Abbott signs "anti-critical race theory" bill into law

9,675 Views | 292 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by quash
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

quash said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

quash said:

Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

HuMcK said:

Gee, doesn't that sound familiar...


No.

You should adjust your settings, somehow the notion of the state banning ideas fails to register on your screen.



My settings are fine. Preventing leftist politicians from using state mandated educational institutions to indoctrinate kids into racism is not remotely like preventing free people from expressing their opinions privately. If you want a parallel to Putin, look to Facebook and Twitter.

Banning ideas is wrong no matter what ideology you fear.

Making no exceptions even for what is taught to children in public school is what makes your position to be foolish and extremist nonsense.


Some of you operate under the delusion that schools will teach anything if not restrained by state law. You're wrong.


Right or wrong, how does that invalidate the idea of enabling the state to restrict what is taught to children?

It doesn't.
He doesn't get it and he'll never admit he's wrong. He'll just dig his feet in deeper and get more ridiculous. That's his MO.
90sBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jupiter said:

Quote:

Public Schooling Battle Map



Americans are diverse ethnically, religiously, ideologically but all must pay for public schools. The intention is good: to bring people together and foster harmony. But rather than build bridges, public schooling often forces people into wrenching, zerosum conflict.

This map aggregates a relatively small, but especially painful, subset of battles: those involving basic rights, moral values, or individual identities. Think creationism versus evolution, or assigned readings containing racial slurs. The conflicts are often intensely personal, and guarantee if one fundamental value wins, another loses.
The goal may be peace and equality, but the outcome is too often the opposite.
Incidents are continually added. Note that some years contain very few conflicts because we list the year a conflict started, but we only started cataloging in the mid2000s. Earlier years reflect conflicts that had a new development after we started collecting data.




https://www.cato.org/education-fight-map

"The intention is good: to bring people together and foster harmony."

I have never before heard anyone say that this is the intention of public schools.
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

quash said:

Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

HuMcK said:

Gee, doesn't that sound familiar...


No.

You should adjust your settings, somehow the notion of the state banning ideas fails to register on your screen.



My settings are fine. Preventing leftist politicians from using state mandated educational institutions to indoctrinate kids into racism is not remotely like preventing free people from expressing their opinions privately. If you want a parallel to Putin, look to Facebook and Twitter.

Banning ideas is wrong no matter what ideology you fear.

Making no exceptions even for what is taught to children in public school is what makes your opinion a whole lot of foolish and extremist nonsense.


Some of you operate under the delusion that schools will teach anything if not restrained by state law. You're wrong.


Some of you operate under the delusion that a school's curriculum is never wrong and only based on facts. Hell, back in the day, schools had gender specific classes like home economics and wood shop. Gotta teach a women's role and a man's role.

But the fact that school are willing to teach a THEORY, pretty much shows that exactly, that they'll teach anything. After all, when I was in school they tried to teach me that Henry Ford invented the automobile
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

quash said:

Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

HuMcK said:

Gee, doesn't that sound familiar...


No.

You should adjust your settings, somehow the notion of the state banning ideas fails to register on your screen.



My settings are fine. Preventing leftist politicians from using state mandated educational institutions to indoctrinate kids into racism is not remotely like preventing free people from expressing their opinions privately. If you want a parallel to Putin, look to Facebook and Twitter.

Banning ideas is wrong no matter what ideology you fear.

Making no exceptions even for what is taught to children in public school is what makes your opinion a whole lot of foolish and extremist nonsense.


Some of you operate under the delusion that schools will teach anything if not restrained by state law. You're wrong.


Some of you operate under the delusion that a school's curriculum is never wrong and only based on facts. Hell, back in the day, schools had gender specific classes like home economics and wood shop. Gotta teach a women's role and a man's role.

But the fact that school are willing to teach a THEORY, pretty much shows that exactly, that they'll teach anything. After all, when I was in school they tried to teach me that Henry Ford invented the automobile

Were you absent when they taught what a THEORY is?
Cuz I was taught the theory of gravity, among others.

Schools don't teach just anything, and they don't do that because citizens and parents and self-proclaimed libertarians vote and go to PTA and parent- teacher conferences and send Canon-style emails to teachers.

She me schools will teach CRT, many won't. Some will get accused of teaching it because so many don't understand what it is; that's why I started a thread with the New Discourses article.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

quash said:

Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

HuMcK said:

Gee, doesn't that sound familiar...


No.

You should adjust your settings, somehow the notion of the state banning ideas fails to register on your screen.



My settings are fine. Preventing leftist politicians from using state mandated educational institutions to indoctrinate kids into racism is not remotely like preventing free people from expressing their opinions privately. If you want a parallel to Putin, look to Facebook and Twitter.

Banning ideas is wrong no matter what ideology you fear.

Making no exceptions even for what is taught to children in public school is what makes your opinion a whole lot of foolish and extremist nonsense.


Some of you operate under the delusion that schools will teach anything if not restrained by state law. You're wrong.


Some of you operate under the delusion that a school's curriculum is never wrong and only based on facts. Hell, back in the day, schools had gender specific classes like home economics and wood shop. Gotta teach a women's role and a man's role.

But the fact that school are willing to teach a THEORY, pretty much shows that exactly, that they'll teach anything. After all, when I was in school they tried to teach me that Henry Ford invented the automobile

Were you absent when they taught what a THEORY is?
Cuz I was taught the theory of gravity, among others.

Schools don't teach just anything, and they don't do that because citizens and parents and self-proclaimed libertarians vote and go to PTA and parent- teacher conferences and send Canon-style emails to teachers.

She me schools will teach CRT, many won't. Some will get accused of teaching it because so many don't understand what it is; that's why I started a thread with the New Discourses article.

Many liberal teachers will teach CRT as fact and not a theory. It won't start out that way, but it will end up that way.

Maybe schools should teach about intelligent design and go back to having prayers in schools. After all, not good to ban ideas, now is it?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.

“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan
Canon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan


CRT is religion. Honestly, if it's unfalsifiable, it has no place in education at any level.
Florda_mike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ShooterTX said:

Doc Holliday said:

boognish_bear said:

Tucker has the stones to say Milley, a green beret, is not brave. He of course did say it to him directly.


He's a high paid bureaucrat engaged in the systemic creation of war for profit and he knows it.

Don't start believing an alternate reality because it's politically convenient.


I have known 2 generals and almost a dozen colonels over the years. They all did the same things about the pentagon and especially the joint chiefs. Everyone at that level is less of a soldier, and more of a politician.
One of the generals (at that time a major) put it this way: there is a huge difference between Swartzkopf and Powell... one cares about defeating the enemy and the other cares about fighting "the right way". Few true soldiers ever make it at the pentagon, and they never make it to the joint chiefs. The best they can do is make a high ranking general over a major installation or a region. Of the 2 generals, one retired under Obama and the other is currently serving over a major region in the southwest. He knows he has hit his ceiling because he is too outspoken. He won't go along with the political nonsense. He would be gone already, if not for that fact that he is very good and they need him in his position. According to him, there are a lot of colonels with one foot out the door. The reason this general still has a job is that he is really good at keeping these officers from retiring. They like him, but that can only go so far and for so long. In the next 2 years, there will be a ton of turn over in the military... and my buddy will probably be one of those leaving.

The real problem is who is left behind? Probably a lot of "woke" officers who will not hesitate to point their rifles at citizens who aren't "woke" enough.... which has likely been the plan all along.


We live in NW Florida just outside gate of Elgin AFB, and have many retired military friends. Several bases near(Duke, Hurlburt Special Ops, etc) and military loves to retire here. We rent homes mainly to active duty for a reason as they take good care or their commander finds out. Ha

Although I'm not military my friends tell me same stories as you've told above so I really appreciate your post

Interesting tidbit they tell me about the 2 generals that run in our circles(close to colonels like you too fyi). One is an older retired Army general. He seems happy go lucky and very pro USA and just fun to be around. Other is Air Force General recently retired and uptight as hell and makes my heart race as I'm edgy being around him. My retired buddies say that's just how Army Generals are compared to Air Force Generals

Funny
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

1. Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
2. Voters, through state legislatures, have the right to determine the curriculum.
3. Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
4. Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on middle class parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.
Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin to a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

If public schools can teach Christianity as fact, that's news to me and a lot of others.
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Forest Bueller_bf said:

Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.



A lot of people don't realize what CRT is and are under the delusion that it just means teaching history in ways that include how blacks were mistreated. They are so emotionally invested in it that discussing what CRT actually is with them is hopeless.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We're 8 pages deep in a thread of people talking about why banning "CRT" is some great moral necessity, but unless I missed it the whole thing is devoid of any actual examples of CRT being taught to kids in the first place.

Lots of commenters seem to accept the premise that it is, and are ready to justify just about anything to stop it, but the actual evidence seems pretty lacking.
bularry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

quash said:

Canon said:

quash said:

Canon said:

HuMcK said:

Gee, doesn't that sound familiar...


No.

You should adjust your settings, somehow the notion of the state banning ideas fails to register on your screen.



My settings are fine. Preventing leftist politicians from using state mandated educational institutions to indoctrinate kids into racism is not remotely like preventing free people from expressing their opinions privately. If you want a parallel to Putin, look to Facebook and Twitter.

Banning ideas is wrong no matter what ideology you fear.

Making no exceptions even for what is taught to children in public school is what makes your opinion a whole lot of foolish and extremist nonsense.


Some of you operate under the delusion that schools will teach anything if not restrained by state law. You're wrong.


Some of you operate under the delusion that a school's curriculum is never wrong and only based on facts. Hell, back in the day, schools had gender specific classes like home economics and wood shop. Gotta teach a women's role and a man's role.

But the fact that school are willing to teach a THEORY, pretty much shows that exactly, that they'll teach anything. After all, when I was in school they tried to teach me that Henry Ford invented the automobile

Were you absent when they taught what a THEORY is?
Cuz I was taught the theory of gravity, among others.

Schools don't teach just anything, and they don't do that because citizens and parents and self-proclaimed libertarians vote and go to PTA and parent- teacher conferences and send Canon-style emails to teachers.

She me schools will teach CRT, many won't. Some will get accused of teaching it because so many don't understand what it is; that's why I started a thread with the New Discourses article.

Many liberal teachers will teach CRT as fact and not a theory. It won't start out that way, but it will end up that way.

Maybe schools should teach about intelligent design and go back to having prayers in schools. After all, not good to ban ideas, now is it?
Sidebar: and you know this how? I love how you just make up facts "Many liberal teachers will teach CRT as fact" and this is based on what... your perception of the world?

and your second paragraph is outstanding. a great logical leap which is consistent with your posting history.

Florda_mike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

Forest Bueller_bf said:

Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.



A lot of people don't realize what CRT is and are under the delusion that it just means teaching history in ways that include how blacks were mistreated. They are so emotionally invested in it that discussing what CRT actually is with them is hopeless.


Nice government daily talking point cut and paste post, you government tool?

Or you're a sockette straight from China as you pass that test, by never getting too ruffled of my insulting you just like Cinque!!!
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

If public schools can teach Christianity as fact, that's news to me and a lot of others.

Who said they could? You're farther away from what I was talking about than Rawhide.

“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

If public schools can teach Christianity as fact, that's news to me and a lot of others.

Who said they could? You're farther away from what I was talking about than Rawhide.


Wasn't keeping track. I'm trying to get back to what I was talking about, that is whether CRT should be taught in schools. I find your distinction between theory and fact immaterial because, as your New Discourses thread pointed out, CRT isn't really a theory but a worldview.
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
Come on now squish... you said that prayer isn't banned... you're wrong. Can a school lead a classroom in prayer? yes or no? This is apples to apples with the school instructing our children with CRT.....

So tell me, do you have an issue with the gov't banning itself from leading the discussion about CRT and no issue with banning itself from leading prayer?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?
D. C. Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Florda_mike said:

D. C. Bear said:

Forest Bueller_bf said:

Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.



A lot of people don't realize what CRT is and are under the delusion that it just means teaching history in ways that include how blacks were mistreated. They are so emotionally invested in it that discussing what CRT actually is with them is hopeless.


Nice government daily talking point cut and paste post, you government tool?

Or you're a sockette straight from China as you pass that test, by never getting too ruffled of my insulting you just like Cinque!!!


When someone who might have a brain injury insults me, I tend to let it slide most of the time.

When that same someone thinks that saying CRT supporters are deluded is a "government daily talking point cut and paste," I tend to think the brain injury hypothesis might be accurate.
HuMcK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
D. C. Bear said:

Forest Bueller_bf said:

Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.



A lot of people don't realize what CRT is and are under the delusion that it just means teaching history in ways that include how blacks were mistreated. They are so emotionally invested in it that discussing what CRT actually is with them is hopeless.

That definitely includes the people clamoring to do something about it.
Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

D. C. Bear said:

Forest Bueller_bf said:

Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.



A lot of people don't realize what CRT is and are under the delusion that it just means teaching history in ways that include how blacks were mistreated. They are so emotionally invested in it that discussing what CRT actually is with them is hopeless.

That definitely includes the people clamoring to do something about it.

Gotta agree with you here, those books are nothing more than teaching about what has happened in the United States when it comes to the fight to desegregate not just schools, but daily life itself. This needs to be taught.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

D. C. Bear said:

Forest Bueller_bf said:

Redbrickbear said:

It is perfectly acceptable to ban CRT and CRT allied ideology in state schools.

Public education is a state monopoly, not a marketplace of ideas.
Voters, through state legislatures, determine the curriculum.
Children should be protected from racial scapegoating.
Filing federal lawsuits to stop CRT in schools puts the onus on parents, rather than schools, which is unjust.
Anytime a cancer such as CRT is removed from a classroom it's a good thing.

CRT the ideology will never go away, and it is not banned. It should not however have government sponsorship to teacher our children from K-12. It is akin a Religious ideology cloaked in academia.

It will always have a place at Universities, and training programs with companies etc. because it's the new IT dogma. It's a shame such a divisive ideology has taken hold.



A lot of people don't realize what CRT is and are under the delusion that it just means teaching history in ways that include how blacks were mistreated. They are so emotionally invested in it that discussing what CRT actually is with them is hopeless.

That definitely includes the people clamoring to do something about it.



For every 1 off incident you can find of some parent complaining about some de-segregation books.

We can find plenty of actually CRT allied and adjacent ideology actually being taught and advocated for in school environments.




Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

We're 8 pages deep in a thread of people talking about why banning "CRT" is some great moral necessity, but unless I missed it the whole thing is devoid of any actual examples of CRT being taught to kids in the first place.

Lots of commenters seem to accept the premise that it is, and are ready to justify just about anything to stop it, but the actual evidence seems pretty lacking.
Do you want CRT taught in schools?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

If public schools can teach Christianity as fact, that's news to me and a lot of others.

Who said they could? You're farther away from what I was talking about than Rawhide.


Wasn't keeping track. I'm trying to get back to what I was talking about, that is whether CRT should be taught in schools. I find your distinction between theory and fact immaterial because, as your New Discourses thread pointed out, CRT isn't really a theory but a worldview.

I'm sure there are appropriate times to discuss CRT for five minutes. I can't think of one but a creative teacher might. Does Sokal come up in HS?
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
Come on now squish... you said that prayer isn't banned... you're wrong. Can a school lead a classroom in prayer? yes or no? This is apples to apples with the school instructing our children with CRT.....

So tell me, do you have an issue with the gov't banning itself from leading the discussion about CRT and no issue with banning itself from leading prayer?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?

Yer killing that straw man. State-sponsored prayer was brought up by you to cover the fact that you thought all prayer had been banned. It hasn't and by now you know it.

But your fans are diggin' it. Go you.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
Come on now squish... you said that prayer isn't banned... you're wrong. Can a school lead a classroom in prayer? yes or no? This is apples to apples with the school instructing our children with CRT.....

So tell me, do you have an issue with the gov't banning itself from leading the discussion about CRT and no issue with banning itself from leading prayer?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?

Yer killing that straw man. State-sponsored prayer was brought up by you to cover the fact that you thought all prayer had been banned. It hasn't and by now you know it.

But your fans are diggin' it. Go you.

I love how you want to avoid the fact that school lead prayer and school lead discussion of CRT are the same thing....

So come one now.... if banning school lead discussion of CRT is bad, then certainly you think a ban on school led prayer is just as, yes? Or are you going to avoid question - AGAIN?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
Come on now squish... you said that prayer isn't banned... you're wrong. Can a school lead a classroom in prayer? yes or no? This is apples to apples with the school instructing our children with CRT.....

So tell me, do you have an issue with the gov't banning itself from leading the discussion about CRT and no issue with banning itself from leading prayer?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?

Yer killing that straw man. State-sponsored prayer was brought up by you to cover the fact that you thought all prayer had been banned. It hasn't and by now you know it.

But your fans are diggin' it. Go you.

I love how you want to avoid the fact that school lead prayer and school lead discussion of CRT are the same thing....

So come one now.... if banning school lead discussion of CRT is bad, then certainly you think a ban on school led prayer is just as, yes? Or are you going to avoid question - AGAIN?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?


So it turns out you still think prayer is banned in schools.

I can't help you.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
Come on now squish... you said that prayer isn't banned... you're wrong. Can a school lead a classroom in prayer? yes or no? This is apples to apples with the school instructing our children with CRT.....

So tell me, do you have an issue with the gov't banning itself from leading the discussion about CRT and no issue with banning itself from leading prayer?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?

Yer killing that straw man. State-sponsored prayer was brought up by you to cover the fact that you thought all prayer had been banned. It hasn't and by now you know it.

But your fans are diggin' it. Go you.

I love how you want to avoid the fact that school lead prayer and school lead discussion of CRT are the same thing....

So come one now.... if banning school lead discussion of CRT is bad, then certainly you think a ban on school led prayer is just as, yes? Or are you going to avoid question - AGAIN?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?


So it turns out you still think prayer is banned in schools.

I can't help you.
I see you're avoiding the question again
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:

Rawhide said:

quash said:


Intelligent Design is not banned, and neither is prayer.


Try and have a classroom teacher led discussion about the bible, God and a be lead in prayer and sit back and what the **** hit the fan

That's not what I'm talking about and I suspect you know that. ID is not banned and it looks a whole lot like CRT.
the gov't deciding what the gov't can or can't teach is perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like what the gov't isn't teaching, then go to a private school. If the gov't tried telling private schools they can't teach something, then we have a problem.

or do you not understand the concept of private vs. gov't?

Did you change your mind about ID and prayer being banned?

I'm waiting for you to wake up realize that you're wrong.

School sponsored prayer has been banned since the 60s... students can pray on their own.

So now let's talk about school sponsored instruction about CRT. When the gov't puts restriction on what gov't run schools can or can't teach, it's acceptable. If schools tried to tell students they can't study CRT on their own or discuss it privately among themselves, then we have a problem. If a private school wishes to teach CRT, then the gov't shouldn't prevent them from doing it.

You are either 1) Not a libertarian and know it, but just trying to convince everyone you're not a snot nosed liberal 2) A liberal who is thinks they are libertarian, but doesn't quite have a grasp of it.

Hell, here's an example.... The gov't should have every right to demand that masks be worn on gov't/public property. They should not have the right to demand that private business require it of their cutomers.

Nice try. I never mentioned school sponsored prayer, but you finally bring it in to try and get around it. And you still haven't discussed ID.

But keep pretending this is all about my political views.
Come on now squish... you said that prayer isn't banned... you're wrong. Can a school lead a classroom in prayer? yes or no? This is apples to apples with the school instructing our children with CRT.....

So tell me, do you have an issue with the gov't banning itself from leading the discussion about CRT and no issue with banning itself from leading prayer?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?

Yer killing that straw man. State-sponsored prayer was brought up by you to cover the fact that you thought all prayer had been banned. It hasn't and by now you know it.

But your fans are diggin' it. Go you.

I love how you want to avoid the fact that school lead prayer and school lead discussion of CRT are the same thing....

So come one now.... if banning school lead discussion of CRT is bad, then certainly you think a ban on school led prayer is just as, yes? Or are you going to avoid question - AGAIN?

Are you a libertarian or are you liberal trying to pretend to be one?


So it turns out you still think prayer is banned in schools.

I can't help you.
I see you're avoiding the question again

You own the straw man.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.