The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 85

Thread: & in TEXAS

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pac NW
    Posts
    4,419

    Default & in TEXAS

    The TX Board of Education is removing what they believe is the perceived slant from the textbooks that TX students read. This will also have an effect on what students around the country are exposed to. Is this a good thing?
    Last edited by Marvin S; 03-14-2010 at 05:56 PM.
    __________________________

    Marvin S

    Everyone's friend is No One's friend

    Someday your life will flash before your eyes. It's your responsibility to make sure it's worth watching!

  2. #2
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    I just read two articles on this issue; one is published in the Houston Chronicle and the other in the New York Times.

    I have no problem with the changes.

    Correcting the left wings radical idea that the first amendment somehow means there is a separation of church and state will be a positive step.

    Here are some links:

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6910429.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  3. #3
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    I just read two articles on this issue; one is published in the Houston Chronicle and the other in the New York Times.

    I have no problem with the changes.

    Correcting the left wings radical idea that the first amendment somehow means there is a separation of church and state will be a positive step.

    Here are some links:

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6910429.html

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html
    You mean the radical separation noted by Jefferson in his letter to the Baptists in 1800 and upheld repeatedly by the Supreme Court ever since?

  4. #4
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marvin S View Post
    The TX Board of Education is removing what they believe is the perceived slant from the testbooks that TX students read. This will also have an effect on what students around the country are exposed to. Is this a good thing?

    Some BODY is going to do it. I'd druther a few parents with US Constitutional beliefs making the suggestions than what's been foisted on us by the ACLU, assorted liberal/socialists, and environmental airheads.

    Have you read what's being taught in public schools recently, Marvin? Or, what ISN"T included? Ever hear of a high school student talking about Econ 101...or Civics?

    But I have seen references to "Sally has two mommies", and in our neck of the woods, the revisionists have excluded almost all mention of the pioneers getting killed by the Native Americans. Actually that part of American history is hardly taught at all, from any perspective.

    I think the people of Texas have had enough of the revisionists and political correct crowd, and it's time to get back to teaching the foundational basics upon which this nation was established.

    Plus it's also an attempt at taking away the power of the feds and the NTA unions that insert many of their views of not what it was, but how they thought it should have been.

    You can bet the MSP, teachers unions, and all the atheists that want all mention of God removed from any US and state documents, money, the Pledge, and everything the founders thought important for a moral society to thrive, will be taken to court by their pawns in the ACLU. It's another attempt at corrupting this nation's foundations, so the socialistic oligarchy is in place for the eventual One World Government.

    I for one applaud what the Texas board of education is doing. I'll take my chances with them way ahead of what has been in charge.

    UB
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  5. #5
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    that be the one.

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    the part I like best is that pesky "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." You know the exact part the left attacks regularly.
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  6. #6
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    that be the one.



    the part I like best is that pesky "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." You know the exact part the left attacks regularly.
    But "free exercise thereof" does not extend to using the trappings of government to promote religious activities, which is innately what is done when, for example, group prayer us conducted in public schools. In my mind, the appropriate test of whether or not an activity constitutes "respecting an establishment of religion" is whether you would support the activity equally if practiced in the same manner by a religious group that you found abhorrent.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    But "free exercise thereof" does not extend to using the trappings of government to promote religious activities, which is innately what is done when, for example, group prayer us conducted in public schools. In my mind, the appropriate test of whether or not an activity constitutes "respecting an establishment of religion" is whether you would support the activity equally if practiced in the same manner by a religious group that you found abhorrent.

    What I find detestable is the PC crowd and the atheists can't allow a show of religion in ANY manner. Please explain to me how a silent prayer is so 'abhorrent'? According to the ACLU, even that form of prayer is unacceptable, opening the door for pure secularism, and promotes further lack of morality.

    UB
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Koolaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NB, Canada
    Posts
    148

    Default

    So lack of religion and lack of morality are the same thing?

  9. #9
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Bill View Post
    What I find detestable is the PC crowd and the atheists can't allow a show of religion in ANY manner. Please explain to me how a silent prayer is so 'abhorrent'? According to the ACLU, even that form of prayer is unacceptable, opening the door for pure secularism, and promotes further lack of morality.

    UB
    I have no problem with a moment of silence. If someone uses that opportunity to say a prayer, it is their business. I do have a problem with using the cloak of government to call for prayer, silent or not, because it implies that everyone should, in fact, be praying. But it never really stops there anyway. Next someone is saying "Let us bow our heads and give thanks", etc. When I was in school (not public), we stood behind our chairs until permitted to sit. When it was time, the teacher in charge would simply say "Quiet please." The room would become silent and stand still for about 30 seconds or so at which point the teacher would say "You may be seated." Undoubtedly some said silent prayers in the interval, while others simply settled down in anticipation of the meal to come. I don't think the ACLU would have problems with that as an activity. But somehow, those who want "silent" prayer still seem to want public acknowledgment that all should pray. That, in my belief and the belief of the Courts, is giving respect to an establishment of religion.

  10. #10
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    I have no problem with a moment of silence. If someone uses that opportunity to say a prayer, it is their business. I do have a problem with using the cloak of government to call for prayer, silent or not, because it implies that everyone should, in fact, be praying. But it never really stops there anyway. Next someone is saying "Let us bow our heads and give thanks", etc. When I was in school (not public), we stood behind our chairs until permitted to sit. When it was time, the teacher in charge would simply say "Quiet please." The room would become silent and stand still for about 30 seconds or so at which point the teacher would say "You may be seated." Undoubtedly some said silent prayers in the interval, while others simply settled down in anticipation of the meal to come. I don't think the ACLU would have problems with that as an activity. But somehow, those who want "silent" prayer still seem to want public acknowledgment that all should pray. That, in my belief and the belief of the Courts, is giving respect to an establishment of religion.
    Have you been on the planet for the last several years??

    What "cloak of Government" is forcing prayer on any one??
    (God knows we need it!!)

    Quite the opposite.






    rk
    Last edited by road kill; 03-14-2010 at 04:51 PM.
    Stan b & Elvis

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •