Texas school board debates 'pro-Islamic' bias in textbooks

[soblessed53]

Are Texan youth being fed a sugar-coated version of Islam while Christianity is unfairly taken to task for its sins?

At a three-day meeting that started Wednesday, the board is scheduled to consider a resolution that would require it to reject textbooks that it determines are tainted with teaching “pro-Islamic, anti-Christian half-truths and selective disinformation,” a bias that it argues is reflected in current schoolbooks.

Jihad ‘sanitized’

Among the assertions in the resolution are that world history textbooks currently in use:

* “Dwell” on atrocities committed by Christian Crusaders during the Middle Ages while ignoring similar acts by Muslims.
* Provide sanitized definitions of “jihad” and ignore Muslim practices involving sexism, slavery and persecution of non-Muslim groups.
* Devote significantly more coverage of Islamic beliefs, practices and holy writings than they do on Christianity.


Texas debates 'pro-Islamic' bias in textbooks - U.S. news - Education - msnbc.com

 

[Belk]

Oh goody! Please, do continue with the warpath to crazy town. I'm sure that will help.

 

[Axioma]

Yeah, I'm sure Texas of all places has been producing tons of pro-Islamic propaganda.

 

[lawtonfogle]

The problem is Texas is so looked down upon, they could be telling the truth and most will ignore them, like the boy who cried wolf.

 

[soblessed53]

The problem is Texas is so looked down upon, they could be telling the truth and most will ignore them, like the boy who cried wolf.

"Texas speaks, publishers listen
The sheer size of Texas’ textbook market means that the state’s requirements and sensitivities have considerable influence on what publishers produce.

That’s because Texas is the largest of about 20 “adoption” states that make decisions about textbooks at the central level — effectively dictating what some 4.7 million K-12 public school students in the state will read. That also means its textbook contracts are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. "

 

[Polycarp1]

"Texas speaks, publishers listen
The sheer size of Texas’ textbook market means that the state’s requirements and sensitivities have considerable influence on what publishers produce.

That’s because Texas is the largest of about 20 “adoption” states that make decisions about textbooks at the central level — effectively dictating what some 4.7 million K-12 public school students in the state will read. That also means its textbook contracts are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. "

This is true. A big part of the recent controversy was that Gov. Goodhair had appointed Creationists to a majority of State School Board seats, and at least some of them were openly racist as well. (By which I'm not implying anything about Creationists generally -- only those particular individuals.)

One point worth noting, however, in evaluating things like this, is that jihad and related terms, like Crusade in English, have several meanings. The overcoming of temptation, for example, is spoken of as the "internal jihad" -- conceived of as being a victory for the Muslim over his concupiscence, his tendency to sin. Defensive jihad, the protecting of territories historically occupied by Muslims (including non-Islamic residents within them) from invaders, is also something we generally do niot think of when we hear jihad.

Personally, I think that radicalized Islam does constitute a threat to much of Judaeo-Christian Western civilization. And I think that a large part of combatting that is in recognizing that not all Muslims are militant radicals, and fostering peaceable relations with moderate and pro-Western Muslim governments does more to combat radical Islam than sending troops to wage war on them, and inevitably stir up more radicalized Muslims, including ones who see fighting us as defensive jihad, with us as the invaders, but who would not be moved to radicalism by the insanity of Al Qaeda. I hope it's evident what the connection of this to proper education about Islam is.

 

[Wirraway]

...Defensive jihad, the protecting of territories historically occupied by Muslims (including non-Islamic residents within them) from invaders...

what kind of jihad means "military conquest of non-islamic lands and then historically occupying them"?

 

[SithDoughnut]

I assume they're planning on switching to Conservapedia's Bible as well? After all, they need to make sure that Christianity doesn't have any liberal bias...

One question though: why is it bad that they teach more about Islam that Christianity? Presumably, as Christians, the students will know a lot more about Christianity, so teaching more Islam would seem the logical thing to do to give the children a wider education.

 

[Umaro]

what kind of jihad means "military conquest of non-islamic lands and then historically occupying them"?

I think the Americans called it "Manifest Destiny."

 

[Wirraway]

I think the Americans called it "Manifest Destiny."

true, that's what we call our own conquest of the continent. but I'm asking about the islamic term for slaughter and conquest of infidels, since "jihad" is such a peaceful, benign word.

 

[Polycarp1]

what kind of jihad means "military conquest of non-islamic lands and then historically occupying them"?

Offensive, of course -- in both senses of the word. I'm not defending Islam here; I'm defending teaching the truth. Jihad can mean things we consider immoral and reprehensible, and it can mean things we consider morally justified, even laudable. All I'm saying is, tell the truth.

Wolves can and do kill people, but wolves as a rule do not seek out and kill people unless there is famine or they perceive people as threatening their cubs. Painting either the fluffy bunny or the ravening beast picture without telling the whole story is wrong. Same thing applies to Islam and jihad.

 

[keith99]

Offensive, of course -- in both senses of the word. I'm not defending Islam here; I'm defending teaching the truth. Jihad can mean things we consider immoral and reprehensible, and it can mean things we consider morally justified, even laudable. All I'm saying is, tell the truth.

Wolves can and do kill people, but wolves as a rule do not seek out and kill people unless there is famine or they perceive people as threatening their cubs. Painting either the fluffy bunny or the ravening beast picture without telling the whole story is wrong. Same thing applies to Islam and jihad.

Well said. And thank you for reminding me there are rational and honest Christians.

My understanding is:

Jihad means strugle or conflict.
Satan is just the adversary/enemy.

In context either can mean the worst, but then so can purification as some Semites know all too well.

 

[Wirraway]

Offensive, of course -- in both senses of the word. I'm not defending Islam here; I'm defending teaching the truth. Jihad can mean things we consider immoral and reprehensible, and it can mean things we consider morally justified, even laudable. All I'm saying is, tell the truth.

Wolves can and do kill people, but wolves as a rule do not seek out and kill people unless there is famine or they perceive people as threatening their cubs. Painting either the fluffy bunny or the ravening beast picture without telling the whole story is wrong. Same thing applies to Islam and jihad.

"jihad" has ugly connotations and I am personally not interested in its nuances and shades of meaning, as in describing as "defensive" jihad the defense of european and north african lands taken by the sword. so we'll just have to disagree civilly.

the wolf analogy is useful, from the perspective of farmers threatened by marauding wolves. I'd expect the wolves to be shot without much thought to the wonders of wolfdom.

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

"jihad" has ugly connotations and I am personally not interested in its nuances and shades of meaning, as in describing as "defensive" jihad the defense of european and north african lands taken by the sword. so we'll just have to disagree civilly.

the wolf analogy is useful, from the perspective of farmers threatened by marauding wolves. I'd expect the wolves to be shot without much thought to the wonders of wolfdom.

Very usefull indeed.
If early man had continously held that same Shoot-on-sight attitute towards wolfs we would not have "Man's best friend" the dog today.

 

[Wirraway]

Very usefull indeed.
If early man had continously held that same Shoot-on-sight attitute towards wolfs we would not have "Man's best friend" the dog today.

if you're going to misrepresent me, at least do it more elegantly. my statement referred to marauding wolves. the wolves that self-domesticated would have posed anything but a danger.

 

[Gecko King]

Jihad is one of those words where you can put almost any meaning into; from resisting tempation to fighting infidels.

 

[keith99]

Very usefull indeed.
If early man had continously held that same Shoot-on-sight attitute towards wolfs we would not have "Man's best friend" the dog today.

Fools forget that wolves serve many ther uses. I am vividly aware of them because of a local coyote shortage. The result is rodents, especially rabbits are increasing in numbers. I can not plant a tree and expect it to survive unless I cage it for several years. Typical garden plants survive only in enclosed and in areas where the dogs run free around the caged area. If I were making my living from food production or depending on food production for a significant part of my survival I would be in deep trouble.

 

[keith99]

Jihad is one of those words where you can put almost any meaning into; from resisting tempation to fighting infidels.

Can we include fighting ignorance?

 

[Belk]

"jihad" has ugly connotations and I am personally not interested in its nuances and shades of meaning, as in describing as "defensive" jihad the defense of european and north african lands taken by the sword. so we'll just have to disagree civilly.

the wolf analogy is useful, from the perspective of farmers threatened by marauding wolves. I'd expect the wolves to be shot without much thought to the wonders of wolfdom.

Well of course not. It is much harder to demonize people when you understand them.

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

if you're going to misrepresent me, at least do it more elegantly. my statement referred to marauding wolves. the wolves that self-domesticated would have posed anything but a danger.

You will have to forgive me I think I misunderstood what you where trying to say. I thought you where saying that people will precieve all wolves as marauding wolves and will deal with them as such. And have no interested in learning things such as realizing that only some wolves are marauders and the others are not a threat and even usefull.

Fools forget that wolves serve many ther uses. I am vividly aware of them because of a local coyote shortage. The result is rodents, especially rabbits are increasing in numbers. I can not plant a tree and expect it to survive unless I cage it for several years. Typical garden plants survive only in enclosed and in areas where the dogs run free around the caged area. If I were making my living from food production or depending on food production for a significant part of my survival I would be in deep trouble.

I agree, I just found it hard to find a analogy that made "Well they kill roddents" into something that reflected well on muslims. So went with dogs.