Christian conservatives win, children lose: Texas textbooks will teach public school students that the Founding Fathers based the Constitution on the Bible, and the American system of democracy was inspired by Moses.

On Friday the Republican-controlled Texas State Board of Education voted along party lines 10-5 to approve the biased and inaccurate textbooks. The vote signals a victory for Christian conservatives in Texas, and a disappointing defeat for historical accuracy and the education of innocent children.

The textbooks were written to align with instructional standards that the Board of Education approved back in 2010 with the explicit intention of forcing social studies teaching to adhere to a conservative Christian agenda. The standards require teachers to emphasize America’s so called “Christian heritage.”

In essence, Christian conservatives in Texas have successfully forced a false historical narrative into public school textbooks that portray Moses as an influence on the Constitution and the Old Testament as the root of democracy.
Critics called the whole process into question after publishers posted a number of last-minute changes to the textbooks yesterday, leaving board members and observers without time to figure out exactly what was in the approved texts.


Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2014/11/texas-approves-textbooks-with-moses-as-founding-father/#ixzz3K6TrlFfo

Film at 11

Any idea where this hangs?

Sounds unconstitutional. The courts will handle them.

They want to speak for the founding fathers. They'll hear from the founding fatners soon enough.

If that isn't conservative hypocrisy I don't know what is.

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

The Second Continental Congress appointed a committee on July 4, 1776, the day the Declaration of Independence was adopted, to select a design for a United States seal. The original members were John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson.

One of them, Benjamin Franklin, designed a seal that depicted Moses parting the waters.

Here it is:






You people need a history lesson in the worst possible way.

PS - the relief of Moses posted above hangs in the US House of Representatives. I doubt any of these numbskulls knew that.

A seal is different than the indoctrination of children in public schools based on biblical philosophy.

Ben and Moses Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Second Continental Congress appointed a
> committee on July 4, 1776, the day the Declaration
> of Independence was adopted, to select a design
> for a United States seal. The original members
> were John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas
> Jefferson.
>
> One of them, Benjamin Franklin, designed a seal
> that depicted Moses parting the waters.
>
> Here it is:
>
> src=http://www.greatseal.com/committees/firstcomm/
> 1CommBLossingLG.jpg>
>
>
>
>
> You people need a history lesson in the worst
> possible way.
>
> PS - the relief of Moses posted above hangs in the
> US House of Representatives. I doubt any of these
> numbskulls knew that.

No doubt. This country was founded on Christian values, and fine tuned with Judeo-Christian values. It's the way it is, and you can't change history. Texas got it right.

"All men…are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness"

Thats in the Declaration of Independence BTW.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A seal is different than the indoctrination of
> children in public schools based on biblical
> philosophy.

They are teaching social studies based on historical fact. To deny that Moses was an influence on our founding fathers is absurd. The historical record is replete with information that confirms that. Just in this thread alone are two depictions that show our founders looked to Moses for inspiration. There are countless more.

We need the history lesson? This type of crazy shit you see from conservatives. Some idiot comes up with nonsense idea and conservative immediately jump to make a law because they don't want another conservative to look stupid.

Many civilizations have used fictional characters and symbolism.

Does an eagle on US currency mean America was built and founded by birds?
Attachments:

Erfd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We need the history lesson?

Absolutely. Your lack of historical knowledge of this nation is astounding.

> This type of crazy
> shit you see from conservatives. Some idiot comes
> up with nonsense idea and conservative immediately
> jump to make a law because they don't want another
> conservative to look stupid.

WTF are you talking about?

> Many civilizations have used fictional characters
> and symbolism.

Why would they do that? Just for shits and giggles? Or, perhaps, because they find them inspirational and influential?

> Does an eagle on US currency mean America was
> built and founded by birds?

No, what it means is liberty and freedom and that is what was conveyed. Look, denying that our founding fathers were influenced by the bible and religious leaders is really stupid. I put it up there with those that are creationists. All the evidence is against you, but you cling to a stupid notion.

Separation of Church and State dipshits. You can't change the Constitution. Doesn't matter how Fox News spins ot.

We love seeing you struck down by the founders whenever you raise your ugly heads.

The Supreme Law of the Land says you pieces of shit are of detriment to this great nation.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Separation of Church and State dipshits. You can't
> change the Constitution. Doesn't matter how Fox
> News spins ot.


They aren't establishing a religion. They are stating that our founders were influenced by the bible and Moses, et. al. That is an undeniable fact. Why do you not want our children learning a factual and complete history of this country?

This would be like teaching a course on Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and leaving out the fact that he was a religious pastor.

Why do you hate history so much????

Moses was an influence on the Constitution. lol, the Constitution is a little more advanced than thou shalt not steal. How did Moses influence the very first Bill of Rights?

The first American immigrants were predominantly puritans but there were many other religions that came to the US to escape religious prosecutions from the Christian church of England.

So in a way founders were "anti-christian" church of England.

You know the one that specifically says the government can't promote Moses.

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports."

The Constitution itself says don't affiliate me with religion.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know the one that specifically says the
> government can't promote Moses.

ORLY? Go take a look at this. It's a quick metro ride away.

Our public schools aren't your tax payer funded madrasas. The Constitution will give you a well deserved swift kick in the ass.

That's Neptune! You fuck stick!

Neptune symbolizes the rebirth of fresh waters!

Neptune : was the Roman god of freshwater and the sea[1] in Roman religion. He is the counterpart of the Greek god Poseidon.[2] In the Greek-influenced tradition, Neptune was the brother of Jupiter and Pluto, each of them presiding over the realms of Heaven, our earthly world, and the Underworld, respectively.[3] Salacia was his consort.

Depictions of Neptune in Roman mosaics, especially those of North Africa, are influenced by Hellenistic conventions.[4] Neptune was likely associated with fresh water springs before the sea.[5] Like Poseidon, Neptune was worshipped by the Romans also as a god of horses, under the name Neptunus Equester, a patron of horse-racing.
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Moses was an influence on the Constitution. lol,
> the Constitution is a little more advanced than
> thou shalt not steal. How did Moses influence the
> very first Bill of Rights?

Does the Bill of Rights address cruel and unusual punishment?

Does the Bill of Rights address fair trials?

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Our public schools aren't your tax payer funded
> madrasas. The Constitution will give you a well
> deserved swift kick in the ass.


I see you want our public schools to not teach history accurately. You might as well leave out the whole slavery thing too. Call the Civil War a shouting match between a couple of brothers while your at it.

histroy lesson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Moses was an influence on the Constitution.
> lol,
> > the Constitution is a little more advanced than
> > thou shalt not steal. How did Moses influence
> the
> > very first Bill of Rights?
>
> Does the Bill of Rights address cruel and unusual
> punishment?
>
> Does the Bill of Rights address fair trials?

Does an eagle fly higher than most birds?

The atheists are right about you freaks.

Yet another thread where Gerrythefairy gets PWND! Just like every thread he posts in.

What a failure. Typical lib.

libs hate America.

WTFers?? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> histroy lesson Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Moses was an influence on the Constitution.
> > lol,
> > > the Constitution is a little more advanced
> than
> > > thou shalt not steal. How did Moses influence
> > the
> > > very first Bill of Rights?
> >
> > Does the Bill of Rights address cruel and
> unusual
> > punishment?
> >
> > Does the Bill of Rights address fair trials?
>
> Does an eagle fly higher than most birds?


I'm not an ornithologist, so I have no idea. You got a point?

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The atheists are right about you freaks.


What do they say about people such as you who deny historical facts?

I got one historical fact. Keep your religion out of our schools punk.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I got one historical fact. Keep your religion out
> of our schools punk.


Do you know the difference between religion and history? Teaching the FACT that our founders were influenced by a certain religion and religious leaders is NOT teaching religion. It is teaching history. You want no mention of religion at all in history? Who do you say the Nazis killed in concentration camps? How do you explain the Crusades without discussing the fact that religion influenced the belligerents?

Well I'll tell you this much. You've failed before and you'll fail again. You're also unamerican. Americans believe in and uphold the principles and foundation of the Constitution.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well I'll tell you this much. You've failed before
> and you'll fail again. You're also unamerican.
> Americans believe in and uphold the principles and
> foundation of the Constitution.


Once again you dodge all questions. Too difficult for you?

Apparently your version of America includes teaching an inaccurate and incomplete version of history. You really are no better than a creationist.

No my version of America is an all inclusive nation where the Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion or impeding the free exercise of religion.

Moses influenced the Constitution is an irrelevant opinion.

Gerry wants to go back through American history and erase any references to Christianity in order to make it correct. lmao

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No my version of America is an all inclusive
> nation where the Constitution prohibits the making
> of any law respecting an establishment of religion
> or impeding the free exercise of religion.

No law here is establishing or impeding the free exercise of religion. teaching historical facts is not establishing religion. Learn the difference.

> Moses influenced the Constitution is an irrelevant
> opinion.

It is a historical facts supported by established and accepted evidence. You wish to deny it. You are no better than a creationist.

I deny it. I am fully under the impression that the founding fathers would have known that you shouldn't steal without the contributions of Moses.

Moses is not only a Christian figure either. He is also a Jewish and Muslim figure and selective history cannot be exercized.

Moses and all other Abrahamic faith prophets or messiahs originated in the middle east. So accurate portrayal of the facts in that manner should also suggest that the US Constitution has had its ideals originate in the middle east.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I deny it. I am fully under the impression that
> the founding fathers would have known that you
> shouldn't steal without the contributions of
> Moses.

There were many more contributions, but given what I've seen from you so far, it is understandable that you remain blissfully unaware of them

> Moses is not only a Christian figure either. He is
> also a Jewish and Muslim figure and selective
> history cannot be exercized.

Who said it is?

> Moses and all other Abrahamic faith prophets or
> messiahs originated in the middle east. So
> accurate portrayal of the facts in that manner
> should also suggest that the US Constitution has
> had its ideals originate in the middle east.


Which is why Hammurabi is among those whose reliefs hang in the US House of Representatives.

Go Ted Cruz and Palin! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Christian conservatives win, children lose: Texas
> textbooks will teach public school students that
> the Founding Fathers based the Constitution on the
> Bible, and the American system of democracy was
> inspired by Moses.
>
> On Friday the Republican-controlled Texas State
> Board of Education voted along party lines 10-5 to
> approve the biased and inaccurate textbooks. The
> vote signals a victory for Christian conservatives
> in Texas, and a disappointing defeat for
> historical accuracy and the education of innocent
> children.
>
> The textbooks were written to align with
> instructional standards that the Board of
> Education approved back in 2010 with the explicit
> intention of forcing social studies teaching to
> adhere to a conservative Christian agenda. The
> standards require teachers to emphasize
> America’s so called “Christian heritage.”
>
> In essence, Christian conservatives in Texas have
> successfully forced a false historical narrative
> into public school textbooks that portray Moses as
> an influence on the Constitution and the Old
> Testament as the root of democracy.
> Critics called the whole process into question
> after publishers posted a number of last-minute
> changes to the textbooks yesterday, leaving board
> members and observers without time to figure out
> exactly what was in the approved texts.
>
>
> Read more:
> http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhum
> anist/2014/11/texas-approves-textbooks-with-moses-
> as-founding-father/#ixzz3K6TrlFfo


.
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I deny it. I am fully under the impression that
> the founding fathers would have known that you
> shouldn't steal without the contributions of
> Moses.
>
> Moses is not only a Christian figure either. He is
> also a Jewish and Muslim figure and selective
> history cannot be exercized.
>



Uh, if you'd read more than just the idiot propaganda piece linked above, then you'd know that's basically exactly what they did. What was included was reference to the importance of biblical law including those of the Old Testament in the foundation of law in the US.


> Moses and all other Abrahamic faith prophets or
> messiahs originated in the middle east. So
> accurate portrayal of the facts in that manner
> should also suggest that the US Constitution has
> had its ideals originate in the middle east.


Which further reduces your claim of it representing establishment of any given religion.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I deny it. I am fully under the impression that
> the founding fathers would have known that you
> shouldn't steal without the contributions of
> Moses.
>
> Moses is not only a Christian figure either. He is
> also a Jewish and Muslim figure and selective
> history cannot be exercized.
>
> Moses and all other Abrahamic faith prophets or
> messiahs originated in the middle east. So
> accurate portrayal of the facts in that manner
> should also suggest that the US Constitution has
> had its ideals originate in the middle east.


Yes Comrade!

We can make history better!

Yeah, where's Hammurabi and its influence on the Constitution lol.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, where's Hammurabi and its influence on the
> Constitution lol.


Is that a question? Have you ever taken a history course? Did you pay attention?

THE MAYFLOWER VOYAGE

The group that set out from Plymouth, in southwestern England, in September 1620 included 35 members of a radical Puritan faction known as the English Separatist Church. In 1607, after illegally breaking from the Church of England, the Separatists settled in the Netherlands, first in Amsterdam and later in the town of Leiden, where they remained for the next decade under the relatively lenient Dutch laws. Due to economic difficulties, as well as fears that they would lose their English language and heritage, they began to make plans to settle in the New World. Their intended destination was a region near the Hudson River, which at the time was thought to be part of the already established colony of Virginia. In 1620, the would-be settlers joined a London stock company that would finance their trip aboard the Mayflower, a three-masted merchant ship, in 1620. A smaller vessel, the Speedwell, had initially accompanied the Mayflower and carried some of the travelers, but it proved unseaworthy and was forced to return to port by September.

Did You Know?
Bradford and the other Plymouth settlers were not originally known as Pilgrims, but as "Old Comers." This changed after the discovery of a manuscript by Bradford in which he called the settlers who left Holland "saints" and "pilgrimes." In 1820, at a bicentennial celebration of the colony's founding, the orator Daniel Webster referred to "Pilgrim Fathers," and the term stuck.

Some of the most notable passengers on the Mayflower included Myles Standish, a professional soldier who would become the military leader of the new colony; and William Bradford, a leader of the Separatist congregation who wrote the still-classic account of the Mayflower voyage and the founding of Plymouth Colony. While still on board the ship, a group of 41 men signed the so-called Mayflower Compact, in which they agreed to join together in a “civil body politic.” This document would become the foundation of the new colony’s government.

history lesson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yeah, where's Hammurabi and its influence on
> the
> > Constitution lol.
>
>
> Is that a question? Have you ever taken a history
> course? Did you pay attention?

It sounds like he thinks Hammurabi is a place on the map.

Hammarabi's Code you stupid fucks. Don't leave out Hammarabi,it precedes Moses.

Hammurabi's Code is actually more historically relevant. It detailed law governing property rights and inheritance.

Get this, it is the first known example of the notion of persumption of innocence.

Hammurabi's Code blows the Ten Commandments out of the water.

Its selective analysis of history based on personal religious beliefs.

US law is based on jurisprudence of legal realism and handed down from English\Roman law.

Whoever is saying "Moses" is seriously fucked in the head and never studied US law.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its selective analysis of history based on
> personal religious beliefs.

+10

Teatards!

They want to go back to the origination of basic law for mankind lmao.

Over imaginary bogeyman.

Evolution is a theory that has been scientifically proven false. Why would any school teach that anyway? It's factual that the USA was founded by religious people. After all, that is why they came here to escape religious persecution from a tyrannical government and that is why there is separation of church and state. Not to keep religion out of state run institutions but to allow freedom to practice religion.

libs hate EVERYTHING!

In bubble.

Always satisfying to see Gerry try so hard and get pwnd over and over. We know it's so easy, but I still smile every time it happens (which is all the time). What a moronic fool our pudgy, balding Gerry is.

 
Attachments:

To be completely honest, the Founding Fathers were largely influenced by Christianity. Even Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, recognized that the newly founded United States had roots in it. While the United States was founded with the understanding that there would never be a state religion, it was founded on Judeo-Christian values in some ways.

This is NOT an issue of "separation of church and state." This is an issue of historical fact, which some people don't like because it doesn't go with their agenda.

Also, Texas isn't "throwing out" evolution any time soon. Evolution is, like it or not, heavily supported by the evidence. Based on what we know, it seems to explain the complexity of life. The thread title is misleading at best.

The Virginia Declaration of Rights

Virginia's Declaration of Rights was drawn upon by Thomas Jefferson for the opening paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. It was widely copied by the other colonies and became the basis of the Bill of Rights. Written by George Mason, it was adopted by the Virginia Constitutional Convention on June 12, 1776.


Section 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practise Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hammarabi's Code you stupid fucks.

Be honest, you had to Google that.

> Don't leave out
> Hammarabi,it precedes Moses.

Who said they are?

Do you know what this is? Do you know what words are inscribed upon it?

Good. As long as it upholds the 2nd amendment.

Never Run Out of Ammo

Guns Don't Kill People. People Kill People

Them or You

The two most important days in your life are the day your were born and and the day you find out why

Gunlover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good. As long as it upholds the 2nd amendment.

Ignorant posters such as yourself is one reason the citizens would want the 2nd amendment repealed.

I am disappointed with all of my children that have lost their way. My son Jesus will be arriving shortly to take all believers to the promise land.

The rest of you libtards will be left behind in a living hell. Get ready, it's going to get real hot for you libtards, enjoy the devil as he butt fucks you every day.

Oh Christ,

Moses must be rolling over in grave watching all the greed and hate republicans spew into the world.

Republican Jesus is the anti-Christ.

If Moses or Jesus were alive they would banish the GOP and all its followers with death.

>The first American immigrants were predominantly puritans but there were many other religions that came to the US to escape religious prosecutions from the Christian church of England.

They were hardly the first, but it's also worth noting that having arrived, the lost little time in doing a bit of religious persecution of their own. They didn't come here to be free so much as 'in charge'.

Passioned as Gerrymander2 is on this you would think he never prayed a day in his life.

He been on his knees a lot.

Never Run Out of Ammo

Guns Don't Kill People. People Kill People

Them or You

The two most important days in your life are the day your were born and and the day you find out why

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >The first American immigrants were predominantly
> puritans but there were many other religions that
> came to the US to escape religious prosecutions
> from the Christian church of England.
>
> They were hardly the first, but it's also worth
> noting that having arrived, the lost little time
> in doing a bit of religious persecution of their
> own. They didn't come here to be free so much as
> 'in charge'.


They were pretty close to the first, at least from Europe. They came about 15 years after the Brits set up in Jamestown and were the second main contingent. They came to practice their religion (the Pilgrims), not embrace other religions. And you didn't address the point in your response and end with an opinion. All in all, a typical abelard fail post.

Gunlover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Passioned as Gerrymander2 is on this you would
> think he never prayed a day in his life.
>
> He been on his knees a lot.

It's best to keep fingers idle and let people think your're stupid
rather than type and everyone know you are.

See, it keeps attention away from libshtz! Waaaaa!

Wisdom of Words Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gunlover Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Passioned as Gerrymander2 is on this you would
> > think he never prayed a day in his life.
> >
> > He been on his knees a lot.
>
> It's best to keep fingers idle and let people
> think your're stupid
> rather than type and everyone know you are.


Hi Gerry why be anon? Not like you.

Never Run Out of Ammo

Guns Don't Kill People. People Kill People

Them or You

The two most important days in your life are the day your were born and and the day you find out why

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No my version of America is an all inclusive
> nation where the Constitution prohibits the making
> of any law respecting an establishment of religion
> or impeding the free exercise of religion.

Except for Jews. My version of America allows for the extermination of the hook nosed demons.



> Moses influenced the Constitution is an irrelevant
> opinion.

As irrelevant as an Enon lobbyist.

Signed,
GerryManderer2

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Moses or Jesus were alive they would banish the
> GOP and all its followers with death.

OK, Gerry, you've had too much to drink and you are now cut off. If you ever read anything serious about Jesus you would know that was an ignorant statement. I don't really care what you think about Christians, but to say Jesus would ever condemn any one is ridiculous. Even liberals know that.

>They were pretty close to the first, at least from Europe.

True, unless you count the Swedes, the French, the Spanish (for about a century), the Portuguese, other Brits, and (IIRC) the Dutch. So, pretty much anybody with a boat. C for effort, ZZZ.


>They came to practice their religion (the Pilgrims), not embrace other religions.

Sigh. They tossed out members of their own religion. They really weren't the embracing sort.

>And you didn't address the point in your response and end with an opinion. All in all, a typical abelard fail post.

ZZZzz, contact your old high school and demand your money back. You need more than Wood Shop if you're gonna think of yourself as educated. No offense intended - I'm sure your folks still treasure the lamp you made.

ETA: Please tell me you're just an Eesh puppet - I've only so much scorn to spare and was hoping to double up.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2014 07:21PM by abelard.

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >They were pretty close to the first, at least
> from Europe.
>
> True, unless you count the Swedes, the French, the
> Spanish (for about a century), the Portuguese,
> other Brits, and (IIRC) the Dutch. So, pretty
> much anybody with a boat. C for effort, ZZZ.
>
>
> >They came to practice their religion (the
> Pilgrims), not embrace other religions.
>
> Sigh. They tossed out members of their own
> religion. They really weren't the embracing sort.
>
> >And you didn't address the point in your response
> and end with an opinion. All in all, a typical
> abelard fail post.
>
> ZZZzz, contact your old high school and demand
> your money back. You need more than Wood Shop if
> you're gonna think of yourself as educated. No
> offense intended - I'm sure your folks still
> treasure the lamp you made.
>
> ETA: Please tell me you're just an Eesh puppet -
> I've only so much scorn to spare and was hoping to
> double up.


Still wrong and deflecting. Immigrant means something brainless. Explorers aren't immigrants. Plunders aren't immigrants. Immigrants came here in the early 1600's and, you know, immigrated.

You can sigh all you want genius. Like that makes you sound like you're right or something. LOL What a fool.

Just another too-smart-by-half pompous fool trying to insinuate that he knows what he's talking about. Still failing abelard. And foolishly to boot.

You actually edited that lame post and still made it so lame. There's a word for that you know.....

 
Attachments:

Ha - I stand corrected. When you go in after the holiday's over, tell your home room teacher that you need more than Wood Shop on class list. She'll discourage you but stand your ground.

A short list of terms for you to google. That's a computer thing, feel free to google it.

'Immigration'
'New Netherlands'
'L'Anse aux Meadows'
'Acadia'
'Roanoke Colony'
'São Vicente'

That's enough homework for one night.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2014 07:50PM by abelard.

I hope no one notices the cloud in my great seal design was actually a vagina.

Ben

For without the Belief of a Providence that takes Cognizance of, guards and guides and may favour particular Persons, there is no Motive to Worship a Deity, to fear its Displeasure, or to pray for its Protection ... think how great a Proportion of Mankind consists of weak and ignorant Men and Women, and of inexperienc'd and inconsiderate Youth of both Sexes, who have need of the Motives of Religion to restrain them from Vice, to support their Virtue, and retain them in the Practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great Point for its Security; And perhaps you are indebted to her originally that is to your Religious Education, for the Habits of Virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it.

You can PRACTICE any religion in the USA, but the CONSTITUTION forbids any religion being TAUGHT in our STATE/GOVERNMENT/LOCAL schools.

> You can PRACTICE any religion in the USA, but the CONSTITUTION forbids any religion being TAUGHT in our STATE/GOVERNMENT/LOCAL schools.

Actually, I don't think that is the correct interpretation. The Constitution protects you from being forced to practice any particular religion. It doesn't really prevent secular schools. This is obvious with private schools. With public schools, teaching one religion over another could be seen as a government endorsement of a particular religion. But what Texas wants to teach isn't religion.

What Texas wants to teach isn't especially wrong either. The Founding Fathers would have been considered deeply religious by today's values. From the Constitution:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,..."

Note the religious overtones in this phrase. This is perhaps one of the most important ideas in the document. It didn't arise from some belief that we all evolved from the same group of primates. That doesn't make this idea wrong either. It argues, if we all have a common origin, none of us are born with special rights to rule or entitlements.

I do hope they also mention the other influences like English Common law.

>This is perhaps one of the most important ideas in the document. It didn't arise from some belief that we all evolved from the same group of primates.

Surely this was written to refute the 'divine right of kings' foundation of the land they were rebelling against, yes? If England had no god-given right over us, then they had no 'rights' over us at all, just might.

This was then a mere political statement justifying self-rule, not a statement about how to examine physical reality and make sense of it. These were men of reason and while I'm sure they too would find some of the discoveries of modern science unsettling, I wonder if they wouldn't find the Texas creationists absurd. This would be on intent to rule (and this is about ruling, not about reason) by appeal to the divine, not on substance since Creationism would be very familiar to 18th Century minds.

Give me a bit of time to get Jefferson up to speed on current science and I'm pretty sure he'd pen an addendum saying 'That's not what your forefathers meant - when you guys can pray up an iphone or a a sensible phylogeny of life on earth, you can sit at the table with those who think for a living.'

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >This is perhaps one of the most important ideas
> in the document. It didn't arise from some belief
> that we all evolved from the same group of
> primates.
>
> Surely this was written to refute the 'divine
> right of kings' foundation of the land they were
> rebelling against, yes? If England had no
> god-given right over us, then they had no 'rights'
> over us at all, just might.
>
> This was then a mere political statement
> justifying self-rule, not a statement about how to
> examine physical reality and make sense of it.
> These were men of reason and while I'm sure they
> too would find some of the discoveries of modern
> science unsettling, I wonder if they wouldn't find
> the Texas creationists absurd. This would be on
> intent to rule (and this is about ruling, not
> about reason) by appeal to the divine, not on
> substance since Creationism would be very familiar
> to 18th Century minds.
>
> Give me a bit of time to get Jefferson up to speed
> on current science and I'm pretty sure he'd pen an
> addendum saying 'That's not what your forefathers
> meant - when you guys can pray up an iphone or a a
> sensible phylogeny of life on earth, you can sit
> at the table with those who think for a living.'


Given any time at all with Jefferon, I am sure he would see what a bore you are and quickly put a bullet in your empty head. That would be perhaps his greatest contribution to our society as we have too many self-important windbags musing empty nothings to the rest of us as it is.

> Surely this was written to refute the 'divine right of kings' foundation of the land they were rebelling against, yes? If England had no god-given right over us, then they had no 'rights' over us at all, just might.

This is exactly my point. Jefferson was arguing that all men are created equal in the eyes of the Creator. His argument was that God didn't go around saying, "OK, you guys are Kings and get to do whatever you want.".

But Jefferson's argument had a religious foundation instead of a scientific foundation. That doesn't make the idea of equality wrong though. If you showed Jefferson the theory of evolution he would probably argue it doesn't matter what you believe, creationism or evolution, all men are equal.

>This was then a mere political statement justifying self-rule,

I don't think so. This all men are equal idea also gave the Founding Fathers pause about slavery. While they continued to own slaves, this founding precept made them question the morality of holding another man in bondage.

But like Aristotle, they rationalized that slavery was a necessary evil at the time and that society as a whole benefited therefore it was acceptable.

FACT: TEXAS WAS FOUNDED AND SETTLED BY VIRGINIANS.

>If you showed Jefferson the theory of evolution he would probably argue it doesn't matter what you believe, creationism or evolution, all men are equal.

Agreed, and oddly enough, I think you can (arguably) find more justification for this in evolution than in a creation story. And kudos for saying 'are equal' rather than 'created equal'. That woulda been loaded language, even though I don't think Jefferson thought so.

>While they continued to own slaves, this founding precept made them question the morality of holding another man in bondage.

Unfortunately, even if men are created equal, they're decidedly unequal half a second later. Circumstances matter, and being born black in 18th century america wasn't nice. But then they did leave us with the machinery for rectifying this, even if it did require suspending the the constitution in order to implement it.

>That would be perhaps his greatest contribution to our society as we have too many self-important windbags musing empty nothings to the rest of us as it is.

You know, this is so close to an actual sentence that I'm gonna let it slide - so proud of you, ZZzzzz. Keep working on your smack talk, you'll get there.

ETA: Okay, my didactic side got the best of me - it's 'Jefferson' and 'boor'. Still, B+ for the unintended pun of 'bore' and shooting me in the head.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2014 09:50PM by abelard.

abelard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Agreed, and oddly enough, I think you can
> (arguably) find more justification for this in
> evolution than in a creation story.

taint necessarily so, mcgee.

there can be a hierarchy as between races, some higher, some lower.

some "civilised," some "savage."

given these conditions, someone might even make a scientific prediction that, at some very not distant period, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races.

oops, whaddya know, someone did.



of course, we're all much more enlightened now, right?

lulz...........................

jefferson had it right: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."

that is a rock you can build on.

nature red in tooth and claw?

not so much.

Do Texans also think America was founded based on the Romans because of "E pluribus unum."

The stupidity of conservatives simple minds is astounding.

> there can be a hierarchy as between races, some higher, some lower.

But the point here would be that evolution doesn't give any particular group of individuals "divine right" to rule. This is the claim of most tyrants and despots (even the benevolent ones).

The religious argument that there is no "divine right" to rule is a bit difficult to prove. For instance, Moses was a prophet which is a position appointed by the Divine being (you prove it by performing miracles). Of course, being a a prophet isn't hereditary so you don't get monarchies from this. But I believe Jefferson's argument probably goes back to all men being crated in the image of God. Not some but all and all are created in the same image. I don't know Jefferson's stance on women. That might be interesting since, Bibically, women are created from man which would seem to give man dominion.

Yes, evolution would seem to predict that there are certain groups who will be better adapted for certain environments. So, I suppose there are groups somewhere that are better adapted for leading other men. Unfortunately, in a democracy, the evolutionary pressure would not cause great leaders to emerge, but rather great campaigners.

uF7y7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > You can PRACTICE any religion in the USA, but
> the CONSTITUTION forbids any religion being TAUGHT
> in our STATE/GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC schools.
>
> Actually, I don't think that is the correct
> interpretation.

Yes it is correct.

> The Constitution protects you
> from being forced to practice any particular
> religion.

Correct, that is why teaching "creationism" is illegal and would have to be taught with every other religions ideals on mans existence.

> It doesn't really prevent secular
> schools. This is obvious with private schools.

I said "STATE/GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC" - not private or homeschooling.

> With public schools, teaching one religion over
> another could be seen as a government endorsement
> of a particular religion.

It is and that is the reason NO religion should be allowed in schools, unless you are to include the other 10,000 religions equally.

> But what Texas wants to
> teach isn't religion.

It is religion and only the Christian brand.

> What Texas wants to teach isn't especially wrong
> either. The Founding Fathers would have been
> considered deeply religious by today's values.

Irrelevant, Christian (fill in the blank) should not be taught in the schools. The founding fathers were very aware that church and state should be separate in all aspects of this country.


> From the Constitution:
>
> "We hold these truths to be self-evident,
> that all men are created equal, that they are
> endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
> Rights,..."
>
> Note the religious overtones in this phrase. This
> is perhaps one of the most important ideas in the
> document. It didn't arise from some belief that
> we all evolved from the same group of primates.
> That doesn't make this idea wrong either. It
> argues, if we all have a common origin, none of us
> are born with special rights to rule or
> entitlements.

Again, unless ALL religions are going to be accounted for and equally brought into the mix, it is illegal to teach Christianity in our schools.

> I do hope they also mention the other influences
> like English Common law. The words "their Creator" could be any Gods from any religions, nothing is specified and does not allow for interpretations.

Honestly, this all is no different then Muslims taking a few words or phrases and twisting them to fit their agenda. Same crazy shortsighted people, just using different sources.

Just beacuse our culture, laws and government are based on Christianity doesn't mean we need to learn about it. We really only need to learn about the bad stuff people did. That will make us all better people. If they only teach things like slavery and racism and gay bashing then kids will know how treat everyone with respect and fairness.

What is this, some Stormfront shit?

"Civilised" Caucasians are going to "exterminate" the "savage races" in the "not very distant" future?

"As we may hope"?

Because then, "the break between man and his nearest allies will be wider," because Caucasians will have evolved to be even "more civilized" ?

Okay, I guess that's a pretty good reason for exterminating the "savage races" -- I mean, we all want to be "more civilised," right?

And getting down to some good, hardcore exterminatin' has always been one of the best ways I know of to become more civilised.

But wait!

Here's another good reason: after we're (I mean, you and me, white people, Caucasians) done exterminating those damn savages, there's an extra added bonus!

Check it out: the evolutionary spread between man and the lowly baboon will be greater than the spread that CURRENTLY exists between the civilised "Caucasian" and the savage "negro or Australian" (with "Australian" presumably referring to Aborigines).

Hot damn.

I guess you could call that "progress"... if you're a white supremacist.

Anyway, this fella does a real nice job of laying a solid scientific foundation for racial supremacy.

Builds it right into the system.

And if the system seems too slow, we can always accelerate it by doing a little exterminating of our own.

That's downright thoughtful of him, that last part; it's like he wants to sort of nudge us in the right direction without being too obvious about it. (Not that human beings ever needed a whole lot of nudging to get into the extermination business. We take to it natural, like a fish to water.)

I admit, I was a little skeptical when I started reading this; you know how they're always trying to teach you in school that people are equal, even when you know they ain't? Some of that sorta rubbed off on me, I guess, but now I see the truth of it. Now I understand the scientific side of the matter.

Now I know who's civilised and who's savage.

And it's not just a theory -- it's a fact!

But you know what the funny thing is...?

It's just like I suspected all along.

White folks on top, niggers on the bottom.

I think there are some people who can make good use of this lesson!

Well done!

Are all Americans this stupid? No wonder why you guys are billions in debt to China. Oh well, you'll all be our slaves soon

Supreme leader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are all Americans this stupid? No wonder why you
> guys are billions in debt to China. Oh well,
> you'll all be our slaves soon

You speak as if you're not an American...

Evolution hasn't been proven. I think both schools of thought should be addressed. The signers of the constitution and declaration didn't all view Christianity as we are led to believe. Some were , some believed that there was something greater than them, but didn't call it god. Both extremes want to force their propaganda down our children's throats. I believe there's a god, but I have no problem with kids being taught to think for themselves. That's how you learn to spot propaganda

>Evolution hasn't been proven

Neither has gravity. Feel free to ignore it the next time you are near a cliff.

MKDuT Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >Evolution hasn't been proven
>
> Neither has gravity. Feel free to ignore it the
> next time you are near a cliff.


Sure it has.

Just look down at all the Cheeto crumbs on your shirt.

Notice how you aren't floating around your mom's basement but rather firmly pulled into the couch as you watch those Parkour Youtube videos?

> Sure it has.

Law of gravitational attraction versus theory of gravity. Get an education.

LOL, the top of the seal from Benny sorta looks like a hairy vagina. When they were putting together this awful monstrosity of a constitution, they were thinking "gee how can we keep what we got and fuck over the common guy? That is what was in the constitution. Throw some words about religion in there to keep them dopey-eyed. Geez.