Facebook Posts
After my last couple of posts (hey, mandatory vaccines and Bible readings, what could go wrong?), I’m going to mount my soapbox for a brief rant.
I am so weary of getting the following response, which I got on Facebook, on Twitter, and even on Substack, plus by email. This response takes various forms, but here’s the gist of it:
“You’re completely wrong about vaccines [or about teaching the Bible in Texas schools], and although we’ve used your curricula for years, I am now going get rid of them because I can’t trust you.”
This is one of the most destructive aspects of the tribalism that has taken over so much of our national conversation. It’s the intellectual equivalent of “If you don’t have a U.S. passport, you are an enemy of our country.””
I am very appreciative of those of you who’ve posted disagreements while remaining civil. “You’re wrong about this issue because of the following considerations” is always a worthwhile stance. “You obviously know nothing about history or patriotism and so I will shun you” is useless.
Think it through, people. Do you *really* believe that you have nothing to learn (about grammar, say, or ancient history, or how to write an essay) from someone who posts a take about vaccine mandates that you disagree with?
If so, you live in an impoverished world. I have learned tremendous amounts from writers and historians and, yes, even podcasters with whom I have serious disagreements. That’s because we live in a complex and complicated world where multiple strands of thought—about liberty and civic responsibility, about the most faithful way to practice our beliefs, about how to be responsible for our health—intertwine.
When I was a young reader, and voraciously reading every book I could get my hands on, my mother gave up policing the content. She told me: If you read something and you’re have a question about it, or it makes you feel uneasy, turn the page down and we’ll talk about it when you’re done.
She didn’t say: Throw the book down and never read anything by that author again.
On my morning run today, I listened to a conversation between Ezra Klein, a most definitely left-leaning opinion writer at the New York Times, and Chris Rufo of the Manhattan Institute, an architect of the anti-DEI policies of the current administration. They agreed on very little. (Maybe 10% of the issues brought up.) They argued vigorously, sometimes speaking over each other. They constantly said, “I don’t think that’s an accurate framing of the issue” and “I think that’s a little unfair, because…” and “Let me rephrase the question in another way.” What they didn’t say? “Your so-called expertise is a joke.” “I’m not going to listen to you any more.” “Clearly, you are an idiot.”
Much of the responsibility for our current reprehensible level of public discourse can be chalked up to politicians who insist on referring to their political opponents with morally weighted words such as “evil”, “sick”, and “enemies of our country.” But too many people have embraced this method of communicating with glee.
When I taught the Bible as Literature course at William & Mary, I usually got a solid 80% of student comments that were along the lines of, “Pretty good course. I learned a lot.” But I would get 10% of comments that said “This professor is obviously a rabid Christian who is trying to convert me” and 10% that said, “This professor is obviously an atheistic liberal who is trying to destroy my faith.”
I always figured that the breakdown meant I was doing a decent job of presenting the material without excessive bias. (We all have bias. We should aim to not be excessive.) But I have a feeling that, were I to teach the course in the same way today, I’d get a 50/50 split. That’s how we’ve been teaching our young people to respond.
I hope that we don’t stay here. ... See MoreSee Less
23 hours ago
- Likes: 1478
- Shares: 122
- Comments: 169
I have great respect for your work even though I disagree with some of it. But I recall once reading about your decision to exclude Doug Wilson's quotes from later editions of the Well Trained Mind due to his other statements that, if I remember right, you considered misogynistic. No doubt you made the right decision based on your views, but I don't think his actual statements on education were in question. He was removed because of other publicly stated views. I think this post does a very good job of identifying a particular Ill in our society. But I somehow feel also that there are times when we trust certain sources for our homeschool because we know we are in alignment with the author on things that are important to us. I think using a school book author to teach my children is a different kind of decision from 'can I learn from this book ' Although the vitriol from your critics is quite unnecessary. I appreciate your point and can only imagine what it's been like to receive the online criticism you've had to take over the years. But to offer to teach history to kids does seem to raise the bar when it comes to ideological comparability.
If we’re attempting to educate our children in the classical method (which many of your followers are), we need to apply the same standards to ourselves. I just finished a couple days of refresher training on the core tenets of classical education so that I can lead my son’s Gr 9 homeschool class this fall. Among the core principles are asking thoughtful questions, making comparisons, looking for relationships, thoughtfully crafting arguments, defining terms, and having respectful debate and discourse. In other words, using critical thinking skills as we practice the arts of dialectic and rhetoric. Maybe we as the parents can try using these skills ourselves when we come across something we don’t agree with? 🤔
I appreciate your comment Susan. It helps me to stay civil when confronted with opposing views. I really want to meet somewhere in the middle because I’m so tired of the anger but, getting to the middle can be like walking through Dante’s Inferno! By the way, would you mind if I asked you what podcast you were listening to on your morning run? I might like to subscribe.
I appreciate the modeling you are offering for civil discussion and disagreement of ideas. Simply offering it up in a public space will do some good, I hope. Particularly since you are clearly reaching many minds. Thank you, by the way, for the work you have done in creating curriculum. I relied on it as a novice homeschooler as my lifeline. The booklists by grade were beyond helpful. The grammar made my sixth grader cry but she is beautifully articulate at 20 and I can barely hold a discussion without seeing parts of my points in diagram form. The last big thank you is for the WTM Academy during COVID it kept us all connected and afloat academically.
So fun fact, I distinctly remember learning the concept ‘everyone has bias, we all have an axe to grind, but it’s only a problem if you think you don’t’ from your Bible as Lit course. It has served me well both in my writing and what I choose to read. So thank you for that. I feel like part of why it’s so hard to have civil discourse (besides the internet and other usual suspects) is that it’s easy to conflate ‘being civil’ with ‘being nice.’ And there’s a lot of justifiable disdain towards being nice nowadays… smiling and not rocking the boat often genuinely enables people’s prejudices. But one can be civil and still call other people out when you think they’re in the wrong. One can be civil and still say ‘let’s talk about that subject, but not right now because your view actively hurts other people in the room.’
I am very impressed that you can listen to intense political debate on your morning run and not have it ruin your day. 😂Thanks, Susan, for having the courage to rant and call us all to our responsibility to civility.
The Great Shadow is the best book I’ve read all year! Pediatric NP here. Keep up the good work!
I followed you because I like your curriculum. Turns out I enjoy your posts too. Keep up the drama. 😆
Welcome to the current homeschool environment that claims conservatism but acts like the world with their vitriol and cancel culture behavior. Personally i was scared away from your materials by hard right homeschoolers for years. But when nothing else worked i gave it a try and Story of the World is everything we were looking for those 14 years. Then i heard you speak onna podcast i listen to and agreed with everything you said. I enjoy your posts greatly. I don't agree with everything at times and that is ok. I am working hard in my new exvangelical life to be ok with other opinions. I am also trying to glean from those opinions so i can learn and grow even in disagreement. Sadly none of that was allowed in our past evangelical life.
Do you think people should be forcibly vaccinated? I missed that post.
I've talked people out of throwing out your curriculum. We probably share many concerns – the decline of public discourse, growing distrust of institutions and experts, and even the (seeming) paranoia of some people I'm politically sympathetic to. What I struggle with is that you seem to write about political issues that antagonise the right while rarely addressing those that would similarly challenge the left. Whether intentional or not, that perceived imbalance inevitably fuels tribalism. One side continually feels scrutinised by your Facebook rants.
Any human being whom we give absolute trust will inevitably fall from the pedestal. That happened to me recently with an author I had read, enjoyed and--yes, trusted implicitly--for years. This person confessed to years of a sinful relationship. Books written during that time suddenly seemed icky. I haven't discarded them yet, and perhaps the time will come when I can reread them. The issue in this case was confessed sin, clear moral failure, and yet I remind myself that this sin doesn't wipe out all of this author's work. At the other extreme, I've had to recognize value in people I deeply disagree with. Maybe that theologian's doctrine or that writer's experience seem off-base, but if I truly believe that no one sees things perfectly, I can look for alignment on the key doctrines of faith and be more open to different perspectives. It seems unwise and unsound to take the position that different interpretations of Scripture or its application warrant brushing the dust off your feet..
Oh my, yes. We are in the most ill-mannered, small-minded era. I’m fascinated by differences in opinion and love to hear all perspectives. It’s quite sad that our children are seeing such zero tolerance ways of communicating.
This post popped up in my feed. I read it. I liked it. Though your position on teaching the Bible in Texas and vaccine mandates wasn't relevant to me liking this particular post, I was curious. So I looked up what you'd written on those things too. I like them also. Thank you. It's nice to read sanity now and again.
I always ask- do we think iron sharpening iron is supposed to be a painless process? We play tug of war across the circle of ideas and then get mad that there are people actually pulling the other end of the rope. 🙃 The result is that we don’t know that there is much in common in the middle of the circle- refusing to engage means you don’t know where anyone else’s circle is, and leaves you to assume their ideas are all alien.
I think you’ve got it wrong about vaccines, but I love you and your curriculum anyways.
What's hilarious is that it used to be the other way around--about twenty years ago it was the liberals saying you were too conservative to be trusted.
Just this week Randy Fine (US Rep from Florida) said he didn’t come to work with Democrats but to beat them. And this seems to be the prevailing attitude in our government right now. People can’t even have civil discourse, of course they won’t figure out how to work together. It’s so frustrating.
Love your stuff. You have no idea how relieved I was when I discovered that you were as reasonable, empathetic, logical, and articulate in your contemporary viewpoints as you are in your historical writings. I’m almost certainly still to the political “left” of you, but that doesn’t make you the kind of person that so many on the political “right” are (or have become in the last decade). I continue to use and recommend your work, and I think we’d have a great chat if we ever ran across each other one day.
Hmm, never understood the mentality of this. Why throw the baby out with the bath water? I don’t have to agree with every point of a person for said person to have valuable information. End of story. For the record, I do disagree with you on one point vehemently and agree on the other point moderately. That’s okay! I’m a thinking individual and can take the awesomeness along with the other. Maturity, people. We can still all be friends!
I think we can all disagree with many issues, but forcing opinions on our bodies is hitting below the belt. It harms and hurts.
Hilariously, not all, but some of those people absolutely still use your stuff despite their bellicosity and I like to imagine them resentfully reciting the memory work from First Language Lessons 😆.
I used to love when someone disagreed with me. It made me open to alternative thought and expanded my mind. Now I keep my mouth shut as much as possible because it’s a fight on their part. At times I remind myself that two things can be correct but with those of closed minds there is only one correct, theirs. When I was schooling my son who was also a book a day reader I gave up reading things first 🤣. I started having him read things I totally disagreed with or disliked. Then I’d ask him what he thought and at times I’d cringe at his response. That’s what I wanted though, his own perspective to come out in a complete thought. In therapy there’s the phrase we can agree to disagree. We’ve lost that and I think it’s forever.
80-10-10 puts you in good company. I read that the Elizabethan Settlement establishing religion in England was supported by eighty percent the populace. Ten percent thought it too Catholic. It didn’t go far enough in eliminating the hated papist religion. Ten percent thought it went too far. They wanted to retain some of the rituals and music. It is impossible to please everyone, especially at a time of intense fear and hatred. Then, as now, some of the fear and hatred is deliberately created and maintained.
Your relative, I think your son, called my place of employment to complain about my comment on your Facebook post. Seems like karma to me.
I've been repeatedly asked to weigh in on the new Texas reading list, which includes required Bible readings from both the Old and New Testaments, so here goes. (As a preliminary aside, I'm not a fan of set reading lists, so let me tackle THAT problem in a future post.)
Now, about requiring students to read the Bible: I have conflicting thoughts.
Let me start with some personal context. When I was working at the College of William & Mary, I taught the Bible as Literature course in the English department. The course was introduced because the English faculty realized that students were coming into their literature requirements with no knowledge of the Bible at all--which meant that they had a very hard time understanding Paradise Lost, East of Eden, Moby-Dick, and anything by T. S. Eliot. Biblical literacy, it turns out, is quite important for the critical analysis of most English-language works produced between 400 and, well, 2000. (Our literature, as Peter Leithart points out, "continues to feed off the root of the Christian Bible, but in a more subtle way than the literature of earlier centuries.")
I was asked to teach the course because I have an MDiv as well as my MA in English and PhD in American Studies. The other faculty who taught the course in alternate years were specialists in medieval and Renaissance literature.
That context grounds my objections to the Texas literature requirements.
Yes, students need an understanding of Biblical content so that they can understand an entire millenium of literature constructed on the knowledge of biblical metaphors, language, and concepts. No one should object to the simple inclusion of Biblical passages in a literature curriculum.
BUT. Who is teaching these passages? What training have they received? Do they have any theological knowledge? Do they understand that ancient literature works under different assumptions than an article from (at random) People magazine? If they are teaching the story of Jonah and the whale, which is currently on the elementary school list, how will they present it? As a funny fairy tale? As a literal account? As a presentation of the conflict between the God of the Old Testament and the mythical forces thought to rule the deep waters? (Probably not, unless they've been to seminary and studied Hebrew.)
There is, in the Texas decree, absolutely no sense that anyone involved in constructing these literature lists has ANY comprehension that teaching ancient literature, literature considered as sacred, AND (as a double whammy) ancient sacred literature requires particular skills in understanding these stories.
Instead, Religion News reports that the "Daniel and the Lion's Den" [sic] selection is to be "supplied by the Christian Broadcasting Network, a media company founded by televangelist Pat Robertson in the 1960s." In addition, it appears that the recommended translation for these stories is the New International Readers Version of the Bible--a modern, much-debated translation simplified to a third-grade reading level. This introduces a whole new set of distortions and problems to the Old Testament stories in particular.
As a scholar, I shudder to think of the misdirections that unprepared (through no fault of their own) teachers will provide their young students. As a parent, I'd never want my child to encounter the stories of Noah's ark or the creation of humanity through an unqualified, overwhelmed elementary school instructor. I'd rather handle that myself, thank you very much.
So, despite my desire that all young readers (no matter their faith) acquire enough Biblical literacy to not be totally adrift while reading pre-2026 literature, I'm coming down on the "This is a very bad idea" side of the equation.
www.nytimes.com/2026/06/25/us/texas-schools-book-list.html?unlocked_article_code=1.tlA.EH-H.yZg92...
religionnews.com/2026/06/19/which-bible-passages-are-in-texas-proposed-student-reading-list/?utm_...
theopolisinstitute.com/the-bible-and-western-literature/ ... See MoreSee Less

Which Bible passages are in Texas’ proposed student reading list? Here’s what the sections reveal.
religionnews.com
(RNS) — The chosen readings, to be voted on by the State Board of Education, draw heavily from Christian perspectives.3 days ago
So do you have reservations about homeschooling moms or Sunday school teachers teaching Bible literacy?
I had the pleasure of taking your Bible as Literature Course in 2001. It was one of my favorite classes at The College. You did an excellent job of explaining your bias as a Christian and what you did to limit its impact on the course but more than anything i remember your words on the first class following 9/11. All of us in that room needed them and i thank you for them.
As a curmudgeonly conservative Christian, every time I hear some lawmaker wants public schools to teach the Bible, I always wonder if they’ve thought about how that would play out.
While I understand your view, why not let the literature speak for itself? The reading itself will provide some context. When reading Shakespeare, most people read it in some edited state that is less than the original, but still valuable in literature. It seems valuable simply as literature to me.
As an enthusiastic former student of your Bible as Literature class, I do not believe I quote a single class more in my day to day life. When my daughter was in Kindergarten, we lived in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and her school had an "opt in" program for Week Day Religious education (WRE). This meant that children whose parents gave permission, traveled off campus to learn about the Bible with an independent group. We are Christian and she was enthusiastic, so we agreed. Midway through the year, her WRE teacher taught the story of Jesus' first miracle at the wedding in Cana. It just so happens that her Sunday School teacher at church had also taught this lesson recently. She came home very upset because her WRE teacher had taught that the wine steward had come to Jesus to tell him they were out of wine. Our daughter raised her hand and said she thought it was Mary, Jesus' mom, who told him they were out of wine. The teacher told our daughter she was wrong. I pulled everything you taught me from that Bible as Literature course and employed it for my Kindergartener. I told her we would go to the text rather than relying on our memory. When we read John 2:3, we learned that indeed she had remembered her Sunday School teacher's lesson correctly and that Mary was the one who came to Jesus when the wine ran dry. We went on to talk about why it mattered and how we should look at the larger story being told about the beginning of Jesus' ministry. At the end of the year concert for WRE, I asked the teacher about this and she dismissed me saying that my daughter "must have misunderstood and that it didn't really matter who told Jesus anyway." This very story is why I have grave concerns about the Texas ruling. Thank you for your lessons that my daughter (and current William and Mary student!) continues to employ.
The same could be said about any other subject. I say this as a public school teacher. Who is teaching algebra? What training have they received? Do they have any mathematical knowledge? And so on. I mean, the vast majority of teachers aren’t really trained to teach their specific subject matter. A professional development, here and there, maybe. But these passages aren’t meant to be Sunday School lessons or seminary classes, so the highly specialized training and knowledge isn’t truly necessary, in my humble opinion. Also, Bible scriptures have already been required reading in many classes across America for decades. Lincoln’s Second Inaugural address is inundated with quotes and allusions to the Bible. So are many other American speeches and addresses from other presidents to abolitionists to civil rights activists to famous preachers and their sermons. I read “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” by Jonathan Edwards in eleventh grade over twenty years ago. Teachers in public schools who would force their own beliefs on vulnerable students will use any material, no matter how neutral, to do so and are already doing it. Adding one passage from the Bible a year isn’t going to make a big difference.
I took your Bible as Literature class at William & Mary. Thirty-ish years later, I still have my notebook, and it's the one college class I still mention (in discussions about the Bible with my husband and sons). I still remember the final project -- to compare translations of a particular passage. That class did give me the foundation you mentioned for other English classes and, honestly, just life in a country that references the Bible regularly. But it also helped me read the Bible in a new light. If every student could take *that* class -- with Professor Bauer and as a 19 or 20 year old -- I would support it. As an aside, this is my chance to tell you how fun it was to stumble across your work when I started looking into homeschooling my kids during the pandemic. You were one of my favorite professors in college. I still remember you inviting us to your farm house to watch the Ten Commandments. I'm guessing you know you make a big difference with the work you've done in recent years, but I hope you know you made a big difference as a young professor, too.
I do agree about using it for cultural literacy (although also agree that it shouldn't get sandwiched into the elementary school curriculum). But even with that, I would not want to be using a simplified version, because that's just not how it gets referenced. For a small example, I was reading a book with a friend who is learning English (we read together in both our languages). A character was going to see their estranged mother, and mentioned that there would be no fatted calf. Although my friend did know the story in his language, he completely missed the reference that for many of us is immediately implied by the usage of "fatted" (the person who translated it to his language made the reference more explicit).
I don't think that the purpose of requiring specific Bible passages in Texas public schools is to help students understand allusions in literature. If that were the case, I think it would be high school English teachers making that demand and not religious zealots.
I’m a non-believer in agreement with all your logic, both in favor of biblical literacy and against doing it in public schools. It sure seems to me that it needs to be KJV or something similar. I sure wouldn’t want my kids instructed in Shakespeare in some modernized third grade version!
Teachers should watch Christine Hayes’s Introduction to the Hebrew Bible course to prepare. It’s fantastic. To be fair though, “Teachers might make a hash of it” is an objection that could be deployed against any change in curriculum. The guidelines provided by the state are the real problem, IMO.
I would also want these Biblical texts paired with other ancient texts, so students can be exposed to more than just the Judeo-Christian tradition. But as a retired public school teacher, I would not want to add anything to the curriculum without proper training and I don’t see that happening. 
I see many talking about biblical literacy. How do you all feel about equal time for ALL religious/spiritual literacy in public school? Maybe a course in all mythological teachings, weighted equally?
How do you think we can improve biblical literacy in public education?
I completely agree with the concerns you mentioned. To me, there’s a huge difference between teaching the Bible from a theological standpoint versus from a lens of, say, critical biblical scholarship. Is it a reverend teaching the class, or a scholar? I’d sign my kids up to learn from Daniel O. McClellan in a heartbeat, for example, even though we’re not believers.
Are you ok with school teachers (not specialized in ancient history or lit) overseeing other works of ancient literature, or whatever era they are not specialized in? Or ancient history?
Sorry if this is redundant (haven’t read all the comments). What about parents who teach their kids the Bible? Must they have degrees in ancient sacred literature?
Agreed. As a tangent, when I hear people on a national stage talk about wanting the Bible in schools, I always wonder if they have been to more than one Christian church. Moving around between Ohio and NC we tried a number of different Protestant churches. One Christian church can have a vastly different approach to the Bible from another. Frankly, the rural churches with lay pastors who did not go to college for theology have wild takes on many parts of the Bible and cherry-pick passages to back their own personal beliefs. If you want your kids to learn a certain flavor of Christianity, you're going to have to do it at home or church, because thinking it's going to be taught in school the same way you would at home is wild. I don't think the people who want this know what they are asking for.
I took a semester of Bible as literature in a public school. Would you propose that only teachers with MDiv teach the Bible as lit? Teachers aren’t expected to have a masters to teach in any other subject. Perfection can be the enemy of progress. Let’s let kids read one of the foundational pieces of Western literature. When I was in school, we read the KJV, as that was the version from Shakespeare’s era. Sadly, most public school kids today would be unable to focus and work through that translation. Third grade level lets the kids concentrate on content. Like any translation it will be weak if it is on 3rd grade level, but I know ESL teachers who use that version you mentioned for those learning English as a second language. And these are ministries that are committed to a doctrine of inerrancy. I would also support kids reading other religious texts in school for history or intro to religion. But the Bible outranks the other texts like you mentioned — whether or not you believe in it religiously, it is foundational to all of Western classic literature.
Precisely my concern. I am a HUGE proponent of the Bible as literature; when I majored in English as an undergraduate, I was so dismayed by my peers' lack of Biblical knowledge that I wrote my undergraduate thesis on why the English major should require a Bible as literature class. I went on to get my M.Div. I have no faith that the folks who will be teaching these Bible passages have the background to do it well, and I am deeply concerned about both the set literature required and also what they're taking out. I think in an ideal world, high school students would learn about the Bible as literature and also have a world religions class, but it simply takes far more training than the education course I took to get my teaching license grants you to do this well, especially under such fraught political background.
I had a friend in high school (first generation American, Hindu Faith). She was so frustrated at no knowing the biblical references in our honors English classes. Back then I recommended she get a children’s book of Bible stories or The Bible for Dummies and read it to get an overview of the basic stories. It wouldn’t prepare her for paradise lost but at least she would know who David and Goliath were. As a 16 year old it was the best I could think of. I don’t think a regular ed teacher should be teaching biblical texts. And I definitely don’t believe it should be integrated in to elementary school. At the same time I’m not sure that a MDiv alone is the correct teacher. I’ve known some who aren’t quite aware of how many religious presuppositions they are reading back into the text and taking as biblical in origin. In either situation what begins as a basic Biblical literacy lesson can become a doctrinal minefield as the different religious convictions of the students come into conflict with each other and the instructor. As a parent and a deeply religious person I would trust the school to teach my child anything in this realm and would be furious if they taught what I would consider false doctrine using the Bible. If the state is looking to increase Biblical literacy so that students can engage with English literature (in my opinion a valid goal) I think they only have two realistic options. One is to simply integrate a single lesson into high school curriculum pointing out different texts that require biblical knowledge to understand and encourage students who intend to pursue a college degree that would require such texts to have a knowledge of the Bible. Then let Students pursue it on their own. The second option would be to produce a series of video lessons (so they can be standardized and you aren’t dependent on any one random teacher) that dive into 1) why biblical knowledge is important to understanding english lit and western history, 2) what goes into biblical scholarship, 3) examples of how a common Biblical story can have multiple layers and conflicting interpretations, 4) a list of the most influential (the most commonly referenced) Biblical accounts. This sort of production should be produced using input from Biblical, literary, and historical scholars from a wide range of religious backgrounds (Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Agnostic, etc). This would keep the focus off doctrine and on giving the students an understanding of the importance and the complexity of understanding biblically infused literature. It would still leave the bulk of achieving Biblical literacy on the student, but i think do the best job at sparking the student’s interest
This is also my opinion. Bible literacy for all of us is foundational to a better understanding of Western Civilization, literature, culture, ancient history, etc, but should be carefully taught by Bible scholars.
I will be very interested to read your post on reading lists, and I'd also live to hear more about the specific skills necessary for understanding ancient stories, if it's possible to give an overview. I remember reading Ruth and maybe a smattering of other Bible passages in 10th grade English class at my Texas public high school. My teacher approached it as poetry.
You raise good points, however your points can be applied to every text and every subject. When I was teaching in a high achieving public school, I was shocked when my colleague confided in me she’d never read Hamlet and was basically reading it one night ahead of her students. To compound matters, she’d never taken a Shakespeare class when majoring in English and had only read Midsummer when she was in middle school. Teachers teaching things they know nothing about is quite common. I’ve finally landed at the place where I’d rather students be exposed to a text than not at all.
Yes, this. And the fascinating stage of development in our language and the English society and Protestantism and so much that lead to the language of the KJV being intentionally constructed to create a sense of majesty and beauty for public reading. Also King James’ rules for the translation that made so many factions come together. It is a fascinating work and it influenced so much. If the goal is to understand the influence it seems essential to look at this translation. And yes it started long before KJV. It is fascinating to start with St Patrick and take two full years to work through major works alongside British history and the development of the language. It definitely gives a basis for better understanding our own culture.
open.substack.com/pub/susanwisebauer/p/george-washington-vs-pete-hegseth ... See MoreSee Less
5 days ago
The comparison between flu and smallpox is ridiculous… 🙄
Flu vaccine has negative efficiency. We know that to be a fact. So this is moronic. Furthermore, Something is wrong here. They all had their flu shots last year and still got whatever it is that just went around. So, either they didn't catch the flu OR we see that last year's flu shots were absolutely worthless. AND why didn't we see a similar sized outbreak in their spouses, children, civilian colleagues, the stores and services around the base, etc... someone is lying here.
Excellent summary of the main points at play here, and in the anti-vaccine movement as a whole.
"Hegseth, who is supposed to be representing the highest level of military authority, is leaning pretty hard here on personal autonomy—which is an odd choice for a soldier. Anyone who enlists in a branch of the armed services has already, voluntarily, relinquished rights that civilians can still claim." Was about to make a similar point to someone commenting on personal freedoms. As a veteran myself, I can attest to the fact that soldiers don't have those lol. And your point about soldiers not also being given medical autonomy to use prescriptions like Adderall or Ambien is well made also. There's always the inconsistency in ideology it seems. Thank you for speaking up for truth and history, even when you're attacked. I admire and appreciate you.
And yet each person can make the decision now vs being forced.
It would have been much better if religious and philosophical exemptions had been allowed in the modern era. But after COVID, could we trust the military even with that responsibility? Did you know that while the military branches allowed airmen and soldiers to apply for a religious exemption, they effectively approved none of the COVID vaccine requests? A request could be approved by the chaplain, a required step in the process, and still be denied at the final level. It was a clown show. A system that invites people to apply while never granting relief is difficult to view as a meaningful exemption process. It assumes people’s religious convictions never change and creates the appearance of due process without the reality of it. Second, the COVID vaccine mandate was a tragic demonstration of why trust matters. The vaccines were introduced under Emergency Use Authorization, meaning there was necessarily no long-term safety data available at the time they became mandatory. Members who refused were threatened with punitive consequences, including dishonorable discharges that ultimately were not imposed. From the inside, many service members experienced the process as coercive. Enlisted members were separated while officers often remained in lengthy administrative proceedings, in part because of the greater likelihood of litigation. Have an autoimmune disease and know you have vaccine reactions? For many members, that wasn’t enough to receive a medical exemption. Third, having the same institution responsible for maintaining readiness also decide who qualifies for medical exemptions creates an inherent conflict of interest. If your reaction wasn’t immediate and obvious, but instead involved a psoriasis flare, prolonged autoimmune symptoms, or weeks of flu-like illness severe enough to keep you in bed and out of work, obtaining an exemption could still be extraordinarily difficult. Even when such exemptions were granted, they often required annual renewal. Imagine facing the same decision every year while knowing it could trigger another serious reaction. A military member moves to a new base and they might get a new doctor who won’t give the exemption. The flu vaccine itself is a separate question. It provides moderate protection, but its effectiveness varies widely from year to year because influenza changes rapidly. Even in good years, outbreaks still occur among highly vaccinated populations. That doesn’t necessarily mean the vaccine has no value, but it does mean an outbreak by itself isn’t evidence that mandates are necessary. Moderate effectiveness can support voluntary vaccination just as easily as someone else might argue it supports mandates. The study on efficacy: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7188082/ Ultimately, my objection isn’t primarily about the flu vaccine. It’s about trust. A government can only justify overriding individual medical and religious decisions when people have confidence that the system is transparent, fair, and acting in their best interest. The military damaged that trust during the COVID mandate by presenting religious exemptions that were, in practice, unavailable, by handling medical exemptions through a process many viewed as conflicted, and by relying on coercive tactics that alienated thousands of service members. COVID made many Americans less interested in military service. Removing the flu vaccine mandate may have been politically advantageous, but it also acknowledged a deeper problem. Before asking service members to trust another medical mandate, the military first has to earn back the trust it lost.
And this is one of the many reasons I tell homeschoolers as much as I love Story of the World, try to buy used copies because no one should support communist ideologues. Bodily mandates are totally incompatible with freedom.
Which is why none of my boys are even remotely considering joining the military. I’m glad there are other families who don’t mind rolling up their sleeves and taking the risks of long term health effects. Our soldiers are taking so many other serious risks, too, which is extremely admirable.
We visited Valley Forge last year and that time they had a display about Washington and the smallpox vaccine.
Thank you for this piece! We are a homeschooling family - but we believe in vaccination 🙂 it has truly protected us and given all of us confidence to go out and explore the world . God bless you!
It is always interesting to me that two people can read the same historical facts and get two different messages or insights into them. I had never heard the story of why innoculation had a bad reputation in VA. However, I think that story has great modern pertinence. It shows how failing to properly research or apply scientific discoveries can lead to devastating consequences (can anyone say Covid vaccine?) And also parallels why there is so much distrust of scientists, medical professionals, etc today. If only we could learn from history rather than repeating it...
As a historian I am glad you brought your craft to this issue. We homeschooled as well and vaccinated.
I'll stick with my 58-year history of never having a flu shot and never having a flu. As opposed to my grandma who got the flu shot every year and was always down with the flu for a week afterwards.
Vaccines, Amen is an excellent read and systematically goes through all the vaccines on the childhood schedule. If you are truly interested in the whole truth you should read this book.
George Washington was wrong.
It’s almost like VACCINES WORK!!
How dare they have a voice in their healthcare
I used to be pro vaccine until my daughter was injured by them. The risks far outweigh the benefits in my eyes now.
Copied from a relative: “Your story here is misleading from many standpoints, not the least of which are: 1-The military was not kicking people out for not taking the flu shot before COVID-Biden era mandates. I know because I was there. 2 - The San Antonio outbreak was not the same strain of flu the new recruits would have been vaccinated for. Flu shots only work over many years of taking them consistently, but this also increases your odds of an adverse effects, like Epstein-Barr disease. 3 - Christians believe in the 10 commandments, one of which is, “Thou shalt not murder.” You can’t be unread enough to believe all Christians who refuse the vax due so because they are Christian scientists or the like. You strategically and manipulatively omitted the true reason most Christians refuse vaccines on religious grounds- because aborted fetal materials are included or used to produce them. Even if people had time enough to discern which vaccines use them (as at least one of the COVID vaccines did), it would be reasonable to assume they do until proven otherwise for those who believe murder is a mortal sin. 4- I am a believer in the flu shot after having had the flu many times as a child, but have only had it once since taking the shot for over 20 years in the military. Why do you believe others wouldn’t be able to make a similar, rational choice after experiencing the flu once or twice and seeing for their own eyes that their counterparts get sick less than they do? 5- Forcing vaccines only generates mistrust of government. Our military is proudly run by volunteers. People who act on their own free will are much better citizens, civil servants, and soldiers, which you, as a student of history, surely understand. 6- This reminds me a great deal of your Bible arguments- that the masses are too stupid to think for themselves and that elites like you should be the ones to dictate to the rest of us not only common sense, but conscience. I am disappointed.”
Oh my, to compare smallpox inoculations with the flu shot shows incredible misunderstanding of medicine and vaccines. The flu shot only tries to potentially isolate which flu might be around that year. My aunt who was an advice nurse at Kaiser said the flu shots were worthless at best. "Vaccines" like Covid and Flu are completely different in nature than polio, measles or chicken pox. Many soldiers have severe adverse reactions to the flu shot. One of my son in laws fellow soldiers got paralyzed from the waist down for about a day after the shot. Others get sicker than having the flu.
Tyrants use mandates when people can’t be convinced through evidence and sound reason.
Getting rid of the mandatory flu vaccine is completely ludicrous for the military; it's the perfect storm for the spread of disease, which often kills more folks than combat. However, I do think the press about the outbreak at Lackland being a result is a bit disingenuous, since the annual flu vaccine wouldn't have started until around October.
Interesting. I wonder how many who caught the flu had and how many had not received a flu vaccine.
Localized military surveillance data from Lackland AFB reported a baseline trend of a few hundred cumulative cases over typical seasonal outbreaks each year. The vast majority of flu-related deaths occur in adults aged 65 and older, with this group accounting for 70% to 85% of seasonal flu-related deaths.
It is difficult to do the hard work of educating yourself about vaccines and uncomfortable if you will truly give yourself to reading and studying broad span. Covid was a new era with mrna vaccine, never used before & not tested properly(this is fact)... this along with the smearing reputations of tenured viralogists & immuniolgists (people who study viruses & help create vaccines)who called out and warned about the spike protein... really caused me to do deep research. Now these same professionals have been proven right & the things they warned about are now listed as side effects of these vaccines... truth matters , it matters who we trust! Following so called science & government propaganda is never wise! Also flu vaccines are actually one of the biggest gambles ever, i learned this and had it explained to me in high school biology class. It an scientific educated guess every season, sometimes they correctly predict how the virus will mutate other times they get a entirely different virus. I'm Canadian and not an anti-vaxer😉
