion, etc… and to them, that’s worse than voting for some wingnut who’s against real science, unbiased history and revisionism.

I didn’t say that, Euphonious Polemic did, and he was clearly being facetious (though accurate as to core motivations).

No, all are essentially correct. They want to whitewash sl;avery, turn Joe Mccarthy and Jefferson Davis into heroes, and you know damn well they want to remove evolution from the science curriculum and would do it altogether if they legally could.

Hell, they just started their their meting yesterday with a prayer calling for America to “return” to being a full “Christian land governed by Christian principles.”

There was only one real cause of the Civil War, and even if you want to add other factors, slavery still belongs at the top of the list. Putting it as the “third most important” is a lie. Changing the phrase “slave trade” to “Atlantic Triangular Trade” is just as dishonest and trying to put Jefferson Davis on an equal footing with Abraham Lincoln is not only dishonest, but flat out racially hostile and insulting.

The attempt to remove Thomas Jefferson from textbooks is another stunningly disgraceful and blatantly political thing to do.

Your attitude about teaching children false and politicized history is puzzling given the mission of this board (not to mention the ostensible mission of THAT board).

So, he was being facetious in 2 of his 3 claims? Then it’s an even weaker argument than I thought.

Again, you allow any claim to be made, under the rubric of facetiousness, as long as it supports your thesis. Well, I’ll just claim, facetiously, that you are an over-acting liberal nut job, and say that I’m “essentially correct”.

I’m agin’ it. I already said so. I just can’t get all worked up about it, as I think it’s a minor part of a curriculum that most of these kids are going to forget no matter what we teach. Just stating my own opinion. You’re free to yours.

You are not free, however, to mischaracterize what is going on.

I’m confused…
The evil,conservative Texans want to list slavery as only the third,least-important cause of the Civil War.
But good,liberal California–hippie-lovin’, gay-lovin’ California— doesn’t even mention the word slavery at all in its list of the seven important issues to be studied?

That’s just an outline, so it’s not surprising that they don’t list all the details. I only used that cite to show **DtC **that his view is not the one that is generally taught in schools now.

Which lord?

As a Jew, are there any apologists out there who can tell me not to be offended, or even threatened, by this?

“…a Christian land governed by Christian principles…”

Gah!!! That such people are deciding the education of our children!

Dio, I know you don’t like it when facts get in the way of your rants, but schools have been teaching students about the Triangle Trade for decades. And unless you just say “Triangle Trade!” and leave it at that, you have to explain who was being traded. So I very much doubt Texas can hide the existence of slavery in America’s past.

That was not a list of standards. Mace only wanted to use it show that other states list multiple “causes” for the Civil War, even though, in reality, there was only one.

No, he was being facetious in how he phrased all three of them. He was riffing on the “first they came for…” poem. Nitpicking the literal semantics is missing the point.

Other states have not been forbidden to use the phrase “slave trade.”

That’s the way learned it. And I didn’t leave school thinking they were trading triangles. I’ll give two 90s for an isosceles!

Texas teachers are “forbidden” to use that phrase?

Under these new standards, yes, they would be.

I know what he was riffing on, and I was criticizing the content, not the semantics.

Can we have a cite to back that up?

Never mind. I’ll just quote from the link in your OP:

Which further backs up my overall lack of outrage.

Well, yeah. Which is why – coming all the way back around to the OP – we should of course have no problem with listing the President’s name as “Barack Hussein Obama”, right? We certainly don’t anyone accusing us of hiding anything.