|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90305
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | 24 wrote: | | They are all connected, and meant to be so. Anywhere they can inject a dogma into textbooks they give it the patina of fact, reinforcing what is taught in home and church. |
That strikes me more as paranoia than as reality. |
It has always been reality. Religion has for centuries been a control mechanism,mused by the state, and vice versa. There is a very real, coordinated effort right now (a rear guard action really) against the inevitable coming secualrism.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
I find it embarrassing that kids in my state are going to be taught that Moses was an influence for the Founding Fathers. By itself, though, that's not enough to get me worked up. I find it more silly than anything else. |
It's the standard procedure, IMO, to get around the establishment clause.
The next version could be that jesus and god were influences to founding the country. In addition, that laws in the US all were influenced by religions who believe in that.
All implying, and in some degree, proselytizing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
I find it embarrassing that kids in my state are going to be taught that Moses was an influence for the Founding Fathers. By itself, though, that's not enough to get me worked up. I find it more silly than anything else. |
It's the standard procedure, IMO, to get around the establishment clause.
The next version could be that jesus and god were influences to founding the country. In addition, that laws in the US all were influenced by religions who believe in that.
All implying, and in some degree, proselytizing. |
Eh. I'm not that impressed by slippery slope arguments, at least in this context. The specific examples you give are pretty well accurate anyway. If a curriculum tried to erase the influence of Christianity on the founding of this country, that would just be a different flavor of lie. But it seems that some people would prefer that kids be taught that particular lie because it comports with an agenda. As I said in my last post, this is the fundamental problem with social studies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17245
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | tlim wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
I find it embarrassing that kids in my state are going to be taught that Moses was an influence for the Founding Fathers. By itself, though, that's not enough to get me worked up. I find it more silly than anything else. |
It's the standard procedure, IMO, to get around the establishment clause.
The next version could be that jesus and god were influences to founding the country. In addition, that laws in the US all were influenced by religions who believe in that.
All implying, and in some degree, proselytizing. |
Eh. I'm not that impressed by slippery slope arguments, at least in this context. The specific examples you give are pretty well accurate anyway. If a curriculum tried to erase the influence of Christianity on the founding of this country, that would just be a different flavor of lie. But it seems that some people would prefer that kids be taught that particular lie because it comports with an agenda. As I said in my last post, this is the fundamental problem with social studies. |
The influence of Christianity on the founding of the country was covered pretty clearly in the 1st Amendment.
Just curious if you'd have a different opinion if these Texas textbooks mentioned Mohammed as an influence, because there's just as much proof that Moses was an influence as Mohammed (e.g. none). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | The influence of Christianity on the founding of the country was covered pretty clearly in the 1st Amendment.
Just curious if you'd have a different opinion if these Texas textbooks mentioned Mohammed as an influence, because there's just as much proof that Moses was an influence as Mohammed (e.g. none). |
First of all, I'm not sure that you really understand the how the First Amendment fits into all of this. The First Amendment was more about protecting religion from the state than the reverse. That should make perfect sense in the historical context (i.e., the Church of England).
When you say that there is just as much proof that Moses was an influence as Mohammed, you're just being dogmatic. As I said before, there are a considerable number of people who disagree with your view that the Founding Fathers were a bunch of deists. I don't claim to be an expert, but I find your viewpoint to be dubious.
I suppose that the Founding Fathers are yet another ink blot test. Some people see them as gun totting anarchists, other people see them as atheists, other people see them as bigots and sexists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90305
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think people make the mistake of thinking the founding fathers were a bunch of deists because, well, the founding father's largely were a bunch of deists. There are people who disagree with that, but they also tend to disagree with the separation of church and state, evolution, and climate change, to name a few...
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | I think people make the mistake of thinking the founding fathers were a bunch of deists because, well, the founding father's largely were a bunch of deists. There are people who disagree with that, but they also tend to disagree with the separation of church and state, evolution, and climate change, to name a few... |
Well played sir!
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | I think people make the mistake of thinking the founding fathers were a bunch of deists because, well, the founding father's largely were a bunch of deists. There are people who disagree with that, but they also tend to disagree with the separation of church and state, evolution, and climate change, to name a few... |
This sort of response exposes you as just as dogmatic as the people you are attacking. There were around 50 men who actually attended the constitutional convention. I doubt that you could name more than a handful without cheating. There have been scholars who have examined the religious views of the Founding Fathers. The idea that the Founding Fathers were mostly deists is not a majority viewpoint.
This illustrates my point about social studies. You may not even realize that you have an agenda, but you do. You have your own version of the truth. Just because I find the reference to Moses to be silly, it does not mean that I think that textbooks should jam your agenda down the throats of school children. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90305
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | 24 wrote: | | I think people make the mistake of thinking the founding fathers were a bunch of deists because, well, the founding father's largely were a bunch of deists. There are people who disagree with that, but they also tend to disagree with the separation of church and state, evolution, and climate change, to name a few... |
This sort of response exposes you as just as dogmatic as the people you are attacking. There were around 50 men who actually attended the constitutional convention. I doubt that you could name more than a handful without cheating. There have been scholars who have examined the religious views of the Founding Fathers. The idea that the Founding Fathers were mostly deists is not a majority viewpoint.
This illustrates my point about social studies. You may not even realize that you have an agenda, but you do. You have your own version of the truth. Just because I find the reference to Moses to be silly, it does not mean that I think that textbooks should jam your agenda down the throats of school children. |
My agenda is simple:accuracy. I've read copious text about and by the founders, and while i admit, as you can say, there are large gaps in the names i can pull off the top of my head, i have read extensively about a lot of them. furter, i think you would agree that the fifty didn't contribute equally, and the movers and shakers tended toward what we call deism. There are a lot of terms, and even some of the acknowledged (by their own writings) deists would have called themselves something else, even Christian at times, in the case of Jefferson, for example, who was anything but what we would define as Christian. Almost all were raised in organized christianity. That doesn't change he fact that christianity in particular, and religion in general, was not a guiding principle behind the constitution. Keeping the government and religion separate was. Of course, the bill of rights (where the establishment clause we are discussing is found) came kater, but that is another, more convuloted discussion about federalism.
All of this is interesting, but it does detract from the central idea that the folks wanting to put Moses into the textbooks in the way they do are doing so not on some broad, intellectual sense of accuracy and historical context. They are doing so for the same reason they want to add creationsim into science texbooks. I wouldn't have a problem with references to Moses, the Bible, Jesus, or any other number of influences of a religious nature being listed, provided there is context. But they aren't looking for context.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
With government like we have now can we remove "In God we trust" from our currency? Surely none of them actually believe a God would approve of their theft and greed and lies?
| Quote: | Over the years, people have argued against the presence of the religious motto on American currency . President Theodore Roosevelt, in a letter published in the New York Times in 1907, wrote that keeping the motto on coins was unwarranted and possibly sacrilegious.
"My own feelings in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good, but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege," Roosevelt wrote. |
http://m.livescience.com/32542-why-does-it-say-in-god-we-trust-on-our-money.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
Eh. I'm not that impressed by slippery slope arguments, at least in this context. The specific examples you give are pretty well accurate anyway. If a curriculum tried to erase the influence of Christianity on the founding of this country, that would just be a different flavor of lie. But it seems that some people would prefer that kids be taught that particular lie because it comports with an agenda. As I said in my last post, this is the fundamental problem with social studies. |
Then let's take a real world example, and it especially relates to Texas and the south. Now that Moses will be thought of as an influence (and still possibly a "founding father"), it would then be accepted policy to put the 10 commandments at all courthouses and all public areas that they deem fit.
That slippery slope is actually quite steep, and it can and will have immediate impact on the establishment of religion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90305
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think camel's nose under the tent is a more apt metaphor than slippery slope.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | Then let's take a real world example, and it especially relates to Texas and the south. Now that Moses will be thought of as an influence (and still possibly a "founding father"), it would then be accepted policy to put the 10 commandments at all courthouses and all public areas that they deem fit.
That slippery slope is actually quite steep, and it can and will have immediate impact on the establishment of religion. |
You realize that the Supreme Court has already decided this issue in three different cases, right? To simplify a bit, the answer is no for schools, no for courthouses, and usually not for other public places. There is no slippery slope here.
Now, if the GOP manages to pack the Supreme Court, you could see some changes. But that has always been true when it comes to the Supreme Court. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90305
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | tlim wrote: | Then let's take a real world example, and it especially relates to Texas and the south. Now that Moses will be thought of as an influence (and still possibly a "founding father"), it would then be accepted policy to put the 10 commandments at all courthouses and all public areas that they deem fit.
That slippery slope is actually quite steep, and it can and will have immediate impact on the establishment of religion. |
You realize that the Supreme Court has already decided this issue in three different cases, right? To simplify a bit, the answer is no for schools, no for courthouses, and usually not for other public places. There is no slippery slope here.
Now, if the GOP manages to pack the Supreme Court, you could see some changes. But that has always been true when it comes to the Supreme Court. |
They are one short.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | tlim wrote: | Then let's take a real world example, and it especially relates to Texas and the south. Now that Moses will be thought of as an influence (and still possibly a "founding father"), it would then be accepted policy to put the 10 commandments at all courthouses and all public areas that they deem fit.
That slippery slope is actually quite steep, and it can and will have immediate impact on the establishment of religion. |
You realize that the Supreme Court has already decided this issue in three different cases, right? To simplify a bit, the answer is no for schools, no for courthouses, and usually not for other public places. There is no slippery slope here.
Now, if the GOP manages to pack the Supreme Court, you could see some changes. But that has always been true when it comes to the Supreme Court. |
They wouldn't have to put the 10 Commandments up in the school, since the history book acts as a Trojan horse is getting it in. Any depth to why Moses had an effect on the FF would naturally lead to a discussion of the 10 Commandments.
Then all of a sudden they're playing Charlton Heston's movie, which leads to some NRA representative giving a speech during an assembly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
You realize that the Supreme Court has already decided this issue in three different cases, right? To simplify a bit, the answer is no for schools, no for courthouses, and usually not for other public places. There is no slippery slope here.
Now, if the GOP manages to pack the Supreme Court, you could see some changes. But that has always been true when it comes to the Supreme Court. |
Of course I do. But it's being done anyways, even just a year ago. Just a simple google of: 10 commandments at courthouse will get you a number of places where it is still happening.
Now, with the folks in the future thinking, "it's moses, and he was a founding father. it's no longer based upon religion." yada yada...
It's a religious war, and they'll continue to do so, every single day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | They are one short. |
It's not that simple. The media greatly oversimplifies the split on the Supreme Court. In order to get the votes to do something as dramatic as overturning Establishment Clause jurisprudence, the GOP would need to replace 2-3 of the liberals/moderates with Clarence Thomas clones. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vanexelent wrote: | They wouldn't have to put the 10 Commandments up in the school, since the history book acts as a Trojan horse is getting it in. Any depth to why Moses had an effect on the FF would naturally lead to a discussion of the 10 Commandments.
Then all of a sudden they're playing Charlton Heston's movie, which leads to some NRA representative giving a speech during an assembly. |
That works as a paranoid fantasy, but it isn't rooted in reality. Christianity is already discussed in history classes because, well, it is part of history. This is one of the things that strikes me about these discussions. Do you think it violates the Establishment Clause, or leads to a slippery slope, if social studies courses cover the Crusades, the Reformation, the Puritans, the Great Awakening, etc.? Or if we tell kids that this country was largely founded by religious dissenters?
Seriously, some of the paranoia in these discussions is just as wacky as what we hear from the folks in the Religious Right. Religion . . . must . . . be . . . purged . . . Exterminate! . . . Exterminate! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | | Now, with the folks in the future thinking, "it's moses, and he was a founding father. it's no longer based upon religion." yada yada... |
Right, because something jammed into a textbook in Texas makes 300 million people stupid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | tlim wrote: | | Now, with the folks in the future thinking, "it's moses, and he was a founding father. it's no longer based upon religion." yada yada... |
Right, because something jammed into a textbook in Texas makes 300 million people stupid. |
Well, yeah.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | tlim wrote: | | Now, with the folks in the future thinking, "it's moses, and he was a founding father. it's no longer based upon religion." yada yada... |
Right, because something jammed into a textbook in Texas makes 300 million people stupid. |
Not to dog on the religious too much, but ummm...
The bible?
The koran?
Seriously? The readings have to be contorted just to fit into anything that logically makes sense.
Bible: Exactly how is it that the holy ghost, god, and jesus are one and the same? Even born agains have difficulty reconciling it, and many don't even know that it's supposed to be the case. Yet, they will defend it with blood, sweat, and tears.
Koran: How the heck did 72 virgins get there in the first place? Were their souls automagically created? Or did they die incredibly young, as you know, marriages start at preteens for many people in the muslim world.
Logic gets trumped by religion time and time again. You might think that it's not possible to brainwash folks with enough people believing it, but social experiments have proven otherwise, with subject matters that are a lot less contentious.
So like others have said, yes. Putting out lies will many times, become the truth. Quick question: Who claimed to invent the internet? Al Gore? If you said that, you've already fallen trap to what you said could not make millions of people stupid. (And ask a ton of people and they too will say that Gore said that.) Lastly, we don't need to make 300 million people stupid. Just maybe a few million who are vocal (generally religious or hate based), and then you have momentum. Just a few %, and directions and populations get affected.
If large number of people can't be brainwashed, why are there myths (and mythbusters) as well as snopes, and annenberg to try to inform and debunk the lies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | tlim wrote: | | Now, with the folks in the future thinking, "it's moses, and he was a founding father. it's no longer based upon religion." yada yada... |
Right, because something jammed into a textbook in Texas makes 300 million people stupid. |
Not to dog on the religious too much, but ummm...
The bible?
The koran?
Seriously? The readings have to be contorted just to fit into anything that logically makes sense.
Even born agains have difficulty reconciling it, and many don't even know that it's supposed to be the case. Yet, they will defend it with blood, sweat, and tears.
Koran: How the heck did 72 virgins get there in the first place? Were their Bible: Exactly how is it that the holy ghost, god, and jesus are one and the same? souls automagically created? Or did they die incredibly young, as you know, marriages start at preteens for many people in the muslim world.
Logic gets trumped by religion time and time again. You might think that it's not possible to brainwash folks with enough people believing it, but social experiments have proven otherwise, with subject matters that are a lot less contentious.
So like others have said, yes. Putting out lies will many times, become the truth. Quick question: Who claimed to invent the internet? Al Gore? If you said that, you've already fallen trap to what you said could not make millions of people stupid. (And ask a ton of people and they too will say that Gore said that.) Lastly, we don't need to make 300 million people stupid. Just maybe a few million who are vocal (generally religious or hate based), and then you have momentum. Just a few %, and directions and populations get affected.
If large number of people can't be brainwashed, why are there myths (and mythbusters) as well as snopes, and annenberg to try to inform and debunk the lies? |
Using an incorrect example isn't a good way to make a point.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: |
Using an incorrect example isn't a good way to make a point. |
They are analogous in pointing out that lies become truth to many people.
Explain what isn't accurate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13725
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The 72 virgins thing is not from the Quran, but from Hadith. Virgins are mentioned in the Quran in the context of paradise (not just for martyrs, but for everybody), but not the number 72.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | vanexelent wrote: | They wouldn't have to put the 10 Commandments up in the school, since the history book acts as a Trojan horse is getting it in. Any depth to why Moses had an effect on the FF would naturally lead to a discussion of the 10 Commandments.
Then all of a sudden they're playing Charlton Heston's movie, which leads to some NRA representative giving a speech during an assembly. |
That works as a paranoid fantasy, but it isn't rooted in reality. Christianity is already discussed in history classes because, well, it is part of history. This is one of the things that strikes me about these discussions. Do you think it violates the Establishment Clause, or leads to a slippery slope, if social studies courses cover the Crusades, the Reformation, the Puritans, the Great Awakening, etc.? Or if we tell kids that this country was largely founded by religious dissenters?
Seriously, some of the paranoia in these discussions is just as wacky as what we hear from the folks in the Religious Right. Religion . . . must . . . be . . . purged . . . Exterminate! . . . Exterminate! |
My post was tongue & cheek. But, I do think the Trojan horse comment is true. I think religious folks think "family" values and religious teachings are being slowly chipped away by liberal teachers and science, and that they need to go on the offensive in order to build it back up.
I'm not against religion being taught in school, so long that all of them are taught. That's how I experienced it in my California public school. What I don't like is selective opinions being taught as fact, no matter what the subject is. I'm sure Christianity was a big influence of our FF, as it's been in this country since it's inception. But, who's to say Moses specifically was the MOST important figure?
In the end, I agree with you though. It will eventually fall on the particular teacher to teach this history book and chances are that many will roll their eyes at the inclusion of Moses and probably won't spend too much time on it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
