That's actually the correct position to take and it's a shame that we have a bunch of nut jobs in this country who don't understand that.
Keep thinking that way so more and more states will start letting parents take their school tax dollars elsewhere.
i think it likely that majority of Americans agree with him. I'm no aware of any polling on it. But that's what my bet would be. Anybody with common sense should realize that you can't have an education system where some aggressive parents can decide on what is going to be taught as a factual matter.
Baldy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 05, 2022 8:56 pm
Keep thinking that way so more and more states will start letting parents take their school tax dollars elsewhere.
i think it likely that majority of Americans agree with him. I'm no aware of any polling on it. But that's what my bet would be. Anybody with common sense should realize that you can't have an education system where some aggressive parents can decide on what is going to be taught as a factual matter.
Using a drop down menu, you can see exit polling results for 9 States that went for Trump in 2020 (that's what i count anyway).
In four of them, the majority of exit polling respondents who were Whites with college degrees voted for Biden. in three of them (iowa, Montana, Ohio), the margins are big enough to allow 95% confidence per individual comparison that Biden did win the State among that group. In the other case, North Carolina, Biden's margin among respondents was only 1 point so it was what's commonly referenced as a "statistical tie."
Baldy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 05, 2022 8:56 pm
Keep thinking that way so more and more states will start letting parents take their school tax dollars elsewhere.
i think it likely that majority of Americans agree with him. I'm no aware of any polling on it. But that's what my bet would be. Anybody with common sense should realize that you can't have an education system where some aggressive parents can decide on what is going to be taught as a factual matter.
I would guess that it's close to an even split but that's irrelevant. Education is handled at the local level so what illiberals in DC, NYC or San Francisco think doesn't matter in Wichita Kansas and the like. If illiberals push too hard on this you will see a defund education movement in flyover country and the people that will suffer the most will be the people the illiberals profess to support. They're so stuck on their own self-righteousness that they can't see the damage they're doing. It's just another thing they have in common with the MAGAts.
i think it likely that majority of Americans agree with him. I'm no aware of any polling on it. But that's what my bet would be. Anybody with common sense should realize that you can't have an education system where some aggressive parents can decide on what is going to be taught as a factual matter.
I would guess that it's close to an even split but that's irrelevant. Education is handled at the local level so what illiberals in DC, NYC or San Francisco think doesn't matter in Wichita Kansas and the like. If illiberals push too hard on this you will see a defund education movement in flyover country and the people that will suffer the most will be the people the illiberals profess to support. They're so stuck on their own self-righteousness that they can't see the damage they're doing. It's just another thing they have in common with the MAGAts.
RE: The Beto quite…
Self righteous would also be insisting that a history teacher should teach YOUR version of history to all 27 kids in the class.
Run for school board, supplement your child’s education at home with your own take of history, homeschool.
UNI88 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 07, 2022 9:02 am
I would guess that it's close to an even split but that's irrelevant. Education is handled at the local level so what illiberals in DC, NYC or San Francisco think doesn't matter in Wichita Kansas and the like. If illiberals push too hard on this you will see a defund education movement in flyover country and the people that will suffer the most will be the people the illiberals profess to support. They're so stuck on their own self-righteousness that they can't see the damage they're doing. It's just another thing they have in common with the MAGAts.
RE: The Beto quite…
Self righteous would also be insisting that a history teacher should teach YOUR version of history to all 27 kids in the class.
Run for school board, supplement your child’s education at home with your own take of history, homeschool.
There are options.
That's a two-way street. It is just as self-righteous to insist that a history teacher teach CRT as it is to insist that they teach a watered-down version of history that doesn't adequately cover the impact of slavery and racism.
Supplement my child's education at home? Really? I agree that slavery and racism have played a major role in our country's history. I disagree with CRT in that I don't think they are the foundation upon which the country was built. If CRT is being taught, it's being taught as fact, not theory and I have a major problem with that. How do you think it would go if my child were being taught CRT as history and I supplemented their education at home? Do you really think that the teacher is going to give my child credit for independent thinking? No, they're going to get bad grades because their answers and papers will contradict what is being taught in class.
Homeschool? If the majority of the parents in the district agree with me, whose children should be homeschooled? If there is that much dissatisfaction and that many students are being homeschooled do you really think there won't be a local defund education effort?
Baldy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 05, 2022 8:56 pm
Keep thinking that way so more and more states will start letting parents take their school tax dollars elsewhere.
i think it likely that majority of Americans agree with him. I'm no aware of any polling on it. But that's what my bet would be. Anybody with common sense should realize that you can't have an education system where some aggressive parents can decide on what is going to be taught as a factual matter.
It's not going to go over well in a state wide race in Texas.
Mr. Kerry’s Ohio hunting adventure started last Saturday, when the senator, campaign entourage in tow, went into a grocery store and asked the owner: “Can I get me a hunting license here?” Even the phraseology sounded staged. Mr. Kerry ordinarily doesn’t talk this way, and his language sounded fake and patronizing — as if he was pretending to talk like someone from rural Ohio.…
….When Mr. Kerry went hunting on Thursday in Boardman, Ohio, the event was tightly choreographed. Even as Mr. Kerry allowed himself to be photographed wearing a camouflage jacket,….
….After two hours of hunting, photographers with long photo lenses noticed that Mr. Kerry’s hand was bloodied. By the time he reached the reporters, he had tucked that hand into his sleeve. Unlike the other hunters, all of them carrying their geese, Mr. Kerry was careful not to be photographed holding the bird he shot…..
Mr. Kerry’s Ohio hunting adventure started last Saturday, when the senator, campaign entourage in tow, went into a grocery store and asked the owner: “Can I get me a hunting license here?” Even the phraseology sounded staged. Mr. Kerry ordinarily doesn’t talk this way, and his language sounded fake and patronizing — as if he was pretending to talk like someone from rural Ohio.…
….When Mr. Kerry went hunting on Thursday in Boardman, Ohio, the event was tightly choreographed. Even as Mr. Kerry allowed himself to be photographed wearing a camouflage jacket,….
….After two hours of hunting, photographers with long photo lenses noticed that Mr. Kerry’s hand was bloodied. By the time he reached the reporters, he had tucked that hand into his sleeve. Unlike the other hunters, all of them carrying their geese, Mr. Kerry was careful not to be photographed holding the bird he shot…..
So as I've read it, the ballot result means abortion remains a right under the Kansas Constitution as the donk controlled (5 of 7) Kansas Supreme Court ruled it 6-1 in 2019, so it can't be outlawed. BUT current restrictions (no abortions post 22 weeks unless the mother's life in danger, no public funding, parental consent for minors) remain in place. Seems reasonable.
Those current restrictions could be litigated. What could change things is apparently the Kansas gov appoints the judges, but they have to run for retention elections, & 4 of the 5 donk judges are up for retention elections this fall. That seems like a good way of holding judges accountable.
I have zero issues with those restrictions. Very reasonable.
As does most of America, which is why the Roe v Wade overturning is not as big of a deal as the Leftists wanted it to be.
Self righteous would also be insisting that a history teacher should teach YOUR version of history to all 27 kids in the class.
Run for school board, supplement your child’s education at home with your own take of history, homeschool.
There are options.
That's a two-way street. It is just as self-righteous to insist that a history teacher teach CRT as it is to insist that they teach a watered-down version of history that doesn't adequately cover the impact of slavery and racism.
Supplement my child's education at home? Really? I agree that slavery and racism have played a major role in our country's history. I disagree with CRT in that I don't think they are the foundation upon which the country was built. If CRT is being taught, it's being taught as fact, not theory and I have a major problem with that. How do you think it would go if my child were being taught CRT as history and I supplemented their education at home? Do you really think that the teacher is going to give my child credit for independent thinking? No, they're going to get bad grades because their answers and papers will contradict what is being taught in class.
Homeschool? If the majority of the parents in the district agree with me, whose children should be homeschooled? If there is that much dissatisfaction and that many students are being homeschooled do you really think there won't be a local defund education effort?
Spot on. And the number of kids being homeschooled has gone through the rough in recent years.
That's a two-way street. It is just as self-righteous to insist that a history teacher teach CRT as it is to insist that they teach a watered-down version of history that doesn't adequately cover the impact of slavery and racism.
Supplement my child's education at home? Really? I agree that slavery and racism have played a major role in our country's history. I disagree with CRT in that I don't think they are the foundation upon which the country was built. If CRT is being taught, it's being taught as fact, not theory and I have a major problem with that. How do you think it would go if my child were being taught CRT as history and I supplemented their education at home? Do you really think that the teacher is going to give my child credit for independent thinking? No, they're going to get bad grades because their answers and papers will contradict what is being taught in class.
Homeschool? If the majority of the parents in the district agree with me, whose children should be homeschooled? If there is that much dissatisfaction and that many students are being homeschooled do you really think there won't be a local defund education effort?
Spot on. And the number of kids being homeschooled has gone through the rough in recent years.
i normally don't call out spelling but come on, that's kinda brutal.
Self righteous would also be insisting that a history teacher should teach YOUR version of history to all 27 kids in the class.
Run for school board, supplement your child’s education at home with your own take of history, homeschool.
There are options.
That's a two-way street. It is just as self-righteous to insist that a history teacher teach CRT as it is to insist that they teach a watered-down version of history that doesn't adequately cover the impact of slavery and racism.
Supplement my child's education at home? Really? I agree that slavery and racism have played a major role in our country's history. I disagree with CRT in that I don't think they are the foundation upon which the country was built. If CRT is being taught, it's being taught as fact, not theory and I have a major problem with that. How do you think it would go if my child were being taught CRT as history and I supplemented their education at home? Do you really think that the teacher is going to give my child credit for independent thinking? No, they're going to get bad grades because their answers and papers will contradict what is being taught in class.
Homeschool? If the majority of the parents in the district agree with me, whose children should be homeschooled? If there is that much dissatisfaction and that many students are being homeschooled do you really think there won't be a local defund education effort?
During our lockdown, the teachers in my daughters class were teaching that it was racist to screen immigrants for COVID. I shit you not. Middle of lockdowns and swabbing a nose is racist.
I sent her teacher a very watered down email asking about the testing, but quickly dropped it. Didn't want her labelled as non conformist. Our Superintendent just took a job with that large school district in VA that is always in the news.
Re: 2022 Elections Thread
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:02 am
by Pwns
Kids should learn that conquering, pillaging, displacing, subjugating, and killing was a way of the world for a long time and literally no one doesn't have ancestors who didn't participate in it (it's just that some cultures developed a written language and had it written down while others didn't).
The problem is certain groups of people are selective about which crimes they talk about because they see it as a cudgel to advance noxious race politics. They're not everywhere but they are gaining influence in some school systems and states. It's dumb to call it "Critical Race Theory" but it's describing something very real.
Re: 2022 Elections Thread
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:22 am
by kalm
Pwns wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:02 am
Kids should learn that conquering, pillaging, displacing, subjugating, and killing was a way of the world for a long time and literally no one doesn't have ancestors who didn't participate in it (it's just that some cultures developed a written language and had it written down while others didn't).
The problem is certain groups of people are selective about which crimes they talk about because they see it as a cudgel to advance noxious race politics. They're not everywhere but they are gaining influence in some school systems and states. It's dumb to call it "Critical Race Theory" but it's describing something very real.
Maybe kids shoukd also learn that pillaging, conquering, et al are the dark side of human nature and why they were wrong then as well as today.
Pwns wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:02 am
Kids should learn that conquering, pillaging, displacing, subjugating, and killing was a way of the world for a long time and literally no one doesn't have ancestors who didn't participate in it (it's just that some cultures developed a written language and had it written down while others didn't).
The problem is certain groups of people are selective about which crimes they talk about because they see it as a cudgel to advance noxious race politics. They're not everywhere but they are gaining influence in some school systems and states. It's dumb to call it "Critical Race Theory" but it's describing something very real.
Maybe kids shoukd also learn that pillaging, conquering, et al are the dark side of human nature and why they were wrong then as well as today.
Kids have been learning that for decades. The 20th century was a century of great societal evolution. The problem now is that so many today are trying to put a 21st century value system on societies that existed 100, 200, 300 or more years ago.
Maybe kids shoukd also learn that pillaging, conquering, et al are the dark side of human nature and why they were wrong then as well as today.
Kids have been learning that for decades. The 20th century was a century of great societal evolution. The problem now is that so many today are trying to put a 21st century value system on societies that existed 100, 200, 300 or more years ago.
It's silly.
That’s presupposing that 21st century values such as compassion, equality, community didn’t apply before. Or that we should or even can study history through a lens other than our current era?
Baldy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:18 pm
Kids have been learning that for decades. The 20th century was a century of great societal evolution. The problem now is that so many today are trying to put a 21st century value system on societies that existed 100, 200, 300 or more years ago.
It's silly.
That’s presupposing that 21st century values such as compassion, equality, community didn’t apply before. Or that we should or even can study history through a lens other than our current era?
Baldy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:18 pm
Kids have been learning that for decades. The 20th century was a century of great societal evolution. The problem now is that so many today are trying to put a 21st century value system on societies that existed 100, 200, 300 or more years ago.
It's silly.
That’s presupposing that 21st century values such as compassion, equality, community didn’t apply before. Or that we should or even can study history through a lens other than our current era?
Nothing is being presupposed. Societal evolution has context. Maybe an example will help.
From the dawn of man to the first 1/3 of the 20th century it was commonplace and socially acceptable for men to marry young girls...little girls. It was perfectly legal at the time for 10 year olds or younger (7 in Delaware) to marry. I don't believe lots of 10 year olds were married off, but a 13 or 14 year old marring was customary at the time. There were lots of different legitimate reasons why, but the most common and obvious reason to marry 'em young was so they can start spittin' out youngins to work on the family farm. Most all of our family trees are full of examples of this.
Society has evolved from that practice and men who desire to marry girls that young today are rightly labeled pedophiles.
Were our great greats just pedos or were they simply products of their environment?
That’s presupposing that 21st century values such as compassion, equality, community didn’t apply before. Or that we should or even can study history through a lens other than our current era?
Nothing is being presupposed. Societal evolution has context. Maybe an example will help.
From the dawn of man to the first 1/3 of the 20th century it was commonplace and socially acceptable for men to marry young girls...little girls. It was perfectly legal at the time for 10 year olds or younger (7 in Delaware) to marry. I don't believe lots of 10 year olds were married off, but a 13 or 14 year old marring was customary at the time. There were lots of different legitimate reasons why, but the most common and obvious reason to marry 'em young was so they can start spittin' out youngins to work on the family farm. Most all of our family trees are full of examples of this.
Society has evolved from that practice and men who desire to marry girls that young today are rightly labeled pedophiles.
Were our great greats just pedos or were they simply products of their environment?
That’s a damn good argument which I’ll need to chew on. My smarmy first blush response is were slave owners actually racist or were they just employers…products of their environment?
Supposedly, TJ was bothered by slavery.
I sincerely think your your argument is interesting and it’s worthy of discussion.
Baldy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:43 pm
Nothing is being presupposed. Societal evolution has context. Maybe an example will help.
From the dawn of man to the first 1/3 of the 20th century it was commonplace and socially acceptable for men to marry young girls...little girls. It was perfectly legal at the time for 10 year olds or younger (7 in Delaware) to marry. I don't believe lots of 10 year olds were married off, but a 13 or 14 year old marring was customary at the time. There were lots of different legitimate reasons why, but the most common and obvious reason to marry 'em young was so they can start spittin' out youngins to work on the family farm. Most all of our family trees are full of examples of this.
Society has evolved from that practice and men who desire to marry girls that young today are rightly labeled pedophiles.
Were our great greats just pedos or were they simply products of their environment?
That’s a damn good argument which I’ll need to chew on. My smarmy first blush response is were slave owners actually racist or were they just employers…products of their environment?
Supposedly, TJ was bothered by slavery.
I sincerely think your your argument is interesting and it’s worthy of discussion.
When life expectancy is 45, life “starts” much younger.
That’s presupposing that 21st century values such as compassion, equality, community didn’t apply before. Or that we should or even can study history through a lens other than our current era?
Nothing is being presupposed. Societal evolution has context. Maybe an example will help.
From the dawn of man to the first 1/3 of the 20th century it was commonplace and socially acceptable for men to marry young girls...little girls. It was perfectly legal at the time for 10 year olds or younger (7 in Delaware) to marry. I don't believe lots of 10 year olds were married off, but a 13 or 14 year old marring was customary at the time. There were lots of different legitimate reasons why, but the most common and obvious reason to marry 'em young was so they can start spittin' out youngins to work on the family farm. Most all of our family trees are full of examples of this.
Society has evolved from that practice and men who desire to marry girls that young today are rightly labeled pedophiles.
Were our great greats just pedos or were they simply products of their environment?
