I snipped everything else because I agree with it. On this one all I have to say is, “It takes two to tango.”
Schools should not be dedicated to showing that “Christianity has historically been a force for good”, or the like. Schools should be dedicated to the truth. If the truth turns out to be that Christianity has been a force for good, then that should be taught, but not because it’s pro-Christian, but because it’s true. Likewise, in those cases where Christianity has not been a force for good, that should be taught, too. Frankly, promoting Christianity without regard for truth is worship, not of God or Christ, but of a set of cultural ideals, and worship of a culture is something that true Christians really should be up in arms against.
I couldn’t agree more. Especially when it comes to the founding. Let kids learn, for instance, what Jefferson really believed, and not let them be stuck with the cartoonish icon of him being an atheist or anti-religionist, or even a secularist. It’s simply a lie that has been—and is—perpetuated by many on the left.
(For the record, I don’t practice any religion.)
"Texas Edition - Now with More Ignorance!! "
[QUOTE]
-The Bible was also used to condemn slavery.
-So did the Union and also while they were traitors the CSA was not an evil Proto-Nazi country.
-The benefits of civilization teh missionaries brought and them attempting to protect the Indians from violence and removals.
-Perhaps mildly arrogant but it was the ancestor of the ideology of American Exceptionalism.
-True but very minor compared to the discrimnation in Europe. All our Founding Fathers were tolerant of Catholics and Jews.
-True
-Many have neo-pagan underpinnings nowadays (mostly the neo-Nazis not the KKK remnants). Also the Christian underpinnings of civil rights movements.
-Outside of gay marriage and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell very minor.
-Well both sides of the culture wars are to blame. The hippies started it by attacking virtually every American value.
No one is arguing that religion was not a part of the formation of the United States. It is one aspect of many and certainly needs to be taught and, at least when I was in high school in the 80’s, was taught. They also taught me about the Reformation and the Crusades and many other things that were heavy with religion as a force of those times.
I have zero problem with any of that.
What the guys in the OP are on about is quite different though. Perhaps you missed this part I posted earlier: “The curriculum, they say, should clearly present Christianity as an overall force for good – and a key reason for American exceptionalism, the notion that the country stands above and apart.”
I’m surprised you cannot see the difference.
Nonsense. This is moral relativism at it most putrid – not to mention simply absurd, e.g.:
You’re right, as Curtis LeMay points out the culture war is generally a creation of the Left.
This is the part that is so baffling. The United States was not exceptional in being a nation of Christians. We broke off from Christian England. All the colonisers of the new world were Christian nations. WTF are they trying to teach here? Do they want us to teach that it was OK to steal land from the Indians because they weren’t Christians? I mean seriously, WTF are they trying to say?
I see mswas wasn’t actually referring to the formation of the U.S. where churches were supposedly so pivotal (i.e. events leading up to the Revolutionary breakaway from England), but to history in general. I was having trouble with the concept that religion was essential to the founding of the nation.
This sounds a lot like the weaselly “teach the controversy” proposal regarding the teaching of evolution, which emanates from creationists and is purely an attempt to sneak religious doctrine into science classes.
I think you can have a consensus among good historians as to what led to specific events, without dooming history teaching to “well, one side says this, and another says this, so who knows what really happened?” The concept that “it’s our turn to slant things now” is more than “troubling”.
It’s reprehensible and disgusting.
Wow. I haven’t been called an ideologue in years. It feels weird.
The point I was attempting to make is the one Whack-A-Mole makes about four posts up. The religious views of the founding groups are definitely worth teaching and I have no objection to having been taught them. The approach advocated by the group in the OP giving an exclusively positive spin to the effects of these views, which have been a mixed bag, is blatant revisionism and borderline advocacy.
Yes?
Religion was essential to the founding of this nation. The contrary opinion is simply wrong.
:rolleyes: We aren’t talking about science we are talking about social studies. The same criteria do not even remotely apply. Social Studies is the appropriate class in which to teach political controversy.
The teaching of history is ALWAYS slanted, and that’s the point.
No reprehensible and disgusting is teaching to an agenda and trying to convince people that it’s the more objective of the two subjects. History is by its very nature subjective. If you are judging it by the criteria of a science class then you are just doing the exact same things the Creationists were doing to Science classes only in the other direction.
Whack-a-Mole I refer you to my first post in this thread where I acknowledged the issue and pointed out that it’s a necessary result of the culture war which many in this thread (not you) are tenaciously fighting.
Yes, I agree that Christianity should not be taught as an inevitable force for good leading to American exceptionalism. I think DanBlather summed it up perfectly when he points out that we split off from Christian Europe.
Question: During the American Revolution, to what extent did those loyal to the British Crown use religious arguments to make their case?
(shrug) To some extent, yes. No one is completely objective and impartial about history. My point, though, is that Begbert and others on this thread aren’t concerned with an impartial presentation of history, they’re concerned that somebody has challenged their right to use the public schools to promote their take on American history.
And the word “revisionist” is thrown around much too lightly these days, but that’s probably a whole 'nother thread.
And why not? After all, they were busy stealing it from each other when the Europeans first arrived anyway. White brother wasn’t playing a new game. He just played the old game better, and red brother didn’t have a problem with the game until he lost.
Obviously it isn’t only Christians who are guilty of simple minded moralizing and putting a spin on history.
That’s a group of Texans offering “A mainstream voice to counter the Religious Right.” They are already planning for next year’s State Board of Education elections–which might help prevent future atrocities. And there’s news that “the religious right failed to pass any major parts of its legislative agenda during the regular session.”
Yes, this latest idiocy is discussed. (And it looks as though the* WSJ *has read TFN press releases.)
Most Texans do not agree with these fools. But their backers have been working for years to put them in positions of power. Most people just don’t pay much attention to school board elections, etc.
Loyalist preachers found trouble for still maintaining the view that the king was king for the grace of god:
Then you are arguing against American exceptionalism.
Pretty much, yes. Believe me, I am no idealist.