Sorry if this doesn't make loads of sense or is all fragmented. I mereley wrote what came to mind at the moment.
Last Wednesday we "discussed" history, religion, miniorties, and all that good stuff. In my opinion, this whole debate makes me feel like the public has turned into little kids fighting over a toy or something. I think Texas should just relax. Just because the country doesn't unamiously agree that Christianity should be shoved down people's throats doesn't mean it needs to over react and attempt to sucede from the U.S.
I do believe that Christianity did indeed play a vital role in influencing this country, but I do think we should consider other factors as well besides religion. If my mind is doing me justice, I believe that the first successful place that was settled was Jamestown, Virginia. It was settled for economic reasons, was it not? Then from there religous affilations that were being prosecuted back in their mother country felt the need to escape so they could get religious freedom. Eventually, as the colonies were settled it slowly split to the south being more economically founded while the north based more on religion. So why is religion emphasized? I think both of these should be emphasized equally.
I know in the Constitution is does not state in bold print that there is seperation of church and state, but don't you think this would be wise especially after 1692 (we all know how well it went for all the "witches" in that time). But alas, this is somewhat impossible to implement when it comes to history, since it did have somewhat of an impact. I believe that history books should state the facts and provide a mini explanation of the incident. Just like Connie stated in class, "history books can't just say 'They were Christians. There has to be some sort of an explanation.'" The goal is an unbiased textbook, but we ALL know that's rather impossible. It would be like beating a dead horse. Rather pointless.
Anyways, I do indeed that we are suppose to tie this discussion with 1984 aren't we not? Well you know that one quote "Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present, controls the past." It seems like we are in this dilemna. Religious affilations, minorities, political parties are all trying to prove why their way is the way to go. It feels like each one of these groups is trying to justify the reason why they are the "best." Honestly, what happened to thinking for ourselves? Remember the good ole days when we were able to generate opinions off facts and not off biased propaganda. Alright. These "good ole days" I'm referring to go further back than the early nineties. Wait. I take that back. I don't these days I speak of even exsist because (I think) there has always been at least a smidge of bias. Oh boy. The process of thought is rather complicated.
Anywhoo, to wrap this sucker up I think that it would be simply rather rad if there was a way to include all perspectives on every event in history into one book. Yeah. That would be a HUGE book. Until that day comes I guess we'll continue to debate this issue.....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Doesn't all of this knowledge that you have on the workings of Jamestown prove that they ARE presented equally? I have never felt that religion was emphasized. As I said on someone else's blog (can't remember) in an effort to lower it's influence, I believe that religion is not always presented properly, which can create some harsh comments from peers that hurt. (IE: The indulgences of the Catholic Church in germany during the time of Martin Luther. We get that what that guy did was wrong, but we didn't get the views of the Catholics of that time and now. Being Catholic, I felt it was presented in a bias against me).
We can't focus only on religion, or only on the econ/political reasons as well. Knowing what and why people believed things in history is vital to knowing why they acted the way they did.
Jazz/Blues came from the culture brought forth from African slaves, Without knowing the Christian orientation, it would be hard to understand why. Also, I keep using the Black Muslims as an example places, but consider them. All we see is extreme violence. I still wouldn't agree with the violence, but I would love to know the beliefs behind that religious system that they used to justify their actions.
Also, the original implications of Separation of Church and state are not as harsh as we consider them today. What they meant was, that religion could not be taught in public schools as a truth (IE: no mandatory Christian/Islam/Jewish etc classes). Now, people want to stamp out all religion in schools. In some schools, children can not even pray privately. That, I believe, is a true violation of not only the first amendment, but of individual freedom.
Gabby,I agree with what you are saying entirely. Each one of us as individuals must realize that the whole purpose of America was not just to establish an area for Christianity. There were, as you stated, many other reasons to the beginning of America (like economic and political). Furthermore, I like your idea of incorporating both sides of this controversial debate into a giant textbook, but realistically can we do this? I got the feeling from your blog that you, like myself, do not find this possible in our society today. Well, to wrap it up, I really enjoyed reading your perspective on the3 subject.
Post a Comment