texas new education policy

Post Reply New Topic

WTF indeed. Churchill was a drunk old bigot and imperialist, but he saved Britain from the "narzis".

ruveyn

Clement Atlee and the Labour Party deserve the credit. So they found a Conservative, Churchill, who didn't want to make nice with the Nazis and could make nice speeches, but it was Labour that was the backbone of the anti-Nazi government in Britain.

Perhaps the lesson here is that history does not conform to our contemporary penchant for polarization. Neither does it comply with our contemporary norms of pluralism. Does this mean that the teaching of history ought properly to be revised to fit within our contemporary mode? I think not.

In a world where DVDs of the early seasons of Sesame Street are accompanied by a parental advisory, on really must wonder whether we have lost the plot.

Who was appointing the generals and the field-marshalls? Who was attending the multi-power conferences with FDR and Stalin? Churchill had the executive powers for conducting the war, not the Labor members of the cabinet.

ruveyn

This is unconstitutional as made clear during the "monkey" trial. I would bet money that if this gets passed, there will be another monkey trial in a couple of months after.

There will always be another "monkey trial" or another Dover trial. The Creationists simply will not give up. The only solution is to completely privatize schooling. That way parents who want to have their children educated about the Theory of Evolution or atheistic views can have what they wish. Private schools can completely determine what is being taught within their walls. If you don't like a school don't send your kid their. If you like what they teach, apply for admission.

In the U.S. , Creationism is an endemic disease, like certain STDs. As long as Creationists have kids, another generation of Creationists is there in waiting. There is no way of getting rid of it. The only thing to do is to keep these yo-yo s from determining public policy. The Government should be a Religion Free Zone. No prayers, no invocations, no "in God we trust" on the currency issued by the Government. Also governments should get out of regulating marriages completely. That is a private matter. The only thing a government should do is run an army, a police force and have courts of law to settle legal disputes. Also there should not be more than a thousand laws on the books in total. Just about everything should be private. The purpose of the government is to keep the peace and make sure people behave themselves in public. What they do in private short of torture, murder and involuntary sexual relations is no business of the government.

ruveyn

There is much to be said for private education--I, myself, was educated privately. But to completely disestablish the public school system is economically shortsighted.

Even if we succumb to the notional appeal of "vouchers" to ensure that all people are able to fulfil a requirement to send their children to school (that I presume would continue to exist until complete privatization), the realist is that complete privatization would result in even more teachers "teaching the test." In order for parents to make informed choices about where to send their children, results are king. Parents will go to extraordinary lenghts to get their children into French immersion programs in some provinces in Canada because of the perception that the quality of teaching is higher, and that results related to the FSA (in BC) and post-secondary admissions are higher.

In a private environment, where principals and administrators are not answerable to a regulatory authority, the singleminded fixation on results will contribute to educational environments in which children with learning disabilities are undesirable clients, and those schools that serve all comers will lack the resources to attract the teachers that they need to succeed.

Why should a private vendor be forced to serve a party against his/her will? Are private vendors slaves?

ruveyn

And isn't it the conservatives who are always bitching about too much "government interference"?

This is similar, however, to the Kansas legislature that passed a law declaring that evolution never happened. The good politicians from the fine state of Kansas are powerful folks indeed ... they alone amongst all the humans who have ever lived, are able to legislate who their ancestors were.

There are many private vendors who are forced to serve parties against their will, and rightly so.

Consider lawyers--they are private sector service providers (leaving aside the vagaries of public defender systems for the moment). Every person who is compelled as a party in a case has a right to representation by the counsel of their choice. Lawyers are ethically prohibited from refusing a client unless the lawyer has a reasonable basis upon which to withdraw (e.g. a conflict of interest, or a lack of competence to provide the service required). Because lawyers are officers of the court, there are situations in which a court can compel a lawyer to appear for a client, even if the client is unable to pay. It's part of the deal you sign on for when you get called to the Bar.

Physicians are in a similar situation. You treat the patient in front of you, no questions asked, unless you are incompetent to perform the treatment, in which case you see to it that the patient is put in the care of a qualified specialist. (And you keep the patient stable until a qualified physician comes along, if necessary).

So, in the case of schools, it goes back to the question of whether or not the party has an entitlement to the service. Does every child in the United States have an entitlement to an elementary and secondary school education? (We can even restrict the question to every child legally in the US, repugnant though that may be.) If the answer is, "yes," then someone has to provide that service, and someone has to pay for it. Once you, "completely privatize schooling," there will be no public sector service providers. In that case, the obligation must, perforce, fall on a service provider within the private sector.

I grant you that the affirmative answer to that question is one that is open for discussion, but a society which does not guarantee every child access to primary and secondary education is a society that is heading for economic disaster.

Well, that is the difference between a conservative and a libertarian, isn't it?

Conservative = keep the government out unless you are talking about protecting what I see as American values
Libertarian = keep the governement out, period

Appears to me it's more like:

conservative -- oppose anything the Democrats say, no matter what it is
libertarian -- oppose anything anybody says, no matter what it is

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100521/ap_ ... Nib2FyZGFk

The new curriculum passed.

Moving out of state is much much more likely now.

I say go with it.

Jesus created the Earth in 4004 BC, so it is the year 6014, use that for all dates, it is your right!

Demand that the National Language be changed to Arameic, for that is the only language of God.

The money must be converted to Mites, Shikels, and Talents.

Abolish all laws except The Ten Commandments.

Abolish all punishments except stoning.

Await the Rapture.

Too bad we can't ship these Texans to Japan is a shipment of the Japanese History Textbook New History Textbook 2005 version (新しい歴史教科書), Published by Fusosha. as that book is so politically skewed to the right because it changes history to fit the rights views. Then replace the Texans in Texas with Germans from Germany as they are much smarter than Texans. I think the only people dumber than Texans are Arizonians, who violate the constitution so blatantly just to fit their political goals.

Can you provide specifics for that assertion? There is nothing unconstitutional about enforcing immigration laws, if that is what you are referring to.

ruveyn