Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change

[the last donut of the night]

Normally, I don't care much for the New York Times and it's liberal bullshit, but this caught my attention:



AUSTIN, Tex. — After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that will put a conservative stamp on history and economics textbooks (http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/textbooks/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier), stressing the superiority of American capitalism, questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government and presenting Republican political philosophies in a more positive light.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html?ref=todayspaper

And so the capitalists lie to our children...

[Die Neue Zeit]

I think Texan teachers can still opt out of this.

[Imposter Marxist]

Yeah. All the Leftist history and econ teachers in Texas will opt out of it. And then the rest of them will file complaints until the guy is fired. :P

[Red Commissar]

This has been a long time coming. I covered this issue when they had finished debating it.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/religious-conservatives-trying-t129110/index.html?t=129110

The SBOE is a total joke. Many of their sitting members have little to no experience in education, so ideologues can find their way in easily on account of them being "elected" to the position.

Two groups which have a major influence in this process,

http://www.wallbuilders.com/
http://www.kingministries.com/index.html

[CartCollector]

Yeah I live in Texas and the SBOE pisses me off. Take a look at this: http://www.tfn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=JustSayDontKnow
According to the report, 94% of Texas schools teach nothing about birth control- they just teach kids a bunch of lies about the inefficacy of condoms and tell them to not do it. Then there's another 2% of them that don't teach anything about sex ed, because they fear how the parents would react. One teacher from one of these districts rationalized it by saying that kids don't need sex ed because they can just watch the animals in on their farms have sex and learn it from there. I'm not kidding.

However there is some good news: Dan McLeroy, the ringleader of the conservative alliance of the SBOE and a dentist who thinks he knows evolution better than actual scientists, was recently defeated in the primaries:

The surprising result of the night came from the State Board of Education District 9 Republican primary, as Thomas Ratliff defeated incumbent and former SBOE Chairman Don McLeroy. This particular campaign actually received national attention, as McLeroy received notoriety criticizing evolution and comprehensive sex education. During the campaign Ratliff presented himself as a moderate alternative, and McLeroy actually used that term as why the constituents of District 9 should not vote for his challenger. There was also a grassroots effort to turnout moderate Republicans to vote for Ratliff and for Democrats to vote in the Republican primary to vote against McLeroy.
From: http://www.leftofcollegestation.com/2010/03/texas-primaries-state-board-of.html

As there's no Democratic or Libertarian opposition running for this SBOE seat, I believe this means that Ratliff has won. So hopefully the SBOE can now put an end to the curriculum insanity that we've had under McLeroy- we'll have to see who wins the other seats.

[The Ben G]

Conservatives are scum. 'Nuff said.

[Red Commissar]

However there is some good news: Dan McLeroy, the ringleader of the conservative alliance of the SBOE and a dentist who thinks he knows evolution better than actual scientists, was recently defeated in the primaries:

From: http://www.leftofcollegestation.com/2010/03/texas-primaries-state-board-of.html




As there's no Democratic or Libertarian opposition running for this SBOE seat, I believe this means that Ratliff has won. So hopefully the SBOE can now put an end to the curriculum insanity that we've had under McLeroy- we'll have to see who wins the other seats.

I hope that there will be a swing in the make up of the chairs. But I know a lot of the Republicans will probably be kept in check by the tea-bagger types in Texas, who are closely aligned with the religious right, so it'll be tough doing so.

If more people in Texas were aware of what's going on, we might see more pressure on the SBOE. AT the same time however, I fear many Texans would probably approve of what they see as correcting "leftist domination" of social studies.

[Audeamus]

Some gems


“We are adding balance,” said Dr. Don McLeroy, the leader of the conservative faction on the board, after the vote. “History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left.”

I love the obsession with balance in American politics. There is a sense that the truth can only be arrived at if both sides of the mainstream political spectrum are in total balance. You see this in the media a lot, trying to tell "both sides of the story", even when one side is a respected scientist, and the other side is a creationist nutcase.


He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians as well as Japanese were interned in the United States during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

While it is true that Germans and Italians were interned, this lacks a hell of a lot of context. Germans and Italians were not subjected to a general eviction, they were interned on an individual basis. The Japanese, as we know, were subjected to a general eviction from specified areas.


“Let’s face it, capitalism does have a negative connotation,” said one conservative member, Terri Leo. “You know, ‘capitalist pig!’ ”

Gee, I can't imagine why that would be. :lol:


In the field of sociology, another conservative member, Barbara Cargill, won passage of an amendment requiring the teaching of “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” in a section on teenage suicide, dating violence, sexuality, drug use and eating disorders.

Remember kids, it's your fault you're depressed/were raped/gay/anorexic! As if we needed more evidence the people drafting this had no expertise at all.

[Red Commissar]

In my previous thread, I also found that they are planning to vindicate McCarthy, that is plans were done out of a genuine concern to protect America rather than personal motivation and fearmongering that the vile, leftist media has bastardized him to be. :rolleyes:

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

This is disgusting.

I guess we should expect it.

The disprespect shown to education, though, really gets me angry. Particularly the complete lack of subtlety or tact shown.

[The Ghost of Revolutions]

In my previous thread, I also found that they are planning to vindicate McCarthy, that is plans were done out of a genuine concern to protect America rather than personal motivation and fearmongering that the vile, leftist media has bastardized him to be. :rolleyes:
All anyone has to do is watch the Army-mccarthy hearings to realize that the senator was a power hungry piece of shit! mccarthy didn't become hated over time. He was hated right away and died two years later. He failed to catch a single communist. I hope mccarthy fan boys have their life ruined just like there fat savior ruined so many!

[ZombieGrits]

my world history teacher has this very nice sticker on his wall
http://brian.carnell.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/ufos_teach_the_controversy-300x300.gif

he's a cool guy, but every other teacher in the history dept is Xtreme right-wing. the US history teacher actually went so far as to refuse to teach us about the turn-of-the-century labor movement, she just told us to find it on the internet

[heiss93]

The changes I found most interesting was that Thomas Jefferson has been removed as an Enlightenment influence on revolution and replaced with Aquinas and John Calvin.

Also all references to the USA being CAPITALIST, has been removed.

"Members voted to polish up references to the American 'free enterprise' economic system and removed most mentions of 'capitalism,' a word that board member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, said has a negative connotation."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/13/texas-textbook-massacre-u_n_498003.html

[The Ghost of Revolutions]

[QUOTE=heiss93;1693075]The changes I found most interesting was that Thomas Jefferson has been removed as an Enlightenment influence on revolution and replaced with Aquinas and John Calvin.

Also all references to the USA being CAPITALIST, has been removed.

"Members voted to polish up references to the American 'free enterprise' economic system and removed most mentions of 'capitalism,' a word that board member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, said has a negative connotation."



How the hell do you remove the writer of the decleration of independence from a US histpry textbook. ITs like taking lenin out of the Russian revolution.

[Klaatu]

"questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government"

Is this not a violation of separation of church and state? The US government is prohibited from
endorsing or promoting religion, via the first amendment.

[Agnapostate]

In terms of the statement about capitalist indoctrination in the OP, public schools have long formed an integral component of the capitalist economy. Aside from mere human capital transmission, the hierarchical nature of classroom instruction and its effects on character development are designed to condition students for smooth transition into the similarly hierarchical and authoritarian labor market. All educational institutes reflect the values and principles of the larger society that they exist in to some degree.

As for this, I'm in agreement that this is very straightforward insertion of obvious rightist bias into textbooks. It's an example of majority opinion in Texas forcing its way near the minds of all school students. Textbooks that purport to be objective should obviously remain free from ideological bias.

[Klaatu]

As for this, I'm in agreement that this is very straightforward insertion of obvious rightist bias into textbooks. It's an example of majority opinion in Texas forcing its way near the minds of all school students. Textbooks that purport to be objective should obviously remain free from ideological bias.

And then they criticise the Russians and the "communists" etc. for distorting textbooks.

Hypocrites.

[Le Libérer]

From the report I saw on Huffington, heres the clincher


"We have been about conservatism versus liberalism," said Democrat Mavis Knight of Dallas, explaining her vote against the standards. "We have manipulated strands to insert what we want it to be in the document, regardless as to whether or not it's appropriate."
and

The Board removed Thomas Jefferson from the Texas curriculum, "replacing him with religious right icon John Calvin."
If there was any doubt that the US has become a theocracy, that should make it clear.

[Red Commissar]

If you guys want a good summary of what they've done thus far,

http://tfninsider.org/2010/03/13/the-list-of-shame-in-texas/


Religious conservatives on the board killed a proposed standard that would have required high school government students to “examine the reasons the Founding Fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion over all others.” That means the board rejected teaching students about the most fundamental constitutional protection for religious freedom in America. (3/11/10)

Even as board members continued to demand that students learn about “American exceptionalism,” they stripped Thomas Jefferson from a world history standard about the influence of Enlightenment thinkers on political revolutions from the 1700s to today. In Jefferson’s place, the board’s religious conservatives inserted Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin. They also removed the reference to “Enlightenment ideas” from the standard, requiring that students simply learn about the “writings” of various thinkers (including Calvin and Aquinas). (3/11/10)

Board conservatives succeeded in censoring the word “capitalism” in the standards, requiring that the term for that economic system be called “free enterprise” throughout all social studies courses. Board members such as Terri Leo and Ken Mercer charged that “capitalism” is a negative term used by “liberal professors in academia.” (3/11/10)
The board removed the concepts of “justice” and “responsibility for the common good” from a list of characteristics of good citizenship for Grades 1-3. (The proposal to remove “equality” failed.) (1/14/10)

Social conservatives on the board removed Santa Barraza from a Grade 7 Texas history standard on Texans who have made contributions to the arts because they objected to one of her (many) paintings — one including a depiction of a woman’s exposed breasts. Yet some of Barraza’s works had been displayed in the Texas Governor’s Mansion during the gubernatorial administration of George W. Bush in the 1990s. (3/11/10)

The board stripped Dolores Huerta, cofounder of United Farm Workers of America, from a Grade 3 list of “historical and contemporary figures who have exemplified good citizenship.” Conservative board members said Huerta is not a good role model for third-graders because she’s a socialist. But they did not remove Hellen Keller from the same standard even though Keller was a staunch socialist. Don McLeroy, a conservative board member who voted to remove Huerta, had earlier added W.E.B. DuBois so the Grade 2 standards. McLeroy apparently didn’t know that DuBois had joined the Communist Party in the year before he died. (1/14/10)

In an absurd attempt to excuse Joseph McCarthy’s outrageous witchhunts in the 1950s, far-right board members succeeded in adding a requirement that students learn about “communist infiltration in U.S. government” during the Cold War. (Board member Don McLeroy has even claimed outright that Joseph McCarthy has been “vindicated,” a contention not supported by mainstream scholarship.) (1/15/10)

The board voted in January to remove children’s book author Bill Martin Jr. from a Grade 3 standard about significant writers and artists because members confused the author of Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See? with another Bill Martin who had written a book about Marxism. An embarrassed board reinserted Martin into the Grade 3 standards in March. (3/11/10)

Board members added Friedrich von Hayek to a standard in the high school economics course even though some board members acknowledged that they had no idea who the Austrian-born economist even was. (3/11/10)

The board added a requirement that American history students learn about conservative heroes and icons such as Phyllis Schlafly, the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority. The board included no similar standard requiring students to learn about individuals and organizations simply because they are liberal. (1/15/10)

Board conservatives passed a standard for the eighth-grade U.S. history class requiring students to learn about the ideas in Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address as president of the Confederacy during the Civil War. (1/14/10)

In a high school government standard about “the importance of the expression of different points of view in a democratic republic,” the board added a requirement that students learn about the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. (3/11/10)

The board’s bloc of social conservatives tried to water down instruction on the history of the civil rights movement. One board amendment, for example, would have required students to learn that the civil rights movement created “unreasonable expectations for equal outcomes.” That failed to pass. Other amendments passed in January minimized the decades of struggle by women and ethnic minorities to gain equal and civil rights. (Board member Don McLeroy even claimed that women and minorities owed thanks to men and “the majority” for their rights. Earlier in the revision process, a conservative appointed by McLeroy to a curriculum team had complained about an “over-representation of minorities” in the standards.) Under pressure from civil rights groups, the board partially reversed those earlier amendments. (3/11/10)

The board’s right-wing faction removed references to “democratic” (or “representative democracy”) when discussing the U.S. form of government. The board’s majority Republicans changed those references to “constitutional republic.” Board member Cynthia Dunbar also won approval for changing references to “democratic societies” to “societies with representative government.” (3/11/10)

Religious conservatives stripped from the high school sociology course a standard having students “differentiate between sex and gender as social constructs and determine how gender and socialization interact.” Board member Barbara Cargill argued that the standard would lead students to learn about “transexuals, transvestites and who knows what else.” She told board members she had conducted a “Google search” to support her argument. Board member Ken Mercer complained that the amendment was about “sex.” The board consulted no sociologists during the debate. (3/11/10)

Board member Barbara Cargill proposed a standard to the high school economics course requiring students to “analyze the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar since the inception of the Federal Reserve System since 1913.” After debate, the board passed a revised standard that requires students to “analyze the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.” References to 1913 and the Federal Reserve System were dropped. The board consulted no economists during the debate. (3/11/10)

The board approved a standard requiring students to learn about “any unintended consequences” of the Great Society, affirmative action and Title IX. (3/11/10)
In a high school U.S. history standard on musical genres that have been popular over time, the board’s bloc of social conservatives removed “hip hop,” equating this broad genre with “gangsta rap.” (3/11/10)

The board voted to use “BC” and “AD” rather than “BCE” and “CE” in references to dates in the history classes. That means students going off to college won’t be familiar with what has become an increasingly common standard for dates. (3/10/10)

The board removed Oscar Romero, a prominent Roman Catholic archbishop who was assassinated in 1980 (as he was celebrating Mass) by rightists in El Salvador, from a world history standard about leaders who led resistance to political oppression. Romero, they argued, wasn’t of the same stature as others listed in the standards: Nelson Mandela and Mohandas Gandhi. One board member argued that “he didn’t have his own movie like the others.” He quickly reversed himself — the film Romero, based on the archbishop’s life, was released in 1989 and starred actor Raul Julia in the title role. (3/10/10)

The board’s right-wing faction removed a reference to propaganda as a factor in U.S. entry into World War I. (The role of propaganda on behalf of both the Allies and Central Powers in swaying public opinion in the United States is well-documented. Republican Pat Hardy noted that her fellow board members were “rewriting history” with that and similar changes.) (1/15/10)

The board changed a “imperialism” to “expansionism” in a U.S. history course standard about American acquisition of overseas territories in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Board conservatives argued that what the United States did at the time was not the same as European imperialism. (1/15/10)

It is amusing, they always complain about "lefties" screwing up history, but this is the most blatant I've seen, on par with "dictatorships" they often rail against.

[RadioRaheem84]

Surprisingly, I haven't really seen any right wing pundits be in favor of the Texas School Board. They casually and indirectly give their support but for the most part keep their distance from total supporting the group. I guess even they see the outright dangerousness of these right wing whackos.

What puzzles me is how could they want to live in a world they probably know is blatantly false? They cannot truly believe that their view of history is the only true account? If they do then that is plain frightening.


They're probably pissed off about Jefferson cutting up and distorting the Bible, so ironically, they're going to cut him out of the history books!

[Red Commissar]

Surprisingly, I haven't really seen any right wing pundits be in favor of the Texas School Board. They casually and indirectly give their support but for the most part keep their distance from total supporting the group. I guess even they see the outright dangerousness of these right wing whackos.

They're beginning to take opposition to it as it's beginning to enter mainstream news sources. Before then they didn't care. The issue is that on account of Governor Perry being silent about this, and Bill White taking up this issue as an example of his incompetence (I got an email from the White campaign about that for some reason... I don't recall ever registering with his campaign or any other democrats :blink:). In short this could hurt their image to independents when we get to gubernatorial election time.



What puzzles me is how could they want to live in a world they probably know is blatantly false? They cannot truly believe that their view of history is the only true account? If they do then that is plain frightening.

They are dogmatic in their religious and political views. It's a defining feature of the religious right and neo-cons.


They're probably pissed off about Jefferson cutting up and distorting the Bible, so ironically, they're going to cut him out of the history books!

And all the while tell us about how the Soviet Union was doing the same:rolleyes:

[Klaatu]

If there was any doubt that the US has become a theocracy, that should make it clear.
Naw, just Texas. Let's just kick 'em out of the union, and let Puerto Rico in, so we can still have 50 states.

[Sendo]

Naw, just Texas. Let's just kick 'em out of the union, and let Puerto Rico in, so we can still have 50 states.

We should have let them go when we had the chance to. Then they could have dealt with a mass slave rebellion with possibly the poor whites joining in.

Reconstruction was great and all, but c'mon, it's been completely undone. If anyone could have seen the way things would turn out today I don't know if they would have wanted them back.

[Physicist]

We should have let them go when we had the chance to. Then they could have dealt with a mass slave rebellion with possibly the poor whites joining in.

Reconstruction was great and all, but c'mon, it's been completely undone. If anyone could have seen the way things would turn out today I don't know if they would have wanted them back.

It was undone (completely is a bit of an exaggeration as education for blacks never remained as minimal as it did immediately following the 1860s, but that was mostly due to the efforts of black women); I fail to see how modern Texas exemplifies a complete reversal of Reconstruction.

[Physicist]

Surprisingly, I haven't really seen any right wing pundits be in favor of the Texas School Board. They casually and indirectly give their support but for the most part keep their distance from total supporting the group. I guess even they see the outright dangerousness of these right wing whackos.

What puzzles me is how could they want to live in a world they probably know is blatantly false? They cannot truly believe that their view of history is the only true account? If they do then that is plain frightening.


They're probably pissed off about Jefferson cutting up and distorting the Bible, so ironically, they're going to cut him out of the history books!

Thankfully, the leader of the conservative coalition who pushed for these reforms was replaced (by election) with a moderate Republican. Texas is not as red as many outsiders initially assume.

[Klaatu]

Thankfully, the leader of the conservative coalition who pushed for these reforms was replaced (by election) with a moderate Republican. Texas is not as red as many outsiders initially assume.
There are a LOT of rabid conservatives there. Both my brother and sister live there. Both used to be quite left-wing (even for the first few years they lived there after moving from Michigan) Everything was OK until the 2008 presidential election. Suddenly, my sister is a conservative shill, 2nd-amendment gun rights, Obama-is-socialist and all of that. My brother "has no problem with" those making $100 million bonuses (from taxpayer bailout funds). This is the influence of peer pressure. Surrounded by cons and libertarians, they have changed for the worse. Texas is a breeding ground for right-wing ideology. This spreads, like a virulent cancer, throughout the country.

I've been to Texas half a dozen times over the years. I will not ever return there and spend my hard-earned money. I think I'll buy an electric car too, so I don't have to buy their gasoline. I am not going to buy anything made in Texas.

[RadioRaheem84]

With the exception of the major urban areas in Houston, Austin, San Antonio and Dallas, Texas is extremely right wing. The only good thing is that it's more libertarian free spirit than christian conservative whacko right wing. Most people just want to be left alone by the government and don't trust the major corporations but instead ally themselves with the petit-bourgeois. Even the left wing progressives here are sort of libertarian and many of them harbor NWO conspiracy theories that you wouldn't attribute to most leftish people.

Austin a bastion of leftish progressivism but it's mostly snobbish lifestylism that triumphs there. Inner city Houston is very liberal but also very trendy yuppie-ish liberal as it wants to mold itself into the LA of the South. Dallas thinks of itself as a Yankee city in Texas and the blueblood center of the state. Metropolitan San Antonio is largley working class, Mexican American, and a bit of Democratic stronghold.

All in all, Texas is very diverse in the major cities but very homogenous in the rurual and suburban areas which tend to be dominated by the moderate to extreme right wing.

[Dimentio]

With the exception of the major urban areas in Houston, Austin, San Antonio and Dallas, Texas is extremely right wing. The only good thing is that it's more libertarian free spirit than christian conservative whacko right wing. Most people just want to be left alone by the government and don't trust the major corporations but instead ally themselves with the petit-bourgeois. Even the left wing progressives here are sort of libertarian and many of them harbor NWO conspiracy theories that you wouldn't attribute to most leftish people.

Austin a bastion of leftish progressivism but it's mostly snobbish lifestylism that triumphs there. Inner city Houston is very liberal but also very trendy yuppie-ish liberal as it wants to mold itself into the LA of the South. Dallas thinks of itself as a Yankee city in Texas and the blueblood center of the state. Metropolitan San Antonio is largley working class, Mexican American, and a bit of Democratic stronghold.

All in all, Texas is very diverse in the major cities but very homogenous in the rurual and suburban areas which tend to be dominated by the moderate to extreme right wing.

One funny thing which is differing the USA from say... Sweden, is that the different factions have different strongholds. In Sweden, the right-wing and right-centre parties are strong in the major urban regions, while the left is strong on the countryside. It is almost the polar opposite of the USA.

[RadioRaheem84]

One funny thing which is differing the USA from say... Sweden, is that the different factions have different strongholds. In Sweden, the right-wing and right-centre parties are strong in the major urban regions, while the left is strong on the countryside. It is almost the polar opposite of the USA.That used to be the case in the States too as the stronghold of populist, progressive tendencies tended to rest in the Midwest and South. Granted this included a lot of racist ideas into the mix but these areas were largley democratic-populist bastions.

But the only way the right has been able to wield interest in the rural areas is by attachig right wing ideals with populism and stolen the rhetoric of the past populist parties to garner support. They did this by appealing to their religious and moral outlook. Liberals were able to on the other hand to usurp the language of the urban left, which was really socialist and communist, and use it to dilute the leftist struggle and make compromises with the urban industrialists.

In the States, the two polar opposite parties, at the base, have very contradictory positions. The rich liberals want the status quo only with a few reforms and concessions that they think will benefit the poor and working class. The rural conservatives think that if we give everything to the rich then somehow they will trickle down goodies to us in the form of jobs and opportunities for better social mobility.

As you can see, we have a very backwards political system in the States. One that isn't based off of anything but sheer games the two ruling parties play with each other to win votes.

[GPDP]

With the exception of the major urban areas in Houston, Austin, San Antonio and DallasDon't forget the Rio Grande Valley and the area around El Paso. Republicans are almost non-existent where I live.

Hasn't done us a whole lot of good, of course, what with this being one of the poorest regions in the entire nation, but at least we're spared much of the fundie and libertarian drivel.

[RadioRaheem84]

Don't forget the Rio Grande Valley and the area around El Paso.


I forget about El Paso. I didn't know it was a democratic stronghold until I met a person from El Paso who gave me the 411 on El Paso and how its not a right wing bastion.

[h9socialist]

I'm surprised the books don't discuss the evils of masturbation, and why lynchings were sanctioned by Scripture. Is there a chapter on clinging to guns and Bibles????

[Red Commissar]

Thankfully, the leader of the conservative coalition who pushed for these reforms was replaced (by election) with a moderate Republican. Texas is not as red as many outsiders initially assume.


This is right. McLeroy was beat out in the Republican Primary for his area. It is telling however that it was a very close contest between McLeroy and Ratliff. But the rest of the peddlers like Cynthia Dunbar, Ken Mercer, and Terri Leo seem like they're staying on board.

The problem with the SBOE is, in my opinion, it opens up for random idiots to get elected. There are members on the board who have no experience with teaching or anything that would make them experts in relevant fields of education. They're just ideologues shoving their personal views. They weren't even consulting experts for much of their revisions.

Yet the average Texan is either unaware of this happening and/or apathetic. Understandable, because the state government of Texas is a clusterfuck. On top of that however, some Texans might genuinely feel there is 'leftist' revisionism in social studies and are applauding these actions.

These are the 15 districts for the SBOE if any of you are interested.

http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/sboe_district_maps/district_map_big.gif

Current members (ripped off wikipedia... this is before the Primaries)

District 1: Rene Nuñez (D)
District 2: Mary Helen Berlanga (D)
District 3: Rick Agosto (D)
District 4: Lawrence A. Allen, Jr. (D)
District 5: Ken Mercer (R) Vice Chair
District 6: Terri Leo (R)
District 7: David Bradley (R)
District 8: Barbara Cargill (R)
District 9: Don McLeroy (R)
District 10: Cynthia Noland Dunbar (R)
District 11: Patricia Hardy (R)
District 12: Geraldine Miller (R)
District 13: Mavis B. Knight (D)
District 14: Gail Lowe (R) Chair
District 15: Bob Craig (R)

The bolded ones are the ones who are usually voting for this nonsense. The vote that is attracting attention was 10-5. I believe it was on party lines in this case, the Republicans who were on the fence and not working with the religious conservatives got more or less bullied into it.