What Your Tax Dollars Are Paying to Teach

Katie Halper has an article about some of the more bizarre things taught in private religious schools that receive tax dollars through state voucher problems. In addition to the usual creationist nonsense that has been exposed a million times, some of the history being taught is quite absurd. Like this one:

4. The ’60s and ’70s: Everything Goes to S***, Mainly Because the State Stops Killing Born People and Starts Killing Pre-Born Babies and… Freud.

We also learn from America: Land I Love In Christian Perspective that when the death penalty was suspended in 1972, “crime began to increase across the nation. In 1973, just one year later, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of abortion, the killing of babies before birth.”

Coincidence? More likely God’s plan: “A lesson taught continually throughout history is that, as prosperity and new found enjoyments increase, people ‘forget’ God. As morals lessen, culture will definitely take a turn for the worst [sic].”

Which it did, according to A Beka, with an “increase in white-collar crime [and] the legalization of gambling….” But the worst part? “Many psychologists,” the authors note, began advocating “the teachings of Sigmund Freud.”

Well I guess that sums that up, doesn’t it?

"Great routine by a great comic whose insights into mass foolishness should be even more ..."

Wiles: Christians in America Just Like ..."
"I see what you did there, good catch.Also, at the end of a sermon, one ..."

Christian Right Still Oblivious to Their ..."
"Heh. As I like to tell my kids and grandkids, "You gotta learn to allow ..."

Christian Right Still Oblivious to Their ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • doublereed

    Didn’t Pro-Life used to mean being against the Death Penalty? Isn’t that what the Catholic Church says?

  • zippythepinhead

    Yes, I absolutely agree, the worst part IS … psychologists advocating the teachings of Sigmund Freud.

  • cptdoom

    “Many psychologists,” the authors note, began advocating “the teachings of Sigmund Freud.”

    Yeah, in the early 1900s. By the 1970s the use of traditional psychoanalysis was an increasingly small percentage of overall identification and treatment of psychological diseases. Antidepressants, antipsychotics, ECT, behavioral therapy, cognitive therapy – they were all widely in use and far more effective than psychoanalysis, even then.

  • Shatterface

    Freud’s work was entirely discredited by the end of the Sixties – except in Eng Lit, film studies, and a few other disciplines.

  • Shatterface

    I have dozens of psychology text books and psychoanalysis generally occupies the same place in them that the luminiferous aether does in physics books.

  • Glenn E Ross

    If the facts are in dispute with your world view, change the facts.

  • karmacat

    I apologize for derailing the thread but it drives me up the wall when Freud is seen in such black and white terms. Freud has not been totally discredited. His ideas have led to psychotherapy and eventually to cognitive-behavioral therapy, which are helpful. Is idea to observe psychological development has also been helpful. His writings have led to more thoughts and writing about understanding human internal motivations, reactions, relationship with others. We cannot look at what is going on inside people’s brains and it is hard to figure out what therapy will work for whom. Psychoanalysis does work but for only a very small population who can handle the intensity and regression of psychoanalysis. Freud’s ideas obviously have a lot of problems, including not really understanding female children’s emotional development. If someone only read Freud, then that would be a problem. I could go on but I will stop there. the main point I want to make is that it is important to be critical of Freud but don’t throw out all his ideas completely and how he has contributed to psychiatry.

  • http://www.gregory-gadow.net Gregory in Seattle

    Dana has been doing a bang-up job of reading and critiquing the “science” books promoted for use by home schoolers and some private religious schools. Definitely worth a read if you have a strong stomach.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Katie Halper has an article about some of the more bizarre things taught in private religious schools that receive tax dollars through state voucher problems.



    karmacat “…intensity and regression…”

    karmacat, Intensity and Regression was a Saturday morning cartoon show I wrote for. It was cancelled after eight episodes. Even so, it was huge in Germany.

  • dingojack

    Modus – you know what else was huge in Germany…..?


  • karmacat

    Comment by Dingo: proving that Freud may have been right about that whole penis envy stuff. ; )

  • demonhauntedworld

    Wait, so they’re arguing that the legalization of abortion led to an increase in crime?

    Freakonomics argues the exact opposite point – with statistics to back it up.

  • dingojack

    karmacat – some of us don’t need to boast*.



    * Especially when it comes to —-

    NAZISM !!!!eleventy!!! 😀

  • busterggi

    Criticizing Freud? Looks like the Religious Reich wants to include Scientologists now as well as Catholics.

  • Crip Dyke, Right Reverend, Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden

    “Many psychologists,” the authors note, began advocating “the teachings of Sigmund Freud.”

    1. I think they don’t know the difference between psychiatrists and psychologists

    2. I think they don’t know the difference between the 1870s and the 1970s.

    Actually that last one explains a lot.

  • lpetrich

    I also marvel at their making a big villain out of Sigmund Freud. Has anyone tried to chronicle the rise and fall of his reputation and speculate on what made it happen? It was certainly falling in the 1960’s and 1970’s.

  • leonardschneider

    @ karmakat:

    Freudian theory is comparable to paleontology and evolutionary theory: he got the ball rolling, and as time progressed, his ideas were improved upon, narrowed, and sometimes outright rejected. Imagine what life sciences would be like if scientists took Darwin’s initial theories and hypotheses and said, “Perfect! No need for further change or exploration, what he’s got here is all we need!”

    Freud is still around…. But his ideas have been expanded upon so far they don’t look the same anymore.