More Jesus, less Darwin? In Texas, Yes

In San Francisco, where I live, runners participate in an annual race where many show up in costumes. Some even start out of the blocks with nothing on but their birthday suits. It's an oddball sight but harmless fun as everyone's in on the joke.

But before falling for the cliche' that the left(ist) coast has a monopoly on oddball behavior, let's turn our eyes toward Texas where right wing activists are celebrating a victory in their campaign to revise the retelling of United States history. At first blush, you wouldn't usually assume that a battle over curriculum standards for social studies textbooks would be fodder for major yukks. Then again, this is the same state that's already provided us with the likes of Anna Nicole Smith, Marc Cuban and, of course, George W. Bush.

So it is that the curriculum changes passed by Texas's Board of Education will mean more Jesus, less Darwin, and a lot of side issues important to conservative tastes. Reading through the coverage, a few items stood out:

Republicans blocked a Democratic-backed proposal which would have examined why the Bill of Rights prohibits a state religion. Conservatives sought to undo the "leftist" notion that there's a constitutional separation between church and state. Putting his money where his mouth is, board member David Bradley, who is licensed to sell real estate and insurance, has offered to give $1,000 to anyone who can find any such provision in the U.S. constitution.

An amendment to make sure the relevant chapters on the Second World War note that Germans and Italians also got interned here. Otherwise, impressionable minds might buy into the notion that racism played a role in the internment of Japanese Americans.

Board member Don McLeroy, a dentist (and fourth-grade Sunday school teacher) argued that Republicans ought to receive more credit for passing civil rights legislation. He said that there was a need to restore "balance" to the curriculum. "History," he told the New York Times, "has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left." (That also meant rejecting a move to feature more Hispanics in the retelling of the state's history (Apparently, Tejanos did not die at the Alamo.)

Thomas Jefferson got replaced by John Calvin in a discussion of the impact of Enlightenment ideas, thanks to an amendment by board member Cynthia Dunbar.

More space will be set aside for a consideration of the likes of Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association. Also, there will be new focus on "the importance of personal responsibility for life choices." Board member Barbara Cargill noted that sociology tends to blame society for everything.

How to interpret all this? Against the larger backdrop of left versus right, I think the subtext is plain to read. Last July, Rev. Peter Marshall, one of three reviewers appointed by social conservatives to recommend curriculum modifications, said: "We're in an all-out moral and spiritual civil war for the soul of America and the record of American history is right at the heart of it."

Blunt, but honest.