Impressive

Louisiana hasn't gone completely mental yet.

In a state as red as Louisiana, finding sanity among elected officials is like finding unfried food in the Bayou. Recently, Governor Bobby Jindal had made news due to his voucher program which will, legally, funnel millions of tax payer dollars to schools that teach Creationism and similar gibberish like the Loch Ness Monster is real (no, seriously, they do). This move is not doing well in the courts but one school district isn’t taking any chances. Via Patheos:

Earlier tonight, the Orleans Parish School Board voted to amend the way they select their textbooks in the district. Previously, the Superintendent had the final say in “all textbooks and supplementary instructional” that would be used, with optional input from teachers and administrators.

Tonight, the board decided to add a new caveat to that policy.

“No history textbook shall be approved which has been adjusted in accordance with the State of Texas revisionist guidelines nor shall any science textbook be approved which presents creationism or intelligent design as science or scientific theories.”


In case you’re unclear what it is the Orleans Parish School Board is referring to, it has to do with a controversy from last couple of years in which Tea Party fanatics rewrote the guidelines for Texan textbooks. They decided it would be more “American” if they downplayed the horrors of slavery and the South’s role in it and at the same time more or less removing Thomas Jefferson from the books altogether. Why Jefferson? Because he coined the phrase “Separation of Church and State.”

Don’t you long for the good ol’ days when the Tea Party was still pretending to be “just about fiscal issues” before they stopped lying and we all found out that they were just the same old culture warriors and religious bigots?

I fully expect a lawsuit to be brought against the school board for “religious persecution” or some such nonsense. The groups that are pressuring schools to adopt Christian “history” have very deep pockets and very long memories.

What is most notable about this declaration, however, is not that it bans Creationism from schools. It’s already against the law to do that in publicly funded schools. This, incidentally is one of the main reasons for the right wing push for vouchers: they sidestep the 1st Amendment on a semantic technicality. So “rebanning” Creationism is more of a poke at Jindal’s sop to the religious right. The more important aspect is the wholesale rejection of Texas style textbooks. One of the reasons there was such a controversy is that Texas is one of the largest purchasers of textbooks in the country. Therefor, textbook companies tend to make all their textbooks based on Texas’ standards as opposed to different books for different states. Essentially, what Texas decides to teach its kids goes for most of the country. In this context, standing up to Texas’ Tea Party textbook agenda is a huge gamble to take in the deep red South. A gamble, but a necessary one and one that should be copied throughout the country.

Unless, of course, you’re comfortable with Texas Republicans dictating your children’s curriculum?

I didn’t think so.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/12...ory-textbooks/

I think slavery should not be taught to the extent that it is in schools. It's over and long gone. No need for negative modern day individuals to focus soley on it while hating and accusing white/black individuals. We should know that slavery once existed but not exploit it in classrooms.

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

I think slavery should not be taught to the extent that it is in schools. It's over and long gone. No need for negative modern day individuals to focus soley on it while hating and accusing white/black individuals. We should know that slavery once existed but not exploit it in classrooms.

The revolutionary war is over and long gone. Should we cut back on how much is taught about that? Does it really matter if Paul Revere went riding through the night or one if by land two if by sea. Modern day individuals would just send out a tweet.

Originally Posted by rdsesq

The revolutionary war is over and long gone. Should we cut back on how much is taught about that? Does it really matter if Paul Revere went riding through the night or one if by land two if by sea. Modern day individuals would just send out a tweet.

Did I say rid it from the classrooms? No. But I remember being in elementary school and practically have it re-emphasized grade level after the next that slavery existed or this famous person had slaves or this happened because of slavery. Most other historical topics are touched on usually once followed by a test and you move on to the next history lesson. For some like me, it was like okay I understand it was bad and it's no longer prevalent, but for others, I feel it fuels negativity and hatred towards certain groups to this day.

And the revolutionary war is uplifting and is a positive era for our country to look back on. It marks the beginning of the great country we reside in today.

Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta

This is a rare time I agree with Lair. History and science are not meant to be "altered" in any way.

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

I think slavery should not be taught to the extent that it is in schools. It's over and long gone. No need for negative modern day individuals to focus soley on it while hating and accusing white/black individuals. We should know that slavery once existed but not exploit it in classrooms.

Disagree. It should be taught, but in a historical context, not a racial one...as weird as that sounds....the white kids are not to feel guilty around the black kids in the classroom.

However, I do support more world history, and a little less on American history in the earlier grades. To understand American history properly, one really should grasp the European/Empirical history first.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

Disagree. It should be taught, but in a historical context, not a racial one...as weird as that sounds....the white kids are not to feel guilty around the black kids in the classroom.

Maybe this was the context I was eluding to.

Originally Posted by rdsesq

The revolutionary war is over and long gone. Should we cut back on how much is taught about that? Does it really matter if Paul Revere went riding through the night or one if by land two if by sea. Modern day individuals would just send out a tweet.

Or ensure that it is historically accurate from all sides. Not just the viewpoint from the liberal left.

Originally Posted by Raymond42262

Or ensure that it is historically accurate from all sides. Not just the viewpoint from the liberal left.

Yeah...the "westward expansion" is taught from the viewpoint of the "liberal left". Puhleez.

How many classrooms teach that it was the systematic extermination of several civilizations. (Yes, different tribes can be viewed as different civilizations)

Hell, I nearly got kicked out of grade school back in the early 70's for arguing that they weren't teaching history, but, propaganda.

I agree with the idea of "historical context, not a racial one". However, I disagree with the point that "I feel it fuels negativity and hatred towards certain groups to this day" That is a cop-out. Those groups don't need any fueling.

Past glory....

2012 EPL Champion: Man City (That's has just gotta hurt...)
2012 FA Cup Champion: Chelsea
2012 UCL Champion: Chelsea

And please, don't post more depictions of Wayne The Hair Plug...people are trying to hold down food.

Swallowing my pride....I agree with Lair.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

Disagree. It should be taught, but in a historical context, not a racial one...as weird as that sounds....the white kids are not to feel guilty around the black kids in the classroom.

I concur. Not many people know the full story. White guys weren't selling their own tribesmen off to the slave owners, it was a two way street. Not to mention the fact that the US was pretty late to the game, IIRC the Dutch started the slave trade and Columbus was involved in some way.

Slavery exists today in the world, not involving white people or Americans.

Originally Posted by rdsesq

Yeah...the "westward expansion" is taught from the viewpoint of the "liberal left". Puhleez.

How many classrooms teach that it was the systematic extermination of several civilizations. (Yes, different tribes can be viewed as different civilizations)

Hell, I nearly got kicked out of grade school back in the early 70's for arguing that they weren't teaching history, but, propaganda.

I agree with the idea of "historical context, not a racial one". However, I disagree with the point that "I feel it fuels negativity and hatred towards certain groups to this day" That is a cop-out. Those groups don't need any fueling.

I have never seen a school that teaches....

1)Slavery was started by warlords in Africa (blacks) selling blacks to the American slave owners.

2) After slavery was abolished, many freed slaves went BACK to Africa, and promptly ENSLAVED the local population (Liberia.) There is a reason why their capital is Monrovia.

3) When the slaves were freed, many refused to leave.

4) Blacks, as a large percentage are slaves again to the white man, thanks to victimization and they are now slaves to the government instead. In a "school" perspective, during slavery, blacks were property. Just like a car, you take care of it for long service life. The slaves were looked after because if something should happen to them, you lost your property since it would be useless to you. As a result, they were fed, clothed, sheltered, etc. Today, the majority of the prison population is black and young. Inner cities are some of the most dangerous places anywhere. They are not financially independent. Who's to blame? Absolutely the white man for victimizing the black race, rather than let them prosper. This is NOT taught in schools. When is it better for a young black man to be born? During slavery times, or now in the ghetto? It is a legitimate subject that is never talked about.

None of those things are taught in schools, and that is historical...and what some here call, the liberal left way to teach about slavery.

Originally Posted by cowmoo32

Swallowing my pride....I agree with Lair.

Cuz it was written by someone else.

Fantastic news!

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

I have never seen a school that teaches....

1)Slavery was started by warlords in Africa (blacks) selling blacks to the American slave owners.

2) After slavery was abolished, many freed slaves went BACK to Africa, and promptly ENSLAVED the local population (Liberia.) There is a reason why their capital is Monrovia.

3) When the slaves were freed, many refused to leave.

4) Blacks, as a large percentage are slaves again to the white man, thanks to victimization and they are now slaves to the government instead. In a "school" perspective, during slavery, blacks were property. Just like a car, you take care of it for long service life. The slaves were looked after because if something should happen to them, you lost your property since it would be useless to you. As a result, they were fed, clothed, sheltered, etc. Today, the majority of the prison population is black and young. Inner cities are some of the most dangerous places anywhere. They are not financially independent. Who's to blame? Absolutely the white man for victimizing the black race, rather than let them prosper. This is NOT taught in schools. When is it better for a young black man to be born? During slavery times, or now in the ghetto? It is a legitimate subject that is never talked about.

None of those things are taught in schools, and that is historical...and what some here call, the liberal left way to teach about slavery.

Originally Posted by casino is no lie

Fantastic news!

Not mad at all. I was just clarifying my opinion of "historical context." Teaching kids "the whites enslaved the blacks" is hate-breeding and propaganda.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

Teaching kids "the whites enslaved the blacks" is hate-breeding and propaganda.

Are you implying that the majority of slave owners in the United States were not in fact Whites? Furthermore, would you not argue that it has historical significance because the differences in economies and views on social liberties eventually led to the separation of the Union, a bloody civil war and finally the formation of the country as we know it today? It's taught for a reason. It's called context.

Facts are not hate-breeding and propaganda. Are we supposed to tell children that the Nazi's didn't hunt down the Jews... your own people, because it might condone hate-breeding and propaganda against Germans?

Remind everyone again why your family left the Soviet Union. Should we not teach that anymore out of fear that Russians might become targets of hate?



Get the **** out of there.