On Jul 1, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Anne Pemberton wrote: > J South, > > I'm not sure what the "test" was that you put in your message, but > I suspect you were upset that the students were asked to study > about Nat Turner. Is that supposed to be bad? That would entirely depend upon the context. > Nat Turner is not listed in the SOLs, but a good teacher and good > textbook would include him in the story of the events leading up to > the overthrow of the slavery system. Yes one could, as an exemplar of how not to do it. > I can see a teacher asking the children to compare Nat Turner to > George Washington or Thomas Jefferson who both advocated freedom > for the colonies and fought/wrote so that they jeopardized their > lives to make it happen. If you're meaning GW & TJ as the both, then yes, we agree. > Nat Turner did the same Where exactly did you do your reading for that one? > , had many supporters in Virginia and elsewhere, but unlike George > Washington he was not successful in defeating "The British" and > paid the price that would have been paid by George and Thomas had > the war not been won. A comparison that favorably compares Turner with GW & TJ is so obviously deficient in understanding the context that it is beyond words. You might get it across, but I doubt it sincerely at a 4th grade level, as a comparison of opposing means and methods, opposing ideals and practices and similar but never as a direct positive comparison of aims to means, ideals to means and methods, etc. But wait, that's the hyper-relativist argument isn't it, the non- judgmental posture? Perhaps I missed it but where did either GW or TJ advocate discriminating slaughter as in targeting one race? Lyle Browning, RPA