3 ms·
The history of it? Absolutely. The discussion of/against "under God" being part of it? Again, neutral from a historic sense (as in, knowing when it was added).
by LocalH 2y ago
The history of it? Absolutely. The discussion of/against "under God" being part of it? Again, neutral from a historic sense (as in, knowing when it was added). It might not be super easy, but a neutral civics test is possible to create.
What is neutral? Knowledge of the actual mechanisms of governance. Knowledge of the history of it, without any pro or con moral arguments. The test wouldn't be the place to argue something should or shouldn't be the way it is. The test would just determine if you know what the mechanism of governance is, and why it is that way.
And yes, I realize this would probably knock a large amount of people out from the vote, probably myself included. I'd rather not be able to vote myself if people who don't understand the Constitution are also not able to vote.
- dragonwriter 2y ago> What is neutral? Knowledge of the actual mechanisms of governance. As someone with a degree in political science specialized in the pragmatics of the American system of government, let me assure you that questions of the actual mechanisms of government are decidedly not neutral but both highly contentious and with positions highly correlated with political ideology. If you mean, instead, things like “the text of the Constitution”, that's somewhat less contentious, but pretty distant from the actual mechanisms of government.