Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ruairi77 said:
look at the 'don't say gay' ban in Florida.
look at the math textbooks rejected for apparently containing CRT
look at the teacher fired in Mississippi for reading "I need a new butt"
or countless other examples of Christian fundamentalists using legislation to ban books.
Click to expand...
Maths books containing CRT?you do understand the problem there don't you? In a maths book?

The don't say gay bill is exactly the same as this, again the don't say gay is a simply a media headline designed to cause outrage. The real name is parents rights in education bill.

The teacher one is ridiculous.

Banning books is something completely unrelated to these bills.
 
Ghost Rider said:
Maths books containing CRT?you do understand the problem there don't you? In a maths book?

The don't say gay bill is exactly the same as this, again the don't say gay is a simply a media headline designed to cause outrage. The real name is parents rights in education bill.

The teacher one is ridiculous.

Banning books is something completely unrelated to these bills.
Click to expand...
It’s not tho.
The math books did not contain CRT.
 
Ghost Rider said:
Is that 3 year olds k-3?

That is far too young to even think about that, 3/4 year olds here are finger painting and not even learning basic maths.
Click to expand...

No one is nor suggesting we have sex ed classes or building a trans curriculum for this age group...which isn't done anyway.

Kids ask questions. Teachers need to be able to answer them - age appropriately of course.
I have friends with two kids. They are a same sex couple. When a classmate asks the teacher why "John" has two mommies, a teacher could get in trouble for answering the kid's question - even something as simple and vague as saying "some families have two moms or two dads instead of a mom and dad"

These types of laws are pure bigotry and pandering to a specific ignorant voting block.
 
Last edited:
Ruairi77 said:
It’s not tho.
The math books did not contain CRT.
Click to expand...
How do you know they didn't? Genuine question.
RAFUH said:
No one is nor suggesting we have sex ed classes or build a trans curriculum for this age group...which isn't done anyway.

Kids ask questions. Teachers need to be able to answer them - age appropriately of course.
I have friends with two kids. They are a same sex couple. When a classmate asks the teacher why "John" has two mommies, a teacher could get in trouble for answering the kid's question - even something as simple and vague as saying "some families have two moms or two dads instead of a mom and dad"

These types of laws are pure bigotry and pandering to a specific ignorant voting block.
Click to expand...
I posted a quote above from someone saying that it is not designed to remove discussion in the classroom, just not to actually teach it. If they are outright lying about that then fair enough, but if honest questions can be asked in the classroom and they are focused on simply not having it on the curriculum then what is the issue really?

Like we were saying above, if they aren't teaching them already then the bill does nothing different. But headlining it as banning LGBT just suggests to me it's designed to incur outrage in a political climate, especially when the bill is focused on parents rights with their kids. That is not a bad thing!
 
Ghost Rider said:
How do you know they didn't? Genuine question.

I posted a quote above from someone saying that it is not designed to remove discussion in the classroom, just not to actually teach it. If they are outright lying about that then fair enough, but if honest questions can be asked in the classroom and they are focused on simply not having it on the curriculum then what is the issue really?

Like we were saying above, if they aren't teaching them already then the bill does nothing different. But headlining it as banning LGBT just suggests to me it's designed to incur outrage in a political climate, especially when the bill is focused on parents rights with their kids. That is not a bad thing!
Click to expand...
I's a dog whistle though.

Your argument is akin to saying the Civil War was about "states' rights". The obvious follow up question is "a state's right to do what, exactly?"
 
Ghost Rider said:
How do you know they didn't? Genuine question.

I posted a quote above from someone saying that it is not designed to remove discussion in the classroom, just not to actually teach it. If they are outright lying about that then fair enough, but if honest questions can be asked in the classroom and they are focused on simply not having it on the curriculum then what is the issue really?

Like we were saying above, if they aren't teaching them already then the bill does nothing different. But headlining it as banning LGBT just suggests to me it's designed to incur outrage in a political climate, especially when the bill is focused on parents rights with their kids. That is not a bad thing!
Click to expand...
it's 100% designed to remove discussion from the classroom
 
Ruairi77 said:
it's 100% designed to remove discussion from the classroom
Click to expand...
Except for the quote saying otherwise?

And again we are talking about little kids here. My daughter isnt banding about talking about these things, she is talking about Peppa pig and lol dolls

It's not really a natural conversation piece with small children.
 
Ghost Rider said:
Except for the quote saying otherwise?

And again we are talking about little kids here. My daughter isnt banding about talking about these things, she is talking about Peppa pig and lol dolls

It's not really a natural conversation piece with small children.
Click to expand...
don't be fooled by the quote.
It opens the door for school boards to ban all sorts of stuff.
Where I live there are a lot of gay couples with kids and it's definitely a source of conversation in school.

AND ALSO WTF,
This is the crap the republicans are trying to push when the won't take up gun safety as these very same kids are being murdered at their school desks.
 
Ruairi77 said:
don't be fooled by the quote.
It opens the door for school boards to ban all sorts of stuff.
Where I live there are a lot of gay couples with kids and it's definitely a source of conversation in school.

AND ALSO WTF,
This is the crap the republicans are trying to push when the won't take up gun safety as these very same kids are being murdered at their school desks.
Click to expand...
So basically your argument is

1. circumstantial to say 'where I live' in relation to the entirely of America?

2. Doesn't matter what they said , it's a lie because it suits your argument

3. It's the damn republicans , wanting parents to have more involvement in their own children's lives but it's all an agenda really because of a completely different thing you have tried to connect together.

I mean WTF , trying to connect the gun issue with parenting rights bills for little kids? At this point I know no matter what I say you will disagree because your true argument is anti republican
 
Ghost Rider said:
So basically your argument is

1. circumstantial to say 'where I live' in relation to the entirely of America?

2. Doesn't matter what they said , it's a lie because it suits your argument

3. It's the damn republicans , wanting parents to have more involvement in their own children's lives but it's all an agenda really because of a completely different thing you have tried to connect together.

I mean WTF , trying to connect the gun issue with parenting rights bills for little kids? At this point I know no matter what I say you will disagree because your true argument is anti republican
Click to expand...



Give it a rest Ash, you clueless ballbag
 
Ghost Rider said:
So basically your argument is

1. circumstantial to say 'where I live' in relation to the entirely of America?

2. Doesn't matter what they said , it's a lie because it suits your argument

3. It's the damn republicans , wanting parents to have more involvement in their own children's lives but it's all an agenda really because of a completely different thing you have tried to connect together.

I mean WTF , trying to connect the gun issue with parenting rights bills for little kids? At this point I know no matter what I say you will disagree because your true argument is anti republican
Click to expand...
well yeah, you're right.
The republican party is a freaking mess.
They are controlled by evangelical Christians and countless other lobbies. (check out the NRA convention on Friday)
Check out who's math textbooks made the cut in Florida.
Their latest bill is a Trojan horse to restrict progressive family values.
Of course my views are circumstantial but my circumstance involves a kid in the US education system. You don't know what age a third grader is.
I'm making the connection between gun laws and education bills because it's the same politicians pushing the bill and refusing to pass gun laws, both actions affecting the same kids.
You could learn a lot if you read what Americans are telling you about American education on here but I'm not sure you want to.
 
This was posted in the US shooting thread, but I'm posting it here too because this was a very political move by Beto. Not suggesting it was only about politics for him, but that's massively political.
I hope it makes a difference both for his campaign and for the issue of gun violence.

 
Ghost Rider said:
So basically your argument is

1. circumstantial to say 'where I live' in relation to the entirely of America?

2. Doesn't matter what they said , it's a lie because it suits your argument

3. It's the damn republicans , wanting parents to have more involvement in their own children's lives but it's all an agenda really because of a completely different thing you have tried to connect together.

I mean WTF , trying to connect the gun issue with parenting rights bills for little kids? At this point I know no matter what I say you will disagree because your true argument is anti republican
Click to expand...
WIth respect to #2, has there been any proof in the last two decades to assume otherwise?

Fool me once shame on you, fool me literally hundreds of times, well, you know how that saying goes
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top