In a message dated 9/6/2005 3:41:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point was a serious one about how one organizes a course, and
reminder that when people teach a course to argue for a viewpoint and to
ignore other information it undermines academic integrity.  The fact is
this:  a "History of the Influence of Christianity in American history"
taught in a fundamentalist Christian school would not likely teach many
of the topics I suggested; most American history coursres would teach a
number of them, as well as teach about Puritans, the two great
awakenings, the role of religious people in the antislavery movement and
the civil rights movement.

If Rick wants to play the list game, I think it only fair to explore the
issue.
I wonder.
 
Several Christian denominations, for example, have engaged in close self-examination and repentance for their role in some of the things listed; justification of slavery, oppression of First Peoples, etc.  Paul, did you derive your course topics from experience with Christian schools, or from your expectations of what you would find?  Rick, it seems to me, wasn't playing a "list game," although he can speak for himself on this point; I took his listing of approved courses as a shorthand indication of how likely it was that a leftward liberal, non-western-tradition valuing decision-making body can engage in what by titles only seems to be a highly subjective and highly narrowly focused search for overly narrowly focused studies.
 
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to