Texas Senate Bill - Can’t teach KKK is morally wrong

Post Reply New Topic

I tend to agree with that bill. School's job should be two things:

a) Tell facts. Facts don't include what is "morally right" or "morally wrong". Rather they would include "here is the organization called KKK, here is what it did before (lynchings etc) here is what it does now (it doesn't lynch any more but it holds certain opinions that the vast majority of population considers extreme (although the teacher doesn't have to say whether the vast majority is right or wrong)), etc". Whatever is a fact, should be stated. The moral implications of those facts is up to the students to decide.

b) Critical thinking essays. In this case, it would be the student's job to decide whether it is morally wrong or otherwise, while the teacher's job is to evaluate the "persuasiveness" of their argument that they used to back up the point. Does the teacher "teach" something? Absolutely. But not the "answers" to questions such as "is KKK morally wrong". Rather a teacher should teach the way to construct persuasive arguments. And then the students can "excercize" what they have learned on the example of KKK or whatever topic they choose.

And thats not me being liberal or conservative. This argument goes both ways. Either the school "can" teach what is right and what is wrong, or it can't. And that is regardless of the "side" the teachers or students happen to take on any given issue.

This is in Texas, if it's OK to teach morals in school, then teachers may teach the Democrat Party is a far worse organization than the KKK, because the Democrat Party advocates for 1. stealing money (taxes) and 2. killing babies (abortion).

Abortion, though I find it immoral in many cases, is still legal.
Taxation is not stealing anyone's money.
The Democrats are hardly immoral, taking are of poor people, fighting for civil rights, etc.

Both parties advocate for maintaining a system of taxation, they just disagree on how much and how to spend it. It seems unlikely that an explicitly anti-statist view will ever be adopted into the curriculum outside of anarchist and an-cap home schoolers houses.

I would expect that if at some point abortion is widely viewed by society to be a deeply shameful human rights violation that it would be legal to teach about it from that perspective.

The things you're trotting out as worse than a white supremacist terrorist organization that used violence to deny people their civil rights aren't making your point sound more reasonable, they're making your point less reasonable than before you started trying to support it.

I hope those supporting the Texas bill realize they sound as if they're supporting the Klan, and racism in general.

Isn't the battle against the CRT based on morals?

You are using a false premise to make an irrational comparison, Well done! that's going deep down the rabbit hole

A more relevant question is what evidence did the republican government in Texas have that schools were saying the KKK is immoral?

Second question is more curious, Why would this evoke anger? unless the aforementioned GOP clowns are actually offended that their racist grandpappies legacy is being tarnished

The point is that everyone can be labeled "sinner" or "immoral" based on some morality.

So, it would seem unproductive to do this.

Grandpappies? The Klan is still active AFAIK.

The Klan is very active in east Texas, and even has a training kamp in DeKalb.

I'm not concerned with labelling them as sinners, just accurately describing them as a white supremacist terrorist organization that used violence to deny American citizens their civil rights.

I'm not interested in moralizing about them, simply describing their actions and motives should be enough to make reasonable people conclude that they were evil.

My point is that everyone is immoral in the eyes of others.

Person A: "Racist, white supremacist terrorist"
Person B: "Baby killing pro-abortionist".
Person C: "Cruel meat eater"
Person D: "Taxes are theft, so government is full of crooks"
Person E: "CO2 polluter / Carbon Big Foot"
Person F: "Godless atheist sinner"
Person G: "Lazy, welfare mooch"

To teach all these morals to people doesn't seem productive, because people will say their morals are the right one, and the other person has it wrong.

I'm saying they don't need to focus on the morality, just teaching the history accurately will accomplish the same overall goal.

Reasonable people don't need to be told that terrorists who violated the rights of American citizens were evil, they'll reach that conclusion naturally so long as they hold American values. This isn't something they need to teach to moralize to people, it's something they need to teach so people understand the history of their nation and how certain ideologies that might be held by Americans are still antithetical to America's claimed values.

Lots of things violate some people's values, but those aren't relevant when discussing America's values.
Teaching America's values doesn't oblige them to teach every other system of values that might exist, I'm not sure why you keep circling back to statements that aren't relevant to the values America explicitly claims to hold.

Teaching the values America claims to hold (and historic failures to uphold those) is relevant to teaching civics and history. None of the other examples you mention are relevant to that topic.

Yep....present the facts.

What the KKK did in the old days was felonious-----and they still do a lot of felonious things.

I've met quite a few Texans. Not one whom I met would believe in such garbage----that the KKK was not, somehow, "morally wrong."

It's a sick bill.

But few on that list are actually harmful to others. It's those, such as the Klan and other white nationalist terrorist movements, that legitimately fit the bill, and don't just offend someone else' prejudice.