He absolutely is not. People on both sides are pretending otherwise.
Those on the left are putting in quite the effort to pretend that he is over the last few weeks.
Elon = Trump 2.0
- Thread starter GhostOfMatchesMalone
- Start date
He absolutely is not. People on both sides are pretending otherwise.
Those on the left are putting in quite the effort to pretend that he is over the last few weeks.
Me and my conservative colleagues simply disagree on what our roles are and what God expects from us. I'm certainly not convinced that God isn't leading people of both mindsets.
But no, God doesn't lead me to hate anyone. There's no value in it.
No, free speech is guaranteed. There's nothing extra about it. Even speech that we really dislike.
I believe in equal protection under the law, period. I don't believe that I, nor anyone else, needs more protection than that. That law, applied evenly, is all that is required.
Is that overly simplistic? Yes, I'm certain that it is. I admit it, there are limitations...reasonable limitations. But it also isn't as complicated as some would make it out to be. Free speech doesn't include screaming fire in a packed theater and equal protection under the law doesn't cover an adult wanting intimate relations with a child.
Funny Musk rolls in and Dorkey finally grows a pair... Where was Dorkey when he was "running" the place? Under a desk sucking his thumb while the inmates burned down the asylum?
Twitter Founder: Banning Trump Wrong for 'Internet, Society'
Twitter founder Jack Dorsey said the company's banning of then-President Donald Trump was the "wrong thing for the internet and society."
Twitter Founder: Banning Trump Wrong for 'Internet, Society'
Twitter founder Jack Dorsey said the company's banning of then-President Donald Trump was the "wrong thing for the internet and society."
Like I said before...good for you
So the DeSantis "Don't Say Gay Bill" violates what you think is guaranteed, right?
So equal protection under hate crime laws should apply to them, right?
But it does cover speech in an educational setting or in a private business setting like business diversity training @ Disney, right?
The very name "Don't Say Gay Bill" is a lie.
I don't think that teachers have a role in teaching my child to be gay or straight. As I said, there are reasonable limitations. I think it's reasonable that we shouldn't expect our children to have extremist teachers lauding the homosexual lifestyle in a public school setting. They also shouldn't be trashing it.
As in all things, extremism is not the way to go. Dildo parties and drag queen shows are extreme in a public school setting....as is public flogging of known homosexuals.
Hate crime laws are not equal protection under the law. I'm not a fan.
Murder is murder. Battery is battery. Rape is rape. +1 adders are not required.
If you want to discuss the heinousness of a particular crime, you can do that during sentencing.
That's not occuring in Florida
DeSantis's legislation prohibits discussing the topic as does the WOKE Act does with issues of race
lauding or trashing isn't at issue....gender cannot be discussed beyond male or female or the government can persecute you
Remember you said no matter how much you disliked someone's speech you supported their right to speak it
Even if those parents WANT their children exposed to those ideas in Sex Ed?
If you don't want your child exposed to extreme forms of Sex Ed you can have them opted out
Seems like you're in favor of government censorship of what some parents want for their child
How about the parents that don't want it opt out?
So, allow me to answer your question by asking you a question. Let me preface it by saying that some people believe things that you and I absolutely do NOT believe.
One of those things, if I may speak for you, would be the belief in racial or gender inferiority. We'd both hate to see that garbage taught, in any shape or fashion, in a public school setting, agree?
That seems like a reasonable limitation to not allow it in a government funded school.
It certainly isn't now. But we've both seen videos of teachers (and sometimes even by the teachers themselves) that absolutely crossed the line.
It would also seem like a non reasonable limitation to discuss racism in an honest manner...
I.E. who imposed it into our laws & Constitution, who benefitted from it and suffered under it, who fought for its continued existence, and why we as a nation had to enact Amendments to abolish it, etc.
The WOKE Act prevents ALL of that
By their very definition and certainly by their application.
For example, if Jim the hetero killed a homosexual, he is much more likely to be charged with a hate crime than the homosexual would be if he killed Jim the hetero. Yet we know there are biases on both sides.
Hell, for that matter there a decent amount of bias between certain "marginalized" groups like lesbians vs gay men not to mention the more obvious between different races of minorities.
Some do, some don't. Some want their child exposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ in a public school? Would that fly as well?
Tough shit. Put on your big boy pants and be a parent, instead of letting institutions raise your children.
As I mentioned above, reasonable limitations. I think this is reasonable.
Opting out? What if a parent wants that, they can get it elsewhere like parents do for things like religion?
I had sex education in school. I didn't need to learn about homosexuality or heterosexuality in that process. And guess what...I already knew about both by that time. Of course I didn't have sex Ed in K thru 5...which seems a bit early.
You have some nerve posting a pic of Bath House Barry, Manchelle and two girls that are not biologically linked to either of them. Notice how Manchelle's legs are spread.
We have plenty on our plate already. If you don't mind, let's discuss this one another time. It's a debate I think we can have.
This has happened because of the law being passed also...government censorship of books/historical facts, clothing, safe spaces, what pictures you're allowed to have on your desk, etc.
The motion, citing news stories, laid out numerous examples of how schools, teachers and students are interpreting the measure (HB 1557). It alleged:
— The Pasco County school district told teachers to “remove ‘safe space stickers’ from all schools … in order to comply with HB 1557.” Safe spaces are “inclusive environments” where LGBT students can feel secure and welcome.
— Orange County school officials “warned educators not to wear rainbow articles of clothing” and to remove safe-space stickers as well as “pictures of same-sex spouses from their desks.”
— Multiple school districts have removed books with LGBTQ content from library shelves and book fairs, and teachers have been warned that they could lose their teaching licenses if objectionable content is found in their classrooms.
— A Palm Beach County history teacher changed her lesson about Sally Ride, the country’s first female astronaut, “to omit her identity as a lesbian” because “she didn’t know how to explain that without running afoul of the new laws.”
The motion, which included other examples, said the cited instances “only scratch the surface” of the law’s “harmful impact,” and argued that other circumstances are unknown to the plaintiffs without the discovery process.
It's indoctrination imo. Some want to teach your child their own ethics and get them to ignore their parents ethics.
Absolutely not.
I took issue with the amount of homework assigned by some elementary school teachers which, IMHO, taught children to bring their work home as adults and to devalue family time and outside interests.
Are all groups protected by hate crime laws? Yes.
Your incorrect perceived likelihood of charging might just be your own personal bias at work 😲
Which only reinforces the need for hate crime laws in the first place
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ority-of-hate-crime-victims-were-white-people
In Philadelphia, the majority of hate crime victims were white people
by Christopher Tremoglie, Commentary WriterSeptember 26, 2022 03:38 PM
It is not a public schools responsibility to teach other people's children about sexuality.
If the sex ed programs teach sex ed from a scientific approach, and I mean actual science, then fine. That's how I was taught. Homosexuality and heterosexuality never entered the discussion. It didn't need to for us to learn what we needed to learn.
Public schools do not need to teach our kids how to be gay or straight. And that's what this is boiling down to.
So why is your new hero blaming his failed relationship with his child on neo-marxist institutions? 🤣
You proved the point. Only whining cucks want hate crime laws. Guess who is clamoring for them? I'll give you a hint, it's not the Amish. 😂
Because that's what they did. It's people like you that want that kind of trash indoctrinated at the pee wee level.
Absolutely.
Absolutely disingenuous.
Even in a conservative red state, where I live, the "marginalized group" is much more likely to benefit from a hate crime status than members of non-minority groups.
Murder is murder, battery is battery, ect....the heinousness of the crime itself will be considered at sentencing and that is appropriate.
Don't you as a parent elect a board that determines the curriculum?
Didn't parents give the school that responsibility?
Do you know what "actual" science says about gender & sexuality?
And what was the result? Did we have a perfect society and now its all gone to hell?
So basically ignore the suicide rate and sexual harassments numbers...keep it in the closet
Primarily because the old traditional way has worked so well for society
Good that settles the equal protection argument
What needs to be said more than society & the criminal justice system disagree with you
Some acts have been deemed by society as worthy of being a crime in and of themselves
And we actively want to discourage people from committing those crimes in particular
Parents don't have any say over who is grooming their children, unless you put them in a private school or home school. Not everybody has the time or money to do that. The Governor has taken steps to weed out the bullshit out of the classrooms and here you are all butthurt about it. You'e got one speed............
Witness navigator again going bipolar...No more put your big boy pants on and be a parent talk...
Now he's making excuses for parents who don't have the time to be involved in their kids education 🤣
navi is a firmly committed white grievance white supremacist
He also displays traits of multiple personality disorder...no wonder you like Herschel so much 🤣
RGG has the acumen of Festerman and those are his good traits. 😂Witness navigator again going bipolar...No more put your big boy pants on and be a parent talk...
Now he's making excuses for parents who don't have the time to be involved in their kids education 🤣
navi is a firmly committed white grievance white supremacist
He also displays traits of multiple personality disorder...no wonder you like Herschel so much 🤣
A. Would that include that board deciding to teach our kids about Jesus Christ? We elected them, right?
B. That curriculum is also decided, in large part, by bureaucrats at the state and federal levels based on funding. The local school board doesn't get to determine the entire curriculum.
Yes. You will disagree and offer alternative science as a rebuttal.
This isn't a debate worth having between us. We won't find common ground here and that's OK.
In any event, our public schools don't have a legitimate role in teaching our kids about sexuality.
The implications being that if I had been taught your way, society would be perfect and in no way would it be going to hell?
Come on now.
It's entirely possible that the same forces that are driving the sexual identity issues are also driving suicide and harassment. Chicken or egg?
You won't agree but faith, not a gender studies program, would be more effective in preventing both suicide and harassment.
No, it absolutely does not in practice. Equal means equal. Period.
I'm OK with you disagreeing with my position...and I have no desire to marginalize your position. Can you honestly say the same?
IMO, equal protection under the law should absolutely be equal in every way.
As a historical figure...sure they can but I don't know of any public school that teaches the history of Judaism during the Roman empire.
As a religious figure...I don't remember much being taught about any deity from Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hindu or otherwise
I think the separation of church & state has more to do with teaching about Jesus Christ than whether or not you elected a whole board in favor of it
That's why they have private religious schools
No it doesn't nor should it
The long history of public education in America is that there many groups with interests in the school curriculum but the SCOTUS has set a general precedent for legal decisions
https://kappanonline.org/legal-balancing-act-public-school-curriculum-underwood/
No one rule of law explains how to balance these interests. However, the courts generally favor efforts to expand access to knowledge, rather than efforts to restrict it. As stated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Keyishian v. Board of Regents (U.S. 1967), courts will not “tolerate . . . a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom.”
State authority
To carry out their responsibility to provide for the well-being of their citizens, states establish reasonable laws regulating behavior, and sometimes the state’s interest in protecting children can even override parental control. For example, this is the basis for laws that prohibit child labor and require school attendance.
Ray...honest question.
If a Latino man kills an Asian man based on race, is that inherently more evil than a Latino man killing an Asian man over $50?
If so, why? Is the Asian man more or less dead in one scenario as compared to the other?
During sentencing, if you have more understanding over the $50 because the guy was trying to feed his child, fine...let the sentence reflect that. But just carte blanche? No...I absolutely disagree.
If a Latino man kills an Asian man based on race, is that inherently more evil than a Latino man killing an Asian man over $50?
If so, why? Is the Asian man more or less dead in one scenario as compared to the other?
During sentencing, if you have more understanding over the $50 because the guy was trying to feed his child, fine...let the sentence reflect that. But just carte blanche? No...I absolutely disagree.
Why just as a historical figure?
Remember, you said above that we elected them? If the electorate wants the school board to teach the kids that Jesus Christ is the one and only Son of God, then based on your post above, that should absolutely be ok.
Similar threads
