https://x.com/Ifind******s/status/2045615227295969611

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

Why the Hell is Texas on this list? Our elected officials are failing us here in Texas. There’s no more justifying this bullshit, Abbott has sold us out! https://t.co/PDCJUalJ3K

— Anthony Aguero Live 🇺🇸 (@AnthonyAguero) April 19, 2026

IIT alumni in U.S. says if the country continues to suppress talent through unfavourable immigration policies, the ‘brain drain’ could reverse its flow, favouring Europe and India’s own burgeoning hubshttps://t.co/6SsSDcISnn

— The Hindu (@the_hindu) April 19, 2026

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

---

Schools teach what they are?

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

---

Schools teach what they are?

---

You are a disappointment and dishonest. You say, "secularism will be taught in the Classroom." I asked what the content of secularism is. I don't think you know. It is an unthought-through line.

You tell me.
You said schools are secular, but your word is secularism, which indicates that it is some thought through the curriculum that one would teach. Yes, I did, but said secularism as if it were a subject that was taught in school. You are in a corner and know it.
I didn't say specifically what they teach. Of course, you didn't, it's just one of those things Evangelicals say as if it had real meaning. You have yet to give any content for secularism (your word)

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

---

Schools teach what they are?

---

You are a disappointment and dishonest. You say, "secularism will be taught in the Classroom." I asked what the content of secularism is. I don't think you know. It is an unthought-through line.

---

You tell me.
You said schools are secular.
I didn't say specifically what they teach.

I said that what they teach has the traits of religious dogma. It does.

Teachers unions seem to have become more interested in leftest dogma than teaching reading and writing and math.

---

ou said schools are secular, but your word is secularism, which indicates that it is some thought through the curriculum that one would teach. Yes, I did, but said secularism as if it were a subject that was taught in school. You are in a corner and know it.
I didn't say specifically what they teach. Of course, you didn't, it's just one of those things Evangelicals say as if it had real meaning. You have yet to give any content for secularism (your word)

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

---

Schools teach what they are?

---

You are a disappointment and dishonest. You say, "secularism will be taught in the Classroom." I asked what the content of secularism is. I don't think you know. It is an unthought-through line.

---

You tell me.
You said schools are secular.
I didn't say specifically what they teach.

I said that what they teach has the traits of religious dogma. It does.

Teachers unions seem to have become more interested in leftest dogma than teaching reading and writing and math.

---

ou said schools are secular, but your word is secularism, which indicates that it is some thought through the curriculum that one would teach. Yes, I did, but said secularism as if it were a subject that was taught in school. You are in a corner and know it.
I didn't say specifically what they teach. Of course, you didn't, it's just one of those things Evangelicals say as if it had real meaning. You have yet to give any content for secularism (your word)

---

How many examples of ideological dogma being pushed in American public schools do you want me to provide?

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

---

Schools teach what they are?

---

You are a disappointment and dishonest. You say, "secularism will be taught in the Classroom." I asked what the content of secularism is. I don't think you know. It is an unthought-through line.

---

You tell me.
You said schools are secular.
I didn't say specifically what they teach.

I said that what they teach has the traits of religious dogma. It does.

Teachers unions seem to have become more interested in leftest dogma than teaching reading and writing and math.

---

ou said schools are secular, but your word is secularism, which indicates that it is some thought through the curriculum that one would teach. Yes, I did, but said secularism as if it were a subject that was taught in school. You are in a corner and know it.
I didn't say specifically what they teach. Of course, you didn't, it's just one of those things Evangelicals say as if it had real meaning. You have yet to give any content for secularism (your word)

---

How many examples of ideological dogma being pushed in American public schools do you want me to provide?

---

3

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free.

---

A secularism that has the traits of religious dogma.

---

schools aren't teaching secularism

---

You two statements above, "Of course, it's secular because schools should be religion-free."

and…

"schools aren't teaching secularism."

are really not compatible with each other.

---

You did not answer the question what are the specifics of securalism tthat teachers teach?

---

Since you said that schools are secular and not religious, maybe you should answer your own question. It does not seem to be a point of disagreement.

---

stay focused. It's your assertion

---

You said schools are secular.
That's your assessment.

---

My assertion: Schools are secular.
Your assertion: schools taught secularism.
So if I were a teacher of secularism, what would I say?

---

Schools teach what they are?

---

You are a disappointment and dishonest. You say, "secularism will be taught in the Classroom." I asked what the content of secularism is. I don't think you know. It is an unthought-through line.

---

You tell me.
You said schools are secular.
I didn't say specifically what they teach.

I said that what they teach has the traits of religious dogma. It does.

Teachers unions seem to have become more interested in leftest dogma than teaching reading and writing and math.

---

ou said schools are secular, but your word is secularism, which indicates that it is some thought through the curriculum that one would teach. Yes, I did, but said secularism as if it were a subject that was taught in school. You are in a corner and know it.
I didn't say specifically what they teach. Of course, you didn't, it's just one of those things Evangelicals say as if it had real meaning. You have yet to give any content for secularism (your word)

---

How many examples of ideological dogma being pushed in American public schools do you want me to provide?

---

3

I appreciate you sharing that perspective. It's a fair distinction to makeoften, what is true in a specific context or "bubble" can feel universal until we examine the broader educational landscape. Context definitely dictates how "widespread" a trend or behavior actually is.
I had a longer reply typed up a long time ago, but it got lost. Here are some examples.

1 . Claims that requiring students to show their work in math grows out of "white supremacy."

• True: Some equity-oriented math education materials used the phrase "white supremacy culture" to criticize certain traditional classroom norms, including "show your work."
• False or misleading: Claims that Oregon or mainstream education systems officially banned showing work, or declared math itself racist.

As for how widespread this view is:

• It was never mainstream classroom policy across American education.
• It was mostly found in a relatively small segment of equity-focused teacher-training and academic pedagogy circles.
• The controversy became much larger online than the actual adoption of the ideas in schools.

2. Teaching of various books seeking to indoctrinate young children into transgender ideology, including making fifth graders teach these absurdities to kindergartners.


Reports regarding the implementation of gender identity curriculum are accurate, and its prevalence is growing in certain regions. While most instruction is teacher-led, documented incidents do exist where older students have been tasked with teaching or mentoring younger peers on these topics.

3. Seeking to indoctrinate students with politically driven shoddy history like the 1619 project.

he 1619 Project is often defended as a necessary pedagogical tool for critical thinking rather than a mechanism for indoctrination. Advocates argue that its primary value lies in offering a "counternarrative" to traditional American history, which they believe has long minimized the central role of slavery in the nation's development. [1, 2, 3]
Key counter-arguments to the assertion that it is "politically driven shoddy history" include:

1. Focus on Critical Thinking, Not "Right Answers" [1]

• Encourages Inquiry: Many educators argue that the purpose of using such materials is to teach students how to think, rather than what to think. By presenting the 1619 Project alongside traditional texts, teachers allow students to weigh evidence and engage in historical debate.
• Antidote to Omission: Proponents suggest that "blindly celebratory" histories, which dominated for decades, were themselves a form of indoctrination by omission. The 1619 Project serves as a "much-needed corrective" to these earlier gaps. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

I agree with you in some places, and your point is valid. Apparently, you did not apply critical thinking or reading to my points. We agree in several places. You opened my eyes to some circumstances.
Here is the post again so that you can see where I agreed. Several secular doctrines are wrong.

I appreciate you sharing that perspective. It's a fair distinction to make; often, what is true in a specific context or "bubble" can feel universal until we examine the broader educational landscape. Context definitely dictates how "widespread" a trend or behavior actually is.

1 . Claims that requiring students to show their work in math grows out of "white supremacy."

• True: Some equity-oriented math education materials used the phrase "white supremacy culture" to criticize certain traditional classroom norms, including "show your work."
• False or misleading: Claims that Oregon or mainstream education systems officially banned showing work, or declared math itself racist.

As for how widespread this view is:

• It was never mainstream classroom policy across American education.
• It was mostly found in a relatively small segment of equity-focused teacher-training and academic pedagogy circles.
• The controversy became much larger online than the actual adoption of the ideas in schools.

2. Teaching of various books seeking to indoctrinate young children into transgender ideology, including making fifth graders teach these absurdities to kindergartners.


Reports regarding the implementation of gender identity curriculum are accurate, and its prevalence is growing in certain regions. While most instruction is teacher-led, documented incidents do exist where older students have been tasked with teaching or mentoring younger peers on these topics.

3. Seeking to indoctrinate students with politically driven, shoddy history like the 1619 project.

The 1619 Project is often defended as a necessary pedagogical tool for critical thinking rather than a mechanism for indoctrination. Advocates argue that its primary value lies in offering a "counternarrative" to traditional American history, which they believe has long minimized the central role of slavery in the nation's development. [1, 2, 3]
Key counter-arguments to the assertion that it is "politically driven shoddy history" include:

1. Focus on Critical Thinking, Not "Right Answers" [1]

• Encourages Inquiry: Many educators argue that the purpose of using such materials is to teach students how to think, rather than what to think. By presenting the 1619 Project alongside traditional texts, teachers allow students to weigh evidence and engage in historical debate.
• Antidote to Omission: Proponents suggest that "blindly celebratory" histories, which dominated for decades, were themselves a form of indoctrination by omission. The 1619 Project serves as a "much-needed corrective" to these earlier gaps.

Disparities in med school admissions rates:
- Blacks advantaged by at least 30%.
- Hispanics advantaged by at least 13%.
- Whites disadvantaged in 6/9 groupings.
- Asians disadvantaged at all groupings. pic.twitter.com/BMKstnrPb4

— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole) May 9, 2026

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

No, it is not "the truth," it's AI slop. I'm not interested in discussing education with a computer program. Furthermore, you used a poor prompt that doesn't engage my point at all, a point which apparently went over your head.

---

It's amazing how inaccurate AI slop is. I was looking up a Youtube hooper and AI said he averaged 22.5 a game at a random D2 college, which I thought no way, the guy isn't all that good. I looked the school up directly and his stats are found on the actual school website, he averaged 2.7 a game and didn't even start, only got into about a third of their games.

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

Here is some some more truth..and it's take a brave man to speak it

To summarize what's happening in America: The era of unconstitutional special privileges and considerations put in place for black people following the unjust Jim Crow era has come to an end. We are entering the age of equality under the law.

America has spent six decades with…

— Kevin Briggins (@KJBrigg) May 10, 2026

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

No, it is not "the truth," it's AI slop. I'm not interested in discussing education with a computer program. Furthermore, you used a poor prompt that doesn't engage my point at all, a point which apparently went over your head.

---

How do you. Know. You didn't read it.

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

No, it is not "the truth," it's AI slop. I'm not interested in discussing education with a computer program. Furthermore, you used a poor prompt that doesn't engage my point at all, a point which apparently went over your head.

---

How do you. Know. You didn't read it.

---

I didn't read what?

Scenes like this will be coming soon to Collin County cities such as Plano and Frisco.

White people need to have more kids or they will continue to be replaced by people that dont have recessive genes.

Hopefully Trump can make America great again because white people are being pushed out of every major city in America

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

Here is some some more truth..and it's take a brave man to speak it

To summarize what's happening in America: The era of unconstitutional special privileges and considerations put in place for black people following the unjust Jim Crow era has come to an end. We are entering the age of equality under the law.

America has spent six decades with…

— Kevin Briggins (@KJBrigg) May 10, 2026

---

It takes a brave man to speak the truth. People with recessive traits are at risk of gettting wiped out if they dont have a bunch of kids.

I blame porn for this problem.....the BBC is pedaltilized. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a small d***.
This is why Jim Crow laws were established 100 years ago. The forefathers knew the dangers of integration.

Take a look at what is currently happening in Europe. The same thing happened in the Deep South back in the day.

2024 France National Basketball team


1969 Texas Longhorn Football team



2024 Texas football recuits:

Method Man said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

Here is some some more truth..and it's take a brave man to speak it

To summarize what's happening in America: The era of unconstitutional special privileges and considerations put in place for black people following the unjust Jim Crow era has come to an end. We are entering the age of equality under the law.

America has spent six decades with…

— Kevin Briggins (@KJBrigg) May 10, 2026

---

It takes a brave man to speak the truth. People with recessive traits are at risk of gettting wiped out if they dont have a bunch of kids.

I blame porn for this problem.....the BBC is pedaltilized. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a small d***.
This is why Jim Crow laws were established 100 years ago. The forefathers knew the dangers of integration.

Take a look at what is currently happening in Europe. The same thing happened in the Deep South back in the day.

2024 France National Basketball team


1969 Texas Longhorn Football team



2024 Texas football recuits:

---

Black people excelling at sports is a example of meritocracy at work (hiring the best athletes/people for the job)

No one complains about it.

So why do you have a problem with meritocracy taking place in all aspects of our society and NOT giving out certain political & economic privileges and advantages based on race?

PS

So strange you bring up pornography and male genitalia in this tread.....something you want to tell us?

Progressives have become increasingly conspiratorial in their discussions of race, @herandrews writeshttps://t.co/XBuRKx07lI pic.twitter.com/TZH2zfFjUm

— Matthew Schmitz (@matthewschmitz) May 12, 2026

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

No, it is not "the truth," it's AI slop. I'm not interested in discussing education with a computer program. Furthermore, you used a poor prompt that doesn't engage my point at all, a point which apparently went over your head.

---

How do you. Know. You didn't read it.

---

I didn't read what?
D. C. Bear
In reply to Waco1947 2:57p, 5/7/26



I'm not really interested in reading AI slop

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

I'm not really interested in reading AI slop.

---

It's the truth, and you are afraid of it.

---

No, it is not "the truth," it's AI slop. I'm not interested in discussing education with a computer program. Furthermore, you used a poor prompt that doesn't engage my point at all, a point which apparently went over your head.

---

How do you. Know. You didn't read it.

---

I didn't read what?
D. C. Bear
In reply to Waco1947 2:57p, 5/7/26



I'm not really interested in reading AI slop

---

---

I read it. I wasn't interested it because it has the earmarks of a language model, not a human mind. There are many things that I read that I find I am not interested in.