Slashdot Mirror
Texas Textbooks Battle Is Actually an American War
ideonexus writes "I've been lackadaisical when it comes to following stories about Texas schoolboard attempts to slip creationism into biology textbooks, dismissing the stories as just 'dumbass Texans,' but what I didn't realize is that Texas schoolbooks set the standard for the rest of the country. And it's not just Creationism that this Christian coalition is attempting to bring into schoolbooks, but a full frontal assault on history, politics, and the humanities that exploits the fact that final decisions are being made by a school board completely academically unqualified to make informed evaluations of the changes these lobbyists propose. This evangelical lobby has successfully had references to the American Constitution as a 'living document,' as textbooks have defined it since the 1950s, removed in favor of an 'enduring Constitution' not subject to change, as well as attempting to over-emphasize the role Christianity played in the founding of America. The leaders of these efforts outright admit they are attempting to redefine the way our children understand the political landscape so that, when they grow up, they will have preconceived notions of the American political system that favor their evangelical Christian goals."
Wow! Your family has been paying off a mortgage for 220 years? Can you still pay in slaves?
One is science the other is religion. Guess which one does not belong in a schoolbook?
Science can't explain how the universe was formed from. At one point it couldn't explain how the earth was formed, or why the rain fell, what was lightning.
Why is a concept like Zues' lightning bolt sound more absurd then 'a big bang'
are you saying because something is not well understood it should be ignored?
Other than a very tiny minority, Americans are viciously relgionist and many of those who aren't, don't read the news. With the manipulation of textbooks, the willfully ignorant are further masturbated in their ignorance.
That is why the US is becoming a decreasingly competent and increasingly toxic country. We are getting what we collectively deserve, though some of us individually don't deserve it.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
There is no vagueness at all. The constitution is very simple and easy to read. Anyone and their mother can read the constitution and know exactly what it means.
I'm not sure if this deserves a "+1 Funny", or a "-1 More retarded than Sarah Palin" mod.
I knew this and am not even American. Every piece of coverage I've seen on this issue has explained how wide reaching the ramifications are. How can anyone have missed it?
Because they're American.
Bullshit, start to finish. Citation needed for any of this garbage.
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
Science? Religion? I'm listening to the guy with the lens in a tube rather than the guy with the corpse on a stick.
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
Could you tell me how long your arms are? Because I'm curious as to how far in you had to reach to pull
that bullshit out of your ass.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
When their education doesn't fit people to become self-aware and give them both SUBJECT AWARENESS and the ABILITY TO LEARN FROM OPPOSING VIEWS there can be consequences (such dead civilians, dead G.I.s, dead antiwar protesters).
I offer you up Barack Hussein Obama as yet another example.
So wait, you get to push your truth, but they don't get to push their truth ?
"That does not make it so ?". Of course it does. After all, postmodernism, which is (equally forcibly) taught at universities, clearly states it does in fact make it so.
Stating something is true or false, postmodernism teaches, involves being certain about facts. And nobody is certain about any facts at all.
Furthermore, it seems strange to dismiss theories as "not science", when any definition of such has been thrown out either for including the most utter lunacy, or excluding things like social sciences (any non-exact science). Some definitions like "anything we can prove" were thrown out for only allowing 1 or 2 obscure mathematical theories.
Of course, without postmodernism, things like equality of races would directly be dismissed out of hand. After all, equality means that properties match, meaning that even if the only difference was skin color, there would be no equality (equality before the law would, of course, be another thing. Equality without qualifiers means exact sameness, and is therefore obviously untrue). With only reasonably proven things allowed, stuff like global warming, medicine and psychology based solely on statistics of large-error-margin data series would not stand up to scrutiny. In fact most non-exact sciences, excluding perhaps (some parts of) biology and other purely descriptive sciences, would not pass munster.
And then there is the other beauty of "science", the "scientific consensus". Unfortunately, when analysed closely, "scientific consensus" turns out to mean that a small group of government-selected people mostly agree on a specific, speculative conclusion. This does not exclude these groups from calling things "scientific consensus" that are blatantly wrong. Just follow theoretical physics for 6 months, you'll see 3 theories become "consensus" and then get thrown out.
And of course, the consensus that creationism is based on is much more democratic (anyone can join, and, at least in Chrsitianity, anyone can leave, even if that specific quality is not shared by most other religions). It is also much, much larger. Any "scientific consensus" means 500 people in practice (people who are accepted experts and have done research themselves). Best possible case it means 5000 people.
The creationism consensus total for all religions is somewhere between 2 and 4 BILLION people (if not 5 by now).
And of course, both forms of consensus have been known to be utterly wrong. Both types of groups, scientists and clerics (mostly everyone, during 99.99% of history) have been known to not just be wrong, but to actively use violence, fraud and even murder (including genocide, even if large scale genocide is mostly limited to non-Christian religions and ideologies) to push their viewpoint on others. The muslim genocides (of which there have been many) were started by clerics, communist and national socialist exterminations counted lots of scientists in their upper echelons)
In reality, a postmodernist would say, you merely differ in opinion. The truth doesn't exist, and so it is on nobody's side. And, at least according to today's universities, we're all supposed to be good little postmodernists.
(needless to say, this post is mostly an attack on the bullshit that is postmodernism, not a defense of creationism. I do, however, loathe with all my soul, the fact that the opposition to creationism is a social phenomenon. It should be a rational phenomenon. People should be taught both creationism and evolution, and they should be taught to identify and think about the differences. And only then should one, properly equipped, decide for oneself. And of course, whatever decision is made should be accepted, which is something the parent post is not exactly promoting. It is just social-based "I get to make fun of 'dumb' people because they're creationist". The post is an example, not of science, but of socially-imposed conformity. Ironically this soci
I think it's funny that you think your lack of knowledge or understanding is somehow my fault. Mark 16 is the story about Mary finding Jesus' tomb empty and what Jesus said to his disciples. The part you quoted is where he told the disciples to go and preach his message, and those are signs that would confirm the message. It doesn't say that anyone can or will heal someone, it says that those signs will follow as in some will be able to do that in his name.
Why don't you stop reading what you think you want to hear into the damn thing and actually attempt to understand it a bit. I'm betting that if you put half as much effort into understanding it as you are trying to demonize it, you would find that it's an entirely different beast then you think it is. Hell, you might even dismiss some of your prejudices while your at it. And that's all probably going to happen even if your not a believer.
Again, we find ourselves at a point in time when you are simply wrong and attempting to blame it on others. Perhaps you should stop you mental gymnastics and just leave it alone if you aren't competent enough to read and understand the thing.
Again, your ignorance is a shining example of idiocy. The verse you quoted is taken out of context. As other places in the bible indicate, what a person does with their body is up to them. This means that you can't force yourself onto a woman and a woman can't force herself onto a man. There is no rape involved here. In the bible, the term used for getting married was taking a wife. It was meant by mutual consent or some law of the land which made it happen (IE. buying a slave for a wife or making a deal with some family for a wife.) However, whether or not she put out was completely up to her even though the bible says that not having sex with your husband or wife when they want it is a sin. The bible also makes it clear that you are not to be with a married person and you are not to kill the husband of someone to take her as your wife.
The verse you quoted is not permission to plunder a village and steal the women after murdering their family, it's permission to ignore the other rules of conduct so if someone has lost their family due to war in which you participated and won, and you found her attractive, you could marry her without violating god's will. IF you notice, there is a part that allows you to let her go if your not satisfied with her.
What is the biggest cause of divorce today? No sex life is. It amplifies all of the other problems and may be a cause of some of the problems but not having a sex life does cause divorce as it encourages cheating and infidelity, creates hostile moods in which money problems become more of a problem, it creates issues concerning trust, even if it's all imaginary. You simply do not understand what you are reading and have not read more then what someone else has put out there for you to pretend you know it all. If you have read the bible, then you are one dumb mother fucker because it seems that you are forgetting about everything that gives it context.