|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Fundamentalists (of all stripes) at it again (Re: Textbook Wars: Religion in History) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member (Idle past 126 days) Posts: 4001 From: Adirondackia Joined: |
Regardless of how you want to view the Scopes-Monkey trial, both sides were using the courts. The question is whether scholarship was on the side of those pushing the myths Haeckel had created Wrong again, Rand. You can keep saying that until you are blue in the face, but it was religious folk who were using the law and the court in this case. A defendant isn't "using the law"--he has no choice but to plead guilty or mount a defense. Haeckel is not the question; Haeckel is only your chronic non-answer. The question is this topic is clear: you have waved it aside so many times now that you must know it intimately. So try again: tell me how scientists used the courts to force evolution into textbooks. "Dost thou think because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?" -Sir Toby Belch, Twelfth Night Save lives! Click here!Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC! ---------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22940 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
randman writes: Evolutionists used the courts and media to get evolution accepted into school curriculums (Scopes-Monkey trial for example which was a test case). You're like an error factory! Reading ahead I see that this statement has already been thoroughly rebutted, so I won't bother rebutting it again.
One of the myths they succeeded into forcing into schools is the myth of the Biogenetic Law. You're once again wrong. In this case, prevailing scientific views made their way into textbooks in the manner that they usually do. There was never any court case forcing the Biogenetic Law into schoools. Are you ever going to make any claims that are actually true and which you can support? This is not a case of you making tiny errors while we're being picky. You're making fundmental errors concerning a significant event in American history, and then you're making up things that never happened. I'm sure the secularization of America is viewed with concern and sadness by Christian conservatives, but fabricating stories about secular misdeeds isn't the answer. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 5150 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Actually percy, there are court cases right now with evos prohibiting the teaching the controversy, and thus prohibiting the kind of scholarship that can correct evo-myths such as the Biogenetic law, which thankfully was finally corrected after many, many years of evos ignoring good scholarship.
I realize, of course, to you fabricating data and a myth is not a misdeed but perfectly understandable for evo secularists, but I doubt most of the rest of the nation sees it that way. As far as the law, it does appear that legislatures tried to use the law to prohibit the teaching of evolution. But you are missing one key issue. In doing so, they were trying to resist teaching blatant myths such as the Biogenetic law. Secularists were pushing myths in the guise of science. This message has been edited by randman, 02-07-2006 06:09 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22940 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
randman writes: Actually percy, there are court cases right now with evos prohibiting the teaching the controversy... There is no controversy within science. The controversy is within school systems and inside courtrooms. If they want to teach this controversy then it belongs in a social studies course. The point I've been making is that your claim that secular groups are doing the same thing as the religious groups described in the article of the opening post is incorrect. There are no secular groups bypassing scholarship to lobby publishers and school boards for representation of their special preferred viewpoints.
I realize, of course, to you fabricating data and a myth is not a misdeed but perfectly understandable for evo secularists, but I doubt most of the rest of the nation sees it that way. Well, how is one to respond to this except to say that this perspective would appear to represent a regrettable lack of conscience and a lack of compulsion against making repeated scurrilous and false accusations, and goes against Christian principles of honesty and integrity.
In doing so, they were trying to resist teaching blatant myths such as the Biogenetic law. Secularists were pushing myths in the guise of science. You just make it up as you go along, I guess. Secularists were not pushing the Biogenetic Law into schools. The Biogenetic Law made it into textbooks when it was a prevailing view within biology. Futhermore, the opponents of evolution in Dayton, Tennessee, knew nothing of the Biogentic Law. The extent of sophistication of their understanding of evolution is reflected in their concern about the harm to faith from teaching we were all just monkeys. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
jar writes: your link does not support your assertion. What the student claims is that Religious Studies, Church History, are being taught as Religious Studies or Philosophy. You missed my point and the point of the student, being that history students don't want to take a course in religion or philosophy to get the whole history story. If it's history, religious or otherwise, it should be included in the history textbooks.
jar writes: How does this support secularization in anyway? It secularizes history, censoring out the religious events pertaining to history. This, in turn secularizes young immature minds, influencing some to become somewhat religiously phobic and ignorant of the religious aspects of history.
jar writes: Are you and other Christians willing to see the actual history taught the way it happened, to show both sides of the issue, the good and bad, the warts and wonders? I certainly am willing to see truth prevail, regardless of whose ox is gored. Imo, historically, the Vatican has the most to loose here. Their bloody role in history has been obscured for many decades, including when I was in school. I say it's time for accountability where it belongs. Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: Are you sure you aren't making a hasty generalization based on anectdotal evidence? My personal (and anectdotal) experience is that students in history are well aware that they need a very broad understanding of the humanities and social sciences to understand their subject. "Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: No one is questioning (or at least I'm not) that the country has become increasingly secularized. The article of the OP described religious groups bypassing scholarship to gain favorable treatment for their views in textbooks by lobbying publishers and school boards. Randman said secular groups do the same thing, and I replied, not once but many times now, that I have no idea what he's talking about and could he please provide some examples. So far he's provided nothing, his standard operating procedure. Holmes says he has some examples from another thread, perhaps he'll post them here. I cited Madelyn Ohare's organization as a group which certainly exerted influence. You seem to agree that unlike religous sects, secularist pressure is being exerted, but pretty much undefined. That being the case, why do you keep asking for specific secularist lobbying groups when this seems to be the answer? I've gotten behind in reading so pardon if this has been addressed again. Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2554 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: |
I believe the search isn't for any secular lobbying group per se. Percy seems to be looking for a group that bypasses the regular science channels and goes directly to school boards and textbook publishers to push their view point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22940 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
buzsaw writes: You seem to agree that unlike religous sects, secularist pressure is being exerted, but pretty much undefined. No, I couldn't agree that secularist pressure is being exerted. What I've said is that the influence of secularism is diffuse because it is everywhere. The prevailing views within any field are what gets taught in school, and right now those views are predominantly secular. Secularists aren't exerting pressure for their views because they don't have to - their views are dominant. They are *writing* the textbooks. They have no need to lobby publishers for their views because they're employed by the publishers. That's the real reason why Randman's charge that they're using the same means as those religious groups is ridiculous, as well as his charge that they're using legal means. They don't have to use these techniques to get representation for their views - their views are already represented. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Percy writes: There are no secular groups bypassing scholarship to lobby publishers and school boards for representation of their special preferred viewpoints. We both seem to agree that secularization of scholarship has been happening. (Abe: edited out phrase.) Can we agree that X-ing out/revising religious events and aspects of history is bypassing scholarship in history classes? Case in point: the student in my link citing Martin Luther being depicted solely as a social reformer. This message has been edited by buzsaw, 02-07-2006 09:31 PM Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Asgara writes: I believe the search isn't for any secular lobbying group per se. Percy seems to be looking for a group that bypasses the regular science channels and goes directly to school boards and textbook publishers to push their view point.Defending the Faith Percy OP Link Title writes: New BattlegroundIn Textbook Wars: Religion in History The OP link title cites history as the topic where religion factors in more than in the science class. Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 6071 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
But is there any similarity to what these religious groups are doing, which is to ask for is distortions of current scholarly understanding in textbooks for public schools. Yes. Findings and discussions of a topic must be tailored to fit popular moral and legal OPINION. That would include textbooks on the subject, though obviously not for most primary school students. I think it would be odd to demand that it be 100% identical to the current situation. I realize Randman will have to in order to defend his assertion that a precedent of this was set by secularists. I'm just saying that yes, resorting to gov't control to change information and rebutt factual scholarship has been done by secularists when it upsets their irrational opinions. That is why I then went on to suggest why we mainly see religious types doing it is because most texts are made by secular sources.
I don't know anything about the groups involved in this dispute, but I would have guessed that the side trying to force moralistic sensibilities on scientific findings would have a healthy non-secular, i.e., religious, component. It was a combination of religious and secular components. Both sides enjoy large populations uninterested in what science has to say on sexuality, unless it is supporting sex negative assumptions. I already said the APA was against the studies from the beginning and helped lead the charge. Unless you are going to argue that the APA is a religious organization, I don't understand why you made the argument you did. The point of that thread was to show that science is not safe from both secular and religious sources. That morality is enforced by law even today, and a dangerous precedent which stands to effect the EvC debate occured at the joint hands of both secular and nonsecular community. You might find the thread interesting as it was a very scary event. I had not heard of until researching what someone had mentioned about the study here at EvC. Its suppression is real, and the importance goes way beyond sex. The precedent is set for science to follow important views by society, and not to inform society so that it can form proper conclusions. holmes "What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2421 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: I took several university-level history courses while earning my liberal arts Bachelor's, buz, and we talked about religion quite a bit. We talked about Buddhism and Hinduism in one of my favorite courses which had a very dry title, "Non-Western Civilization. I wrote a really large paper on the Great Schism in the Catholic Church for an independent study in History during my semester abroad. My husband (Zhimbo) also took a course titled "The Life and Teachings of Jesus" as part of his liberal arts education at Oberlin College. He says it was one of his very favorite classes. So, buz, I don't think you really have any idea of what you are talking about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2421 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yeah, and the Protesants were all soft and cuddly by comparison. When they had the power, buz, they were just as bad. Remember the "witches"? Remember the lovely smallpox-infected blankets they gave to the American Indians? Remember slavery? Remember the KKK and the Christian militia and white supremacicts? Remember Timothy McVeigh? This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-08-2006 08:40 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22940 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
buzsaw writes: Can we agree that X-ing out/revising religious events and aspects of history is bypassing scholarship in history classes? Case in point: the student in my link citing Martin Luther being depicted solely as a social reformer. I can't find any mention of Luther in this thread other than this post from you. It isn't in the link you provided in Message 145, either. So let me say this. Any history book which includes a treatment (not a mention, a treatment) of Martin Luther and fails to mention his role in the origin of protestantism is producing a sanitized and distorted account. Do you actually have an example of this? Just to be absolutely clear, if you produce a passage from a chapter on socialism in the 20th century that says, "Some attitudes about social responsibility trace back to Martin Luther," then this is not an example of what you're looking for. You need a passage from a history book that in the chapter or section on Martin Luther describes him as a social reformer and fails to mention his role in the schisms of Catholocism. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024