Louisiana's New Voucher System Subsidizes Bigotry, Ignorance, and Prejudice

[Fantine]

14 Wacky "Facts" Kids Will Learn in Louisiana's Voucher Schools | Mother Jones

A few highlights:

5. Slave masters were nice guys: "A few slave holders were undeniably cruel. Examples of slaves beaten to death were not common, neither were they unknown. The majority of slave holders treated their slaves well."—United States History for Christian Schools, 2nd ed., Bob Jones University Press, 1991
6. The KKK was A-OK: "[The Ku Klux] Klan in some areas of the country tried to be a means of reform, fighting the decline in morality and using the symbol of the cross. Klan targets were bootleggers, wife-beaters, and immoral movies. In some communities it achieved a certain respectability as it worked with politicians."—United States History for Christian Schools, 3rd ed., Bob Jones University Press, 2001
3. "God used the Trail of Tears to bring many Indians to Christ."—America: Land That I Love, Teacher ed., A Beka Book, 1994

Why is it that people can get vouchers for schools that shouldn't even be state-accredited?

 

[Tomas de Torquemada]

well, (6) is verifiably true. It wasn't excatly a white supremacist as we currently know it. They also hated jews (immoral movies) and catholics (bootleggers), haha. They were nativists. About 30% of lynching occured to white people; if disproprotionate impact is sufficient to claim "racial terrorism", we are going to have rather uncomfortable conversations in the future about our contemporary legal system.

 

[Chany]

14 Wacky "Facts" Kids Will Learn in Louisianas Voucher Schools | Mother Jones

A few highlights:

Why is it that people can get vouchers for schools that shouldn't even be state-accredited?

Because people have a choice, no matter how stupid that choice is.

 

[Fantine]

Because people have a choice, no matter how stupid that choice is.

States shouldn't accredit schools that use this curriculum, period.

And states shouldn't give vouchers to students to enable them to attend these schools.

Bad enough their minds are being poisoned with hatred--but the woeful masquerades of Math and Science courses will leave them ill-prepared for the future.

 

[Tomas de Torquemada]

well... actually we have tried to devise mathematics courses that incorporate set theory at pre-college level, and they've all been dismal failures....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math

They express their opposition to in a way that is reminiscient of the old Cantor controversy of the 19th century, which is unfortunate. But they are largely correct in that the experiment in teaching set theory to adolescents was a complete failure.

Its a very complicated and rather philosophical collection of ideas that is unneccessary for anyone but mathematicians to understand. Maybe statisticians and some variants of computer scientists if they do a lot of really heavy lifting.


EDIT:

Just to know, I'm in favor of the bourbaki group and used their texts extensively in my own college education. They are cheap, rigorous, and well developed. But their structure is unnecessary for all jobs, including engineer and scientists.

 

[Tomas de Torquemada]

fantine, in many ways you are a very conservative person. The 70's are over, the experiments have been tried, and the results are in.

 

[Michie]

fantine, in many ways you are a very conservative person. The 70's are over, the experiments have been tried, and the results are in.

.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I see. So you think that men bought other men in order to kill them? Or to work them to death? Most slaveowners owned slaves because they had no other way to run their farms. It wasn't that they hated blacks. In fact, and the slaveowners themselves probably had no idea of this, but the slaves they owned were probably better treated than at any time prior to their capture at the hands of the opposing warlords, who were also black, by the way, and sold off those they couldn't conveniently feed and enslave themselves.
Now you will possibly try to say that I'm a black-hater, but you'd be wrong. Slavery, at any level is immoral. It may not have been so at the time, and it certainly wasn't so at the time of Moses, when the people wished they were still in Egypt as slaves of the Egyptians. All I'm saying is that most slave owners did not treat their slaves badly, as shown in Hollywood movies. They worked them very hard, in harsh conditions, and the repercussions were brutal if the slave got out of line. But have you watched The Deadliest Catch, lately? Have you read Mutiny on the Bounty?

 

[Chany]

I see. So you think that men bought other men in order to kill them? Or to work them to death? Most slaveowners owned slaves because they had no other way to run their farms. It wasn't that they hated blacks. In fact, and the slaveowners themselves probably had no idea of this, but the slaves they owned were probably better treated than at any time prior to their capture at the hands of the opposing warlords, who were also black, by the way, and sold off those they couldn't conveniently feed and enslave themselves.
Now you will possibly try to say that I'm a black-hater, but you'd be wrong. Slavery, at any level is immoral. It may not have been so at the time, and it certainly wasn't so at the time of Moses, when the people wished they were still in Egypt as slaves of the Egyptians. All I'm saying is that most slave owners did not treat their slaves badly, as shown in Hollywood movies. They worked them very hard, in harsh conditions, and the repercussions were brutal if the slave got out of line. But have you watched The Deadliest Catch, lately? Have you read Mutiny on the Bounty?

Actually, slavery was better in Africa. It was an acceptable social caste you didn't stay apart of forever. And them hating blacks doesn't help their case.

They didn't need slaves to run their plantations. They needed to maximize profit.

It's different if you chose a job as opposed to be forcefully dragged of your homeland and forced into a ship destined to forced labor.

 

[Fantine]

I see. So you think that men bought other men in order to kill them? Or to work them to death? Most slaveowners owned slaves because they had no other way to run their farms. It wasn't that they hated blacks. In fact, and the slaveowners themselves probably had no idea of this, but the slaves they owned were probably better treated than at any time prior to their capture at the hands of the opposing warlords, who were also black, by the way, and sold off those they couldn't conveniently feed and enslave themselves.

It sounds as if you might have been taught by the Bob Jones curriculum yourself.

You certainly could not have developed that opinion out of conventional history books or from friendships with black Americans today (many of whom have some white ancestors due to slaveowners' raping their women slaves.)

 

[BayCityBomber]

1. Dinosaurs and humans probably hung out

I disagree that Genesis has to be interpreted literally, or that it was ever meant to be. If you want you can send your child to a school that will teach it if you think that's the way it is. You could also send your child to a school that will teach something in line with Islamic, Jewish, or whatever beliefs as well.

2. Dragons were totally real

Most myths do have some grounding in reality. Any theory on the uses of various chambers discovered on differing species of animals that have been extinct for millions of years is going to involve a good deal of guess work. I may personally think that fire breathing is out in left field, but it's opinion based.

3. God used the Trail of Tears to bring many Indians to Christ

Opinion statement. You may not agree with the opinion, but it's just an opinion statement.

4. Africa needs religion

Another statement of an opinion. Given there are Catholic missions in Africa it's one the Church doesn't seem to disagree with.

5. Slave masters were nice guys

The relevant passage cited did not say they were. It did present a view of the realities of the institution of slavery that is more balanced than what is commonly taught.

6. The KKK was A-OK

That's not what the cited passage said. The KKK did become a very large American organization, and as it's post-war origins drifted away it evolved as organizations typically do.

7. The Great Depression wasn't as bad as the liberals made it sound

Opinion statement.

8. SCOTUS enslaved fetuses

That's another opinion statement.

9. The Red Scare isn't over yet

So we're supposed to teach kids that despite the body count communism has piled up it's a good thing?

10. Mark Twain and Emily Dickinson were a couple of hacks

I really fail to see why this guy is so riled up about different opinions. The cited passage talked about a view of the lives and characters of authors, it really made no statement as to the quality of what they wrote.

11. Abstract algebra is too dang complicated

I really don't see a problem with abandoning the idea that all students need to be forced through the torment and pointlessness that is advanced math. High school trig has yet to come in handy, don't know anyone for whom it has.

12-14

All statements of opinions that some people hold.

 

[BayCityBomber]

Bad enough their minds are being poisoned with hatred--but the woeful masquerades of Math and Science courses will leave them ill-prepared for the future.

How many times a day do you use Trigonometry or Calculus?

 

[Fantine]

I realize that most of those topics are the opinions of the text writers--bigoted, hateful, prejudiced, opinions which condone not only slavery but also domestic terrorists (the KKK.)

Children are young and impressionable. Do you want them to grow up thinking that the KKK was a fraternal civic association, that slavery was OK, that the depression wasn't that bad?

Who cares if they think dinosaurs frolicked with Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden? That's delusional, but it doesn't teach kids that violence and slavery are OK.

 

[BayCityBomber]

You're arguing a strawman because that's not what any of the cited passages of offense stated. I don't have a problem with children being taught that slaves were very very expensive and as a result beatings or harsh discipline was usually a last resort. It might even broaden students' understanding that in many instances slaves weren't even on the bottom of the racial caste system in the south. When they wanted to build things in mosquito infested swamps they didn't send valuable slaves, the Irish got that short straw.
I don't have a problem with children learning that in the 1920's the KKK basically was a huge fraternal organization. Might teach them something of how widely spread racism was in American society that the Klan could become a huge frat house.

To be blunt, you want a mythology taught because it lines up with your personal views and are challenged by any view that is less black and white. History is many things, but it's rarely (if ever) a black and white, heroes and villains affair. Samuel Clemens was a pretty contrary person by nature, one who took up arms for the Confederate cause. I fail to see any reason why children shouldn't learn that along with reading The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

You still haven't told us how many times a day you utilize trigonometry or calculus.

 

[BBCath]

You're arguing a strawman because that's not what any of the cited passages of offense stated. I don't have a problem with children being taught that slaves were very very expensive and as a result beatings or harsh discipline was usually a last resort. It might even broaden students' understanding that in many instances slaves weren't even on the bottom of the racial caste system in the south.

And exactly where did you get this piece of "history" from?

Because God knows they (we) chose to come to America and pick "massa's cotton on da plantation" and be hung on a tree if they (we) tried to run away because be cause they (we) were expensive.

(I really tried to stay out of this thread. I'm thinking I need to stay off this board completely...)

 

[Root of Jesse]

Actually, slavery was better in Africa. It was an acceptable social caste you didn't stay apart of forever. And them hating blacks doesn't help their case.

Oh, it was better in Africa. Yeah, sure. So why did black African warlords sell black African captives to be sold in the American South? And then, you'll have to prove that, as a general rule, all the slaveowners in America hated black people...

By the way, I'm not diminishing the part of plantation owners buying slaves and putting them to work. The whole institution is unthinkable today.

They didn't need slaves to run their plantations. They needed to maximize profit.

Yes, the very purpose of being in business. They needed cheap labor. They paid for men, a lot of money, I might add. Again, not diminishing what was done. It's easy, though, to look in hindsight and gasp in horror...

It's different if you chose a job as opposed to be forcefully dragged of your homeland and forced into a ship destined to forced labor.

Again, I'm not promoting slavery...

 

[jpcedotal]

How many times a day do you use Trigonometry or Calculus?

more than I will ever need to know about the evolution religion taught in public schools..

 

[Root of Jesse]

It sounds as if you might have been taught by the Bob Jones curriculum yourself.

You certainly could not have developed that opinion out of conventional history books or from friendships with black Americans today (many of whom have some white ancestors due to slaveowners' raping their women slaves.)

I'll ignore your attack, but I might not be as nice next time...

Oh, it's not conventional knowledge that black people sold black people to white people who sold them to other white people? Many if not most of the slaves sold in the American South were victims of war, sold by victorious warlords so they wouldn't have to feed their POWs.

But that doesn't make it right, and I AM NOT DEFENDING SLAVERY IN ANY WAY. I am pointing out that it wasn't just white Europeans that were involved in human trafficking. There were blacks and Arabs involved as well.

Having been brought up in the segregated South, I know all about how blacks were treated in that time. I saw a lot of it with my own eyes as a child. My parents weren't prejudiced, in fact, employed black people to maintain our home. But seeing segregated schools, bathrooms, and water fountains and living like that, I do know. But I spent my teen years working along side them and getting to know them. So get off your high horse, Fantine.
I am not defending slavery as an institution. But I know why slavery lived in Southern America.

 

[Root of Jesse]

And exactly where did you get this piece of "history" from?

Because God knows they (we) chose to come to America and pick "massa's cotton on da plantation" and be hung on a tree if they (we) tried to run away because be cause they (we) were expensive.

(I really tried to stay out of this thread. I'm thinking I need to stay off this board completely...)

BBCath,
Nobody wants to be a slave. And nobody deserves to be a slave. Every person deserves dignity. And people didn't seem to see it that way back then. Hopefully, we're growing. But slavery is still an issue in the world.

 

[BayCityBomber]

And exactly where did you get this piece of "history" from?

Because God knows they (we) chose to come to America and pick "massa's cotton on da plantation" and be hung on a tree if they (we) tried to run away because be cause they (we) were expensive.

(I really tried to stay out of this thread. I'm thinking I need to stay off this board completely...)

Frederic Bancroft’s book, Slave Trading in the Old South details the business of the slave trade. A superior quality slave would go for about $1000. When you factor in inflation that's over $20k in today's money.
Emotionalism is great, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the subject at hand. They would be correct, you are not slave, nor have you ever been one.