Tennessee Tea Party Wants Slavery Removed From School Textbooks To Make Founding Fathers Look Good

[The_Dude 1,142]

"Yes! I am upset anyone would bother to teach Blacks, Native Americans, or any other minority, especially Blacks and Gays, actually played any role in US or World history,"

That's all you have to say Danno, your position is transparent.

If it's not in the text books, how can I back it up?

[Danno 1,228]

Focus on what? What actually happened? A complete picture? Why would anyone want that?

Complete pictures are good but as when you are taking a photo of someone , the farther you backup to get "everything in".... the more insignificant the real subject in the photo becomes.

I wonder, in the spirit of "getting everything is" if we should then include all the moral failing of Dr King when presenting this lesson in class.

The intellectual property theft, The betrayal of his calling to Ministry by pursuing all these sexual relationships with women.

certainly if Thomas Jeffersons suspected sex life is relevant, in so many class rooms MLKs should be as well.

Certainly if the supposed inconsistencies of the Founders are meaningful why wouldn't MLKs ripping off his Doctrinal theses .... not add more education to the subject?

When the "I have a dream" Speech is presented in Class, should the kids also know it was taken in part from another Black Preacher?

No, no, it seems "getting the complete picture" is only appealing in certain areas.

[Danno 1,228]

Danno espouses selective memory in the Clintonian style. For example, Danno would never admit to having sex with a hooker when he paid her $50 for a bj. It helps him sleep better at night.

Fifty Bucks???

You must be accustomed to street walkers?

If I ever got to the place where I were going have to buy sex..... I wouldn't be at the hooker flea market.

Everything I do is first class..... but you are free to bargain shop.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Complete pictures are good but as when you are taking a photo of someone , the farther you backup to get "everything in".... the more insignificant the real subject in the photo becomes.

I wonder, in the spirit of "getting everything is" if we should then include all the moral failing of Dr King when presenting this lesson in class.

The intellectual property theft, The betrayal of his calling to Ministry by pursuing all these sexual relationships with women.

certainly if Thomas Jeffersons suspected sex life is relevant, in so many class rooms MLKs should be as well.

You seem to be mistaking curriculum for literary innuendo. I have never even heard of Thomas Jefferson's penchant for bending his slaves over taught in a classroom, so why would you want to focus on the failings of Dr. King? I know you don't like him or support his message Danno, but I would hope for consistency in the schools.

Certainly if the supposed inconsistencies of the Founders are meaningful why wouldn't MLKs ripping off his Doctrinal theses .... not add more education to the subject?

When the "I have a dream" Speech is presented in Class, should the kids also know it was taken in part from another Black Preacher?

No, no, it seems "getting the complete picture" is only appealing in certain areas.

Danno, at least tell the truth on this one. I have a dream speech was not plagiarized. The only similarity is using lyrics to "My Country Tis Of Thee". Here is the snopes entry, which if you actually read it, shows the two parts of the speeches in question. It does go into his plagiarism while a doctoral student at BU as well.

Snopes

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If it's not in the text books, how can I back it up?

By showing that it's indeed not there. When I look at bios of the founders online, I find references like these for Benjamin Franklin...

As a printer, he had owned slaves. But in later life, he became president of the world's first anti-slavery society.

...or Alexander Hamilton...

Most strikingly, it was an economic vision with no place for slavery. Before the 1790s, the American economy, North and South, was tied to a transatlantic system of slavery. A member of New York's first antislavery society, Hamilton wanted to reorient the American economy away from slavery and trade with the slave colonies of the Caribbean.

...or Thomas Jefferson...

Jefferson was an extremely complex man, and his life is filled with many inconsistencies. An idealist who repeatedly denounced slavery as a curse and expressed his willingness to support any feasible plan to eradicate the institution, he owned 200 slaves when he wrote the Declaration of Independence and freed only five slaves at the time of his death.

Oddly, it doesn't end with the mention of them having owned slaves as you would claim but provides proper context on the issue as it relates to them.

[Danno 1,228]

If we banned the importation of dogs tomorrow how long would it take the US to run out of dogs?

These are Humans we are talking about not dogs.

Banning the importation of slaves was a great first step and it was all that body could do due to limits of power and the lack of will by enough people..... not only in Philadelphia at the time but around the world.

Where are these wonderful societies which banned Slavery in earlier times?

I have posted the time line on slavery around the world and we come out in pretty good shape.

So yes the Founders took a first step..... you can complain it was not enough but when you do that..... name the countries who had even done that.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Where are these wonderful societies which banned Slavery in earlier times?

Western Europe.

[Danno 1,228]

You seem to be mistaking curriculum for literary innuendo. I have never even heard of Thomas Jefferson's penchant for bending his slaves over taught in a classroom, so why would you want to focus on the failings of Dr. King? I know you don't like him or support his message Danno, but I would hope for consistency in the schools.

THe reason is as Big Dog said.... to get a complete picture.

Would it be fair or truthful to present DR. King as this great spiritual leader who in all ways was selfless.... when in fact we know there was this whole other side to him one that ran contrary to his public persona?

If Newts 3 marriages are sure to be noted in the history books, why not Martins countless bed groupies?

Just the fact that we address him with the title of Doctor of Divinity... is a fraud and you know it, where it nearly anyone else his Doctorate would have been stripped when the basis of it was so heavily flawed and dishonest..... I mean what kind of person in Divinity School cheats?

But even so, I think his greater work... his contribution should be the focus in primary text books.... not his short comings and for the same reason I think this "Bashing of the founders" is wrong.

Just look at the title of this subject:Tennessee Tea Party Wants Slavery Removed From School Textbooks To Make Founding Fathers Look Good[/b]

The suggestion is that the founders weren't good and coverup is under way.

What kind of sick view do these folks have of this country?

[Danno 1,228]

Western Europe.

I was hoping you would name non-white countries, care to go again?

Seems as though the countries the minorities came from enjoyed slavery long after we said-No more.

Why are we the bad guys?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

THe reason is as Big Dog said.... to get a complete picture.

But you oppose teaching kids the complete picture. Have you changed your mind?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

But you oppose teaching kids the complete picture. Have you changed your mind?

You've just found yourself right in the middle of the Danno logical abyss.

[The_Dude 1,142]

THe reason is as Big Dog said.... to get a complete picture.

No it isn't, you're just trying to score cheap points here. Is there any evidence that any of it this is true, other than the disputed tales of Ralph Abernathy?

Would it be fair or truthful to present DR. King as this great spiritual leader who in all ways was selfless.... when in fact we know there was this whole other side to him one that ran contrary to his public persona?

Danno, this is a nice red herring. You dismiss the original premise, and supplant it with your flawed tangent. The issue is covering up the misdeeds of this country in its founding years as a means to portray our founding fathers in a better light. The issues at hand are well documented and can be shown within historical context. I don't see what teaching kids rumors about Dr. King would accomplish. None of the claims against him have been verified. I would hope your standard for curriculum would be beyond teaching rumors.

If Newts 3 marriages are sure to be noted in the history books, why not Martins countless bed groupies?

I doubt it, but maybe they will one day teach a course on the duality of politicians rise to power and hypocrisy.

Just the fact that we address him with the title of Doctor of Divinity... is a fraud and you know it, where it nearly anyone else his Doctorate would have been stripped when the basis of it was so heavily flawed and dishonest..... I mean what kind of person in Divinity School cheats?

I'll agree with you here. There is a lot of evidence that shows that he did plagiarize his doctoral thesis. I guess the bigger question is why do they offer a doctorate in theology? That seems quite a useless endeavor.

But even so, I think his greater work... his contribution should be the focus in primary text books.... not his short comings and for the same reason I think this "Bashing of the founders" is wrong.

Another red herring Danno. Issues like slavery, internment of Japanese American citizens and the trail of tears are integral parts of our history that cannot be denied. I think Santayana said it best "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". Or is that your goal Danno?

Just look at the title of this subject:Tennessee Tea Party Wants Slavery Removed From School Textbooks To Make Founding Fathers Look Good[/b]

The suggestion is that the founders weren't good and coverup is under way.

What kind of sick view do these folks have of this country?

Wrong. The suggestion is that the tea party is advocating that we cover up certain inconvenient truths in our history to make our founding fathers look good.

[slim 1,514]

By showing that it's indeed not there.

How can I show something that doesn't exist?

Oddly, it doesn't end with the mention of them having owned slaves as you would claim but provides proper context on the issue as it relates to them.

I believe we have a slight misunderstanding. I'm not disputing slavery existed or the founders had slaves or anything at all on the back end. What I'm suggesting is we don't teach kids the rest of the story on this end.

We say to them, "Your great-grandparents were slaves. Your grandparents were freed but discriminated against. Your parents weren't discriminated against but never had a fair shake. So, basically, you can expect to not be anything your whole life and you can blame it on the history of racism in this country."

What we should be saying is, "Nobody alive today was a slave. Nobody alive today's parents were slaves. There are probably very, very, very few people alive today whose grandparents were slaves. Simply put, slavery has been dead and gone for a long, long time in this country and to use that as an excuse to underperform in the present or future is racist."

[The_Dude 1,142]

How can I show something that doesn't exist?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I was hoping you would name non-white countries, care to go again?

Why would the appropriate point of comparison be the least developed part of the world rather than a comparably developed part of the world? If you want to claim leadership and exceptional status, you need to compare yourself and demonstrate superiority to advanced nations not to those stuck in centuries past.

Edited January 26, 2012 by Mr. Big Dog