I used that as an example...could be any school. It is a long process to get academic scholarship money and even harder once enrolled at another school...you can't just jump from school to school because you feel like it unless you are personally financed. If you were at Duke for instance and decided to leave due to a reason like this after the spring semester, I'd bet you'd have to sit out an entire year before getting academic scholarship to another school as all of those decisions are made very early in the year. Applying in April or May would probably mean missing an entire school year.

 

I meant if you are already there, it's not always an option to leave due to family or financial reasons. So you may have to stay at a school that suddenly allows censorship of portions of history.

 

I still don't get it but I never had scholarships dictating what I could and couldn't do with my education.

You strike me as a like or lump it guy.

 

Either way I would expect plenty of research into a private college like the one in the midst of controversy.

 

What was the story a few years ago about the kid who was offended at one of the private Christian colleges in the state over gay rights? He should have known that would be an issue before he walked on campus before his first class.

 

BYU and celibacy is another.

People you have to know what you're getting into!

 

I agree with you should know what you are getting into...but if a teacher/professor/school suddenly takes a stance like that the kid/student make be stuck, they can't always just leave school because they don't like it.

 

The bigger issue to me is deciding not to teach a portion of history because it is upsetting or ugly. Should we stop teaching about Civil Rights abuses in this country, Slavery, Nazis, Communist atrocities because we don't agree...of course not. Whether it is Greco-Roman history, Germany of the 30s and 40s or the Slavery in this country there is something of value that can always be learned by studying the past and not turning a blind eye to it.

I still don't get it but I never had scholarships dictating what I could and couldn't do with my education.

 

Some kids probably couldn't leave EKU because they are taking care of parents at home. Some may not be able to relocate due to living with family is the only way they can afford to go to college...it's not just about scholarship money.

 

I know people with money that changed schools like they changed their underwear, that isn't a reality for many students. If your school starts doing something stupid like NOT teaching controversial history, in many cases they just have to stick with the school due to many reasons money of which is only one of them.

Some kids probably couldn't leave EKU because they are taking care of parents at home. Some may not be able to relocate due to living with family is the only way they can afford to go to college...it's not just about scholarship money.

 

I know people with money that changed schools like they changed their underwear, that isn't a reality for many students. If your school starts doing something stupid like NOT teaching controversial history, in many cases they just have to stick with the school due to many reasons money of which is only one of them.

 

Ehhhh, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Ehhhh, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

I guess so.

 

The bigger issue to me is deciding not to teach a portion of history because it is upsetting or ugly. Should we stop teaching about Civil Rights abuses in this country, Slavery, Nazis, Communist atrocities because we don't agree...of course not. Whether it is Greco-Roman history, Germany of the 30s and 40s or the Slavery in this country there is something of value that can always be learned by studying the past and not turning a blind eye to it.

 

I totally agree with this. In the eightys, while visiting Germany, we found our tour guide dismissing all questions about WWII saying things like "Why do you ask me. I wasn't there. That is past." In the meantime, she pointed out historical sites for us to see.

I totally agree with this. In the eightys, while visiting Germany, we found our tour guide dismissing all questions about WWII saying things like "Why do you ask me. I wasn't there. That is past." In the meantime, she pointed out historical sites for us to see.

 

Yeah, Germans are really bad about that. Probably has a good deal to do with the emergence of neo-Naziism there. If enough sane people act like it was too embarrassing to talk about, it's not a big step to grow up believing it didn't actually happen.

Yeah, Germans are really bad about that. Probably has a good deal to do with the emergence of neo-Naziism there. If enough sane people act like it was too embarrassing to talk about, it's not a big step to grow up believing it didn't actually happen.

 

 

I have spent a LOT of time in Germany the past 20 years. The generations of Germans since WWII were extremely embarrassed and apologetic about WWII, the Nazis, etc. The latest generation(s) are taking a different approach: "we are not apologizing any more, we didn't do it etc." , and they are very defensive in this approach if that is the right word.

Edited May 8, 20179 yr by True blue (and gold)
Fixed quote

I have spent a LOT of time in Germany the past 20 years. The generations of Germans since WWII were extremely embarrassed and apologetic about WWII, the Nazis, etc. The latest generation(s) are taking a different approach: "we are not apologizing any more, we didn't do it etc." , and they are very defensive in this approach if that is the right word.

 

Sounds Familiar.

Edited May 8, 20179 yr by True blue (and gold)
Fixed quotes

 

Sounds Familiar.

 

 

I was about to say the exact same thing.

Sounds Familiar.

 

How so?

How so?

 

I'm thinking white people and slavery but I could be wrong.

I have spent a LOT of time in Germany the past 20 years. The generations of Germans since WWII were extremely embarrassed and apologetic about WWII, the Nazis, etc. The latest generation(s) are taking a different approach: "we are not apologizing any more, we didn't do it etc." , and they are very defensive in this approach if that is the right word.

 

I understand this view, as long as they do not try to deny that it happened.

An example of denial to an atrocity is what the Turks did to the Armenians during WWI.

For many whites and their relationship to slavery, is that their ancestors did come this country until after the Civil War. Now if they try to deny slavery was evil, that is another matter.

I'm thinking white people and slavery but I could be wrong.

 

Winner! :thumb:

I would like to ask, at what point should a group be allowed to say that was their ancestors and not them ? They realize that something terrible happened and there is a lesson to learn, hoping never repeat such an atrocity. Looking back on history, besides what the Nazis did, what the Turks did, what Commies did in a number of countries, slavery, not just in our country, but throughout the world, including Africans selling others into slavery. At what point is it all on their ancestors?