Why send your children to private school?

[CaptainHaplo]

Do you guys think I should continue feeding the troll?

While I take offense to being called a troll - I did - mistakenly - accuse you of bias, so I will let it go.

I see now where your coming from - and though I disagree, one statement finally made clear that we have been in dispute over 2 seperate things.

I never said it was a revision to the act wording of the curriculum lol. Merely that the changes to the textbooks, the tools the teachers have to use to teach the kids, the blood that keeps the curriculum alive, will fall back and affect the actual curriculum- as in how effective it is and how these things shall be taught.

Ok this is where we were on different pages. My whole thing was you were complaining about the changes to the curriculum - when in fact your more concerned with the textbooks themselves. Now however is a good time to point out that the "religious nuts" (my term - not yours) that everyone is so upset by that are making these curriculum changes - are not the ones that get to write the textbooks. So until we see the textbooks that are being written to accomodate the curricullum you now admit to not having a problem with - there isn't much point in being concerned. So its pretty much a non-issue.

During the Civil War, nobody living in one of these states owned slaves either. Census records going up to 1860 show that there were escaped slaves living in the Northern states, hence they were listed as "slaves" on it.

First time I have heard that explanation - will check into it.

Julia still owned four, as a Dent, but the Grant family, Ulysses' family, never owned and slaves in his lifetime.

Actually - your in error here. Grant did in fact own one slave that he acquired from Dent. He freed that slave within one year , but he did in fact own one.

http://www.neh.gov/news/humanities/2002-01/grant.html

How exactly will changing what the name of the trade is called make the study any more in depth than it previously was as you are claiming?

I will let a teacher who deals with the subject explain it better than I can. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1396821&postcount=55

Out of curiosity, what reasons?

My issue with the term "native american" is that words have specific meaning. Native - one born in a location specified. American - the place specified. Thus - a native american is anyone born in america. During the times in question - alot of "non-indian" folks met the technical definition of native american. A large portion of the kids getting taught this stuff meet that definition. Using the term is incorrect - language wise. If they wanted to be specific, then they should keep it as either American Indian - or detail the specific subset of Indians.

And yes - I am one of those real pains when it comes to stuff like that - I even answered the census as marking "other" and writing in Native American. I was born in Georgia, after all!

Or perhaps that I'm not willing to sidetrack from the original topic: that the revisions to the history books they are making are, in the first place, inaccurate

Wait a minute - "they" are not making changes to the history books - they are setting up a curriculum - that you stated you didn't have specific issues with. Yet your complaining about the books that a company (not the people on the Texas Board of Education) is going to write - when we havent even seen what they include - because they are not written yet. So call me confused - but your saying you don't have a problem with what the books are going to be based off of (the curriculum) - and the books aren't written yet - but

these incompetents are not cut out to hold a position of this kind of power in the education system, in which case they should be removed and the changes they've made revoked.

So if you don't have a problem with the curriculum itself - why should they be removed and the changes revoked - unless you want to do it just on the basis that you disagree with their personal philosophy and beliefs.

I mean seriously - if your going to be upset over the books that will be used to teach - shouldn't you at least see the books first before you judge them? Or is that not necessary because you have a preconcieved notion already about what they will contain - even though they are not created by the people you call incompetent (though they were competent enough to get elected - but then again - so was the president... ) and the books are not yet even written.

Seems your worried about a lot of stuff that isn't even real......