Government Should Teach Traditional Values

[Foxfyre]

Hard to see how you can 'do your job' since you don't realize that there is hardly an objective way to include 'history, science, civics, ect."
Herein is the entre to Left wing views for children.

Further, would you really object if you could be convinced there are "skills, and traits that are identified above, and that add to the chances that both the individual and the society would be most successful."

Really?

I agree with Caela that schools should not be teaching that premarital sex or having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad. I think you are right, however, that a good education includes information on the statistics of poverty and other economic and social factors re those who enter into traditional marriage versus single parents, etc.

There is a problem when the government school imposes a moral value on the facts.

The same goes with information on landmark court decisions, acts of Congress, various government policies, key elements of history and culture etc. Again the student should not be instructed that one thing is good while the other is bad, but should be providing honest and complete objective information by which the student can make value judgments.

There is no problem with teaching the facts that will provide sufficient information for the student to consider what values he or she wants to guide his/her life.

"...having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad."

This has nothing to do with the "government school imposes a moral value on the facts."

Rather, it has do with preparing children to be successful.
These are the facts:
"Here is the lottery ticket that single mothers are handing their innocent children by choosing to raise them without fathers: Controlling for socioeconomic status, race, and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single parent. By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy-two percent of juvenile murderers and 60 percent of rapists come from single-mother homes. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents, and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced.

A 1990 study by the Progressive Policy Institute showed that after controlling for single motherhood, the difference between black and white crime rates disappeared."
From “Guilty” by Ann Coulter


BTW...
The numbers cited by Coulter come from the Department of Justice's Bureau of Statistics report, "Intimate Partner Violence in the United States." The survey found that "on average from 2001 to 2005, both females and males who were separated or divorced had the greatest risk of nonfatal intimate partner violence while persons who were married or widowed reported the lowest risk of violence." Between 2001 and 2005, 1.2 out of 1,000 married women reported physical abuse by an "intimate partner" (in this case, their husband), versus 5.5 out of 1,000 among women who never married.
In short, Coulter cites the numbers accurately.
PolitiFact | Coulter says husbands rarely beat up their wives


If children are lucky enough to have shop class, I know that you would agree that they should be warned about the dangers of the equipment....so....
...you get the idea.

How about it....do we include " teaching that premarital sex or having kids out of wedlock etc. is right or wrong, good or bad."

No, you don't teach it as right or wrong, good or bad any more than you teach forms of government as right or wrong, good or bad, or the environmental issues as right or wrong or good or bad. You give them the statistics and the truth about different choices of lifestyle from single parenthood to traditional marriage to permanently single, etc. and the crime, education results, financial circumstances etc. olf each group. You give them the rationale behind the various forms of government from feudalism to monarchy to Marxism to democracy to the Constitutional Republic that is the USA and the honest version of what has happened when each was put into practice and let the kids decide which is good, which is bad, etc. You give both sides of the debate re global warming, exploitation and use of resources, etc. along with the best information available and let the kids decide.

There are all kinds of ways to arm the kids with what they need to know to make value judgments without making those value judgments for them or skewing the information so that only one point of view seems logical.

 

[Money]

No prob.

There is no perpetual 'Elite Wealthy Class' in America.

There is no 'Rich Class.'

The hypostetical construct is a useful image ginned up by the Left.
You seem to have fallen for it.

25 percent of the “super-rich” in 1996 remained in that category in 2005.

Um......how have I "fallen for" anything?

Your own (sanitized to remove the subjectivity) quote demonstrates that there is a "Super-Rich" class, and that 25% the perpetuated itself over the past decade.

I'm not certain what happened to the other 75% (oddly omitted) however, I doubt they qualified for food stamps. My guess is that for convenient statistical reporting purposes (about which you seem oblivious), they slipped into either the "Super-Duper Rich" class, or into the "Not-so-super Rich" class.

Still a CASTE SYSTEM suggests that people are stuck with the circumstances they are born into. I don't think you believe that Americans must forever endure the circumstances they are born into, so I don't know why you seem to be arguing for that point of view. Our Constitution was intended to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity meaning that it protects our unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The intention was that each individual would then make of that whatever they chose to do. The fact that so many immigrants arrived here with little more than the shirts on their backs and prospered beyond anything they could expect in their home countries is proof of the lack of a caste system in this country.

Well, like any society we do have social classes. I think there's a big difference between a caste system and having recognizable social classes. a caste system is far more deliberate and sophisticated then anything in place in the United States. At most, here in the United States, individuals take pride in the set of values with which they were raised, and would look to perpetuate those values from one generation to the next. This is far less standardized than you would find even in countries like the United Kingdom, but certainly in countries like India or many countries in Latin America.

 

[Money]

No, you don't teach it as right or wrong, good or bad any more than you teach forms of government as right or wrong, good or bad, or the environmental issues as right or wrong or good or bad. You give them the statistics and the truth about different choices of lifestyle from single parenthood to traditional marriage to permanently single, etc. and the crime, education results, financial circumstances etc. olf each group. You give them the rationale behind the various forms of government from feudalism to monarchy to Marxism to democracy to the Constitutional Republic that is the USA and the honest version of what has happened when each was put into practice and let the kids decide which is good, which is bad, etc. You give both sides of the debate re global warming, exploitation and use of resources, etc. along with the best information available and let the kids decide.

There are all kinds of ways to arm the kids with what they need to know to make value judgments without making those value judgments for them or skewing the information so that only one point of view seems logical.

Do you recognize that there is some value in having any sort of judgment placed on what might be good or bad in a society or what might be good or bad for our American society? In the same way that ideally we're preparing students for employment here in America, shouldn't the school system be improving the nature of citizen created by the education system?

Devoid of some of this preparation, we literally leave these kids with weak values instilled by their parents at risk of having those judgments made in a court of law or at a job interview, and to their detriment.

If the goal of education is preparation, this is the missing link.

 

[Old Rocks]

If you get your impressions from the Old Left Media, the following Gallup poll may come
as a shock!

This Gallup poll certainly came as a surprise to me...

In terms of expressing the view that view that government should do what it can to promote traditional values in society guess which age group showed the highest support!!!

C'mon....guess!


"In most of Gallup's Governance surveys from 2001 through 2010, older generations of Americans were more likely than those in Generations X or Y to say they want government to sanction and protect traditional values. However, the percentage of young adults -- aged 18 to 34 -- who want government to promote traditional values has been steadily increasing in recent years, rising from 38% in 2008 to 53% today."
As a result -- and owing to declines in older adults' support for government's promoting traditional values -- young adults are now the most likely to favor it.
Americans Divided on Gov't Role in Promoting Values


Meaning???
The end is near for the Left!


Hallelujah!!

Exactly. That is why the younger folks are leading the OWS movement, and us older workers are just following their lead. Traditional values like hard work should be rewarded and criminals should land in jail. Of course, then we would have to find a whole bunch of people to replace many of those in the banks and wall street.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If you get your impressions from the Old Left Media, the following Gallup poll may come
as a shock!

This Gallup poll certainly came as a surprise to me...

In terms of expressing the view that view that government should do what it can to promote traditional values in society guess which age group showed the highest support!!!

C'mon....guess!


"In most of Gallup's Governance surveys from 2001 through 2010, older generations of Americans were more likely than those in Generations X or Y to say they want government to sanction and protect traditional values. However, the percentage of young adults -- aged 18 to 34 -- who want government to promote traditional values has been steadily increasing in recent years, rising from 38% in 2008 to 53% today."
As a result -- and owing to declines in older adults' support for government's promoting traditional values -- young adults are now the most likely to favor it.
Americans Divided on Gov't Role in Promoting Values


Meaning???
The end is near for the Left!


Hallelujah!!

Exactly. That is why the younger folks are leading the OWS movement, and us older workers are just following their lead. Traditional values like hard work should be rewarded and criminals should land in jail. Of course, then we would have to find a whole bunch of people to replace many of those in the banks and wall street.

The simplest way to shred the essence of your post is to point out that the Pee Party members, regardless of age, are not those who have participated in the traditional values, i.e., hard work in the sense of having done so educationally is to ask you this....

....what is the unemployment rate for college grads?

Higher than the general population?
Lower?
As in so many other areas....you don't know, do you?


"-- the unemployment rate for college graduates (that is, those holding at least a Bachelor’s degree) is only 4.3 percent. Moreover, this figure has slowly declined from 5.0 percent in August 2010."
Despite Unemployment Worries, 95% of U.S. College Grads Have Jobs - Jobs & Hire

And, as of September, 2011, it is even lower.....4.2%.

Wise up.

The Pee Party is a construct of the Obamunists to
1. change the subject of the public discussion....worked with you, huh?
2. magnify the class warfare theme
3. play to the covetous
4. try to convince folks that America is a caste society...as some on this
board try to project.

The members of this rent-a-mob include
1. 60's hippies trying to relive the glory days.
2. Left wingers
3. slackers who want what those who have achived have- without
the concomitant efforts.
4. Left wingers
5. simpletons....if the shoe fits....
6. Did I mention Left wingers?
7. agent provocateurs...the administration
8. Oh, yes...and Left wingers!

Rocks, you should only open your mouth to change feet.

Welcome to the real world.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If you get your impressions from the Old Left Media, the following Gallup poll may come
as a shock!

This Gallup poll certainly came as a surprise to me...

In terms of expressing the view that view that government should do what it can to promote traditional values in society guess which age group showed the highest support!!!

C'mon....guess!


"In most of Gallup's Governance surveys from 2001 through 2010, older generations of Americans were more likely than those in Generations X or Y to say they want government to sanction and protect traditional values. However, the percentage of young adults -- aged 18 to 34 -- who want government to promote traditional values has been steadily increasing in recent years, rising from 38% in 2008 to 53% today."
As a result -- and owing to declines in older adults' support for government's promoting traditional values -- young adults are now the most likely to favor it.
Americans Divided on Gov't Role in Promoting Values


Meaning???
The end is near for the Left!


Hallelujah!!

Its nice to see people want to preserve america for all the things that made it great instead of fundamentally transforming it into something else.

 

[Foxfyre]

No, you don't teach it as right or wrong, good or bad any more than you teach forms of government as right or wrong, good or bad, or the environmental issues as right or wrong or good or bad. You give them the statistics and the truth about different choices of lifestyle from single parenthood to traditional marriage to permanently single, etc. and the crime, education results, financial circumstances etc. olf each group. You give them the rationale behind the various forms of government from feudalism to monarchy to Marxism to democracy to the Constitutional Republic that is the USA and the honest version of what has happened when each was put into practice and let the kids decide which is good, which is bad, etc. You give both sides of the debate re global warming, exploitation and use of resources, etc. along with the best information available and let the kids decide.

There are all kinds of ways to arm the kids with what they need to know to make value judgments without making those value judgments for them or skewing the information so that only one point of view seems logical.

Do you recognize that there is some value in having any sort of judgment placed on what might be good or bad in a society or what might be good or bad for our American society? In the same way that ideally we're preparing students for employment here in America, shouldn't the school system be improving the nature of citizen created by the education system?

Devoid of some of this preparation, we literally leave these kids with weak values instilled by their parents at risk of having those judgments made in a court of law or at a job interview, and to their detriment.

If the goal of education is preparation, this is the missing link.

I don't think you have to make moral judgments about the subject matter if you give the students honest history and honest results of what happens when THIS happens or what has typically happened when THAT happens. It is not necessary to make a moral judgment of whether people prefer to have their unalienable rights secured and then govern themselves or whether they are more comfortable having a powerful central government assign rights and privileges to the people. The latter would include teaching that a large central government that gives you what you want can also take away anything it wants. The former would include teaching that the most free forms of society include disparities between rich and poor, achievers and those who choose not to try, etc. and have them think about whether that is good or bad, okay or not okay.

It does not require assigning moral values to teach both sides of the global warming debate, including ALL the facts re each, and let the kids figure out which is most logical.

At the same time you aren't shortchanging the education of the students in any way nor are you suggesting that there are no moral judgments to be made. To this day I know the religious affiliation of two of my teachers that I had from first grade through college, and I don't know the political affiliation of any. And yet I am pretty much the most opinionated person on the issues that I know and I think my moral center is in no way weak. I think most of those who travelled that journey with me would say pretty much the same thing about themselves. A weak society has values dictated to them. A strong society adopts values that work, that make sense, that accomplish the greater good.

 

[Samson]

If you get your impressions from the Old Left Media, the following Gallup poll may come
as a shock!

This Gallup poll certainly came as a surprise to me...

In terms of expressing the view that view that government should do what it can to promote traditional values in society guess which age group showed the highest support!!!

C'mon....guess!


"In most of Gallup's Governance surveys from 2001 through 2010, older generations of Americans were more likely than those in Generations X or Y to say they want government to sanction and protect traditional values. However, the percentage of young adults -- aged 18 to 34 -- who want government to promote traditional values has been steadily increasing in recent years, rising from 38% in 2008 to 53% today."
As a result -- and owing to declines in older adults' support for government's promoting traditional values -- young adults are now the most likely to favor it.
Americans Divided on Gov't Role in Promoting Values


Meaning???
The end is near for the Left!


Hallelujah!!

Its nice to see people want to preserve america for all the things that made it great instead of fundamentally transforming it into something else.

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If you get your impressions from the Old Left Media, the following Gallup poll may come
as a shock!

This Gallup poll certainly came as a surprise to me...

In terms of expressing the view that view that government should do what it can to promote traditional values in society guess which age group showed the highest support!!!

C'mon....guess!


"In most of Gallup's Governance surveys from 2001 through 2010, older generations of Americans were more likely than those in Generations X or Y to say they want government to sanction and protect traditional values. However, the percentage of young adults -- aged 18 to 34 -- who want government to promote traditional values has been steadily increasing in recent years, rising from 38% in 2008 to 53% today."
As a result -- and owing to declines in older adults' support for government's promoting traditional values -- young adults are now the most likely to favor it.
Americans Divided on Gov't Role in Promoting Values


Meaning???
The end is near for the Left!


Hallelujah!!

Its nice to see people want to preserve america for all the things that made it great instead of fundamentally transforming it into something else.

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

 

[Sky Dancer]

Texas changed it's history curriculum based on the value of promoting a conservative view.

The curriculum plays down the role of Thomas Jefferson among the founding fathers, questions the separation of church and state, and claims that the U.S. government was infiltrated by Communists during the Cold War.

Because the Texas textbook market is so large, books assigned to the state's 4.7 million students often rocket to the top of the market, decreasing costs for other school districts and leading them to buy the same materials.

Discussions ranged from whether President Reagan should get more attention (yes), whether hip-hop should be included as part of lessons on American culture (no), and whether President of the Confederacy Jefferson Davis's inaugural address should be studied alongside Abraham Lincoln's (yes).

Of particular contention was the requirement that lessons on McCarthyism note that "the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government."

The Venona papers document communication between the Soviet Union and its spies. Historians dispute the extent to which transcripts show Soviet involvement in American government.

Also contentious were changes that asserted Christian faith of the founding fathers. Historians say the founding fathers had a variety of approaches to religion and faith; some, like Jefferson, were quite secular.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/17/AR2010031700560.html

My guess is right wing posters here approve of this change in the history textbooks even though historican disagree.

 

[Foxfyre]

Its nice to see people want to preserve america for all the things that made it great instead of fundamentally transforming it into something else.

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

I think Samson was being sarcastic. So far he hasn't been too sympatico with the whole concept of schools making it possible for students to have ALL the information they need to make value judgments without the government dictating those values to them. I believe he is more in agreement with that than he's letting on, but that's just a gut feeling and he certainly can speak for himself.

 

[Sky Dancer]

In a report being released today, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute gives the Texas social studies curriculum standards a "D" while accusing "the conservative majority" of using the curriculum "to promote its political priorities, molding the telling of the past to justify its current views and aims."

"Biblical influences on America's founding are exaggerated, if not invented. The complicated but undeniable history of separation between church and state is flatly dismissed," the group wrote.

The broad swipe from a respected conservative education think tank comes after civil rights groups and minority lawmakers have demanded the board scrap the standards and start over.

The Fordham Institute report faults the new Texas standards for distorting or suppressing aspects that the board found politically unacceptable, such as slavery and segregation, while exaggerating religious influences.

History classes are faulted for 'politicized distortion' - Houston Chronicle

 

[Sky Dancer]

Judging from the updated social studies curriculum, conservatives want students to come away from a Texas education with a favorable impression of: women who adhere to traditional gender roles, the Confederacy, some parts of the Constitution, capitalism, the military and religion. They do not think students should learn about women who demanded greater equality; other parts of the Constitution; slavery, Reconstruction and the unequal treatment of nonwhites generally; environmentalists; labor unions; federal economic regulation; or foreigners.

Here are a few examples. The board has removed mention of the Declaration of the Seneca Falls Convention, the letters of John and Abigail Adams and suffrage advocate Carrie Chapman Catt. As examples of "good citizenship" for third graders, it deleted Harriet Tubman and included Clara Barton, founder of the Red Cross, and Helen Keller (the board seems to have slipped up here—Keller was a committed socialist). The role of religion—but not the separation of church and state—receives emphasis throughout. For example, religious revivals are now listed as one of the twelve major "events and eras" from colonial days to 1877.

The changes seek to reduce or elide discussion of slavery, mentioned mainly for its "impact" on different regions and the coming of the Civil War. A reference to the Atlantic slave trade is dropped in favor of "Triangular trade." Jefferson Davis's inaugural address as president of the Confederacy will now be studied alongside Abraham Lincoln's speeches.

In grade one, Veterans Day replaces Martin Luther King Jr.
The Nation: Twisting Texas History : NPR

 

[Samson]

Its nice to see people want to preserve america for all the things that made it great instead of fundamentally transforming it into something else.

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

America prospered between 1780-1860 ...80 years, and arguably the most critical years because it produced cheap cotton and cotton textiles partly as a result of inexpensive labor.

The US Constitution Withheld freedoms specifically to promote its economy during this period, and "Made America Great" (actually, I wouldn't use "great" as an adjective, but rather "Allowed America to Survive.")

Ironically, part of what has made America "Great" is its ability to do exactly the opposite of
"preserve america for all the things that made it great."

Being able to "Fundamentally transforming itself into something else," is what makes the USA a unique, and successful nation.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

I think Samson was being sarcastic. So far he hasn't been too sympatico with the whole concept of schools making it possible for students to have ALL the information they need to make value judgments without the government dictating those values to them. I believe he is more in agreement with that than he's letting on, but that's just a gut feeling and he certainly can speak for himself.

I was being sarcastic too and don't typically find samson to "be that way" about things.

I at least hope he knows thats not what I was referring to

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

America prospered between 1780-1860 ...80 years, and arguably the most critical years because it produced cheap cotton and cotton textiles partly as a result of inexpensive labor.

The US Constitution Withheld freedoms specifically to promote its economy during this period, and "Made America Great" (actually, I wouldn't use "great" as an adjective, but rather "Allowed America to Survive.")

Ironically, part of what has made America "Great" is its ability to do exactly the opposite of
"preserve america for all the things that made it great."

Being able to "Fundamentally transforming itself into something else," is what makes the USA a unique, and successful nation.

Ok you weren't being sarcastic

Do you really think I personally was referring to slavery and bringing it back, something we fought a civil war to abolish?

 

[Samson]

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

I think Samson was being sarcastic. So far he hasn't been too sympatico with the whole concept of schools making it possible for students to have ALL the information they need to make value judgments without the government dictating those values to them. I believe he is more in agreement with that than he's letting on, but that's just a gut feeling and he certainly can speak for himself.

It is unrealistic to
1. expect students to make "value judgements" about anything: these are people who would gorge themselves on Pizza and Tacos and watch Spongebobsquarepants all day if given the choice.
2. expect their parents to be anything but slightly marginally better at making value judgements: Many cannot even be bothered to feed their kids before sending them to school, much less taking time to teach "value judgements."

 

[Samson]

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

America prospered between 1780-1860 ...80 years, and arguably the most critical years because it produced cheap cotton and cotton textiles partly as a result of inexpensive labor.

The US Constitution Withheld freedoms specifically to promote its economy during this period, and "Made America Great" (actually, I wouldn't use "great" as an adjective, but rather "Allowed America to Survive.")

Ironically, part of what has made America "Great" is its ability to do exactly the opposite of
"preserve america for all the things that made it great."

Being able to "Fundamentally transforming itself into something else," is what makes the USA a unique, and successful nation.

Ok you weren't being sarcastic

Do you really think I personally was referring to slavery and bringing it back, something we fought a civil war to abolish?

No, but I thought I'd pre-empt wrybaby.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Texas changed it's history curriculum based on the value of promoting a conservative view.

The curriculum plays down the role of Thomas Jefferson among the founding fathers, questions the separation of church and state, and claims that the U.S. government was infiltrated by Communists during the Cold War.

Because the Texas textbook market is so large, books assigned to the state's 4.7 million students often rocket to the top of the market, decreasing costs for other school districts and leading them to buy the same materials.

Discussions ranged from whether President Reagan should get more attention (yes), whether hip-hop should be included as part of lessons on American culture (no), and whether President of the Confederacy Jefferson Davis's inaugural address should be studied alongside Abraham Lincoln's (yes).

Of particular contention was the requirement that lessons on McCarthyism note that "the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government."

The Venona papers document communication between the Soviet Union and its spies. Historians dispute the extent to which transcripts show Soviet involvement in American government.

Also contentious were changes that asserted Christian faith of the founding fathers. Historians say the founding fathers had a variety of approaches to religion and faith; some, like Jefferson, were quite secular.



Historians speak out against proposed Texas textbook changes

My guess is right wing posters here approve of this change in the history textbooks even though historican disagree.

Have you read "Venona", by Haynes and Klehr?

Have you read "In Denial" by Haynes and Klehr?

Have you read "The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB" by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin?


I have.


It's about time Americans learned of the depth and breadth of the Communist infiltration into our government, and society.
You might want to inform yourself, as well.


Have you read the Declaration of Independance?
If you are suggesting 'secular' as meaning anti- or non-religious, you
will be surprised to find the following:

There are four references to ‘Devine’ in Declaration of Independence… 1)in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’ 2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,” 3) Supreme Judge of the world, and 4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Devine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.


My guess is that the ignornant and the uneducated will disapprove of this change in the history textbooks.

Don't you agree?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I wish I was in the land of cotton,
Old times they are not forgotten;
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land.
In Dixie Land where I was born,
Early on one frosty mornin,
Look away! Look away! Look away! Dixie Land!

Wow you think slavery made america great and not the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution through limiting the power of the govt?

Yikes!

I think Samson was being sarcastic. So far he hasn't been too sympatico with the whole concept of schools making it possible for students to have ALL the information they need to make value judgments without the government dictating those values to them. I believe he is more in agreement with that than he's letting on, but that's just a gut feeling and he certainly can speak for himself.

"I believe he is more in agreement with that than he's letting on,..."

Yup....Samson is the 'Charlie Brown' of the USMB....

"Who walks in the classroom, cool and slow
Who calls the English teacher, Daddy-O
Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown
He's a clown, that Charlie Brown
He's gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me)"


A lot of the time, he's just jerkin' our chains....