[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by August

Why none that I can think of off hand.

That's what I thought.

Originally Posted by August

Are you trying to make the point that Atheists are actually less of a bother than Theists?

Actually, no, that wasn't my original intention. But the fact that you just said they don't come to your door and bother you to "join them" is confirmation enough that they're not a recruitment bother like a lot of Theistic groups are (and some of the other weirdos out there, like the Scientologists and Mormons).

Originally Posted by August

If so, at least the Theists go away when you tell them too.

Of course, the fact that Atheists aren't coming to your door at all makes this pretty much moot. It's all Theists in your case. Not Agnostics or Atheists. Same here, too; no Atheists or Agnostics bothering me, just Theists.

Originally Posted by August

I've yet to see an Atheist gotten rid of so easily.

Though, in the first place, you have yet to see an Atheist even come to your door.

Originally Posted by August

Around here they're like locusts drawn to any thread that even touches upon religious beliefs.

So they're exactly like the Theists here too? Interesting. Very interesting indeed.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Ok - where in the text of changes do you see historical revisionism?

The insinuations that the establishment of the Confederacy was justifiable and perfectly legitimate, despite it being by the very legal definition an act of treason, and the stated desire by Mrs. Dunbar to portray it in the light of being, once again, a justifiable "armed rebellion against the United States government to protect states' rights". She's the founder of the historical revisionist site WallBuilders. I'm not the only one calling her out on her BS either; plenty of historians are too. Even their fellow Christians are. (See this link for a Christian Ethics report on them; they don't agree at all with the nonsense they're coming up with either: http://www.christianethicstoday.com/...er_003_17_.htm).

http://www.wallbuilders.com/default.asp

I mean honestly, if you're going to consider the words of Jefferson Davis, alongside the elected President of the United States of America Abraham Lincoln, you should be doing the same for other leaders in the world of the time that had direct contact with the United States in history. You should be considering the words of Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Hidecki Tojo (and indeed the Emperor, Hirohito) alongsides the words of Roosevelt and Churchill; I don't see too many textbooks these days that have quotes and speeches and the like from Stalin in them either. He should be put in there too. Put Tito and Mao in there too. While we're at it, lets reexamine World War I. Let's put not only the words and speeches of Woodrow Wilson in there, but also the words and speeches of Kaiser Wilhelm II, Tsar Nicholas II, King George V, Emperor Franz Joseph I, Sultans Mehmed V and VI, King Victor Emmanuel III, King Albert I, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Kerensky, etc. in there. We're trying to consider history from all points of view here, after all lol.

The only real problem with the textbooks is how brief they are. The Civil War in the textbook I used for the paragraphs I posted above has a chapter that lasts for like 15 pages total, with 4 chapters total- only one of which is dedicated solely to the actual politics behind the war. It's got the history right, it's just too damn short.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

I ask you to point out the changes as they are in the documentation - not what some news outlet tells you is happening.

Certainly. Just did it for you. If that's not enough, try their website and find out the idiocratic drivel they're spouting via the "Search" box. Not just about the Civil War or the Founding Fathers, but also about World War I, World War II, the Civil Rights Movement, Reconstruction, the Spanish-American War, the Mexican-American War, and the Cold War.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

If there are historical issues with the curriculum, let's deal with them.

There were no real historical issues with the curriculum in the first place. These self-admitted revisionists were elected to represent their respective school boards and decided they didn't agree personally with what was being taught, so the entire thing should be redone and everybody's child in these PUBLIC schools should have to learn what they want them to learn, how they want them to learn. Historical issues are now the problem. And thankfully, there are people out there trying to combat them.