Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA

I discovered the other day that in the State of Arizona, it is against the law in public school at least to teach "ethnic studies" and also "evolution." If this isn't a sign that this state's legislators (and probably most of its people) are ignorant, nothing is. It conjures up images of Hitler's men prancing around a fire and throwing forbidden books into it.

How about a license plate holder that reads: "Arizona. The Stupid State."

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

Do you have a source for your post? I have a feeling those things aren't actually banned, but nothing surprises me in the land of Joe Arpaio.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

The way I heard it, it's not exactly against the law, but rather it is up to the school's administration to decide to teach that material to students or not.

Unfortunately students entering into university will then have some serious catching up to do, especially if they wish to enter into a biology-related field of study.

kendo1 Loc: Edinburgh, UK

1 minute on Google to find Arizona Department of Education (azed.org)15-112.  Prohibited courses and classes; enforcement states:
A.  A school district or charter school in this state shall not include in its program of instruction any courses or classes that include any of the following:
3.  Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
E.  This section shall not be construed to restrict or prohibit:
3.  Courses or classes that include the history of any ethnic group and that are open to all students, unless the course or class violates subsection A.

If you search 'evolution' the first 'hit' is :
Science STANDARD ARTICULATED BY GRADE LEVEL
High school
Concept 4: Biological Evolution
Understand the scientific principles and processes involved in biological evolution.

It looks like what you 'discovered' was bollocks.

Maybe people should check before they post.
No offense, have a nice day :)

Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA

My source is a fellow teacher who has lots of contacts in Arizona, and who has a good friend who is in charge of a department in a high school in Arizona. The friend keeps her posted. I wonder how the students are ever going to learn that in 1850 the United States literally stole a vast amount of territory, including Arizona and California, from Mexico. As the saying goes, "I didn't jump the border. The border jumped me."

over8e Loc: sydney australia

That says it all, sadly much the same applies in many u s states

ted45 Loc: Delaware

You really need to study history. The United States did not steal anything from Mexico. After attaining independence from Spain in 1821 Mexico stole most of its Northern territory from the Comanche, Apache, and Navajo Indians. The Indians were warring on the fractured Mexican government in retaliation. The Mexican government encouraged American settlers to move into the Texas territories because they believed the settlers would provide a buffer between them and the Indians. After Texas fought its war of independence from Mexico it was annexed to the United States and the U.S., based on the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, paid Mexico $15 million for the territories that included Texas, New Mexico and Southern California. In addition the U.S. assumed $3.2 million in debt owed by the Mexican government to U.S. citizens. Nothing was stolen.

Of course in your post you assume that California has no stupid laws either. It is perfectly reasonable that you cannot legally set a mousetrap in Los Angeles without a hunting license or state in writing that a hotel has roaches, even if it is true.

WaltG Loc: Las Vegas NV

Thank you, Ted45. I'm constantly amazed at how many Americans are so willing to openly bash their own country's history.

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

Someone needs to study Richard. But who's going to do it?

Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA

Ted, it is nice to see that you have absorbed a sanitized version of American history -- which shows you do know a little about it. Yet vast portions of what is now the United States were in fact stolen from Mexico, and this is because of the choices given to the people living in what is now our Western area.

Your description of the Guadalupe-Hidalgo Treaty is merely a surface description of that treaty. It is "Feel-Good History," of the sort taught in many of our lousy public schools, and which continues to be promulgated in many secondary school textbooks. It does not reveal what was really going on

The Mexicans in the area had one of two choices. Choice number one was that they could refuse to accept the Treaty and they could fight over the issue. The American powers were much, much, much stronger than Mexico's. If the Mexicans resisted the treaty they were going to be defeated and wiped out -- as in the sense of killed, dead, no more, and no citizenship, etc.

The other choice was to accept the treaty terms offered. Mexico would be paid a few million, people living within the territorial limits could stay there, etc., etc. Now, if one is given a "die or agree" choice, which one do you think a wise person would take ?

In realty, the Mexicans in that area had the choice of live on the one hand or being defeated, losing thousands of lives in the process. Which choice would you have taken ? What happened was a power play that amounted to stealing, a fact which you seem quite happy to cover up.

Many Americans were against this war, which was correctly seen as, among other things, an attempt to expand slavery into a vast, Western area. If you want details other than the sanitized version you are giving us, check out Zinn's History of the American People, Chapter 8. It isn't a pretty a version of that situation as you want to make us believe.

But that's history, isn't it -- a series of stories about people screwing over other people, with a few rare bits of the contrary now and then.

Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA

What we're hearing in WaltG's comment below is not an expression of interest in facts, but an expression of misguided patriotism. If the truth is unpleasant, he doesn't want it told. Wasn't it Twain who commented that the last refuge of scoundrels is patriotism ? And was it not the philosopher Santayana who stated that those who don't remember the past are destined to relive it ? If WaltG wants to live in ignorance, so be it. One cannot argue with a closed mind.

Richard94611 Loc: Oakland, CA

I have answered a good deal of your post about the history of Mexico and the United States in another post. However, your comments about stupid laws in California really aren't germane to the discussion. Every state has stupid laws. I remember that in Massachusetts fifty years ago there was a law that you couldn't mow your lawn on Sunday ! In other words, pleasae discuss history in a substantive way.

bullfrogs Loc: Chico, Calif.

I like Joe. Gutsy Guy doing what he thinks the people of his state wants him to do.
This seems to prove the quote." The worst lie is the one mixed up with the truth" All of this Expansionist in the West was nvolved with Manifest Destiny. "If I can see it, it is Mine!!!!!!!
Bullfrogs

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

Thanks for a quick debunking Kendo.

This was just another thread started without any references or research which then falls into the abyss of fiction. What should the OP do now? Simply change the subject. 8-)

Lmarc Loc: Ojojona, Honduras

It's actually called "A People's Histroy of the United States" It may be called that for a reason. Google Howard Zinn.