Do you support truth or doctrine?

[FalconAngel]

On March 12, 2010, the Texas state school board voted to have their history books changed to support the factually false and misleading "Christian nation" argument.

The decision to do so, will have major changes implemented in all of our nation's history books, which have already been changed multiple times to suit propagandist agendas for various groups.

The changes in the history books from this action will include, For example: with this curriculum, students will learn nothing about Thomas Jefferson's political philosophy or his thoughts on the separation of church and state; the superiority of American capitalism will be lauded; the Tejanos who fell defending the Alamo will be ignored; and all Republican philosophies (no matter how loathsome and wrong) will be seen in a positive light.


For good or ill, I support historical fact, not propaganda or political correctness.

I support teaching our past in it's true light, not the piss poor illumination of propaganda.

Do you want your progeny to learn lies instead of facts?

Make your voice heard on the link below. Sign the petition to stop this heinous denial of facts. If they are not stopped now, then the next thing to happen will be to force us all back into the closet.

http://www.care2.com/go/z/19838608

[darkeyes]

The trouble with history is that one person's history is another's lies... I love history, and try as far as I am able to ascertain the truth of what I read and hear.. yet what I believe is factual has always another slant and viewpoint.. just as my father was taught one version of British history (and much of British history is America's history) at school Falcie, so your father another, and you and I very considerably different from our parents.. and our children's will probably be different again.. indeed from what I have read and know of my country's history, and discussing the subject with history teachers at work, what even I was taught in the mid 1990's is now considered in a very different light..

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

This topic was done a couple of months back too, Sweetie. Changing History is just plain Wrong, I dont care who is it or For. Changing the truth to fit your own gain is still a lie, and teaching our children a lie is just wrong all the way around. I hope it isnt allowed to be and that people who know the real truth of history will protest it all over the US.,
Cat

[Canticle]

I must agree with you Falcon, where it is at all possible, the truth should out and nothing should be hidden. No argument with you there, Not one bit.

However, I also agree with Fran, one man or woman's history, is another man, or woman's, lies. Events are viewed very differently, from opposite sides of the fence.

The absolute truth, written down, as it happened....that should be shown and taught and not hidden. There are so many things, which we are still learning about 20th century history and not information about wars and other such conflicts. Secrets which a country would not like revealed...but those secrets do get revealed, in the end.

We need to keep reminding ourselves, that the truth, which should set us free, has to be fought for. Nothing should be hidden. Repeat, repeat, repeat the message. as many times as it needs repeating.

[tenni]

I think that I would prefer the truth but as darkeyes and Canticle have stated the "truth" may be debatable. I have long held the belief that the US people have been manipulated as far as their teaching of history was concerned and in particular the 20th century. Certain "facts" may be suitable for different ages as well. I don't know much about Thomas Jefferson but he does seem important. I agree with the separation of the State and Church but I think that various countries have had vary success at doing that. Sorry, but from what I have heard the teaching of history in the US is a little too egocentric and not sufficient a global understanding.

One comment that I heard about this issue was how influential the state of Texas is on all school book content in the US. I heard that Texas purchases the greatest quantity of school books and their curriculum ends up being in the rest of the school boards textbooks. Is that true? Now, I suppose that the teachers could add varying views but the views of Texas end up in the textbooks all across the US?

[Darkside2009]

Since this decision was only taken a month ago I'm assuming that no actual revised-books have reached the shelves yet. In which case it seems that a lot of assumptions are being made as to the contents.

Secondly, I'm fairly sure that any proposed changes would be vetted by a panel of historical scholars to ensure its veracity before the School Board voted to adopt it.

Thirdly, I seem to recall both of the Bush Presidents if not also President Clinton, taking their oath of office on the Jefferson Bible.

Lastly, the way history is viewed will often change over time to reflect new information coming to light such as the release of Classified information.

For example details of the Navajo Code used by American forces in World War 2 was not declassified until 1968, the Navajo Code Talkers held their first reunion the following year.

Then, in 1982, they were honoured when the U.S. Government named August 14th as National Navajo Code Talkers Day.

It was one of the few codes in history that had never been broken. Lieutenant-General Seizo Arisue, the Japanese Chief of Intelligence, admitted that although they had broken the American Air Force Code they had failed to make any headway on the Navajo Code.

As to whether the release of this previously classified information has made any difference to the way the Navajo are perceived or treated in America, I suppose you would need to ask a Navajo to find out.

The UK would not be immune from such changes, history books from my grandparent's day would have reflected a more jingoistic view of the British Empire and it's perceived benefits. Today's history books would reflect a more critical assessment of perceived, strategic interests.

[Pasadenacpl2]

Darkside,

You're wrong on just about every count. Hi. I'm Pasa, I'm a school teacher in Texas. I just went through the entire process with English texts this school year.

Guess which text books go up for adoption next year? If you guessed Social Studies, you'd be right. The publishers will print the books to be used for the next ten years this summer. The advance copies will be in schools for teachers to peruse as early as August. Teachers will be given a selection of books from which to choose from (on a district by district level).

You think this will be vetted? There were already experts in the field telling the State Board of Ed that they were crazy to take Thomas Jefferson out of the curriculum. The SBOE is on it's own path to rewrite the curriculum in it's own image of what is right and true. The head of the SBOE is a dentist for cryin' out loud!

It's disgusting.

Pasa

[tenni]

Pasa
Will you explain this "State Board of Education" a bit more? We have a "Ministry of Education" here. The political side of the Ministry is lead by an elected politician on the party that wins the election. The Ministry itself consists of academics and people who have some experience in the trenches of education(depends of course. Some are just power seeking wanna be..;) All of the documents and curriculum are developed by educators and educational theorists, ie PHD etc. I'm not sure how much input the politician Minister has? I suppose that there is some but not enough to alter facts ? How does your system work?

[Pasadenacpl2]

There are varying levels of boards of education.

There is the Department of Education on the federal level. It is an unconstitutional department who has no actual authority beyond using carrot and stick tactics to enforce its will (which it does very effectively). This is a typical bureaucracy full of people who don't know a thing about educating students telling people who do how to do their jobs. They currently use No Child Left Behind as a bullying stick.

Each state has their own BOE (each state calls it something slightly different). This organization is responsible for determining a wide variety of things, very often they are in charge of setting curriculum to be used state wide (very often, but not always). In Texas we have the Texas Education Agency which is responsible for ensuring that the state meets state and federal mandates. It answers to the SBOE. The SBOE is 100% appointed buy the governor. It is incredibly political to get on. This is the first time, however, I have seen it be political in terms of determining curriculum.

Each city has their own school district. Some large cities have several school districts. Each district has their own board which does hiring and firing, sets local policy, and determines how best to enact state and federal mandates all while maintaining a budget that is between 25 and 50% smaller than it should be in order to be in full compliance.

Some local districts get to set their own curriculum because their state grants them the authority to do so. The motto of most folks is that we want schools to be controlled locally as much as is feasible.

Pasa

[tenni]

Thanks Pasa
As i understand this, the BOE usually sets the curriculum and reports that to the SBOE which is a politically appointed organization by the Governor. Has a SBOE ever turned down a curriculum or part of it? What process was used if so? (sent back to the BOE to revise?)

I think that you are suggesting that this SBOE will be dealt with somehow?(court or ?) I assume that the Governor may be in favour of what they are doing or wouldn't the Governor do something?


There are varying levels of boards of education.

There is the Department of Education on the federal level. It is an unconstitutional department who has no actual authority beyond using carrot and stick tactics to enforce its will (which it does very effectively). This is a typical bureaucracy full of people who don't know a thing about educating students telling people who do how to do their jobs. They currently use No Child Left Behind as a bullying stick.

Each state has their own BOE (each state calls it something slightly different). This organization is responsible for determining a wide variety of things, very often they are in charge of setting curriculum to be used state wide (very often, but not always). In Texas we have the Texas Education Agency which is responsible for ensuring that the state meets state and federal mandates. It answers to the SBOE. The SBOE is 100% appointed buy the governor. It is incredibly political to get on. This is the first time, however, I have seen it be political in terms of determining curriculum.

Each city has their own school district. Some large cities have several school districts. Each district has their own board which does hiring and firing, sets local policy, and determines how best to enact state and federal mandates all while maintaining a budget that is between 25 and 50% smaller than it should be in order to be in full compliance.

Some local districts get to set their own curriculum because their state grants them the authority to do so. The motto of most folks is that we want schools to be controlled locally as much as is feasible.

Pasa

[Pasadenacpl2]

I can't tell what this governor is doing, frankly. Perry has lost so much of my support, it's not funny.

Nothing is to be done, unless a parent group somewhere does something legally. I can't do anything as a teacher because if I do, I lose my job. *shrug*

Pasa

[brutal_priestess]

What I worry more about this "Christian Nation" stuff is how it will affect non-Christians should America ever officially declare ourselves as such. Does it mean all other religious expression with be restricted or limited? Or will it just lead to Christianity having more of a free pass in this country than it already does? Kinda being serious here. It really worries me, especially given the fact that I'm a big old heathen.

[12voltman59]

What I worry more about this "Christian Nation" stuff is how it will affect non-Christians should America ever officially declare ourselves as such. Does it mean all other religious expression with be restricted or limited? Or will it just lead to Christianity having more of a free pass in this country than it already does? Kinda being serious here. It really worries me, especially given the fact that I'm a big old heathen.

It is the clearly stated goal of the most extreme fundamentalist types of christians that America "be returned to God."

They constantly have huge rallies at churches all over the US where they pray and worlk towards "the renewal of our nation towards the righteousness of God!" or something along those lines.

They totally reject anything that is at all progressive--certainly "gay rights" is an abomination and evil that must be undone and the depravity of homosexuality must be rooted from the land!!

Believe me--I have watched their preachers say it both on their television shows and in person.

There is one big "ministry" that of a father son team--the Hagees who also hold that America, like Israel is among the few nations of the earth that which God have made "a covenant" and placing his "annointing upon."

We have "fallen short of God" in recent years and our very future is at stake lest we fail to get back into the good graces of God----so they say!

http://www.jhm.org/ME2/Default.asp

Go check it out--his is but only one of thousands of such "minstries" out there to "do God's work in bringing restoration to this land" with one way of restoring America---- is to do something about the rampant homosexuality in our country!!

The website doesn't go too much into some of his more radical stuff--but watch his sermons sometime----he really gets wound up on all the evils of the world and homosexuality is the biggie!!! So we are all damned to hell, ya'all!!

[FalconAngel]

What I worry more about this "Christian Nation" stuff is how it will affect non-Christians should America ever officially declare ourselves as such.

It will mean the end of the 1st Amendment and the beginning of a second Civil War.


Does it mean all other religious expression with be restricted or limited?

Or worse, forced deep underground......along with a lot of other freedoms that the Constitution guarantees us.
We might also expect such insanities as heresy laws, which could include everything from prison to the death penalty, not unlike Islamic fundys do when someone writes or makes art that puts Mohammed in a bad light.



Or will it just lead to Christianity having more of a free pass in this country than it already does? Kinda being serious here. It really worries me, especially given the fact that I'm a big old heathen.

Pretty much. As a Wiccan, It will force me and mine to go underground right along with you. But I will join the fight against it.

If one does not fight against tyranny, one's punishment is to live under it's control. Some say that it is better to be a live sheep, than a dead lion. I prefer to be a live lion.

So if we work to nip it in the bud now, then we may not have to go to war over it, later. I do prefer the minimum force concept. It's easier on all of us in the long run.

[TaylorMade]

What I worry more about this "Christian Nation" stuff is how it will affect non-Christians should America ever officially declare ourselves as such. Does it mean all other religious expression with be restricted or limited? Or will it just lead to Christianity having more of a free pass in this country than it already does? Kinda being serious here. It really worries me, especially given the fact that I'm a big old heathen.

The First Amendment prevents such a declaration... though the phrase "Separation of Church and state" is NOT found in the Constitution - - the First Amendment is meant to protect the church/religious bodies from government abuse, which one could argue, could include calling America a "Christian Nation".

But - - many of the founding fathers, at the very least, functioned in a "culturally Christian" outlook. If that can be admitted, I think it would help greatly.

I don't trade in paranoia and assumptions that the fringe makes the rules. But I guess that's what fundamentalists of any stripe do.


*Taylor*

[brutal_priestess]

The First Amendment prevents such a declaration... though the phrase "Separation of Church and state" is NOT found in the Constitution - - the First Amendment is meant to protect the church/religious bodies from government abuse, which one could argue, could include calling America a "Christian Nation".

Yeah but that's my point/concern. Would becoming a Christian Nation negate the first amendment and other rights?

What I mean by Christian Nation is the noise that's been made to declare America as Christian, not just merely for it to be the majority religious belief in a "secular country".

[TwylaTwobits]

I posted my thoughts in another thread about this same thing.. I think it might have been posted by Pasa and therefore hidden at this time.

My thoughts then are much the same as they are now. History is written by the victors, it is up to everyone to preserve the truth even through oral history if need be.

I support truth but I do not agree with this thread title as it seems to be another slam to Christians.

Perhaps everyone's favorite legal group will get this stopped. Let's remember that we cannot change history, it happened, but they can try to amend it to their heart's content.

Too many films, books and online sources exist for them to ever write out Thomas Jefferson or any other important part of our history. Perhaps they will even include some of the history that apparently got lost on the way to the American Public that our friends in other countries know well.

[Long Duck Dong]

after centuries of the christians trying to * suppress * the love of nature and nature worship.... they have still not succeeded.....
what did work, is the creation of modern wicca and spiritualism to create a new * truth *....

the same principal is what is going on here.... a rebellion against the teaching of one *truth*, in favour of the teaching of another *truth *

what is taught in schools is not the truth, merely a perception of it.... and i do find it interesting that people are very vocal about what perception of the * truth * is allowed to be taught....

so I suggest the following.... how about you teach your kids what you believe is the truth..... and let others teach their kids their version of the truth.... and stop trying to dictate what anybody can learn ..... as we all have the right to learn as many variables of the truth as possible......that way we are more likely to form a informed opinion......

[darkeyes]

after centuries of the christians trying to * suppress * the love of nature and nature worship.... they have still not succeeded.....
what did work, is the creation of modern wicca and spiritualism to create a new * truth *....

the same principal is what is going on here.... a rebellion against the teaching of one *truth*, in favour of the teaching of another *truth *

what is taught in schools is not the truth, merely a perception of it.... and i do find it interesting that people are very vocal about what perception of the * truth * is allowed to be taught....

so I suggest the following.... how about you teach your kids what you believe is the truth..... and let others teach their kids their version of the truth.... and stop trying to dictate what anybody can learn ..... as we all have the right to learn as many variables of the truth as possible......that way we are more likely to form a informed opinion......

You are right Duckie.. the trouble with history is its huge scope for interpretation with aftersight and research..and even mere dogma.. I do have real doubts about teaching children history for it can and does instill in children the worst of humanity's basesness... it can also instill in children real compassion and concern for the wider world.. you pays your money and makes your choice...

... and yes we do teach our children what we believe and how we see the world and our view of history.. but we have explained to the older girl that these are our beliefs.. and that as she grows she should not take what we believe as the only truth.. there are others and that she should find out for herself and develop her own view of the world as she is almost certain to do.. the younger child is too young as yet to do this with in any great detail.. but she will be raised in the same way..

[FalconAngel]

after centuries of the christians trying to * suppress * the love of nature and nature worship.... they have still not succeeded.....
what did work, is the creation of modern wicca and spiritualism to create a new * truth *....

Actually, What we call Wicca, without going into the fallacy of calling all modern Craft "Wicca" (it factually isn't - different gods), The Pagan Craft had survived underground all the way through what many call "the burning times". The familial practices of Witchcraft in the Eastern mountain regions of the US is actually survivors of the Craft that came here from Europe from the 1600's to the 1800's.

Even my own tradition was started by one who was trained by one of the Surviving coven lines in the New Forest region of England.

Would be happy to go into a long discussion of it, but not here on this thread.



the same principal is what is going on here.... a rebellion against the teaching of one *truth*, in favour of the teaching of another *truth *

And that is the problem. They want to teach their truth in place of factual truth.


what is taught in schools is not the truth, merely a perception of it.... and i do find it interesting that people are very vocal about what perception of the * truth * is allowed to be taught....

Exactly. Truth vs. facts. Facts should be taught in history. If you want truth, philosophy class is down the hall on the right.


so I suggest the following.... how about you teach your kids what you believe is the truth..... and let others teach their kids their version of the truth.... and stop trying to dictate what anybody can learn ..... as we all have the right to learn as many variables of the truth as possible......that way we are more likely to form a informed opinion......

God idea with one minor flaw. Teach the children the truth, but let others teach facts, not their version of the truth.

That helps in teaching children to think critically to determine what is best for them as they grow older and (hopefully) wiser than this generation.

[Pasadenacpl2]

Nice Raiders Of The Lost Arc reference, Falcon.

Pasa

[Darkside2009]

Darkside,

You're wrong on just about every count. Hi. I'm Pasa, I'm a school teacher in Texas. I just went through the entire process with English texts this school year.

Guess which text books go up for adoption next year? If you guessed Social Studies, you'd be right. The publishers will print the books to be used for the next ten years this summer. The advance copies will be in schools for teachers to peruse as early as August. Teachers will be given a selection of books from which to choose from (on a district by district level).

You think this will be vetted? There were already experts in the field telling the State Board of Ed that they were crazy to take Thomas Jefferson out of the curriculum. The SBOE is on it's own path to rewrite the curriculum in it's own image of what is right and true. The head of the SBOE is a dentist for cryin' out loud!

It's disgusting.

Pasa

Ok, so Jefferson's part is being replaced in the curriculum, by what exactly? He was not the only signatory to the Declaration, although he was one of the Prime Movers.

In the UK in the teaching of History and English Literature, these are such large subjects that perforce a decision has to be made on which periods or writers to include. D.H.Lawrence or Hardy, etc.

If only a few periods of history,or writers, were taught, then these subjects would lose much of their rich variety and students and these topics would be all the poorer.

At most, we can hope that the student's mind will be so enthralled by what they have read, that they will venture out and expand their horizons further by reading other periods of history and other writers with a critical eye.

For the life of me, I can't see the State Governor appointing people to decide on a curriculum without vetting of any kind by a panel of experts. That would be too bizarre.

I'm assuming that they are presented with a range of history periods or texts, or authors to choose from and they narrow it down from there.

There are some on this site who appear to have an incipient paranoia when the word Christian is mentioned. I'm wondering how much of this thread is fuelled by their visions of conspiracy.

[tenni]

"Go(o)d idea with one minor flaw. Teach the children the truth, but let others teach facts, not their version of the truth.
That helps in teaching children to think critically to determine what is best for them as they grow older and (hopefully) wiser than this generation."

I think that it muddies my understanding to read posters writing about their own spiritual beliefs within the context of this thread? I would suspect that previous history texts were written from a perspective and that perspective had a bias. Facts are left out and other facts emphasized depending upon the political beliefs of the time that the book is written. By say grade 10 though, students should be given facts and other facts that may raise questions about a belief or held "truth" as Falcie states. There may not be a lot of that going on in some states with strong bias one way or other. Does this happen in courses that you know about Pasa?(in Texas)

To leave out a major historical figure seems wrong but whether his philosophy should be included about separation of state and church seems to be a sensitive point. This has nothing to do with Wicca, does it? The major dominating religion has been Christian and more specifically forms of "Protestant".

Social issues and government decisions have been influenced by the beliefs of the politicians who have had their own religious beliefs. Abortion, human & civil rights, same sex marriage and so many social issues have been strongly influenced by the dominant religious beliefs. Has there actually been separation of State and Church in the US..or Canada even? In Canada, I think that it has varied over time but legal same sex marriage came about due to our Constitution and section 15 of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The PM was Catholic and was pressured by Catholic bishops not to confirm this human right to same sex couples. He ignored his religious beliefs and adhered to the Constitution and decision of the Supreme Court. Now, the character who is our PM comes from a fundamentalist Christian perspective and he seems to be attempting to ignore or over ride certain parliamentary democratic criteria. I'm sure that he would have found a way to ignore our constitution and Supreme Court on same sex marriage. It is here though and he remains quiet (for now) about finding a way to remove this right. Harper has however stated that his government will not fund abortion as part of foreign aid even though abortion is legal in Canada. It is almost as if it is an attempt to change things step by step. This may be what is also happening in Texas? Posters here refer to a section of the US constitution that confirms Jefferson's philosophy and it seem strange if this government body is really attempting to ignore the US constitution.

The question for me is does the US really have now or in the past the separation of Church and State, freedom and so many political myths (my perspective) ? Will this removal of Jefferson's philosophy be detrimental to the US? It seems that some believe that it will.

What are the reasons given by this government body to make this change?

[Pasadenacpl2]

Darkside, please understand that I am one who continually speaks out against that very paranoia. And yet, the things you label as bizare are what is actually happening.

The Texas SBOE has hijacked fact for their own brand of truth. And it is indeed bizare.

Pasa

[TaylorMade]

Yeah but that's my point/concern. Would becoming a Christian Nation negate the first amendment and other rights?

What I mean by Christian Nation is the noise that's been made to declare America as Christian, not just merely for it to be the majority religious belief in a "secular country".

Yes it would.

I don't think there is an official movement to declare America a Christian Nation, no matter what the back and forth (more back on this site) from the pagan fundamentalists and the christian fundamentalists state.

Some wish for a spiritual awakening- - like the First and Second Great Awakenings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Awakening), but not by force. Before you get nervous - - this wasn't conversion by force, remember that.

And the First and Second Awakenings supposedly helped give the cultural backdrop to the American Revolution and the Abolitionist movement.

So ,please, rest assured. If they're hiding switchblades in their bibles and guns in the pulpit, I'll be the first to warn you.

*Taylor*

[FalconAngel]

Nice Raiders Of The Lost Arc reference, Falcon.

Pasa

Thanks. I felt it appropriate at the time. :bigrin:

I got a million of em!

[Darkside2009]

The Texas SBOE has hijacked fact for their own brand of truth. And it is indeed bizare.Pasa

Ok, so far we don't seem to have any concrete examples of what is being inserted into these text-books to cause such consternation.

Can anyone provide an example? One that they themselves have read in the manuscript format.

Obviously text-books cannot cover all periods of history, or all historical characters. A selection of some description has to be made, not least in order to pitch it to the level of understanding of the intended pupils.

It may be the case that some aspect/s are removed in order to make way for other equally valid aspects of your Nation's history. This does not constitute a conspiracy to deprive anyone of their religious beliefs.

I gave examples from English Literature teaching in the UK. In some years it might be Thomas Hardy in others it might be D.H.Lawrence simply because of the time limitation on the curriculum.

At one time History was taught in the UK pretty much in rote fashion by learning the reigns of the various Kings and Queens.

It evolved to a more analytical concept of cause and effect and one would hope it equips the student with a growing critical faculty with which to judge eveything else that they read.

Let me know when the text-books come out in the Autumn for perusal by the teachers, if your fears are groundless.

By that time the more paranoid should have finished building their bunkers and stocking them with canned foods ready for your next Civil War.

[Darkside2009]

The Texas SBOE has hijacked fact for their own brand of truth. And it is indeed bizare.Pasa

Ok, so far we don't seem to have any concrete examples of what is being inserted into these text-books to cause such consternation.

Can anyone provide an example? One that they themselves have read in the manuscript format.

Obviously text-books cannot cover all periods of history, or all historical characters. A selection of some description has to be made, not least in order to pitch it to the level of understanding of the intended pupils.

It may be the case that some aspect/s are removed in order to make way for other equally valid aspects of your Nation's history. This does not constitute a conspiracy to deprive anyone of their religious beliefs.

I gave examples from English Literature teaching in the UK. In some years it might be Thomas Hardy in others it might be D.H.Lawrence simply because of the time limitation on the curriculum.

At one time History was taught in the UK pretty much in rote fashion by learning the reigns of the various Kings and Queens.

It evolved to a more analytical concept of cause and effect and one would hope it equips the student with a growing critical faculty with which to judge eveything else that they read.

Let me know when the text-books come out in the Autumn for perusal by the teachers, if your fears are groundless.

By that time the more paranoid should have finished building their bunkers and stocking them with canned foods ready for your next Civil War.

[FalconAngel]

Yes it would.

I don't think there is an official movement to declare America a Christian Nation, no matter what the back and forth (more back on this site) from the pagan fundamentalists and the christian fundamentalists state.

Small problem with that statement, Taylor. Pagans cannot have fundamentalism, since being fundamentalist requires a doctrine to hold as fundamental. Paganism, no matter which path, has no doctrine. The closest that you may find, outside of Cults like the Corellians, would be traditional rituals; but ritual is neither doctrine nor instruction, it is a ritual.

Pagan paths are experiential, not doctrinal. And we don't oppose Christianity as we oppose any religion, forcing it's doctrine on us. As, I imagine you would, if the roles were reversed.

After all, no one has ever heard of a Jew, Muslim, Pagan, Buddhist, Hindu, or Taoist knocking on doors to try to convert anyone.


Some wish for a spiritual awakening- - like the First and Second Great Awakenings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Awakening), but not by force. Before you get nervous - - this wasn't conversion by force, remember that.

A great spiritual awakening would be great, but that would actually require a dying off of fundamentalism. But don't fret. Unlike what the fluffies thought in the 60's, the age of Aquarius does not begin for 2 more years.
Maybe we will begin to see progress toward that awakening, soon. We can hope, at least.


And the First and Second Awakenings supposedly helped give the cultural backdrop to the American Revolution and the Abolitionist movement.

Well, the American Revolution was driven by a lot of humanist philosophies that were very advanced for their day, in addition to the usual reasons that we are all taught in school. Philosophies that are still being fought against today, mostly by fundamentalists in some of the monotheist religions/sects (not just Christianity).


So ,please, rest assured. If they're hiding switchblades in their bibles and guns in the pulpit, I'll be the first to warn you.

*Taylor*

These days, they don't need to hide anything in their bibles, since they usually hide behind their bibles as justification for their actions against others, and they almost never get called on it. Many of them feel confident that they can get away with nearly anything because of that.

Many of them have already taken steps to force their beliefs on others of other faiths and beliefs with such things as anti-choice legislation, "faith-based" initiatives, anti-gay legislation (including fighting legislation designed to prevent sexuality based hate), booing/interrupting prayers from other religions in the House and Senate, and a whole list of other things that they believe is their right to inflict on society. Below are some examples;

http://www.care2.com/causes/human-rights/blog/ugandas-kill-the-gays-bill-gets-reviving-call-from-american-extremist-lou-engel/
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/209660/150_graduates_of_pat_robertsons_college.html?cat=9
http://counterpunch.org/leupp01132005.html
http://www.exposingchristianity.com/Xian%20Censorship.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n31_v29/ai_13881758
http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/fringe-gop-reps-attack-muslim-american-charitable-org/#comment-241799
http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/militia-raid-highlights-domestic-terrorism-problem/

And while those example do, to be honest, show the extremists, Christians worldwide sit quietly by and allow it to continue, unabated, knowing that these things are wrong.

But, as I have said in related threads, the real problem is not the religion as it is the fact that the religion's people have blindly and unquestioningly allowed evil men to seize power within the religion's leadership. Not unlike any cult of personality.
This applies to all fundamentalist/evangelical religions and sects of every type.

With greater vigilance and critical thought, on the part of it's members, religions that have been subverted in such a manner, such as Christianity and Islam have been, can return to what they were meant to be; guides for personal living, rather than a means to power and control for the few over the many.

Fix that and the next Great Awakening can give everyone some real religious freedom and (hopefully) peace for a change.

[Long Duck Dong]

Actually, What we call Wicca, without going into the fallacy of calling all modern Craft "Wicca" (it factually isn't - different gods), The Pagan Craft had survived underground all the way through what many call "the burning times". The familial practices of Witchcraft in the Eastern mountain regions of the US is actually survivors of the Craft that came here from Europe from the 1600's to the 1800's.

Even my own tradition was started by one who was trained by one of the Surviving coven lines in the New Forest region of England.


1) I was referring to modern wicca and spiritualism...... not witchcraft..... I never mentioned it.....

2) I never referred to covens either.....

but my reason for replying, is to emphasis my point...about teaching the truth.....

your statement about covens and witchcraft is your version of the truth..... you can call it fact.... but in fact it had nothing to do with what I was referring to.... and thats a fact....

now as I have said in past threads, as each year passes, there is more and more to teach to kids, but the same amount of time to teach it......so things become a priority in teaching...... that is where parents and reading plays a large part..... as they can assist outside of the school with enhanced learning...

as darkeyes posted, they will teach their kids, their truth.... or their understanding of the facts... a school is the same.... they are in same classes, teaching facts, IE 1+1=2..... but in other classes such as social studies, they are teaching their truth...

that has been seen a number of times, by the way that people in the site present a different understanding and version of the same facts..... the issue with WW2 is a example.......
4-5 years of fighting did not involve the us, and a lot of the fighting in places like turkey, is not mentioned as the us was never there

that can be right or wrong in many peoples eyes, but the simple fact is that there is a limited time to teach a lot of info to kids.... so parts are left out....
what that creates, is a version of the truth, not facts......

currently what is happening, is your version of the * truth * is under threat, and you are reacting over it..... but if your version of the truth is taught freely.... that still doesn't mean that the facts are being taught, merely a aspect of them......

back to your remarks about witchcraft..... thats a aspect of the truth, but not all the facts..... when you present it to people as fact, its in fact, only partly correct, as you have not included all the facts..... but its your version of the truth...... not everybodies.....

[darkeyes]

..there are 6500 million human beings on this wonderful planet of ours... there are 6500 million truths... or none...

[coyotedude]

I know this is a serious topic - and disturbing, too - but I have to share that when I first was grazing quickly over the forum topics, I thought the title of this thread was:

"Do you support truth or dare?"

And for the record, I strongly support truth or dare.

Sorry - just had to be said...

Peace

[FalconAngel]

1) I was referring to modern wicca and spiritualism...... not witchcraft..... I never mentioned it.....

Oh, you mean pop-wicca. And Wicca is Witchcraft. But you clearly do not know the difference.


2) I never referred to covens either.....

My reason for mentioning the covens is to establish clarity of the interrelated facts.


but my reason for replying, is to emphasis my point...about teaching the truth.....

I believe in telling the truth and teaching the facts. You are not stating facts, but you are talking about truth and ignoring the facts. I have given you facts.


your statement about covens and witchcraft is your version of the truth..... you can call it fact.... but in fact it had nothing to do with what I was referring to.... and thats a fact....

Facts have no "version". Facts stand on their own without any underlying "truths".


now as I have said in past threads, as each year passes, there is more and more to teach to kids, but the same amount of time to teach it......so things become a priority in teaching...... that is where parents and reading plays a large part..... as they can assist outside of the school with enhanced learning...

Now that is a factual truth. But what we are talking about is not about the amount of information to teach; we are talking about changing the facts to suit a political/religious agenda. Kind of like when they teach that the Trail of Tears was a "battle" when it was, in fact, a massacre of innocent, and unarmed 1st nations people.


as darkeyes posted, they will teach their kids, their truth.... or their understanding of the facts... a school is the same.... they are in same classes, teaching facts, IE 1+1=2..... but in other classes such as social studies, they are teaching their truth...

Actually, if social sciences and history are taught anything at all like they are here, they are being indoctrinated rather than taught.


that has been seen a number of times, by the way that people in the site present a different understanding and version of the same facts..... the issue with WW2 is a example.......
4-5 years of fighting did not involve the us, and a lot of the fighting in places like turkey, is not mentioned as the us was never there

Actually it isn't so much an "understanding of the facts but an assessment of the effects of certain events. That can vary, particularly when you have a indoctrination version of history taught, which ignores certain facts of certain events.


that can be right or wrong in many peoples eyes, but the simple fact is that there is a limited time to teach a lot of info to kids.... so parts are left out....
what that creates, is a version of the truth, not facts......

But there again, you ignored what is being discussed. We are not talking about taking away a part of history and not teaching so much as replacing the factual history with something more of an indoctrinal nature to suit a particular religion's political agenda. This would not affect their version of the truth, but it would teach false and misleading information to replace the facts.


currently what is happening, is your version of the * truth * is under threat, and you are reacting over it..... but if your version of the truth is taught freely.... that still doesn't mean that the facts are being taught, merely a aspect of them......

Actually, there is no "version of the truth" being challenged here, it is the facts being threatened with replacement by religious propaganda that is the issue.


back to your remarks about witchcraft..... thats a aspect of the truth, but not all the facts..... when you present it to people as fact, its in fact, only partly correct, as you have not included all the facts..... but its your version of the truth...... not everybodies.....

And it is facts that I state, not some ephemeral "truth".

Verified through professors of Anthropology, historians and other (PhD level) scholars that are infinitely better suited and qualified to make those statements than either you or I. This is also been verified through Dorothy Clutterbuck, one of Gerald Gardner's upline and Patricia Crowther, both contemporaries of Gerald Gardner (recognized as one of the founders of the modern resurgance of Witchcraft).

But to clarify where you get your "truth" about it, what qualifies you to make such false claims as truth?

Are you a BTW Wiccan? Pop-Wiccan/Neo-Wiccan? None of the above? Do you have a PhD in any field that would qualify you to make statements that contradict the facts that have been presented to me through upline HP's and HPS' that are also degreed professionals in the associated fields of anthropological, archeological and sociological study.

Factually, if you do not, then you are just talking out of your ass because your mouth knows better.

[FalconAngel]

One more thing, LDD.

When I mention truth in the thread title, I am not talking about philosophical or political "truth".

I am talking about the honest and factual truth. The truth of facts, not philosophy.

Like I said before, in an earlier post; if you want truth, it is down the hall and to the right.

We are talking facts here.

[Long Duck Dong]

Oh, you mean pop-wicca. And Wicca is Witchcraft. But you clearly do not know the difference.



My reason for mentioning the covens is to establish clarity of the interrelated facts.



I believe in telling the truth and teaching the facts. You are not stating facts, but you are talking about truth and ignoring the facts. I have given you facts.



Facts have no "version". Facts stand on their own without any underlying "truths".



Now that is a factual truth. But what we are talking about is not about the amount of information to teach; we are talking about changing the facts to suit a political/religious agenda. Kind of like when they teach that the Trail of Tears was a "battle" when it was, in fact, a massacre of innocent, and unarmed 1st nations people.



Actually, if social sciences and history are taught anything at all like they are here, they are being indoctrinated rather than taught.



Actually it isn't so much an "understanding of the facts but an assessment of the effects of certain events. That can vary, particularly when you have a indoctrination version of history taught, which ignores certain facts of certain events.



But there again, you ignored what is being discussed. We are not talking about taking away a part of history and not teaching so much as replacing the factual history with something more of an indoctrinal nature to suit a particular religion's political agenda. This would not affect their version of the truth, but it would teach false and misleading information to replace the facts.



Actually, there is no "version of the truth" being challenged here, it is the facts being threatened with replacement by religious propaganda that is the issue.



And it is facts that I state, not some ephemeral "truth".

Verified through professors of Anthropology, historians and other (PhD level) scholars that are infinitely better suited and qualified to make those statements than either you or I. This is also been verified through Dorothy Clutterbuck, one of Gerald Gardner's upline and Patricia Crowther, both contemporaries of Gerald Gardner (recognized as one of the founders of the modern resurgance of Witchcraft).

But to clarify where you get your "truth" about it, what qualifies you to make such false claims as truth?

Are you a BTW Wiccan? Pop-Wiccan/Neo-Wiccan? None of the above? Do you have a PhD in any field that would qualify you to make statements that contradict the facts that have been presented to me through upline HP's and HPS' that are also degreed professionals in the associated fields of anthropological, archeological and sociological study.

Factually, if you do not, then you are just talking out of your ass because your mouth knows better.


ok, falcon.......

again,..... I referred to modern wicca and spirituality.... not witchcraft, pop wicca, covens etc...... how about you just stick to your christian bashing

now religious propoganda is still a form of truth..... regardless of what term you use to define it....... cos its the truth some people believe......
hence I refer to it as truths, not facts..... 1+1=2 is a fact.....what colour and size and shape of the 1's and the 2's is a truth relative to each persons understanding

jeeze its like talking to a bloody 2 year old.....

now as I have stated a number of times, falcon, and you really must have had your brain turned off when I did, ..... I use the term *wicca * loosely to define what i believe, but what I believe is not *wicca *

now why I say you must have your brain turned off, is you started to tell me that I was wrong in the way I practised my beliefs, and that i was doing it wrong...that I needed rituals and ceremonies..... once again, falcon trying to be right on everything.....you even have tried to tell me that I need to join a coven and a oath bound religion.... after i stated clearly, I am not at all interested is lollipop sucking, hand holding groups and their stances and posing..... even the american council of witches imploded 6 months after they tried to create the principals of witchcraft........ I personally think there was too many egos and * we wanna be rights * in it

as I have stated, I come from a long and direct line of magick users.... more than 12 generations..... and if push came to shove.... I can even go back to the vikings..... but unlike the teeny bopper wanna be wiccas..... its not stored in books or in pictures etc etc... its handed down person to person thru the generations...in the same way that the aboriginals and other ancient races have......

now I would really appreciate it falcon, if you stop slamming what I believe and know and the origins and foundations of it..... as all you can do is quote what others may say and believe, to be right.....

again, I am not interested, not part of a coven, or any traditional, copy and paste belief or religion, I do not follow the pre fab forms of witchcraft and wicca not do I dance around in circles doing ceremonies while reading parts from witchcraft for teens by raven silver wolfe......

now you can just go sit in the corner with your level one ranking in your coven and your ego..... and do your christian bashing to your hearts content for all I care...... cos you clearly have no bloody idea what you are talking about in regards to me or my beliefs, cos if you did, you would not be asking me what I actually believe, while telling me I have no idea what I am taking about.......

as a wise man once said.... the sum of all knowledge can not be found in a man that is vocal, but one that is silent, for the vocal man never shuts up long enuf to listen and the silent man never asks questions of fools.....

[darkeyes]

...for many...doctrine is truth... an sumtimes it can b.. doctrine don havta b religion eitha..ther r many diff kindsa doctrine.. but followin it slavishly..religious or ne otha shows a lack of imagination an inner strength...

[Long Duck Dong]

true darkeyes..... thats something I agree with a lot..... but with a lot of people, unless its religion based, they do not see what you can

there is also political doctrine and that has lead to a lot of the facts of us history not being taught anyway.... the same as in nz.... there is a fight to get the true facts heard, not the processed * need to know * basis.... that in part is also from the us..... by way of classified documents from ww2 and nam etc...

another form of doctrine is social doctrine and that too is taught in schools... and can mean *colouring or excluding * of the facts..... as I was to find out when I was in scouts and later also, studying christian history and the true history of nz....
one major thing that is not taught, is the celtic ruins in the middle north island from the 12th century..... something that could turn the history books upside down....

so I would say that nz, england, the us and other countries are still not teaching facts or the truth..... and I do not believe they ever will....

[Darkside2009]

...for many...doctrine is truth... an sumtimes it can b.. doctrine don havta b religion eitha..ther r many diff kindsa doctrine.. but followin it slavishly..religious or ne otha shows a lack of imagination an inner strength...

I wouldn't agree, a doctrine is simply a philosophy, a guiding principle/s that resonates with ones life. The moment that one ceases to believe in it, then one will cease to follow it, and look around for another more appropriate to take its place.

A bit like finding a diet and regime of exercise that works for one as an individual. One only tries a new diet if the old diet isn't working.

You have, on previous threads mentioned your beliefs in Socialism and Pacificism, these are simply two more doctrines that work for you in your life.

I presume you adhere to those principles through reasoned choice. You have made a decision that those principles work best for you in your life. That's fine, I for one, would not attempt to deprive you of them.

Then again I would not refer to you slavishly following your principles or lacking in inner strength or imagination.

To give a further example, one would not castigate a vegetarian for refusing to eat meat. A lack of imagination or inner strength
simply does not feature as a deciding factor in their decision.

[TwylaTwobits]

Oh, you mean pop-wicca. And Wicca is Witchcraft. But you clearly do not know the difference.



My reason for mentioning the covens is to establish clarity of the interrelated facts.



I believe in telling the truth and teaching the facts. You are not stating facts, but you are talking about truth and ignoring the facts. I have given you facts.



Facts have no "version". Facts stand on their own without any underlying "truths".



Now that is a factual truth. But what we are talking about is not about the amount of information to teach; we are talking about changing the facts to suit a political/religious agenda. Kind of like when they teach that the Trail of Tears was a "battle" when it was, in fact, a massacre of innocent, and unarmed 1st nations people.



Actually, if social sciences and history are taught anything at all like they are here, they are being indoctrinated rather than taught.



Actually it isn't so much an "understanding of the facts but an assessment of the effects of certain events. That can vary, particularly when you have a indoctrination version of history taught, which ignores certain facts of certain events.



But there again, you ignored what is being discussed. We are not talking about taking away a part of history and not teaching so much as replacing the factual history with something more of an indoctrinal nature to suit a particular religion's political agenda. This would not affect their version of the truth, but it would teach false and misleading information to replace the facts.



Actually, there is no "version of the truth" being challenged here, it is the facts being threatened with replacement by religious propaganda that is the issue.



And it is facts that I state, not some ephemeral "truth".

Verified through professors of Anthropology, historians and other (PhD level) scholars that are infinitely better suited and qualified to make those statements than either you or I. This is also been verified through Dorothy Clutterbuck, one of Gerald Gardner's upline and Patricia Crowther, both contemporaries of Gerald Gardner (recognized as one of the founders of the modern resurgance of Witchcraft).

But to clarify where you get your "truth" about it, what qualifies you to make such false claims as truth?

Are you a BTW Wiccan? Pop-Wiccan/Neo-Wiccan? None of the above? Do you have a PhD in any field that would qualify you to make statements that contradict the facts that have been presented to me through upline HP's and HPS' that are also degreed professionals in the associated fields of anthropological, archeological and sociological study.

Factually, if you do not, then you are just talking out of your ass because your mouth knows better.


Long and short of it, Falcon you are dead wrong to say that Wicca is Witchcraft. You seem to believe more in any links on the net ([sarcasm] oh yeah truth is only found on the internet [/]sarcasm) than any person's personal beliefs that have been handed down through time, unchanged, unmutable, undisputable to them.

So fine here are a few links, expand your knowledge and realize there is an entire world worth knowing about outside your sphere of BTW.

Wicca is a relgion, witchcraft is not. Witchcraft is a way of life, not weekends at the local coven.


http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/4198/wicca_vs_witchcraft.html?cat=34

http://www.spelwerx.com/wvtw.html

http://www.wicca.com/celtic/wicca/wicca.htm

http://craftofthewise.tribe.net/thread/b727d40a-b3cc-49d1-8b2c-62c4b272e449

http://paganismwicca.suite101.com/article.cfm/wiccan_or_witch

In your eyes wicca and witchcraft are the same which leads me to question just what it is that you are not taught in your BTW practice. Wicca has it's foundation in witchcraft... Just as glass has a foundation in sand. But glass is not sand and wicca is not witchcraft. :2cents:

[Darkside2009]

Like I said before, in an earlier post; if you want truth, it is down the hall and to the right.We are talking facts here.

Don't you find those little Freudian slips to be oh! So revealing? Lol

[rissababynta]

Long and short of it, Falcon you are dead wrong to say that Wicca is Witchcraft. You seem to believe more in any links on the net ([sarcasm] oh yeah truth is only found on the internet [/]sarcasm) than any person's personal beliefs that have been handed down through time, unchanged, unmutable, undisputable to them.

So fine here are a few links, expand your knowledge and realize there is an entire world worth knowing about outside your sphere of BTW.

Wicca is a relgion, witchcraft is not. Witchcraft is a way of life, not weekends at the local coven.


http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/4198/wicca_vs_witchcraft.html?cat=34

http://www.spelwerx.com/wvtw.html

http://www.wicca.com/celtic/wicca/wicca.htm

http://craftofthewise.tribe.net/thread/b727d40a-b3cc-49d1-8b2c-62c4b272e449

http://paganismwicca.suite101.com/article.cfm/wiccan_or_witch

In your eyes wicca and witchcraft are the same which leads me to question just what it is that you are not taught in your BTW practice. Wicca has it's foundation in witchcraft... Just as glass has a foundation in sand. But glass is not sand and wicca is not witchcraft. :2cents:

I have to say, I pretty much had this whole post...my own version of course haha...run through my head a posts ago. I agree Twyla.

[Lady_Passion]

Sheez. I used to think there were enough constitutionalists and federalists in TX to prevent this.

We have never been just a christian nation. Was never intended from the first contructs of our Constitution. On the other hand, every state has the right to do what it sees fit for itself.

Why are people so hellbent on screwing themselves? I just don't get it. :upside:

[TwylaTwobits]

Why thank you, Rissa, despite it having a typo cause my brain was ahead of my fingers it sums up my feelings nicely.

[Lady_Passion]

Truth above all.

Doctrines, religions, spirituality and anything between are human constructs.

From an email I wrote someone recently when asked about my leanings toward spirituality:


Whatever view can possibly be considered, there is always the beginning of the beginning which no one has a definitive answer for that satisfies everyone.

If you’ve read Tesla’s and Einstein’s opposing opinions on religion, what is cool is they agreed to disagree and accept their difference without that interfering with the science they each practiced. They could do that because they were scientists who fully comprehended sometimes there is no answer other than faith itself. Even Einstein considered if he had not had faith in his Theory of Relativity, he would not have pursued it further. Curiosity and perseverance are forms of faith.

All life requires order. Entropy being the cycle it is and human nature being what it is, makes religions and other doctrines we choose to live by necessary.

Though I was raised Southern Baptist, two things influence my thinking.

1) Thor Heyerdahl, an explorer who documented the people he associated with in travels, noted that no matter where he went in the world, including the most remote areas christianity had not touched, every group of people no matter how small believed in a higher power or powers than themselves. I believe that speaks to the need for humans to shun responsibility when they cannot or do not want to accept it, and the need to give credit for ‘miracles’ they can’t imagine humans being capable of.

2) Tesla has a theory about unused space between molecules. The implication being there is at least one other, possibly many, dimensions of time that we currently cannot claim any knowledge of. What if there are endless possibilities regarding a supreme being? What if one of those possibilities indicated the existence of a supreme being or beings none of us will be privy to in this lifetime?

Which brings me to energy. Every life form is comprised of some form of energy. Even inert substances are comprised of extremely dense energy molecules.

If there is any single thing that all life has in common, it would be energy which constructs everything. Energy being studied with limited human knowledge, who is to say what is left to be discovered?

Perhaps gods are a human projection of the energies we feel, made more tangible and enough like ourselves so we can relate better to the higher powers we create. There may very well be just one god, or many, or none.

I believe learning how to work with positive energies is what will help us all as individuals, and subsequently as a whole. If we each did so, we would be less concerned with finding unimportant answers and more focused on living a better existence.

Energy, I believe, is directly connected to spirituality, as in the feelings or vibe one gets from another person or place. Have you ever been in an elevator with just one other person and it felt suffocatingly crowded? Or conversely, in an elevator with several people when it felt quite comfortable? Sharing space is sharing energy.

More briefly, I could have said I believe spirituality is bigger than most of us can comprehend. That attempting to pin down what spirituality is or encompasses is a dependence, possibly arrogance and undoubtedly willful ignorance, humans voluntarily indulge in.

Religion and spirituality provide organization, therefore relief from chaos. I’m quite comfortable in the midst of chaos, so I have not been compelled to seek religion or spirituality as a means for the relief they offer.

I do however, wonder endlessly at sunsets, rain, the way trees smell in the morning and at night, how vegetation invariably bears the mark of mathematical sequences (check out a book called “Nature By Numbers” by Ian Stewart – there is also an unrelated but interesting short movie online), that birds can sing, symmetry and asymmetry throughout nature, and that people have not all killed each other.

I need tangibility and trust the consistency and objectivity of nature above all. Nature provides a perfectly serene spirituality I find nowhere else.

No offense intended toward anyone else at all. Just what I believe and feel.

[TwylaTwobits]

Below says it all...

[MarieDelta]

Below says it all...

LMAO! Too true

When will we ever learn?

[TaylorMade]

LMAO! Too true

When will we ever learn?

If we didn't have religion, we'd have something new. . .think about the long standing and recently revived prejudice against . . . redheads (http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=8353ba5a-d1b3-426f-95ab-91fcda3bcb62).

*Taylor*

[MarieDelta]

Indeed, cant argue there.

What the hell, let's just create more arbitrary division while we're at it...

People Suck :/

[TaylorMade]

I swallow.

AND I like Redheads. :p

*Taylor*

[Long Duck Dong]

yeah ....... parents play a important part in what kids learn too


http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0905/the-facts-of-life-demotivational-poster-1243364959.jpg (http://www.motifake.com/the-facts-of-life-demotivational-poster-58309.html)

[TwylaTwobits]

Wonder what jewelry I'm getting, hmmm Duckie darling?

[Lady_Passion]

Below says it all...*lol* That's a keeper!

[FalconAngel]

If we didn't have religion, we'd have something new. . .think about the long standing and recently revived prejudice against . . . redheads (http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=8353ba5a-d1b3-426f-95ab-91fcda3bcb62).

*Taylor*

Only someone who has never been with one could dislike redheads. I love redheads; they always seem to be much wilder in bed than any other group. I don't know why that is and I don't care.:bigrin:

[Jason0012]

Hey, I swallow too! I have never been with a redhead, but I'm pretty sure I would love the experience if I ever were.

This thread seems to have gotten about a thousand miles off topic. I think the danger is the engineering that is being practiced on our nation as a whole. Propaganda is being pushed on us though it is nothing new. We have been subjected to altered truth for a very long time. The evil here is that there are religious groups in this country that feel it is thier duty to convert everyone else at any cost. While they may be working within the framework of constitutional law for the moment, there is a willingness to circumvent, change or worse ignore completely , the constitution . The disturbing thing is our government seems willing to ignore election results, civil rights, international law, and who knows what else. I had high hopes for our new administration as The O man was actually elected, unlike his predecessor. But he has shown himself to be as dangerous, possibly more so. Politics in the US are getting weirder every day and whatever is coming looks pretty worrysome.

I am a bit tickled by the fact that our schools are teaching doctored versions of history. Why, when I was in school back durring the dark days of the evil empire(USSR- was that connected to Darth Vader?), they insisted that one of the great things about our country was that we taught actual facts of history rather than some doctored version like the soviets. So much for the cold war !( see, propaganda is nothing new)