Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Here's the original article:

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/students-told-to-call-9-11-hijackers-freedom-fighters.html

Here's the rebuttal:

http://www.lumberton.k12.tx.us/education/components/whatsnew/default.php?sectiondetailid=10420&viewType=detail&id=1500

This'll be interesting, perhaps.

When I see that the headline "Students Told to Call 9-11 Hijackers “Freedom Fighters”" then I know, for sure, that I'm reading a troll article full of lies.

 Ouze wrote:
When I see that the headline "Students Told to Call 9-11 Hijackers “Freedom Fighters”" then I know, for sure, that I'm reading a troll article full of lies.

If they were doing that, I wonder if it was in the nature of a debater learning his opponent's position.

That's a perspective I had not considered. Good call.

hmmm. Ok where to start. Where to start.
It seems 'ike many of the parents are not upset that Islam is portrayed in the way it is(that is, the teacher things he is doing it postively, when he is not) but more that it is portrayed as anything but soulless murderers bent on taken our freedom.
While i agree with showing Islam in a positive light, This is not the way. He made it seem as if he agreed with terrorists.
And what is wrong with having sutdents show up in Burqa's? Aslong as it isnt required I dont see what is wrong.
And the "Holocaust" was both a genocide and and ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing kinda includes genocide.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
hmmm. Ok where to start. Where to start.
It seems 'ike many of the parents are not upset that Islam is portrayed in the way it is(that is, the teacher things he is doing it postively, when he is not) but more that it is portrayed as anything but soulless murderers bent on taken our freedom.
While i agree with showing Islam in a positive light, This is not the way. He made it seem as if he agreed with terrorists.
And what is wrong with having sutdents show up in Burqa's? Aslong as it isnt required I dont see what is wrong.

I think that it would be a fantastic idea to show Islam in a positive light. Please lead by example and be the first to offer us tales of Islam or deeds done in the name of Islam that can be described as being positive.

And the "Holocaust" was both a genocide and and ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing kinda includes genocide.

I don't like war. I don't agree with the wars that are occurring. I think they're a waste of our time and money, and self-serving. By the same token, you cannot tell me that people who assault embassies and engage in massive plots to fly, who cry for death to infidels, want anything less than just that.

If parents don't want their kids exposed to other cultures then they should shut them inside their houses and home school them to make sure that they will never be exposed to anything that might shatter their self imposed delusions about the rest of the world.

MORTAL KOMBAT!

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
hmmm. Ok where to start. Where to start.
It seems 'ike many of the parents are not upset that Islam is portrayed in the way it is(that is, the teacher things he is doing it postively, when he is not) but more that it is portrayed as anything but soulless murderers bent on taken our freedom.
While i agree with showing Islam in a positive light, This is not the way. He made it seem as if he agreed with terrorists.
And what is wrong with having sutdents show up in Burqa's? Aslong as it isnt required I dont see what is wrong.
And the "Holocaust" was both a genocide and and ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing kinda includes genocide.

Try to get Genghis Connie to wear a burqa and ten thousand wiener dogs will eat your eyeballs. That girl will not brook abridgement of her fashion!

What im saying Frazzled is that forcing themto dress in burqa's is wrong. but maybe having them dressed as that is ok.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
hmmm. Ok where to start. Where to start.
It seems 'ike many of the parents are not upset that Islam is portrayed in the way it is(that is, the teacher things he is doing it postively, when he is not) but more that it is portrayed as anything but soulless murderers bent on taken our freedom.
While i agree with showing Islam in a positive light, This is not the way. He made it seem as if he agreed with terrorists.
And what is wrong with having sutdents show up in Burqa's? Aslong as it isnt required I dont see what is wrong.

I think that it would be a fantastic idea to show Islam in a positive light. Please lead by example and be the first to offer us tales of Islam or deeds done in the name of Islam that can be described as being positive.

Well, Islam is a faith that preaches charity.
Many mosques in my area organize charity drives, often alongside catholic churches.
And no im not pretending that the people suicide-bombing are anything but terrorists, but many are not.
Just like many catholics dont preach "Kill the gays"

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What im saying Frazzled is that forcing themto dress in burqa's is wrong. but maybe having them dressed as that is ok.

You're right that it would be wrong to force that on them. The students had volunteered to dress that way as part of learning about the culture.
The rebuttal actually seems to answer some of the questions and lays out that the differences between Judaism, Christianity and Islam were being put up on a board. To tell the truth, it sounds like an interesting class and perhaps not as bad as the detractors are saying.
It is Texas, after all, and hordes of weiner dogs could be unleashed at any point at something viewed as dodgy.

TBone the Magnificent is pleased with your appreciation of the power of the Wiener Legions.

As to the class, who cares? Just throw the ball!

I just know that the usual suspects are gonna show up and use selective reading to demonize the parents. They will be like, "Look, Texans, They Are So Wrong Because They are Texans!!!".


Seriously, The main complaint that I read was the lack of balance in the curriculum and the politicizing of the educational system. Both of which I can agree with as being either a problem or at least inappropriate..

You see, I agree with a program designed to give a broader perspective but, it has to be implemented in a balanced, fair and careful manner that is in the best mental, emotional and physical interest of the students.

For instance,
Teaching about Islam is not a problem, but teaching about Islam while making it illegal to teach about Christianity ,or any other religion for that matter, is a major problem. There is a difference between encouraging an equal look from all sides perspective and having the course et to discriminate against one faction simply because it is more prevalent.

Also,
Encouraging students to understand that what one group views as a terrorist is often freedom fighters to another group is good.
Encouraging them to do such without properly warning the students that such statements are better saved for the class as opposed to the school hallways is just asking for a tragedy.


So yeah, at face value, the curriculum needs balancing rather than the establishment you know=bad / subvert the dominant paradigm method that it seems was employed.

@Captain,

In the rebutal they point out that they wrre talking about Islam in relation to Christianity and Judaism.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Well, Islam is a faith that preaches charity.
Many mosques in my area organize charity drives, often alongside catholic churches.

That's fantastic to hear!


I find it odd also that they were actually (according to the article) told to call them "freedom fighters".

Beyond this being a tinfoil hat conspiracy to dilute the meaning of the term "freedom fighter" into being synonymous with "terrorist", who's freedom were they fighting for?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why aren't they covering Buddhism? Buddhists are great people, and you NEVER hear a single bad thing about them. Really, you never hear anything at all.

And the Falun Gong are also an actively oppressed people in China right now, with crazy crazy terrible things done to them, which is a real shame. And they didn't even do anything bad in their god's name.

Man, I would have loved to study Buddhism in elementary school.

 daedalus wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Well, Islam is a faith that preaches charity.
Many mosques in my area organize charity drives, often alongside catholic churches.

That's fantastic to hear!


I find it odd also that they were actually (according to the article) told to call them "freedom fighters".

Beyond this being a tinfoil hat conspiracy to dilute the meaning of the term "freedom fighter" into being synonymous with "terrorist", who's freedom were they fighting for?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why aren't they covering Buddhism? Buddhists are great people, and you NEVER hear a single bad thing about them. Really, you never hear anything at all.

And the Falun Gong are also an actively oppressed people in China right now, with crazy crazy terrible things done to them, which is a real shame. And they didn't even do anything bad in their god's name.

Man, I would have loved to study Buddhism in elementary school.

Two words, Khemer Rouge:


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

Buddhism has many admirable followers, but like anything else can be perverted by the wrong people.

Valid point. Perhaps it should be taught that all ideologies can be potentially dangerous when taken to extremes and should be considered practically, on a case by case basis, and in moderation.

 daedalus wrote:
Valid point. Perhaps it should be taught that all ideologies can be potentially dangerous when taken to extremes and should be considered practically, on a case by case basis, and in moderation.

Extremely true.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
For instance,
Teaching about Islam is not a problem, but teaching about Islam while making it illegal to teach about Christianity ,or any other religion for that matter, is a major problem. There is a difference between encouraging an equal look from all sides perspective and having the course et to discriminate against one faction simply because it is more prevalent.

It isn't illegal to teach Christianity. That's just crazy pants nonsense.

This is typical of well-meaning "lets cover all religions with neutrality." It is good to cover religion with neutrality but "freedom fighters" is a poor choice for describing the 9-11 terrorists...

In the second article they showed a decent lesson plan but I would suggest they add 3 topics at the end.

Religion used to justify bad things. Jihadists, the Crusades, Inquisition.

Religion used to ignore bad things. Holocaust, Catholic Pedofile coverup, Islamic holding down women's rights

Religion used to provide good things. Charity, Civility ..

Religion minus morality is very humanist stupid...

 daedalus wrote:

Why aren't they covering Buddhism? Buddhists are great people, and you NEVER hear a single bad thing about them. Really, you never hear anything at all.

I see you don't have many self-righteous, liberal friends.

Anyway, This caught my eye:

“Really,” she asked. “They can’t call the Holocaust Genocide? I was more upset with that than the lessons on Islam. It made me sick.

Jokes about placing a call to the "Holocaust Genocide" aside (good job Todd Starnes), referring to the Holocaust as genocide marginalizes every victim that wasn't Jewish. Genocide is targeted with the intention to exterminate, ethnic cleansing, while targeted, doesn't necessarily entail extermination. And while the Nazis were quite intent on exterminating some groups, there were others that they merely wanted gone.

They could have been doing something akin to this in the class.
http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_richards_a_radical_experiment_in_empathy.html

 Ratbarf wrote:
They could have been doing something akin to this in the class.
http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_richards_a_radical_experiment_in_empathy.html

I'll have to check this out later. Thanks for the link.

Relapse wrote:
@Captain,

In the rebutal they point out that they wrre talking about Islam in relation to Christianity and Judaism.

There was a difference between the accusation and the rebuttal. The accusation gave specifics while the rebuttal talked in very general "cover our ass" disclaimer speak.

Also note, where I said at face value. This means that I'm open to change my position when/if a convincing rebuttal that gives specifics surfaces. Until then, I'm inclined to go with the side that is being detailed in their statement.

 sebster wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
For instance,
Teaching about Islam is not a problem, but teaching about Islam while making it illegal to teach about Christianity ,or any other religion for that matter, is a major problem. There is a difference between encouraging an equal look from all sides perspective and having the course et to discriminate against one faction simply because it is more prevalent.

It isn't illegal to teach Christianity. That's just crazy pants nonsense.

Oh, you who live so far away know so much more than those who have to deal with the reality of our public schools being under constant law suits for even allowing students to have prayers on campus.

Private schools can teach pretty much whatever they want but public schools are proscribed from pretty much anything more than admitting that there is a religion called christianity.

You see, the Supreme Court at one point ruled that the First ammendment meant the separation of church and state. Due to this, The Court has consistently ruled that and publicly funded organization/school that teaches religion is creating a defacto connection between church and state which leads to a subsequent ruling of violating the First Ammendment. The ruling leads to the public orginzation being compelled to stop the offending practice.
The situation attains a grand irony when you read the actual wording of the First Ammendment.

Its one of the flaws with our Judicial system that an interpretation by the high court often supercedes the wording of the constitution they are charged with upholding.


Edit for quotes

I'd say calling terrorists "freedom fighters" is the wrong tack. Teach the kids that these feth heads are scum, and have as much to do with Islam as modern Christianity does with the Crusades. (in most quarters...)

You want to show Islam in a positive light? Show the positive parts of Islam, don't try to repaint the gak bits gold.

For example young muslim bamf Malala Yousafzai.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

Oh, you who live so far away know so much more than those who have to deal with the reality of our public schools being under constant law suits for even allowing students to have prayers on campus.

Are Christian prayers specifically banned anywhere in the US?

Are you under the impression that only Christians pray?

 Captain Avatar wrote:

Its one of the flaws with our Judicial system that an interpretation by the high court often supercedes the wording of the constitution they are charged with upholding.

You might revisit the meaning of "interpretation".

dogma wrote:
Are Christian prayers specifically banned anywhere in the US?

Supreme court has flip flopped on the students praying on public school property. Seems like a quiet personal prayer is ok but group prayers have been ruled against. I think the last ruling was that a member of the school staff can not be present.
Thing is that most public schools have rules stating that students gathering for any purpose outside of class have to be supervised. Catch 22

dogma wrote:
Are you under the impression that only Christians pray?

Heavens no, Now that would be silly pants crazy.

The problem is that the christian faith has been the dominant religion in this country. As such has the most Court rulings.

My question to you is,"How many First Ammendment cases have there been against non judeo-christian religions?".


edit quotes

 Captain Avatar wrote:
Oh, you who live so far away know so much more than those who have to deal with the reality of our public schools being under constant law suits for even allowing students to have prayers on campus.

Private schools can teach pretty much whatever they want but public schools are proscribed from pretty much anything more than admitting that there is a religion called christianity.

You see, the Supreme Court at one point ruled that the First ammendment meant the separation of church and state. Due to this, The Court has consistently ruled that and publicly funded organization/school that teaches religion is creating a defacto connection between church and state which leads to a subsequent ruling of violating the First Ammendment. The ruling leads to the public orginzation being compelled to stop the offending practice.
The situation attains a grand irony when you read the actual wording of the First Ammendment.

You are right that I am, in fact, very far away. But you are very mistaken when it comes to understanding the laws of your own country. Turns out getting born in the USA and spending all your life in it doesn't mean you actually know its laws. How about that.

Anyhow, you are free in a public school to teach about a religion. You can hold classes about Christianity, Islam, and religion you like. This is quite different to, say, mandatory prayer, which is not legal no matter what religion is being taught. The point of distinction being what is taught, not the particular faith in question.

I hope this makes the whole issue clearer for you, and my geography hasn't proved too great a burden in you coming to understand the laws of your country.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

dogma wrote:
Are Christian prayers specifically banned anywhere in the US?

Supreme court has flip flopped on the students praying on public school property. Seems like a quiet personal prayer is ok but group prayers have been ruled against. I think the last ruling was that a member of the school staff can not be present.
Thing is that most public schools have rules stating that students gathering for any purpose outside of class have to be supervised. Catch 22

Which doesn't answer my question.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

dogma wrote:
Are you under the impression that only Christians pray?

Heavens no, Now that would be silly pants crazy.

The problem is that the christian faith has been the dominant religion in this country. As such has the most Court rulings.

My question to you is,"How many First Amendment cases have there been against non judeo-christian religions?".

Why is the number of court rulings relevant?

I mean you might claim to persecution, but you're not really being persecuted.

sebster wrote:
You are right that I am, in fact, very far away. But you are very mistaken when it comes to understanding the laws of your own country. Turns out getting born in the USA and spending all your life in it doesn't mean you actually know its laws. How about that.

Turns out that spending a great time on the internet leads to some individuals having the mistaken belief that they are an authority on other countries laws and pretty much everything in general. See how that works.

sebster wrote:
Anyhow, you are free in a public school to teach about a religion. You can hold classes about Christianity, Islam, and religion you like. This is quite different to, say, mandatory prayer, which is not legal no matter what religion is being taught. The point of distinction being what is taught, not the particular faith in question.

Actually, the ADL and ACLU describe teaching religion in a public classroom as only theoretically "possible" if done in a secular manner. The reality is that lawsuits, injunctions and court decisions claiming that the schools are not being secular enough pretty much stops such programs in their first year or two.

Now it is true that there is currently a movement for christians to stand up for their rights and about 350 public schools have started teaching the bible. Other schools have started teaching a mix of religious texts.

Note, the operative word is "started". The answer as to why they stopped was various court rulings and legal costs. I expect this sudden resurgence of religious education to be met with the usual wave of lawsuits.

sebster wrote:I hope this makes the whole issue clearer for you, and my geography hasn't proved too great a burden in you coming to understand the laws of your country.

The only burden is your innaccurate understanding of our systems. Mayhap, someday you will come and live here for a while to gain first hand experience. Cheers