CA public schools promotes Aztec Religion

[Erik Nelson]

California Public School Children Could be Forced to Sing Chants to Aztec God of Human Sacrifice

The curriculum recommends that teachers lead their students in a series of indigenous songs, chants, and affirmations, including the “In Lak Ech Affirmation,” which appeals directly to the Aztec gods. Students first clap and chant to the god Tezkatlipoka—whom the Aztecs traditionally worshipped with human sacrifice and cannibalism—asking him for the power to be “warriors” for “social justice.” Next, the students chant to the gods Quetzalcoatl, Huitzilopochtli, and Xipe Totek, seeking “healing epistemologies” and “a revolutionary spirit.” Huitzilopochtli, in particular, is the Aztec deity of war and inspired hundreds of thousands of human sacrifices during Aztec rule. Finally, the chant comes to a climax with a request for “liberation, transformation, [and] decolonization,” after which students shout “Panche beh! Panche beh!” in pursuit of ultimate “critical consciousness.”

 

[Sabertooth]

That isn't going to end well.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

If one does not live in California or have children in public school in that state, why get worked up about it? It has no bearing on any outsider's life and isn't anyone else's business.

 

[Desk trauma]

It has no bearing on any outsider's life and isn't anyone else's business.

First amendment violations concern me a great deal, regardless of the school system at fault.

Granted considering the source this being over stated is likely.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

First amendment violations concern me a great deal, regardless of the school system at fault.

Granted considering the source this being over stated is likely.

Explain to me slowly what the first amendment has to do with this, because I don't get it.

 

[Desk trauma]

Explain to me slowly what the first amendment has to do with this, because I don't get it.

This is a public school, they are bound by the first amendment to not require students to engage in religious activities.

Was that slowly enough?

 

[Paulomycin]

Explain to me slowly what the first amendment has to do with this, because I don't get it.

This would be a blatant example of establishing a religion in a secular (government) school. Therefore, a violation of the Establishment Clause.

 

[Ringo84]

Charlie Kirk isn't a believable source to tell me what time it is, much less to editorialize about California schools supposedly promoting the Aztec religion.

When I was in high school, I took a history course that included learning about Islam (gasp!). This was a rural public school in the wake of 9/11. Our teacher had us recite the Five Pillars of Islam to ensure that we learned them. Absolutely nobody in my class converted to Islam or was offended in any way.

People like Kirk either make stuff up whole cloth or they drastically embellish so that they can be offended by something.
Ringo

 

[Paulomycin]

Charlie Kirk isn't a believable source to tell me what time it is, much less to editorialize about California schools supposedly promoting the Aztec religion.

When I was in high school, I took a history course that included learning about Islam (gasp!). This was a rural public school in the wake of 9/11. Our teacher had us recite the Five Pillars of Islam to ensure that we learned them. Absolutely nobody in my class converted to Islam or was offended in any way.

People like Kirk either make stuff up whole cloth or they drastically embellish so that they can be offended by something.
Ringo

No problem. Rod Dreher got it from Christopher Rufo, who got the initial leak. Source:

The Re-Barbarization Of California | The American Conservative

 

[Ringo84]

Something called "The American Conservative" is still not what I would regard a reputable source.

I will say that I think that public schools should be completely religiously neutral. We have churches for religion, and we have public schools for learning the skills we need in life.

However, this story has all of the hallmarks of something that is either taken completely out of context or completely made up, and I just don't buy Charlie Kirk's ridiculous framing.
Ringo

 

[Paulomycin]

When I was in high school, I took a history course that included learning about Islam (gasp!). This was a rural public school in the wake of 9/11. Our teacher had us recite the Five Pillars of Islam to ensure that we learned them. Absolutely nobody in my class converted to Islam or was offended in any way.

Which is odd, because I don't recall any history courses that teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or why the 1st amendment wouldn't exist without the Protestant Reformation.

 

[durangodawood]

....Granted considering the source this being over stated is likely.

Thats my go-to reaction anymore.

I'll get worked up in the highly unlikely case this travesty pans out as valid. It rarely does with these culture war internet "outrages".

 

[Paulomycin]

Something called "The American Conservative" is still not what I would regard a reputable source.

So your standards for "reputable source" are narrowing even further. I'm pretty sure this isn't a conspiracy theory, unless you want to debunk it. Are there any official statements from the school in question yet? If so, then please post them.

I will say that I think that public schools should be completely religiously neutral.

And yet you didn't see anything wrong with being taught to recite the Five Pillars of Islam.

 

[Paulomycin]

Charlie Kirk isn't a believable source to tell me what time it is, much less to editorialize about California schools supposedly promoting the Aztec religion.

Something called "The American Conservative" is still not what I would regard a reputable source.

I forgot something. Should have pointed it out from the very beginning. I apologize.

Per wiki: The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue)[1] is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. In other words, a claim is ignored in favor of attacking or championing its source.

The fallacy therefore fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question.[2] Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits.[3]

If that's not a reputable source, I've got many others to back it up.

 

[Desk trauma]

Thats my go-to reaction anymore.

I'll get worked up in the highly unlikely case this travesty pans out as valid. It rarely does with these culture war internet "outrages".

Yeah, there have been about 100 too many shrieks of persecution over imagined or fabricated slights for me to get invested too heavily.

 

[durangodawood]

I forgot something. Should have pointed it out from the very beginning. I apologize.

Per wiki: The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue)[1] is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. In other words, a claim is ignored in favor of attacking or championing its source.

The fallacy therefore fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question.[2] Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits.[3]

If that's not a reputable source, I've got many others to back it up.

We're talking about reporting here. None of us typically have access to primary evidence about the matter at hand. So of course trust in the source matters.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Which is odd, because I don't recall any history courses that teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or why the 1st amendment wouldn't exist without the Protestant Reformation.

At a conservative Lutheran high school I learned the Five Pillars of Islam in World History class. At a public university we spent an entire class period on Martin Luther and the printing press in Society and Mass Media class.

 

[Paulomycin]

We're talking about reporting here. None of us typically have access to primary evidence about the matter at hand. So of course trust in the source matters.

Well, that just opens up another can of worms, because a lot of reporting is done through anonymous sources, whistleblowers and such.

And arguing to the source alone, instead of the information itself, is an example of genetic fallacy. Sure, you can say, "Well, ultimately it's an anonymous source," and hold out for more public details, but I'd simply be offering too much helpful advice.

 

[durangodawood]

At a conservative Lutheran high school I learned the Five Pillars of Islam in World History class.....

They probly made you do a "pretend" Shahadah too. Thats how they get you!

 

[Paulomycin]

At a conservative Lutheran high school I learned the Five Pillars of Islam in World History class. At a public university we spent an entire class period on Martin Luther and the printing press in Society and Mass Media class.

You mean both private schools?