Election platform for a ban on critical thinking?!

Very Scary

I was reading today, and came across this story.

I thought, surely this must be a mistake. Seriously? No more critical thinking? And THAT is one of your platforms? So, I went to the actual document to read it. I will admit, there are some things I agree with, but, for the most part, this is ridiculous.

“We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values
clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based
Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging
the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority”

I don’t think random people should go around undermining parental authority, however, I also think if you believe something, it should be able to stand up to some scrutiny. If your 10 year old comes running to you about something they learned in school, you should be able to explain WHY you don’t believe or agree with what they were told. Why is it a bad thing to have your fixed beliefs challenged? There are literally hundreds of quotes about going through adversity and coming out stronger, why should our beliefs be any different?

Adversity is the first path to truth.  ~Lord Byron

I’ve been teased recently about my incessant “why” questions. And, it isn’t because I want to change someone’s beliefs, it is because I’m trying to understand them. I’ve heard people blame liberal colleges for their sons and daughters turning their backs on Christianity. I can’t say I agree with this. I think college helps build your critical thinking skills. I think it allows you to question things, and I think that is a good thing. But, when these kids raised with”because I/the Bible says so, that’s why” as their only reasoning for doing, they will question it. I went though a long period of questioning everything. I was told by many “that’s why it’s called faith. I don’t know, you just have to accept it.” Which, honestly pushed me further away. But, I finally met two preachers who welcomed my questions. Who said “I don’t know,so, let’s try to figure it out.” or, one of my favorite quotes to this day “Go ahead, question. If something is true, it will stand up to your questions, and if it isn’t, it won’t and you shouldn’t be worried about it anyway.”

Why would you want to discourage a child’s natural “why”?

Some more quotes from the document

We support objective teaching and equal treatment of all sides of scientific theories.
We believe theories such as life origins and environmental change should be taught as challengeable scientific theories subject to change as new data is produced. Teachers and students should be able to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these theories openly and without fear of retribution or discrimination of any kind

Really? And how exactly is one to question and discuss theories without being taught critical thinking skills? Isn’t that questioning authority?

We strongly oppose those efforts that attempt to use the environmental causes to purposefully disrupt and stop those interests within the oil and gas industry

Well, of course, we’d hate for the environment to get in the way of oil company profits. There is also a blurb in here about abolishing the endangered species act.

– We propose that every Texas driver license shall indicate whether the driver is a U.S. citizen.

You know, I’m marrying a non-citizen, and I’d hate for him to be opened up for harassment because he doesn’t have the Texas stamp of approval.

We call upon governmental entities to protect all symbols of our American heritage from being altered in any way

Seems awfully broad to me.

We oppose the recognition of and granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married

Right, because the only relationship that counts is the one Texas has okay’d. I won’t repost the WHOLE paragraph, but, it says Texas gets to define who is or is not a family, and once TX has made that choice for you, then the “family” is responsible enough to handle ” its own welfare, education, moral training, conduct, and property. Got it, so, in TX Aussie and I are not a family, therefore the decisions we’ve made, in buying cars together, sharing a bank account, painting the deck, paying our bills, and deciding between the two of us to homeschool the kids,are invalid. However, once we get a piece of paper from the state, (which we are allowed SOLEY because he’s a man and I’m a woman) all the past heathen decisions are now acceptable to the state.

We affirm that the practice of homosexuality tears at the fabric of society and contributes to the breakdown of the family unit. Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle, in public policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include homosexual “couples.”

You know what I think has more of an effect on families than gay marriage? Straight people starting families and then not taking their vows, their commitments or their responsibilities seriously. I’d rather bring back fault divorce than worry about if two guys wanna get married.

There are LOTS AND LOTS of paragraphs talking about God, our Christian heritage, how schools should have curriculum based on this, then lots of paragraphs about religious freedom and liberty. So, which is it? Whose freedom and liberty?

I think this is probably enough for now, and I wonder how many Republican voters (or Democrats) actually know what they are supporting?