Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

This feudal revisionist would-be King could be your president

A new civics training program for public school teachers in Florida says it is a “[b]misconception[/b]” that “the founders desired strict separation of church and state,” the Washington Post reports.

The Constitution explicitly bars the government from “respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Scholars interpret the passage to require a separation of church and state.

In another example, the training states that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were against slavery, while [i]omitting the fact that each owned enslaved people.[/i]

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has decried what he has branded "indoctrination” in public education.

DeSantis has instituted new civics curriculum since taking office, and this summer is offering optional “civics bootcamps” on how teachers can implement it. Teachers who participate get paid.

What he's saying: “[b]We’re unabashedly promoting civics and history that is accurate and that is not trying to push an ideological agenda,[/b]” DeSantis said at an event earlier this week.

Students in Florida are “learning the real history, you’re learning the real facts,” he added.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
History teachers don't need this sort of directing. History is a liberal discipline that aspires to an objective reconstruction of the past through free enquiry and rigorous analysis of all plausible evidence. It does not serve any group or dogma, but should be freely available and welcoming to all with the imagination and broadness of mind to cope with it.

I think the idea that the Founders did not desire a separation of church and state would come as a surprise to the early French revolutionaries 🤔
@SunshineGirl [quote]
History is a liberal discipline
[/quote]

There's the problem, though. The word [i]liberal[/i] might just as well be communist, socialist or Democrat, and despite the BS about the intent of the Founding Fathers, what passes for Conservatism these days is a bizarre mixture of populism, anti-intellectulaism and a reaction to the evils of the Enlightenment.
room101 · 51-55, M
@MistyCee I'm guessing that the word "liberal" in this context refers to the type of academic disciplin that History falls into. Not a political ideology.
@room101 And I'm guessing that the distinction is lost on a lot of people, much like the socialist part of national socialism.
room101 · 51-55, M
@MistyCee I can't find fault with your astute observation😁
@room101 lol. Don't you dare ever back down if you can fault whatever I spout!
room101 · 51-55, M
@MistyCee I'm rubbish at backing down. BUT, I'm more than happy to accept a more nuanced opinion.
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
@MistyCee Only in the US have I ever known liberal to have such a partisan connotation, which is quite sad really.
@SunshineGirl It is sad, but a lot of the people calling themselves conservatives here aren't Conservatives at all and are mostly interested in the destruction of the most basic social norms, rather then preventing the erosion of more recent ones.

Shit like Trump lying about the biggest crowd size or saying maybe that wasn't his voice after he admitted it was seems cute until you think hard about "alternate facts" and what it means to brag about killing people and it not bothering his supporters.

Granted, they're a motley lot, some of them choose not to think about the consequences, while others are just dumb as rocks and happy to feel good about it, of course.