Post Numero Uno

So, I figure I should write this here blog, seeing as it's due quite soon. Hopefully it will be done correctly. It is the first blog, so I'm not positive what I'm going to write, even though we've been given prompts, and had a discussion in class, and all that good stuff. Actually, I think this will be about that discussion that we had while we in the Socratic Circle, seeing as that was quite an interesting experience (to me, at least).
Alrighty. So. As I recall, there was a prompt of some sort that we read, and it was about the history books in Texas. There was debate about what went into the books, and the main issue was whether there should be more about the bible and Christianity in the textbooks, yes? Right. People got quite...well, stirred about their viewpoints, as I think many of you would agree, yeah?
Mmmk, so I may not have actually said anything during that discussion, and I regret that, but I feel like making some comments regarding some of the points I heard on Wednesday.
Firstly, of course the bible, or at least Christianity, must be mentioned in the texts. Those who first settled(and I say settled, not lived, I'm not talking about the Native Americans) here, the colonists whose descendants would one day become the first people of the United States, were very religious. This was one of the most important parts, the foundation, of the lives and the society of the colonists. In order for that to accurately be portrayed in the books, their religion simply must be mentioned.
This is not to say that the books should "present Christianity as an overall force for good--and a key reason for American exceptionalism." No. See, while it is likely impossible to have the books be completely objective in the telling of history, those in charge of putting those books together must do their best to do so. The U.S. History book should be filled with the facts; portraying one religion as a "force of good" is horrendously biased, and absolutely unacceptable. Religion should only be mentioned when it is very relevant to the piece of history, such as the colonists, or the Great Awakening.
However, this does not only apply to religion. Minorities and their places in the text became a quite a discussion as well. The entirety of the history of the U.S. is what the text is to represent, people. Only so much information can fit in the book; things will be left out, there is no doubt. Not all people and all events can be represented, as, unfortunately, it is simply not possible to include all the information. So, when a particular group failed to play a major role in an important part of history, that group is not going to be in the book. Sorry, but that's how it is. In other sections of the text, dealing with other times and places, a large portion may be dedicated to that particular group of people, while others are left out.
Okay...so I totally just lost that train of thought. Hmm. Oh well. Maybe I'll return to it later. For now, I think I'm done with this. I hope that this was enjoyed by whoever read this, or that it wasn't too big of a waste of time, at least. If it was, sorry. Guess I'm not so good at these blogs yet. Hehe. Alrighty, I'll see you guys later. Bye byes.