Recently, the Texas Board of Education voted to remove Thomas Jefferson in part from the history curriculum of the state. Purportedly, this was done for two reasons, his role in the First Amendment, and his position that there should be a separation of church and state.

Even in the event that one disagreed with either of these principals, removing Jefferson from our history seems to me to be a mistake. Please take the time to write to the TBofE and ask them to undo this harm.

[email protected]

Bill White also has an open letter to Rick Perry asking him to do something about this:

http://action.billwhitefortexas.com/page/speakout/SBOE?js=false&zip=


Remember that Texas, being the largest purchaser of textbooks in the country, sets the tone for many other states, that is, this decision may well affect the teaching in your own state.

Lyle,

While I agree with what your purpose (for writing this) is, a couple of things...

1. Don't you mean TX is the largest 'supplier' of textbooks (as in they produce / publish / write / edit textbooks)? CA (with the largest population) would be the largest purchaser, no?

2. The older I get, the more I question what something's "history" is. And I'm not saying that 'history' isn't important - rather I'm questioning WHOSE history it is? Example: Ever read a history of England's occupation of India? Yes? Bet it was 'England's perspective'! But if you read India's it surely would read different.

So again, I personally don't want Tom nixed from ANY textbooks...but now I first try to determine who the writer is (and understand that it WILL be bias in some direction).

Karl
Ps: Keep on keeping people honest with good dialog

Lyle,

While I agree with what your purpose (for writing this) is, a couple of things...

1. Don't you mean TX is the largest 'supplier' of textbooks (as in they produce / publish / write / edit textbooks)? CA (with the largest population) would be the largest purchaser, no?

2. The older I get, the more I question what something's "history" is. And I'm not saying that 'history' isn't important - rather I'm questioning WHOSE history it is? Example: Ever read a history of England's occupation of India? Yes? Bet it was 'England's perspective'! But if you read India's it surely would read different.

So again, I personally don't want Tom nixed from ANY textbooks...but now I first try to determine who the writer is (and understand that it WILL be bias in some direction).

Karl
Ps: Keep on keeping people honest with good dialog

Excellent point. The issue has been portrayed in the news in a couple of ways, and inconsistently. They have said both that Texas is the largest producer of textbooks, but also that due to our size, we control the content, that is the textbook writers tailor their books to our desires. They have also said that the textbooks as written according to Texas' dictates are utilized in a number of other states. In good truth, I don't know how all that plays out, nor do I understand how Texas' desires weigh against those of California in textbook writing and production.

I would be surprised if indeed Texas was the largest producer of textbooks (again I don't know this to be true or not) but given that all the major publishers are in places like NY, it doesn't make sense to me. This cycle of this issue has been the first time that I've heard this so I am a little skeptical.

On the other hand, clearly, if the publishers tailor books to their largest buyers, Texas is going to have an influence.

Fundamentally, I am against revising clear historical facts, not interpretations. That Jefferson said there should be a separation of church and state may or may not be fact, although it is well cited and supported. That the TBofE want him removed based on that stand is clear and has no historical aspect to it. They stated quite clearly why they don't want his words taught. In their opinion, they believe that the founding fathers indeed supported a religious base to our system of governance. Now you're back to history, and again, I don't have an answer, but trying to dictate how that is taught to our kids, by removing Jefferson, clearly shows a "right now" agenda that should be pursued in a different fashion, IMO.

Jefferson did many things and made huge contributions to this country. Editing his work to present a unique historical perspective seems wrong to me.

BTW - Karl, I completely agree with your position on historical perspective and who the author is. England isn't the only country susceptible to this problem. :)

Recently, the Texas Board of Education voted to remove Thomas Jefferson in part from the history curriculum of the state. Purportedly, this was done for two reasons, his role in the First Amendment, and his position that there should be a separation of church and state.

Even in the event that one disagreed with either of these principals, removing Jefferson from our history seems to me to be a mistake. Please take the time to write to the TBofE and ask them to undo this harm.

[email protected]

Bill White also has an open letter to Rick Perry asking him to do something about this:

http://action.billwhitefortexas.com/page/speakout/SBOE?js=false&zip=


Remember that Texas, being the largest purchaser of textbooks in the country, sets the tone for many other states, that is, this decision may well affect the teaching in your own state.

Even though his "separation of Church and State" has been morphed over the past 50-60 years. I'm pretty sure there was an American Bible to be used in schools for our new nation and Jefferson was quite fine with it and actually spearheaded the effort.

Even though his "separation of Church and State" has been morphed over the past 50-60 years. I'm pretty sure there was an American Bible to be used in schools for our new nation and Jefferson was quite fine with it and actually spearheaded the effort.

Especially since legend has it that Jefferson carried a bible with him that he had torn out the sections with which he disagreed.

BTW - Karl, I completely agree with your position on historical perspective and who the author is. England isn't the only country susceptible to this problem. :)

The US has done a pretty good job of this as well. Still does.

This is the text of something I wrote for some friends. I think it's appropriate to repost it here:

There has been a movement in the United States over the last 30 or 40 years that is seriously threatening to undermine the integrity of the country. I am speaking of the religious right and their efforts to 're-Christianize' the United States.

The latest assault in the battle is so outrageous, so unthinkable, that I am beginning to believe the war is going to be lost. If they can get away with this, there will be no stopping them.

The Texas Board of Education met almost 2 weeks ago in an effort to revise their social studies curriculum. Two very important decisions came out of this meeting.

1)Thomas Jefferson was removed from the world history curriculum as were the words “Enlightenment ideas.” The original words in the curriculum were “...explain the impact of Enlightenment ideas from John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Thomas Jefferson on political revolutions from 1750 to the present.” The new words are “...explain the impact of the writings of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and Sir William Blackstone.” Thomas Jefferson, first Secretary of State of the US, third president of the US and principle author of the Declaration of Independence, a document that created the freest and most powerful country the world has ever seen has been banned from Texas schoolbooks. Why? Because he was a Deist and because he was a staunch believer in the separation of church and state. Can there be any other reason to ban this man whose influence was indeed felt world-wide?

2)They voted against the following amendment “...examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others.” One of the dissenting board members, apparently unable to understand some of the words in the First Amendment, (specifically “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”) argued that the founding fathers did not mean for the church and state to be separate and that the proposed amendment was “not historically accurate.” Can someone please explain to me how the words that our government is based on could not be historically accurate?

Essentially, they have censored Thomas Jefferson and the US Constitution in order to prevent their secular influence from harming an unsuspecting generation. What has happened here? Why has this been allowed?

The current religious right movement has been building in the US since the mid 1960's. It was a response to the progressive culture of the 1960s and a fear of social disintegration. One of the chief aims of the movement has been to return America to its Christian heritage. They have tried to get creationism taught as a science in school by renaming it 'intelligent design'; they have fought to let the 10 commandments be posted in courthouses; they have thrown their support behind numerous right wing political candidates and, in return for help in getting them elected, demanded that they do their best to help restore America to its founders 'intentions'.

Herein lies the problem. One of the tactics that they have tried to employ is revisionism. They want for people to believe that the founding fathers truly wanted a Christian nation despite what our founding fathers wrote and did. Their thinking is apparently that if people believe that Washington, Madison and Jefferson wanted a Christian nation, then that's what people will attempt to give them.

The problem for the Christian right is that the founding fathers very clearly stated their opposition to the intermingling of church and state. Why do you think they wrote the First Amendment? They had no problem with people being Christian (or Jewish or Muslim or atheist) they just felt that was a private matter, not a public one.

One of the tactics for convincing people of the founding fathers' desire for a Christian nation has been to falsify and misquote them in order to make them seem sympathetic to the cause of the Christian right. I won't go in to the details here, but you should research what a man by the name of David Barton and his Wallbuilders have done. It is truly shameful and a disgrace to intelligent people everywhere.

Fortunately, there are a number of educated people who saw what they were doing and started fighting back. Although David Barton was forced to print a retraction for a number of quotations he simply invented, these quotations continue to show up all over the internet, on TV and in books. (To be fair, it wasn't much of a retraction. He basically said that no one could prove the founding fathers HADN'T said those things.) Most people will simply see these quotations and, not realizing that they are complete fabrications, simply accept them as the truth. At least that was the thinking.

Well, that apparently hasn't completely worked so they've decided to go the Big Brother route. The thinking is apparently that if they can't manipulate what people like Jefferson said, then we'll simply censor him so that no one has a chance to be corrupted by his secular leanings. If we don't teach our kids about the right of religious freedom in the First Amendment, maybe they won't realize they have a choice.

Thus, we have the Texas Board of Education voting to censor the words of Thomas Jefferson and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

It is a sad day for the people of the United States.

As one who has spent a fair bit of his academic time formally invested in these matters I think Jefferson in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802 couldn't have been more clear: he meant that the church and state were to be separate, and that neither should be permitted to tarry in the matters of the other. Period.

The revisionism of the facile in this time is disgusting.

OK, but he didn't say that religion and state were to be separate.

Remember at the time, there was a "Church of England". Perhaps he did not want to see a "Church of America"?

OK, but he didn't say that religion and state were to be separate.

Remember at the time, there was a "Church of England". Perhaps he did not want to see a "Church of America"?


He didn't say faith and government were to be separate either, but the intent is clear that church/religion/matters of faith are to be separate from state/government. Label them as you wish.

And the day that Jefferson is removed from OUR history books will be the day you can look out the window and see monkeys flying!