MaxedOutMama
Monday, May 30, 2005
Should Be Interesting
The first topic:
Update - you can follow this discussion now at Ilona's May Roundup.
Ilona at True Grit linked to Fatal Ignorance, who had written:
I left my thoughts at True Grit's. This ought to be an interesting discussion.
And the second topic is brought to you by Sigmund Carl and Alfred, with a post combining thoughts about Memorial Day and the furor over France's "non" to the EU Constitution:
People join the military (or are drafted) and fight for our land because this land is supposed to provide them with the opportunity to be themselves, to pick their own causes, and to live their own lives. I can't imagine the French people joining the French army in large numbers to defend the EU Constitution. Neither can they. That's why they said no.
Update - you can follow this discussion now at Ilona's May Roundup.
Ilona at True Grit linked to Fatal Ignorance, who had written:
My friends from the US are amazed at the idea that religious education is compusory in UK schools. It's nothing like the kind of mind-control thing that the secularizers fear so much. It covers all world faiths. It aims to bring a wide appreciation of different faith perspectives. But, crucially, it helps people understand others who are *not like them*. Anyone who had done any basic religious education would have realised either:When I went to school there was plenty about religion in history, because religion has affected history. The point about ignorance is a bad one. The US military had issued strict orders about the proper treatment of the Koran. As for the Newsweak reporters, I just won't touch that one.
a) why abusing the Koran would be such a stupid thing to do to radicalised Muslims
(if that really ever happened, or...)
b) why running a story in Newsweek that alleged such a thing would lead to bloodshed
I left my thoughts at True Grit's. This ought to be an interesting discussion.
And the second topic is brought to you by Sigmund Carl and Alfred, with a post combining thoughts about Memorial Day and the furor over France's "non" to the EU Constitution:
Memorial Day 2005. Another year where what this day means will pass, and the day will be only meaningful to those who have a loved one in the military or those of us that have chosen to somehow identify with the meaning of this day.and then SC&A turns to the events in Europe:
We know what we are supposed to be grateful for. We have- and have had- freedoms most of the world has yet to experience and know. All freedoms we take for granted because more than one generation of young men and women died defending the ideals we believe in.
Jean-Claude Juncker, the current EU president (from that mighty state of Luxembourg), declared that if the French said ‘oui’ European integration would proceed, and if they said ‘non’ European integration would proceed. And what does 'consulting the people mean'? In the EU, not much. It is the powers that be, that know best what you need, what you need to know and what you need to believe- and you will vote again and again, until you get it 'right.' That's what M Chirac said, or threatened, last week.To me, the meaning of all this is simple. Whether you agree with their vision or not, the French people do have a vision of what they want their society to be. They decided that vision was endangered by the EU Constitution, so they rejected it. They should have the right to do that - to be French, to create their own vision of a good society. An EU that can't let the French be French is not much of a benefit, IMO.
People join the military (or are drafted) and fight for our land because this land is supposed to provide them with the opportunity to be themselves, to pick their own causes, and to live their own lives. I can't imagine the French people joining the French army in large numbers to defend the EU Constitution. Neither can they. That's why they said no.
Comments:
<< Home
working on it now, and came here to copypaste your url ( I Have it memorized, but this way I can read while I'm here:)
# posted by 
: 9:21 AM
: 9:21 AM
When I went to school some teachers still opened the day with prayer. Religion, now, is largely edited out of the history when it is the Christian religion, and Islam was only included in the most superficial way in earlier curriculum -not sure how it is now.
That celebrated California case had some elements of practicing religion, and I think this is what will raise peoples hackles-on all sides the most.
Without well-written curriculum I don't see how that can be avoided. I don't think it is always intentionally done. It seems to be a mix of interactive types of learning that would be inappropriate to this type of topic that causes the problem.
Religious schools usually handle things differently, and can, than public schools. I fwe think this topic is important to our citizenship then it needs to be in public education. In a careful way.
That celebrated California case had some elements of practicing religion, and I think this is what will raise peoples hackles-on all sides the most.
Without well-written curriculum I don't see how that can be avoided. I don't think it is always intentionally done. It seems to be a mix of interactive types of learning that would be inappropriate to this type of topic that causes the problem.
Religious schools usually handle things differently, and can, than public schools. I fwe think this topic is important to our citizenship then it needs to be in public education. In a careful way.
# posted by : 11:58 AM
: 11:58 AM
Gindy - that's interesting. We did study some about the deities and social system of Egypt. We did learn about Mosaic law and the birth of monotheism. We studied Buddhism and something about the sagas and deities of India, Greece, Rome and old Europe. We read primary texts from Babylon, the Old Testament and the Koran. And Confucious.
And then of course we had to learn about the early church (Roman empire), the split into eastern and western churches and their effects, then the birth of the heresies, then Protestantism emerged, the wars, etc. The Ottoman empire. I'm getting a headache.
I don't see how you can teach history without covering the ideas, law and culture of the different periods, and religion has a lot of ideas and law in it.
We had social studies instead of pure history. For every period we had economy, religion, art, societal structures and history taught together.
And then of course we had to learn about the early church (Roman empire), the split into eastern and western churches and their effects, then the birth of the heresies, then Protestantism emerged, the wars, etc. The Ottoman empire. I'm getting a headache.
I don't see how you can teach history without covering the ideas, law and culture of the different periods, and religion has a lot of ideas and law in it.
We had social studies instead of pure history. For every period we had economy, religion, art, societal structures and history taught together.
Ilona, I think I need to go look at what they are teaching in the schools now. I suppose I always just assumed kids got the same sort of curriculum as I did.
I read about the CA case. The stuff about saying prayers and all did seem a little out there. We didn't pray in school - it had been banned by then. I did trip over some stuff on the web that alleged that a Saudi-funded organization was trying to control what US students learned about Islam. I'll have to look up the woman's name.
But Islam and ME history was certainly covered in our curriculum.
I read about the CA case. The stuff about saying prayers and all did seem a little out there. We didn't pray in school - it had been banned by then. I did trip over some stuff on the web that alleged that a Saudi-funded organization was trying to control what US students learned about Islam. I'll have to look up the woman's name.
But Islam and ME history was certainly covered in our curriculum.
'They should have the right to do that - to be French, to create their own vision of a good society.'
I agree, but what is funny about this is that it was the French using to EU to counter American power, culture and maybe one day military. The EU was fine when it was giving the French more power than they deserved. It was fine when they were allowed to break the rules that they had set for everyone else. Then five years into this adventure, it suddenly dawned on them that they would have to give a little too. Oops, can't have any of that!
Post a Comment
I agree, but what is funny about this is that it was the French using to EU to counter American power, culture and maybe one day military. The EU was fine when it was giving the French more power than they deserved. It was fine when they were allowed to break the rules that they had set for everyone else. Then five years into this adventure, it suddenly dawned on them that they would have to give a little too. Oops, can't have any of that!
<< Home
