I would think the crucification of Jesus is much more drastic for kids than MLK.
Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
And tomorrow you'll be on your way
Don't give a damn about what other people say
Because tomorrow is a brand-new day
The complaint includes an extensive list of grievances with examples. Having not investigated the program, I don't know whether these grievances have any basis in fact. As mentioned, they appear to be focused on allegations of improper framing and age inappropriate material rather than an opposition to teaching about civil rights or MLK. The complainants actually say that the program is "an affront to the ideals of MLK Jr".
Of course not. Though it would certainly be possible to teach that subject in an age inappropriate way.I learned about the Holocaust in elementary. Is that an example too of something age inappropriate?
So no examples just the word of a group who has determined on their opinion that these lessons were inappropriate for the kid's ages?
Examples of this being what? I dissected pig lungs in 5th grade. I'm real curious to hear what's age inappropriate.Of course not. Though it would certainly be possible to teach that subject in an age inappropriate way.
The examples (taken from the program) are cited in the complaint.
It isn't hard to imagine the sort of material from the Holocaust (graphic footage/photographs/accounts) that would be inappropriate for 7 year olds. Some of it is difficult for adults.Examples of this being what? I dissected pig lungs in 5th grade. I'm real curious to hear what's age inappropriate.
None of the examples are specific in nature. Generic examples based on opinion.
And I'll ask again. Who determines whats age appropriate? I could easily argue a 7 year old is old enough to see a picture that might be graphic in nature. The same 7 year olds who already have access to graphic content such as violent video games.It isn't hard to imagine the sort of material from the Holocaust (graphic footage/photographs/accounts) that would be inappropriate for 7 year olds. Some of it is difficult for adults.
The complainants do offer specific examples from the material. Whether those examples prove their case is self-evidently a matter of opinion. Though as I mentioned in my first response, the complainants don't appear to be making the argument that civil rights history should be removed from the classroom.
Presumably the relevant local authority for education determines what is appropriate/legal. That doesn't mean they are not subject to challenge. In this case, it looks like the Department of Education for TN has rejected the complaint.And I'll ask again. Who determines whats age appropriate? I could easily argue a 7 year old is old enough to see a picture that might be graphic in nature. The same 7 year olds who already have access to graphic content such as violent video games.
Except they don't. In your own words the complaint deals with age inappropriate material and and improper framing. It does not describe how the lession was framed improperly nor what material was that presented that as inappropriate.
As for your last statement, not one person here has stated they wanted civil rights out of the classroom. Don't know why you mention it.
Fortunately.Presumably the relevant local authority for education determines what is appropriate/legal. That doesn't mean they are not subject to challenge. In this case, it looks like the Department of Education for TN has rejected the complaint.
It is explicitly stated in the cited article (which was used as the basis for the initial post on this topic):
The group further alleged that teaching children anything about the civil rights movement should be banned.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/tennessee-group-tries-save-elementary-160300057.htmlPanic over.Fortunately.
Rightwing snowflakes. Should teachers in the USA now include MORE trigger-word warnings? "For our non-white people, we warn you that next class about the post-war period in the USA will mention racism and discrimination. For the white people we warn you that the next class will also mention the Civil rights."
alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
"Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
_______________________________________________________
Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).
Last edited by alhoon; December 03, 2021 at 07:41 AM.
alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
"Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
_______________________________________________________
Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).
The Republican party of the civil war was very different from the Republican party of World War II, which in turn was different than the Republican party of today. It's also important to note that for most of it's history, the Democrats were the conservative party. The shift began with FDR and finished in the 80s.
Actually the US fought Spain to colonize the Philippines for itself. Puerto Rico as well, and even though Cuba was liberated, it was still subject to American military occupations, coups, and puppet governments.before that fought Spain to liberate Philipines etc.
Last edited by irontaino; December 03, 2021 at 07:44 PM.
Fact:Apples taste good, and you can throw them at people if you're being attacked
Under the patronage of big daddy Elfdude
A.B.A.P.
Unfortunately, the more teachers "go off the reservation" and stray from educational standards to insert their own political viewpoints into their lessons, the harder the state and administrators clamp down on the teachers to ensure they adhere to the curriculum. This ultimately makes life more miserable for teachers and takes away the freedom which they do have to lead their lessons as they'd like, even if they never intended to make their class into a political diatribe.
Author of Foreign Legions mod 7.0,EB's NTW Total Music, Knights of St. John mod, The Wardrobe of 1805 mod
!Under Proud Patronage of Gunny!
Tell we're not calling this Cultural Fascism like that other brainlet theory? Next there'll be a Youtube-proven, Wikipedia confirmed alt-history that proves the Nazis something something America, therefore OrAnGe mAn?
Some of these Karen movements have to be false flag ops, surely.
Jatte lambastes Calico Rat
Actually, many "USA rightwings" were Nazi sympathizers and anti-Semites. And irontaino is correct on everything he posted.
https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/20...n-bund/529185/
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "We have a protractor."
Under Patronage of: Captain Blackadder
The more important part is that identity politics and by extension racism itself has always been more of a Democrat thing. FDR's government threw wads of cash (they took from starving American taxpayers) at Hitler's military-industrial complex, while brutally repressing ethnic minorities. Then fast forward into Cold War, LBJ saw potential in using them as cannon fodder in Vietnam, so he pushed for "desegregation", while spouting things that would make /pol/ look like a multicultural diversity board. Now we have people that were Jim Crow almost less then a generation ago pretending to be "anti-racist". Heck, the current sitting vegetable-in-chief called black people "suprepredators" and called areas with them "racial jungle". And that wasn't that long ago, literally 70s and 80s.
Republicans, on the other hand, have always distanced themselves from identity politics, but while trying to root out communism across the globe they missed communist shills infiltrating academia and media.
But yeah, racism has always been more prevalent on the left then on the right.
Of course, both of the major parties have changed what they represent over time. So you are certainly correct that historically, the Democratic Party was the party of Southern segregationists and the GOP the party that challenged segregation. But after the civil rights era ended, the GOP deliberately sought to realign themselves with southern conservatives specifically using identity politics (read: including former segregationists) - and is something which the party has since acknowledged and apologised for.
Last edited by antaeus; December 05, 2021 at 06:42 AM. Reason: But carry on. You be you.
IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM