Page 3 of 4 [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Sep 2014, 1:16 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
sly279 wrote:
meh left does this too. they edit history and the bill of rights to what they think it means and ignore what the government says and what it actually reads. they actually edited the bill of rights it self instead of just putting it word for word or putting a picture.

like really take our constitution and bill of rights and edit them so people will learn that it's what it says but really it isn't
maybe that's the plan brainwash them to think it already says B. then tell them it does and say we should "fix" it so it reads B instead of A.

I take more insult to them editing the constitution's and bill of rights meaning then to them slightly changing the reasons for how a war was fault. from what I here the civil war is taught differently depending on where you live. like the revolution compared to here in the us or over in the uk. same with how Canada sees ww1/ww2 compared to how the us teaches them.

but to change a law in text books against what it actually is is terrible.


And how has the Bill of Rights been edited by school books?
Regarding where you live - the truth is not incumbent on geographic location. The truth is the truth. If you figure history is defined by how one region views it over another, then civil rights could be argued to be a bad thing.

see

Quote:
In a textbook approved by Common Core for use by students studying for the Advanced Placement (AP) history exam, the Second Amendment is defined this way: "The Second Amendment: The people have the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia."


Quote:
This amendment states that people have the right to certain weapons, providing that they register them and they have not been in prison. The founding fathers included this amendment to prevent the United States from acting like the British who had tried to take weapons away from the colonists.


Quote:
the Second Amendment ?grant[s] citizens the right to bear arms as members of a militia of citizen-soldiers.?


Image

in this example they shorten/rewrite the other amendments too.
3rd amendment includes during war time, not just peace time.

4th amendment

Quote:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


5th
Quote:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


see the rest too http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html

I've bumped into kids ridding the buss to school and from school who talk about what they learned in class and how firearms are illegal except for those who are licensed and register them. funny though they found the time to add obama's 2nd election and other stuff recent about him but they rewrite the constitution and ignore past court cases. so its ironic the left gets upset when the right starts playing by their rules.

as for where we live. history is written by the victors. there's nothing to say what we read in books is the truth, but more the truth as the victors say it is. to use the revolution was a big important hard thing, to Europe it was nothing but a minor lost. we may think we won the war of 1812, but the English might see it as a victory for them having accomplished burning our capital and putting us in our place. history isnt as black and white as you want to think it is.

to some people it is a bad thing. look to Russia with gays. or nk. I'm sure they are taught differently then the us. their history of the Korean war is different' the us is the bad guys. I'm willing to bet that Russia's history of the cold war isn't similar to ours. so who's right who's wrong. if Russia beat us in 10 years from now 100 years later would what we know as history today be the same, or would it change under Russia's rewriting then become fact.

better yet. if the south had won. imagine what history books would say today. and then you'd be saying what you say but in defense of the war being for states rights etc. cause its the history you'd know.

the south teaches it differently heck teach to teach is differently. they call the battles different too. war of northern aggression vs civil war. did the south start the war by attacking the fort or did the north start it by violating their territory and provking them by increasing troops in the fort? if Russia had a fort on an island in our waters and kept putting more troops in it despite us saying to stop. how long would this go on before we attacked. then we'd likely say it was them who started it, though china and russia would claim as we started military action and Russia didn't fire the first shot it was the us who would start it. the debate goes on, but again if Russia was to win history would say we started it but if we won it would say Russia started it. though even if we lost and got free we'd still write our own books saying Russia started it despite the world saying we did.

with regards to the issue, i don't think rewriting history books is needed unless new discoveries change things. as for issue of the civil war it should show both sides and let the student decide. this is how my college teacher and some history channel shows do it, vs what I was taught in highschool which placed the south as the devil and the north as angels. in college i learned it was much more dirty and grey then that. the north had slaves too and supported slaverly by buying the slave goods to resale to Europe. the south didn't have the manufacturing to turn the raw goods into sale goods, so if the north refused to buy till the south stopped using slaves it might have gone differently.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Sep 2014, 1:43 am

Okay, you've got one example of some editorial business going on with the second amendment.
As far as a different perspective on history - sure, that's going to happen, but within reason. I wouldn't trust history books written in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. As far as the Civil War is concerned, states rights was not included as a reason for secession by the Confederacy till after the war was over. This is simply a case of Neo-Confederates wanting to rewrite history in order to avoid their ancestors choosing the wrong side of the conflict. And for that reason, it's absolutely a mistake to let differing arguments about the causes of the war to be taught to kids, as the Neo-Confederate viewpoint is completely as revisionist as is holocaust denial. No, history isn't entirely black and white, but neither should the truth be subject to choice.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

21 Sep 2014, 3:27 am

Just one reason why I'm glad I live in Australia, where those at the polar ends of an issue are more of a minority. Even in politics, when parties play opposition politics, few are fooled by it. There's almost no fuss made about teaching evolution, and religious people are found all over the left/right spectrum.


_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.


Brainfre3ze_93
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jun 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,912
Location: Not here

21 Sep 2014, 8:51 am

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Despite it all, Texas seems to be doing quite well where it counts; economically.


Unless you look at the lack of earning power of Texas workers, the number of people living under the poverty line, and the lack of healthcare.


So everyone in Texas is poor and there is no healthcare to be had? Funny, it didnt appear that way the last time I was in Texas......


Not everyone in Texas is uninsured, but there is a massive amount of Texans who are uninsured.
In 2011-2012 with a population of around 16 million * meaning adults 19-64 *. About 5 million of those were uninsured, right below is a link of where I got my information.

Texas Uninsured


_________________
" If I did THIS... would that mean anything to you? "


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

21 Sep 2014, 9:08 am

sly279 wrote:
meh left does this too. they edit history and the bill of rights to what they think it means and ignore what the government says and what it actually reads. they actually edited the bill of rights it self instead of just putting it word for word or putting a picture.

like really take our constitution and bill of rights and edit them so people will learn that it's what it says but really it isn't
maybe that's the plan brainwash them to think it already says B. then tell them it does and say we should "fix" it so it reads B instead of A.

I take more insult to them editing the constitution's and bill of rights meaning then to them slightly changing the reasons for how a war was fault. from what I here the civil war is taught differently depending on where you live. like the revolution compared to here in the us or over in the uk. same with how Canada sees ww1/ww2 compared to how the us teaches them.

but to change a law in text books against what it actually is is terrible.


Ah yes, the usual TDIT. I bet you don't you just feel smug?


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


iluvgod
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 44
Location: Mattapoisett, MA

21 Sep 2014, 11:22 am

I disagree. I think it's the far-left trying to stamp God out of the US. It's very sad.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

21 Sep 2014, 11:22 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Okay, you've got one example of some editorial business going on with the second amendment.
As far as a different perspective on history - sure, that's going to happen, but within reason. I wouldn't trust history books written in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. As far as the Civil War is concerned, states rights was not included as a reason for secession by the Confederacy till after the war was over. This is simply a case of Neo-Confederates wanting to rewrite history in order to avoid their ancestors choosing the wrong side of the conflict. And for that reason, it's absolutely a mistake to let differing arguments about the causes of the war to be taught to kids, as the Neo-Confederate viewpoint is completely as revisionist as is holocaust denial. No, history isn't entirely black and white, but neither should the truth be subject to choice.


What is revisionist is painting the conflict as black and white good vs evil. This would be the equivalent more to saying all Germans supported Naziism & the Holocaust, thought they were some Aryan master race that wanted to take over the whole world, and that US + allies fought to save the Jews. Unfortunately that seems to be the picture a lot of Americans have about WWII in Europe, most know next to nothing about WWI and its consequences too.

There were abolitionists in the south, there many against abolition in the north. Most before the war even in the North did not favor immediate emancipation including Lincoln, most at the time opposed the expansion of slavery into new territories. Remember Lincoln didn't even get 40% of the vote when he was elected in 1860, the other candidates were more or less pro-slavery.0 Secession lies in concept of states rights and the idea that states were sovereign nations joined in union free to leave. Slavery was the issue that brought about secession which brought about the Civil war. Trying to paint it any other way is changing the facts. The war and particularly Lincoln are much more morally ambiguous than taught and the same is true for all wars and leaders.

FWIW, my direct ancestor was about 10 when the war started but he had 4 older brothers that fought in the Union Army, 2 of which were officers. My mother put a lot of research in her genealogy some years ago and was able to recover a few letters sent to and from the boys and other family members which was really interesting. She basically wrote a whole book on her family, I've only read a bit of it but now I think I am going to read the rest.

It's easy to forget when thinking about times in history that these were real people, the years have progressed and technology has advanced but we're not so far removed or evolved from them. Think about the complexities and differences of opinion regarding the issues of today, is there one single truth? One way of interpreting things?



andrethemoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,254
Location: Sol System

21 Sep 2014, 12:10 pm

iluvgod wrote:
I disagree. I think it's the far-left trying to stamp God out of the US. It's very sad.


Religion is a personal thing, a country should not be governed by it. From what I've read, none of the founding fathers in the States were religious (at least that's what we learned here in Canada)



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Sep 2014, 2:19 pm

beneficii wrote:
sly279 wrote:
meh left does this too. they edit history and the bill of rights to what they think it means and ignore what the government says and what it actually reads. they actually edited the bill of rights it self instead of just putting it word for word or putting a picture.

like really take our constitution and bill of rights and edit them so people will learn that it's what it says but really it isn't
maybe that's the plan brainwash them to think it already says B. then tell them it does and say we should "fix" it so it reads B instead of A.

I take more insult to them editing the constitution's and bill of rights meaning then to them slightly changing the reasons for how a war was fault. from what I here the civil war is taught differently depending on where you live. like the revolution compared to here in the us or over in the uk. same with how Canada sees ww1/ww2 compared to how the us teaches them.

but to change a law in text books against what it actually is is terrible.


Ah yes, the usual TDIT. I bet you don't you just feel smug?


TDIT???
why would I feel smug? o.O



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Sep 2014, 2:25 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Okay, you've got one example of some editorial business going on with the second amendment.
As far as a different perspective on history - sure, that's going to happen, but within reason. I wouldn't trust history books written in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. As far as the Civil War is concerned, states rights was not included as a reason for secession by the Confederacy till after the war was over. This is simply a case of Neo-Confederates wanting to rewrite history in order to avoid their ancestors choosing the wrong side of the conflict. And for that reason, it's absolutely a mistake to let differing arguments about the causes of the war to be taught to kids, as the Neo-Confederate viewpoint is completely as revisionist as is holocaust denial. No, history isn't entirely black and white, but neither should the truth be subject to choice.


there were 4 examples. and those 4 books are used throughout the nation. It also showed they changed the other amendments too, picking and choosing what they think the amendments should say.
do you think troops should be able to set up shop in your home during wars.

the fourth left out a lot of important stuff and on and on with the others.

you only think that way cause you grow up learning the norths view on history. if you gre up in Nazi Germany you would believe their history books to be true and would be sayin how you won't trust the Us's history books. from what i've heard from people outside the us, they don't trust our history accounts.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,577
Location: Seattle-ish

21 Sep 2014, 2:40 pm

sly279 wrote:
TDIT???
why would I feel smug? o.O


They Do It Too.

Also unsure of where the smugness fits in.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

21 Sep 2014, 3:20 pm

I think most Americans are immune to this "propaganda", because they don't learn much in school anyhow :o



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

21 Sep 2014, 3:35 pm

Dox47 wrote:
sly279 wrote:
TDIT???
why would I feel smug? o.O


They Do It Too.

Also unsure of where the smugness fits in.


ah Google didn't come up with that. but stuff about tournaments and sport.

yep don't have any pride in any revisions that aren't based on new information. just not in favor of saying if one side does it , its ok, but if the other side does it then its this super terrible thing. I don't care for selection-ism



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Sep 2014, 4:33 pm

sly279 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Okay, you've got one example of some editorial business going on with the second amendment.
As far as a different perspective on history - sure, that's going to happen, but within reason. I wouldn't trust history books written in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. As far as the Civil War is concerned, states rights was not included as a reason for secession by the Confederacy till after the war was over. This is simply a case of Neo-Confederates wanting to rewrite history in order to avoid their ancestors choosing the wrong side of the conflict. And for that reason, it's absolutely a mistake to let differing arguments about the causes of the war to be taught to kids, as the Neo-Confederate viewpoint is completely as revisionist as is holocaust denial. No, history isn't entirely black and white, but neither should the truth be subject to choice.


there were 4 examples. and those 4 books are used throughout the nation. It also showed they changed the other amendments too, picking and choosing what they think the amendments should say.
do you think troops should be able to set up shop in your home during wars.

the fourth left out a lot of important stuff and on and on with the others.

you only think that way cause you grow up learning the norths view on history. if you gre up in Nazi Germany you would believe their history books to be true and would be sayin how you won't trust the Us's history books. from what i've heard from people outside the us, they don't trust our history accounts.


Having different opinions about the facts can only go so far. Either your perception of history is true or it isn't. And the Neo-Confederate view that the south had revolted for the sake of states rights simply is not true.
And states rights, as far as I'm concerned, only have merit when the rights of citizens are defended - case in point, in my own state of Washington, where we voted to legalize marriage equality for all couples, gay or straight. States rights certainly were misused either to secede to preserve slavery, as was done by the Confederacy, or in order to keep black Americans second class citizens right up to the Civil Rights era. So any talk about seceding in order to preserve slavery had no legitimacy in regard to states rights.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

21 Sep 2014, 4:44 pm

Conservatives will deny reality if it is tattooed on the inside of their eyelids. It is shameful to watch the lengths they will go to to rationalize and try to justify the lack of integrity in their party. And most of the dishonest, shameful actions of this party from the Tea Party, "Christian" extremists. I think they deny reality just to be contentious, argumentative and belligerent just for the sake of being combative.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

21 Sep 2014, 5:46 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Quote:
I believe evolution should taught, creationism too even. I don't believe restricting knowledge in order to push a specific worldview.

This :thumleft:
Since evolution vs. creationism boils down to A or B let them draw whatever conclusion they will. Most will choose evolution. Some of the ones that claim they chose creationism will actually believe evolution but have religious reservations about openly stating so. That's life in a free society and if the world has to wait an additional half hour for the release of next version of the iPhone because there are still some people that subscribe to creationism then tuff s**t.


This isn't just about backwater areas of the country teaching creationism, but about how said backwaters want it to replace evolution in science classes in the rest of the country. People driven by religion and ideology have a tendency to shove their beliefs down everyone else' throats, and that's the case of those Texas school books going to other states. And the teaching of pseudoscience of any sort leaves the country as a whole at a disadvantage when competing with other countries in science.

Read again the bold part.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson