Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In a widely adopted high school textbook used in South Carolina and other states, an error was found in the Bill of Rights.
Quote:
“The Second and Third Amendments — grant citizens the right to bear arms as members of a militia of citizen-soldiers and prevent the government from housing troops in private homes in peacetime,” the book’s summary reads. In a separate box on the same page it paraphrases the amendment as “the right to bear arms,” not the right to “keep” and bear arms.
This type of error is the second found this week and in newer textbooks related to the new Common Core standards. This error was found by a student at Hillcrest and posted on facebook. Several news outlets picked it up and reported on the error.
A textbook is no substitute for reading the Constitution and understanding what it says. Doing so is not just a right but a responsibility of every citizen.
[quote=lyricamphibian;31456328]A textbook is no substitute for reading the Constitution and understanding what it says. Doing so is not just a right but a responsibility of every citizen.[/
So what students read/study/discuss in an AP history class -- the information they absorb in a public-school classroom -- is no substitute for individual verificaton of said facts? Are you saying that kids (and by extension their parents) are responsible for double-checking every single thing they are told ie "here's what the second amendment says, but you better investigate whether or not we sneakily left out any important words that might or might not advance a particular agenda."
So what students read/study/discuss in an AP history class -- the information they absorb in a public-school classroom -- is no substitute for individual verificaton of said facts? Are you saying that kids (and by extension their parents) are responsible for double-checking every single thing they are told ie "here's what the second amendment says, but you better investigate whether or not we sneakily left out any important words that might or might not advance a particular agenda."
No, that's not what I meant at all, so stop putting words in people's mouths. I was merely pointing out that, when it comes to learning the Constitution, it is best for everyone to read the original source at some point - and then again, and again... However, I don't think a textbook has ever been written that hasn't been slanted to some degree by the authors, so, yes, maybe people should follow the old proverb: trust, but verify.
Note that I haven't disagreed with your original statement, but you seem very eager to pick an argument. That makes you a troll, in my opinion, so I will not be engaging with you any further.
The text book is accurate in its summary. This is nothing more than contrived controversy from nuts like Glenn Beck.
Maybe if the Beck's of the world were more educated then we wouldn't have see posts like this.
With all due respect Joe, I have a Master's degree and also have recently taken a course in the Constitution. The SC textbook is wrong and it is not the first time this has happened.
Some folks would rather just bury their heads in the sand rather than understand what is going on around them.
The 2nd Amendment says we have the right to KEEP and BEAR ARMS. “A well regulated Militia (aka members of the local community), being necessary to the security of a free State (sovereign government), the right of the people (everyday citizens) to keep (own) and bear (use) Arms, shall not (you can’t do it – non-negotiable) be infringed (intruded on).” I hope this helps to clarify for you…
The text book is accurate in its summary. This is nothing more than contrived controversy from nuts like Glenn Beck.
Maybe if the Beck's of the world were more educated then we wouldn't have see posts like this.
Exactly.
The phrase "the right to bear arms" has been used to describe the second amendment since...the second amendment was being written. Patrick Henry ("Give me Liberty or give me death") used the phrase even back then.
It's not like they're teaching creationism in science class or anything. It's one appropriate use of a phrase in a textbook - and a trumped up controversy preying on people's ignorance.
The textbook actually combines the 2nd and 3rd amendments together in their summary, as though they are related.
A student could get the impression that the right to bear arms is tied to being able to prevent the government from housing troops in private citizen's homes in peacetime.
The two amendments have nothing to do with each other and why not just list each one separately?
This appears to be the aspect that Glenn Beck talked about most regarding this textbook.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
