Have you noticed how getting children to “explore” something is nowadays a synonym for paedophilia, as in “the booklet is used because it is hard to find writings that are both sympathetic to the South and explore what the Bible says about slavery”.
Here is a species of intellectual child abuse, found through William Gibson’s blog. Gibson also has quotes, of which I particularly liked this description of the ante-bellum South: “There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world.”
A pamphlet like this should surely be compulsory reading in schools? Provided, that is, it is used appropriately. Treated properly, it would:
* ensure pupils are sceptical about documents they read;
* introduce pupils to the sort of specious arguments used by those who wish to promote hate;
* equip pupils with the capability to identify and refute illogical and ahistorical arguments.
Neither the News Observer journalist nor Mr Gibson offer much direct evidence to suggest that it isn’t being used in this way.
(I know what I suspect, but I’m being strictly evidence-based…)
Incidentally, I’m curious how the oxymoronic “Classical Christian” school reconciles Plato’s mismash of mysticism, monotheism and paganism with Christianity, and where it finds anything written by Socrates for children to read, but that’s another story.
A bit tangential, but you reminded me of an old talk.origins post that still cracks me up today.
A creationist saw this quote from Darwin,and immediately jumped to the conclusion that Darwin was a racist who had sex with blacks. And when he found out that the “full-blooded negro” was named John Edmonstone, well, that just shows that Darwin was also gay.
He persisted in this view for quite some time, despite people pointing out that “intimate” just means he knew him quite well, and that it would be very strange for an upper middle-class Victorian gentleman to blithely discuss having sex with black men in a scientific treatise.