Texans for Truthful Textbooks Rally May 12, 2010

Texans for Truthful Textbooks Rally

American Atheists is sponsoring a rally to be held on the steps of the Texas Capitol building next Sunday, May 16th. The purpose is to fight back against the revisionist history being proposed by the conservatives on the state’s Board of Education.

The “Texans for Truthful Textbooks” rally is organized to protest the Texas Board of Education’s recent decision to inject conservative politics and personal agendas into the state’s textbook curriculum by changing the standards in several significant ways. The curriculum standards, originally developed by teachers and scholars, were altered over a period of two board meetings without consulting with the appropriate subject matter experts and represent a blatant attempt at revisionist history.

You can see examples of the revisions as well as a schedule for the day’s events here.

All religious and non-religious proponents of a real, fact-based education are invited to participate. (It’s not an atheist-only event.)

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • I thought American Atheists opposed explicitly religious intrusion into government, not general conservatism. Since when is atheism tacitly equivalent to liberalism and not just solely the rejection of religion and God.

    In my book, including Phyllis Schlafly as a prominent political/social figure and championing free market ideals don’t comprise religious polemics.

  • @OneSTDV,
    Many of us see this (the Texas revisionism)as a backdoor attempt to introduce religion into areas in which it does not belong.
    The creatard hack dentist lost out in his attempt to directly force creationism down the entire nations throat, so he and his little troupe are trying a more underhanded way of doing it.
    Others are just concerned with pushing a leftist agenda, and I suspect that in this case they are not the majority, but a sizable minority. Just a guess on my part…no stats to back me up on this one.

  • Matt

    Regardless of the agenda that atheists “should” have. Everyone should be worried about a plan to selectively revise our history. That’s some scary stuff.

  • They’re not “selectively” revising. That’s a srawman. They’re taking a more traditionalist approach, which is probably more accurate anyway.

    Just because it’s not Howard Zinn doesn’t make it “selective” revision.

  • Matt

    Failed to include a discussion of religious rights during a lesson on the First Amendment.

    Rejected a proposed requirement that students learn why the nation’s founders banned government from promoting one religion over others.  (3)

    How is that not omitting certain info that doesn’t align with their political or spiritual agenda of promoting the U.S. as a Christian Nation? We all know the religious right loves to claim our country was founded on Christianity, and that, given the chance, they’d slowly erode all information that contradicts their claim.

  • Angelo

    I will be there with several of my friends and I know it is going to be a great event, there will be a large group of teachers as well, I just hope it does not rain since there is a small chance for it, but like we say in Texas, if you don’t like the weather stick around for 5 minutes and it will change.

  • Cherie M


    For me, part of being an atheist is looking for the truth in things and presenting a more complete story instead of one side or the other. As someone pursuing a Master’s in History, the best way to get a complete view of historical events is to understand both sides. One of my main focus areas of study is Mexico in the 19th century – it is absolutely vital to understand that their revolution was largely conservative, but that there were also radically liberal participants, and the turmoil out of it came from the inability to reconcile highly conservative and highly liberal ideas. You can’t understand the causes of that turmoil unless you explicitly study the motives and goals of each side, and how deeply they conflicted with the other. In the United States, whatever conservatives may want to say, the revolution was liberal. The founders weren’t perfect by any means – Thomas Jefferson was brilliant and contributed immensely to the country’s founding, but he also held slaves and had constant troubles with debt. It’s also likely he fathered children with one of his slaves. Should we ignore one aspect and raise up the other? No. Should we drop him from the text completely, as the Texas school board wishes to do? No. Teaching that the men who founded the United States (or any country!) were flawed individuals who managed to do extraordinary things is the best way to present a complete, truthful historical picture.

    Just as I don’t believe kids should be labeled as belonging to one religion or another by their parents, I also don’t believe that children should be labeled conservative/liberal by their parents. If a school board is pushing a religiously (John Calvin over Jefferson, anyone?) and politically conservative dialogue, the children are not only missing part of the picture of their country’s history, they are also being presented with a skewed version of history that promotes one school of thought over the other.

    Where race is concerned, I’m more than willing to recognize that much of US history was advanced under prominent, wealthy white males, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give voice to those of other ethnic groups or the opposite gender. The school board chose to not teach about an hispanic activist, simply because they hadn’t heard of the man. That sort of behavior is unacceptable – they are trying to perpetuate their own ignorance and views onto a generation of school children, and that is ideology pushing at its lowest form.

  • LKL

    When I read the title of this post, I jumped to the conclusion that the article was going to be about a bunch of evangelicals wanting to include the bible in student texts.

    It was a nice surprise, but I’m a little sad that evangelicals are using the word ‘truth’ so much – the meaning of it is being weakened.

error: Content is protected !!