The Truth About the
President Bush, Iraq, Patriot Heroes & Troops: Our forefathers would applaud!
Islam Induction in
our Public School Textbooks
RESPONSE TO “Q & A" REGARDING HOUGHTON MIFFLIN’S TEXTBOOKS
Unbelievable denials by Houghton Mifflin as they ask the question and answer themselves about inducting children to Islam in their textbook. Below are highlights of our response. (very detailed version here). HM questions and answers are shown as Q or A; Comments are BlessedCause (BC)
5/5/03 update: Houghton Mifflin has rewritten their questions and answers in response to this rebuttal, but retained the previous date, again creating deception. For our current response to THOSE denials, click here.
6. HM’s Q: Was the Council on Islamic Education (CIE) involved in reviewing this textbook?
HM’s A: The CIE, as well as the Hadassah Academic Advisory Board, the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center, and the Christian Educators Association International, were all involved in reviewing the textbook prior to publishing.
BC Comment: Christian Educators DENIES having reviewed "Across the Centuries." Mr. Turpen, Director of CEAI wrote me the following regarding this issue on June 13, 2002:
"I agree with you that the response from HM implies that we reviewed the books in the series in total. That isn't the case at all as we focused only our attention on the Christian perspectives that were written and did not look at or compare the other content of the texts...In essence we did no evaluation of the other religions addressed in any of the textbooks of the HM series."( full letter )
Hadassah, one of the most highly esteemed Jewish sites in America, was also listed by Houghton Mifflin's response in what I consider an implied endorsement. Hadassah has given me this statement to post: "Hadassah made a very limited review of only those pages of the manuscript that concerned Judaism, but many of its comments, suggestions and corrections were not incorporated in the textbook. Neither Hadassah nor Dr. Sandra Alfonsi endorse the book."
I have discovered that the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center is very connected with the Council of Islamic Education in that both websites refer to each others with positive commendations. Additionally, Freedom Forum has teamed up with the Council of Islamic Education to write "Teaching about Religion in National and State Social Studies Standards." For a closer look click here.
7. HM’s Q: Did the CIE or any other religious group contribute to the writing of either “A Message of Ancient Days” or “Across the Centuries”?
HM’s A: No, the scope of their involvement was limited to reviewing the textbook material.
BC Comment: That is not what HM's Editorial Director said in an article profiling the CIE! (Council of Islamic Education). See article She states very clearly that
She also notes that the information in the textbook about the Crusades was provided by the Council of Islamic Education.
10. HM’s Q: Do the textbooks take an “apologetic” tone to covering Islam? Does the text praise only Islam’s “great cultural flowering,” and including nothing about Muslim violence, war, or the decline of its empire?
HM’s A: Religions and belief systems are presented appropriately; not as better than another, and not apologetically.
BC Comment: NINE TIMES in the Islam section, Islam is praised for its tolerance of other beliefs. Christians are never described as peaceful, tolerant, etc.. A whole section is titled, “Understanding Religious Persecution” and ONLY THE CHRISTIANS are named as persecuting anyone else. Children are asked to write what is attractive about Islam. In the Christian section, they are asked how they think others felt to be called an infidel. This is common practice throughout the sections. Is this “appropriate” as HM claims?
HM’s A: The textbooks include accounts of positive contributions, as well as accounts of cultures, including Islam, using violence to conquer lands and peoples. Chapter 4 of “Across the Centuries” includes a section about how the Abbasids “forcibly took over territories” using a “strong standing army” (page 86).
BC Comment: That is not what the book says. It states:
The other fragmented quote can be found two paragraphs later,
WOW. For this explanation sheet, Houghton Mifflin is resorting to cutting and pasting phrases together from paragraphs completely apart, to make it appear to be a much stronger takeover when in the textbook, they only took over what was already conquered. And their "strong standing army" merely hung onto it.
12. HM’s Q: The text says that Islam gives
“clear rights” to women. However, today some of the most oppressive
places in the world are Muslim countries. How can this be?
BC Comment: ISLAM DID NOT EXIST UNTIL AFTER 600 AD, and HM claims that in 500 AD, Muslim women had all these various rights??? If that was just an unbelievable typo, I would like to know of ANY rights women had similar to what HM claims, because per the Quran or Sunna, women were sex objects akin to slaves, fully authorized to be beaten, slapped and scourged!
16. HM’s Q: Do the textbooks endorse
aspects of the Islamic faith as fact?
BC Comment: This is a flat out lie. Some
statements do include, “Muslims believe” and are listed below, but many
do not, as listed after HM’s quotes below. I actually counted how much
text was dedicated to Jesus and Muhammad’s claims, along with words
This is LESS disclaimers with almost 10 times the
text! (Actually I had to count ANYTHING that hinted Jesus was anything
more than a teacher, it never even states outright that “Christians
believe Jesus is Lord.”
BC Comment: As you can see, much is written about the beliefs. Then the closing paragraph states, “These revelations confirmed both Muhammad’s belief in monotheism, and his role as the last messenger in a long line of prophets sent by God.” Sheesh! All wrapped up with validation? In addition, the section is listed under the heading, “The Life of the Prophet.” Interesting that Jesus never receives that kind of acclaim or validation. Jesus, the “popular teacher with ideas” while Muhammad is heralded as a prophet again and again. This is unbelievable.
Following are statements without disclaimers anywhere near them, and I challenge HM to show me where if they deny it:
17. HM’s Q: Does the text imply
acceptance of Muhammad’s mission by occasionally referring to him as
“the prophet Muhammad?”
BC Comment: WHAT?? Even one of the headings state, “THE LIFE OF THE PROPHET.” I counted FORTY TWO TIMES Muhammad was referred to as a Prophet!!! FORTY TWO TIMES!!!! Look at the quotes I listed just above this question!
I used the newest revision of "Across the Centuries." Perhaps Houghton Mifflin purposely used a previous version to make such false claims? I don't have every version printed over the past 11 years, aside from that explanation, it amazes me that HM can make such blatantly false claims.