• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Texas board adopts new social studies curriculum

Nice ducking of the facts. A cowardly tactics but not an original one.



In other words you can't debate the points so you are running away. Got it.



I asked if that was the next step since you don't want to talk about the facts of the UN. Don't lie about what I said.



Bull****. You said:



Which is not only a lie its a setup for not talking about an negative facts against the UN. Since you are willing to cover up factual data about the UN because it doesn't fit with your own political agenda I asked if book burning was next on your list since they burned books for the same reason.

And the question still stands....



LOL Right. Because I don't want to censor unflattering history of the UN I'm injecting opinion. If censorship of factual data is what you consider truth you've got a long way to go.



Since you are incapable of reading the OP I'll quote it for you again:

They also required that public school students in Texas evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty.

Is evaluate too big of a word for you?



Wrong again slick. I wish at some point you actually kept up with events.

Texas educators voted to reinstate Thomas Jefferson to the state's study curriculum after earlier deleting him, observers said.

Texas school board 'reinstates' Jefferson - UPI.com

Try to keep up. :2wave:



You're right. I just made up all those quotes of Jefferson and t he rest of the founding fathers :roll:

Thanks for staying predictable.

I'm simply going to leave you with this:

You don't cure the virus of a political classroom by simply redirecting the politics. That's all this bill does. You don't want critical thinking - you want to indoctrinate children with your beliefs in the way you believe liberals have done.

You are no better than that which you abhor.
 
I'm simply going to leave you with this:

You don't cure the virus of a political classroom by simply redirecting the politics. That's all this bill does. You don't want critical thinking - you want to indoctrinate children with your beliefs in the way you believe liberals have done.

You are no better than that which you abhor.

Once again no evidence to back up any of the conclusions you draw and to top it off you ignore the evidence presented to you.

That is where we differ.
 
Last edited:
Who is Thomas Jefferson?

That was me pretending to be a high school student in Texas in a few years.

Sigh. God I wish you would read.

Texas educators voted to reinstate Thomas Jefferson to the state's study curriculum after earlier deleting him, observers said.

Texas school board 'reinstates' Jefferson - UPI.com
 
I knew when they did this that it was going to become a debate almost exclusively about Thomas Jefferson's beliefs and importance. :doh
 
I knew when they did this that it was going to become a debate almost exclusively about Thomas Jefferson's beliefs and importance. :doh

He was Important to the history of this country. I think politically speaking he was ahead of his time. Other than this, people act like he was THE founding father, he was not. He was one of many that had differing views.

He is pretty much the only one that said anything at all about the "wall of separation" so naturally he would come up.
 
I knew when they did this that it was going to become a debate almost exclusively about Thomas Jefferson's beliefs and importance. :doh

That seems to be one of the major grievances. Here's another:

Texas School Board Set to Vote on Challenge to Evolution - WSJ.com

Dr. McLeroy believes that God created the earth less than 10,000 years ago. If the new curriculum passes, he says he will insist that high-school biology textbooks point out specific aspects of the fossil record that, in his view, undermine the theory that all life on Earth is descended from primitive scraps of genetic material that first emerged in the primordial muck about 3.9 billion years ago.

He also wants the texts to make the case that individual cells are far too complex to have evolved by chance mutation and natural selection, an argument popular with those who believe an intelligent designer created the universe.

The textbooks will "have to say that there's a problem with evolution -- because there is," said Dr. McLeroy, a dentist. "We need to be honest with the kids."

The vast majority of scientists accept evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life on earth.

A dentist is dictating what should be taught in science classes. This 'revising' by the Texas school board is an attack on human knowledge by the religious right. Nothing more. Nothing less.
 
Last edited:
He was Important to the history of this country. I think politically speaking he was ahead of his time. Other than this, people act like he was THE founding father, he was not. He was one of many that had differing views.

He is pretty much the only one that said anything at all about the "wall of separation" so naturally he would come up.

The fact that it's such a point of contention to both sides indicates that several views of Thomas Jefferson's beliefs have been given exposure in our educations and this whole thing is completely blown out of proportion.
 
Well, duhh...

Duh... has one 'h'.

Would you mind listing the names and educational backgrounds of the school board--degrees, teaching experience, etc.??

Also, could you note the board member(s) who purposed removing the word slave from 'slave trade'?
 
A dentist is dictating what should be taught in science classes. This 'revising' by the Texas school board is an attack on human knowledge by the religious right. Nothing more. Nothing less.

But you know what? If that's what Texas is supporting, then that's their right. Their board of education is making these decisions and if they don't want these decisions made, then they will vote in a new board.

The evolution/Intelligent Design thing is just stupid but I find it very hard to believe that any kid today won't be exposed to evolution just because they have some Intelligent Design nonsense taught alongside it. Besides, when they go to college, kids have an uncanny knack for being their own persons and defining their own beliefs.
 
But you know what? If that's what Texas is supporting, then that's their right.

That is not the problem though. And if the new curriculum affected Texas only, then you'd have a point. But since it doesn't. You don't. The problem is in how Texas curriculums dictate how the majority of textbooks for a large percentage of school boards will be printed in other states.

Their board of education is making these decisions and if they don't want these decisions made, then they will vote in a new board.

The evolution/Intelligent Design thing is just stupid but I find it very hard to believe that any kid today won't be exposed to evolution just because they have some Intelligent Design nonsense taught alongside it. Besides, when they go to college, kids have an uncanny knack for being their own persons and defining their own beliefs.

Sigh. If schools weren't the place where people create their first base of information I'd agree. But since they don't it's not. It's bad enough that so many Americans believe there is some sort of controversy regarding evolution among scientists. It's worse that 60% refuse to admit evolution as anything other than a fact.

On Darwin?s Birthday, Only 4 in 10 Believe in Evolution

PRINCETON, NJ -- On the eve of the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth, a new Gallup Poll shows that only 39% of Americans say they "believe in the theory of evolution," while a quarter say they do not believe in the theory, and another 36% don't have an opinion either way. These attitudes are strongly related to education and, to an even greater degree, religiosity.

It's not about exposure. It's about what kids are taught in schools. They shouldn't be taught pseudoscience which cannot be supported with scientific evidence of any kind.
 
Last edited:
But you know what? If that's what Texas is supporting, then that's their right. Their board of education is making these decisions and if they don't want these decisions made, then they will vote in a new board.

The evolution/Intelligent Design thing is just stupid but I find it very hard to believe that any kid today won't be exposed to evolution just because they have some Intelligent Design nonsense taught alongside it. Besides, when they go to college, kids have an uncanny knack for being their own persons and defining their own beliefs.

I don't think any one is saying they don't have the right. What I think we are saying is that they should not do things like this. Saying that the Texas board should not push their stupid anti-evolution ideas(not theories) in a science class is not saying they cannot do it, only that it is a bad idea.
 
That is not the problem though. And if the new curriculum affected Texas only, then you'd have a point. But since it doesn't. You don't. The problem is in how Texas curriculums dictate how the majority of textbooks for another 60% of school boards will be printed.

That's not Texas's problem. :shrug:

Sigh. If schools weren't the place where people create their first base of information I'd agree. But since they don't it's not. It's bad enough that so many Americans believe there is some sort of controversy regarding evolution among scientists. It's worse that 60% refuse to admit evolution as anything other than a fact.

On Darwin?s Birthday, Only 4 in 10 Believe in Evolution

Well you just have to deal with that, don't you? They are free to believe as they wish and to raise their children according to their own traditions and beliefs.

It's not about exposure. It's about what kids are taught in schools. They shouldn't be taught pseudoscience which cannot be supported with scientific evidence of any kind.

Too bad. Schools are a function of the community and the community has the right to exert influence over the educations of its children. Texas is well within its rights to do what it is doing. IF you don't like it, don't send your kid to school in Texas or send them to a private school that teaches what you want. Or...homeschool.
 
Last edited:
That's not Texas's problem. :shrug:

Only it is. It's a clear violation of the wall between church and state. I mean we can jerk each other off all day and pretend like creationism is not religion but at the end of the day it is. Intelligent designer, creator - all attempts to water down the word 'God'.
 
I don't think any one is saying they don't have the right. What I think we are saying is that they should not do things like this. Saying that the Texas board should not push their stupid anti-evolution ideas(not theories) in a science class is not saying they cannot do it, only that it is a bad idea.

I've already agreed that it's a bad idea.
 
Only it is. It's a clear violation of the wall between church and state. I mean we can jerk each other off all day and pretend like creationism is not religion but at the end of the day it is. Intelligent designer, creator - all attempts to water down the word 'God'.

No wall exists at that level. It is a misnomer. The Federal government is not passing a law declaring any religion to be sanctioned by Texas. Texas is also passing no law infringing on anyones rights.
 
Only it is.

No, it's not.

It's a clear violation of the wall between church and state.

What? When did text book publishers become the State?

I mean we can jerk each other off all day and pretend like creationism is not religion but at the end of the day it is. Intelligent designer, creator - all attempts to water down the word 'God'.

Show me where States were barred from engaging in religious instruction in school. Not the Federal Government, but States.
 
Ha, it's pretty funny that nobody cares how strong a lefty slant history is taught with here in Virginia and I'm sure lots of other places, but when it's done with a righty slant instead it's an outrage.
 
Ha, it's pretty funny that nobody cares how strong a lefty slant history is taught with here in Virginia and I'm sure lots of other places, but when it's done with a righty slant instead it's an outrage.

Show me a story documenting this, I will care. Slanting history for political reasons is bad no matter who does it.
 
Hey, guys, given the Texans credit... they did change their minds and finally decide Thomas Jefferson was to be included in U.S. History... bunch of progressive, godless, libs.:2razz::2razz:
 
Hey, guys, given the Texans credit... they did change their minds and finally decide Thomas Jefferson was to be included in U.S. History... bunch of progressive, godless, libs.:2razz::2razz:
Chuckle, since they never were going to remove Thomas Jefferson from U.S. history we'll call that a typical hazelnut bromide. Dead on arrival and devoid of any intelligent point or honesty. :roll:
 
No wall exists at that level.

What level? You mean the level of federally funded Texas school board level?

It is a misnomer.The Federal government is not passing a law declaring any religion to be sanctioned by Texas. Texas is also passing no law infringing on anyones rights.

It doesn't have to. It simply has to give preference to one religion specifically.

Jallman said:
Show me where States were barred from engaging in religious instruction in school. Not the Federal Government, but States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_(Bill_of_Rights)

The incorporation of the Bill of Rights (or incorporation for short) is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to the states. In the past, the Bill of Rights was held only to apply to the federal government. Under the incorporation doctrine, certain provisions of the Bill of Rights now also apply to the states, by virtue of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
Prior to the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment and the development of the incorporation doctrine, in 1833 the Supreme Court held in Barron v. Baltimore that the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal, but not any state, government. Even years after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment the Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank, still held that the First and Second Amendment did not apply to state governments. However, beginning in the 1890s, a series of United States Supreme Court decisions interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to "incorporate" most portions of the Bill of Rights, making these portions, for the first time, enforceable against the state governments.
 
Last edited:
What level? You mean the level of federally funded Texas school board level?

Yes. No law being passed.

It doesn't have to. It simply has to give preference to one religion specifically.

Please point out the law which is doing this in this case?


What does the Bill of Rights have to do with this? No one is passing a law regarding religion or a federal or state sanctioned religion.
 
Will FactCheck.org and PolitiFact be reviewing the new textbooks?
 
I was not talking about that letter.

Two different incidents. I was talking about 1797 the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli that stated in Article 11:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"

As for the Danbury letter, this articles pretty much clears up what really happened.

We must confront the uncomfortable fact that, for much of American history, the phrase "separation of church and state" and its attendant metaphoric formulation, "a wall of separation," have often been expressions of exclusion, intolerance, and bigotry. These phrases have been used to silence people and communities of faith and to exclude them from full participation in public life.

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, establishmentarians sought to frighten Americans by deliberately mischaracterizing the religious dissenters' aspirations for disestablishment and liberty of conscience as advocacy for a separation of religion from public life that would inevitably lead to political atheism and rampant licentiousness. This was a political smear. Religious dissenters, indeed, agitated for disestablishment, but like most Americans, they did not wish to separate religious values from public life and policy.

In the bitter presidential campaign of 1800, Jeffersonian Republicans cynically advocated the rhetoric and policy of separation, not to promote religious worship and expression, but to silence the Federalist clergy who had vigorously denounced Jefferson as an infidel and atheist. (Two centuries later, the American Civil Liberties Union and its allies continue to use these phrases to silence people and communities of faith that seek to participate in the public marketplace of ideas armed with ideas informed by spiritual values.)
- Daniel L. Dreisbach, D.Phil. (Oxford University) and J.D. (University of Virginia), is a Professor of Justice, Law, and Society at American University in Washington, D.C. He is the author of Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation Between Church and State (New York University Press, 2002).

Doesn't clear anything up. You have Jefferson's intent below, in his own words to his attorney general at the time of the penning of the letter.

Your info from 2002 isn't going to change Jefferson's intent.

Anyway, post a link.
 
Will FactCheck.org and PolitiFact be reviewing the new textbooks?
Like you care, though I'm certain both can do a better job than you did. Texas wanted to remove Thomas Jefferson from American history! :lamoNot only false, but one of the more asinine DOA goads made at DP today. But then you are chock full of that kind of drek.:roll:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom