Texas Board Passes Social Studies Curriculum

Status
Not open for further replies.
I picked up a book titled "101 things you didn't know about Lincoln" by Brian Thorton. It is very interesting. He didn't want to abolish the slavery but he wanted to fence it in, hoping it will eventually died out. I think it is because there was law about slavery already on the books so he didn't seek out to change it until much later.

Exactly.
 
Now for the big picture .... because someone (not naming any names) apparently missed it.

Why would Texas educators feel there was a need to do this?

Why would Arizona pass similar legislation?
 
My daughter would come home from school and tell what she learned about the Native American and how her teacher said they were bad people , her history book said the Native American killed white people etc! I told my daughter how the government gave the Native American blankets infected with small pox to kill them! The next year my daughter brought her history book home to show me there was small paragraph telling how the 'our government gave the Native American blankets infected with small pox!" I spoke to an Native American about this and he told me the Native American wanted the truth to be printed in the history books and that was all they were able to get printed in the books! I bet the government is not letting a lot of our history be printed in our kids history books!
 
Now for the big picture .... because someone (not naming any names) apparently missed it.

Why would Texas educators feel there was a need to do this?

Why would Arizona pass similar legislation?

Please show me where Arizona has made a proposal to revise their social studies curriculum.

Texas educators didn't feel there was a need to do this. Texas conservative politicians in the form of board members thought there was a need to do this. If you will check the make up of the board, you will find that none of them are educators.:roll:

So, enlighten us. What is the big picture that you believe you see? I think we can all guess with reasonable accuracy the connection you are attempting to make.
 
My daughter would come home from school and tell what she learned about the Native American and how her teacher said they were bad people , her history book said the Native American killed white people etc! I told my daughter how the government gave the Native American blankets infected with small pox to kill them! The next year my daughter brought her history book home to show me there was small paragraph telling how the 'our government gave the Native American blankets infected with small pox!" I spoke to an Native American about this and he told me the Native American wanted the truth to be printed in the history books and that was all they were able to get printed in the books! I bet the government is not letting a lot of our history be printed in our kids history books!

I agree. There has been a particular injustice done to the Native American in hisotry books. And now Texas wants to compound that. You know, parents and educators that are concerned about what our children are being taught need to rise up against practices such as these.
 
But now they can.

Like I said earlier ... shouldn't children be taught the truth? No matter what the truth may be?

(i.e. Honest Abe was a white supremacist and wanted to kick African Slaves out of the country).

Anything less would completely undermine the Civil Rights Movement ....

which coincidentally happened nearly 100 years after the Civil War ended:

An African-American Icon Speaks Truth to the Lincoln Cult by Thomas DiLorenzo




Forced Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream. - Free Online Library

While I agree that Lincoln wasn't the great president that he is labeled in schools, calling him a white supremacist is just utterly ridiculous
 
While I agree that Lincoln wasn't the great president that he is labeled in schools, calling him a white supremacist is just utterly ridiculous

Yes, it is. But it is also a glaring example of the type of narrow minded thinking this proposal endorses.
 
While I agree that Lincoln wasn't the great president that he is labeled in schools, calling him a white supremacist is just utterly ridiculous

He said it himself .... Congressional Records do not dispute that fact.
 
He said it himself .... Congressional Records do not dispute that fact.

Please show the quote of Lincoln stating that he was a white supremist and the source of that quote.

And while you're at it, show where Arizona has proposed to revise their social studies curriculum.
 
Please show me where Arizona has made a proposal to revise their social studies curriculum.

Texas educators didn't feel there was a need to do this. Texas conservative politicians in the form of board members thought there was a need to do this. If you will check the make up of the board, you will find that none of them are educators.:roll:

So, enlighten us. What is the big picture that you believe you see? I think we can all guess with reasonable accuracy the connection you are attempting to make.

Format Document

those tingling synapses going off in your head is just paranoia.
 

This has virtually nothing to do with Arizona revising their social studies curriculum to mimic the revisions proposed in Texas. Do you even read before you click?

Nice way to edit your post after it was quoted. But it still doesn't negate the fact that the document you linked is totally unrelated to Texas revision of its social studies curriculum, and in effect, makes no statement whatsoever about Arizona revising its social studies curriculum.

Perhaps you should get some sleep before you make any more attempts. Clearly, your synapses have decreased their electrical activity to an alarmingly low level.
 
Please show the quote of Lincoln stating that he was a white supremist and the source of that quote.

And while you're at it, show where Arizona has proposed to revise their social studies curriculum.

Wheither or not Lincoln was a racist or not got very little to do with the turning point of the Civil War.

THe reason why he wrote that speech is because he wanted to the give the Union a stronger cause to fight against the South. And of course, it also gave the South a stronger cause... as well.

To say that the Civil War was STRICTLY about slavery... it's only true around 1862 or 1863 and afterward. Before then? Your typical Americans/Southerners were apathetic because most of them were not wealthy enough to become slave owners. However when Lincoln announced that the slaves would be freed, people were terrified that they would become the bottom of the Americanized caste system if the slaves had equal rights.

All one have to do is read the letters of the commonfolks. :cool2:

So what does a person's personal life have to do with the legal and historical documents? Very little.
 
Wheither or not Lincoln was a racist or not got very little to do with the turning point of the Civil War.

THe reason why he wrote that speech is because he wanted to the give the Union a stronger cause to fight against the South. And of course, it also gave the South a stronger cause... as well.

To say that the Civil War was STRICTLY about slavery... it's only true around 1862 or 1863 and afterward. Before then? Your typical Americans/Southerners were apathetic because most of them were not wealthy enough to become slave owners. However when Lincoln announced that the slaves would be freed, people were terrified that they would become the bottom of the Americanized caste system if the slaves had equal rights.

All one have to do is read the letters of the commonfolks. :cool2:

So what does a person's personal life have to do with the legal and historical documents? Very little.

Of course it has very little to do with it. I was simply curious as to where it has been shown that Lincoln stated he was a white supremist, as was claimed.

And, you are absolutely correct regarding the attitudes regarding equality. And the Civil War has very little to do with the topic of Texas proposing a curriculum to teach biased fantasy in the name of history.
 
Texas Education Agency - Welcome to the Texas Education Agency

Texas Tea anyone?


TEA Mission and Responsibilities
Mission

The mission of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) is to provide leadership, guidance, and resources to help schools meet the educational needs of all students.

Note: The agency’s current mission statement is included on page 6 of the current strategic plan.
Composition

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) comprises the commissioner of education and agency staff. The TEA and the State Board of Education (SBOE) guide and monitor activities and programs related to public education in Texas. The SBOE consists of 15 elected members representing different regions of the state. One member is appointed chair by the governor.
Roles & Responsibilities

Located in Austin, Texas at 1701 N. Congress Ave., the TEA is the administrative unit for primary and secondary public education. Under the leadership of the commissioner of education, the TEA:

* manages the textbook adoption process;
* oversees development of the statewide curriculum;
* administers the statewide assessment program;
* administers a data collection system on public school students, staff, and finances;
* rates school districts under the statewide accountability system;
* operates research and information programs;
* monitors for compliance with federal guidelines; and
* serves as a fiscal agent for the distribution of state and federal funds.

The TEA operational costs are supported by both state and federal funds.


nah ... no link whatsoever .... none.
 
Of course it has very little to do with it. I was simply curious as to where it has been shown that Lincoln stated he was a white supremist, as was claimed.

And, you are absolutely correct regarding the attitudes regarding equality.

So, why the big debate about "who Lincoln is"?

It's like trying to debate if Pierre Trudeau is a fascist or not.
 
So, why the big debate about "who Lincoln is"?

It's like trying to debate if Pierre Trudeau is a fascist or not.

You'll have to ask Steinhauer. He is the one that claimed Lincoln claimed to be a white supremist.

My concern is that kids are being taught stuff like this that has been pulled out of someone's rear end and having it represented as fact.
 
You'll have to ask Steinhauer. He is the one that claimed Lincoln claimed to be a white supremist.

My concern is that kids are being taught stuff like this that has been pulled out of someone's rear end and having it represented as fact.

Actually pulled out of Congressional Records ... what is being taught now has been pulled out the rear of liberals. . . for years.

Guess what, Texas got tired of it.

Why then did Lincoln say
"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that."


Or even in his letter dated August 26, 1863 to James C. Conkling:

"I thought that in your struggle for the Union, to whatever extent the negroes should cease helping the enemy, to that extent it weakened the enemy in his resistance to you. Do you think differently? I thought that whatever negroes can be got to do as soldiers, leaves just so much less for white soldiers to do, in saving the Union. Does it appear otherwise to you? But negroes, like other people, act upon motives. Why should they do any thing for us, if we will do nothing for them? If they stake their lives for us, they must be prompted by the strongest motive—even the promise of freedom. And the promise being made, must be kept."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfMnOH4wRMw&feature=player_embedded#
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top