Are you sure that’s what we said. Or is that some radical journalist misinterpreting what he said on purpose to make you think the guy is evil. The democratic news media doesn’t this all the time.
Unfortunately for you I know what he said. He said we need to bring back hanging from a tree. He wasn’t talking about lunching black people. Which was actually created to kill the Italians. More Italian Americans were Lynch than blacks people. He was talking about bring back the death penalty specifically hanging which isn’t lynching its execution brought on by the government which is legal. Frankly if we brought back the stocks in New York we might actually stop crime or at least discourage it.
@goaded yea I heard the files. He was referring to the death penalty specifically hanging. Hang by a tree until dead is a common phrase to describe hanging
Yes, because nobody ever invented gallows for legal hangings. Oklahoma doesn't allow hangings as capital punishment. It was quite common in lynchings, though.
@goaded the largest mass lynching in American history was perpetrated against Italian Americans in Louisianahttps://lasc. libguides. com/mass-lynching-italian-americans
No Forrest, if we’re talking about white remember the only white people are Anglo-Saxons the French are considered white people. The Germans are not considered white people do Italians are not considered white people. The Russians are not considered white people. The only people who are considered to be white people historically were Anglo-Saxons, Irish and Scottish are considered white. Historically they were known as pale.
The right claiming that CRT is nonsense and there's no systematic racism is rather undermined by elected officials lamenting not being able to lych black people any more and how that somehow gives black people more rights than whites.
@goaded Two guys are hardly "the system" especially if you can't point to anything they've done in an official capacity that is racist in nature. Can you?
Three guys, the sheriff of McCurtain County, one of his investigators and a county commissioner, and are you seriously suggesting that their attitudes don't colour their actions?
@uannoyme Why does white wealth outpace Black wealth by 10x? Why does countless research show resumes or loan apps with “black sounding names? get passed over twice as much?
I asked a question, and you didn't bother to answer that, you just want to turn this into a whole debate about CRT. What does that have to do with a few racist assholes? Do you have knowledge of racist policies from these guys? As much as you'd like to assume here, I'd prefer facts.
Critical Race Theory is not only bullshit, it's racist, dangerous, and abusive. Teaching Caucasian children that they need to feel guilty about themselves simply because they were born Caucasian is racist, gaslighting, and mental, emotional, and psychological child abuse and manipulation. Teaching non-Caucasian children that they're automatically disadvantaged because they weren't born Caucasian is also racist, gaslighting, and mental, emotional, and psychological child abuse and manipulation.
Nobody said that there wasn't racist people in the world, just look at how racist the left has become , but that CRT was a selective history and not accurate..
@gorydetails I don’t know I don’t live in China. But I would imagine some level of racism. Just like if you was the only white barber at a black barber shop.
@OddBeMe making a judgment on a person based on the color of their skin is the definition of racism, this is what I mean by saying that the left is racist. I'm assuming you are on the left? Because your comments are racist
Fighting racism by being racist? Lol great idea that should make things better..
You want to improve things then stop voting for the party that is in charge of the black neighborhoods that have done absolutely nothing to improve them for 50+ years..
@goaded CRT is a skewed and biased look at history to cherry pick events and purposefully leave out others all to paint a biased picture and divide us.. any other questions?
@goaded you have never heard of lies by omission? Does CRT teach you about the millions of White Europeans that ended up as slaves? Does it teach you about all the slaves the native Americans had? does it teach you about all the slaves today in Africa? does it teach you that slavery was normal everywhere in every country for 1000s of years before the US even declared independence?
Does it teach you that Slavery was legal in northern Africa up 1981? and owning slaves was not punishable until 2007? did it leave that part out?
CRT paints a false picture, Humans have been terrible to each other for 1000s of years.. CRT only shows one side being bad..
"you have never heard of lies by omission?" Of course I have.
"Does CRT teach you about the millions of White Europeans that ended up as slaves?" In the USA? Indentured servants were eventually let go, and their children weren't automatically slaves.
"Does it teach you about all the slaves the native Americans had?" In the USA?
"does it teach you about all the slaves today in Africa?" Not in the USA.
"does it teach you that slavery was normal everywhere in every country for 1000s of years before the US even declared independence?" Probably. The point about the USA (about which the history is being taught) is that it took a massive civil war to get rid of slavery, decades after the British Empire had abolished it peacefully, and that there was a century of people passing laws that were expressly or intentionally racist after that.
"Does it teach you that Slavery was legal in northern Africa up 1981? and owning slaves was not punishable until 2007? did it leave that part out?" Again, not the USA. Why wouldn't you leave that out of American history lessons? Interesting, though, I didn't know that. Was it morally right in 1980 to own slaves?
"CRT paints a false picture, Humans have been terrible to each other for 1000s of years.. CRT only shows one side being bad.." Yes, the slave owners and people treating black people as if they were subhuman.
LOL. Do you expect American history lessons to talk about the the hundreds of countries around the world and thousands of years before your country existed before it addresses the truth of slavery in the USA? Was it morally right in 1980 to own slaves?
"yes when you are talking about slavery to omit the whole picture is disingenuous " Not when you're talking about slavery in the USA. Besides, do you think it was ever morally right to own slaves? How about to breed them to make more slaves?
What do you think of the people in those countries that still have slavery who want to keep it? Are they moral? Is it even legal?
I don't know what "modern slavery" is, except perhaps that it's illegal but still practiced. Slavery was made illegal in India in 1843, when it was still part of the British Empire, 10 years after most of the rest of the empire.
@goaded Again CRT is opposed because of the false picture they are putting forth, I have proven this. you making excuses for why they are putting forth a false picture is a terrible counter argument on to why CRT is opposed.
If there was a lesson that was being taught about crime and it was 100% crimes committed by black people, I'm sure you would be upset for not including crimes by other races including whites and im sure you would say that it is painting a false picture.. If the comeback is the lesson is just about "inner city" crime.. would you accept that excuse? probably not.. so why are you trying that excuse here?
You've listed excuses why honest US history shouldn't be taught, not that it's a "false picture". I don't think there should have been slaves in the British Empire (or Nazi Germany, for that matter), but that doesn't mean I feel responsible for it happening, just responsible for not letting it happen again. Let me put my earlier question another way, does slavery in Africa in 1980 justify slavery in the US in 1860? Or the explicitly racist laws passed since?
"100% crimes committed by black people" So, you think children should be taught about all the racist laws passed by black people in the US? I think they probably are, because they weren't in a position to pass any. Except in Wilmington, for a short while before the only example of a successful insurrection in US history.
@goaded missed the point again. Teaching about slavery is very important, teach everything not just a biased version of it is the point.. CRT is just a biased view point that tells partial truths.
Firstly, CRT isn't a school subject, Republicans are just labelling everything they don't like as CRT. Secondly, you can't teach everything in depth in a school class, you have to decide what's most important and relevant. For a century, nobody talked about the Tulsa race massacre or the Wilmington insurrection; that in itself is a worthy subject for an American history lesson. So is the internment of Japanese Americans in WWII. They are dark days in American history, but not teaching about them allows them to be repeated.
@goaded first off yes it is. And if your going to teach a subject that can create a wedge between people and races if you don't include everything.. then you include everything, that's the point, CRT is designed to paint a biased view point, I'm arguing to show the whole picture and your argument is that you want it biased.. that's telling
No, it's not. American History is a school subject, Math, English, Spanish, are too. But there's literally no subject you can teach in its entirety to a group of children over the course of tens of hours each year.
If you don't want slavery to be a subject in school unless it covers millennia and hundreds of countries before it mentions what happened in the past couple of centuries in your backyard, you don't want it to mention what happened in your backyard.
I'll ask you again: how does modern-day slavery in Africa possibly justify slavery in 1860s America?
@goaded again the argument against CRT is it paints a biased picture, I have proven that and all you can offer up now is excuses on why it's ok to be biased..
And nobody said anything about slavery being Justified for any reason, that's just an attempt to change the subject because you can't argue against the fact that CRT is a biased retelling of history
The argument against Republican "anti-CRT" bans (which are actually nothing to do with CRT) is that for centuries American children have been given a biased picture, not just in history lessons but in films and TV series. You're only complaining about the bias potentially being removed, even though that means more history is being taught, not less.
@goaded so you admit it's about trying to even the score? Lol Did you really think that was going to be a good strategy? I don't want any biased being taught.. you do.. Thanks for literally proving my point
No, I'm saying it's about correcting the record in the light of more information.
Did you learn about the Tulsa massacre in school? How about the only successful insurrection in US history? Japanese American internment? You want "everything" taught, but not inconvenient facts, only palatable ones.
Really? You learned about the Tulsa massacre in school? In the 1980s? When there was practically nothing about it until the 1990s? Was that CRT?
"For decades, the story of the massacre was largely erased from history. Official records were lost or destroyed, the city's newspapers did not mention it, schools did not teach it.
@goaded Tulsa masacure no.. what's your point? You are all over the place here, I stated why republicans are against CRT.. I proved the reasons are true, and you seem to have lost your mind. Nothing you have said for the last 15-20 posts has anything to do with why CRT is apposed. Your all over the place and babbling at this point You have not provided a counter argument to anything I have said..
"Tulsa masacure no.. what's your point?" It's what you just claimed you were taught about!
"Did you learn about the Tulsa massacre in school? How about the only successful insurrection in US history? Japanese American internment? You want "everything" taught, but not inconvenient facts, only palatable ones."
@goaded yes I know about the Tulsa Masacure NO I was not taught about it in the 80s.. non of this has anything to do with anything.
the question was posted on why Republicans dont like CRT I posted why.. backed it up and here we are.. Non of the last 20 or so posts you have made is a counterargument to the reasons that I posted at all. Its all nonsensical This is the problem when you hang out in an echo chamber and your views are not challenged, you have no idea what to do when someone challenges them and can articulate why your view is wrong.
Projection, much? I asked you a question, you said yes, then you said no, but I'm the one who can't defend my position?
The point is that almost nobody in the 20th century was taught about things like the Tulsa race massacre, or the 1898 Wilmington, North Carolina insurrection. Why not?
@goaded you asked a question I answered it, you clarified the time frame and I corrected my answer, how are you confused by this? also what does any of that have to do with why CRT is a selective history and biased?
You are going off the rails here.. I made the point about CRT. do you have a counter argument yes or no?
All history is selective and biased. The last century of American history has been selective and biased in favour of white Americans. It's only because of that that levelling the playing field feels like being oppressed.
@goaded so at lest you admit that CRT is biased and you are wanting the biased history so that it is "levelling the playing field" thats a stupid reason and will never bring people together, thanks for making my point.. next time just save the 20 posts of gibberish and admit your biased reasoning and save everyone involved all the nonsense
You can't have it both ways. American history has been biased for centuries, you don't want it to continue, but you oppose levelling the playing field? Do you want it to be more biased, or what?
@goaded I can have it both ways because I dont have a time machine so can do nothing about the past, But going forward I can fight against any biased history.. like CRT
Tell the facts.. if its a touchy subject make sure to include ALL of the facts on the subject so its not a biased viewpoint. you can't logically argue against that which is why you have been babbling for 20+ posts.
So, ignoring the obvious insults you seem to need to make, how do you think "there was slavery elsewhere" justifies the confederacy starting a civil war so that they could bring slavery to newly conquered areas of the country? They weren't even being asked to give up their slaves at the time.
If it doesn't justify it, what is the point in bringing it up, other than as obfuscation? The British had already shut down the slave trade from Africa a generation ago, that would have to be brought up, too.
You can't "bring up all the facts" in a school class, there simply isn't time. When I talk about levelling the playing field, that's literally what I'm talking about, levelling it, not tilting it in the other direction. It may feel like that to you, but that's because you're used to playing downhill.
@goaded I was answering the question on why republicans oppose CRT, it's because CRT is selective history, and gave examples. Me pointing out the examples of the selective history is not a justification of it. It's just pointing out that CRT is ignoring history
And just stop with there "isn't time" nonsense how long did it take you to read my post when I cave examples? 10sec? Lol but there isn't enough time. Just stop
And for the insults? I typically have no respect for bigoted and racist people and you fit into that category so..
It was equally selective history when things like Tulsa were left out. How many books have been written about each subject? Should the children read a thousand page book every lesson? There isn't time to go into every detail, and it's no longer acceptable to turn a blind eye. Texas had a textbook calling slaves "immigrant labor", ffs.
As for your examples, most of them had nothing to do with American history and were just attempts to justify American slavery by saying "there was slavery elsewhere". How do you think that justifies the confederacy starting a civil war so that they could bring slavery to newly conquered areas of the country? They weren't even being asked to give up their slaves at the time.
@goaded yes it was selective history and the past was filled with racist and bigoty views because of it.. and it just shows what kind of person you are that you want to continue on with that.. You will never end racism and bigotry by YOU becoming a racist and a bigot..
So you think that levelling the playing field by demanding that all the truth is shown, rather than just falsehoods and omissions is being racist and bigoted?
They're not teaching CRT in schools (it's a university course), what Republicans call CRT is anything that goes against their narrative. They like the status quo because it avoids facing unpalatable truths. Some states have been teaching that the civil war wasn't about slavery. It was.
Apologies. Texas stopped teaching their 2010 curriculum that played up "the role of states’ rights and sectionalism and downplay slavery as the reason Texas entered the Civil War on the side of the Confederacy." in 2018, finally teaching that "slavery was the central issue of the American Civil War". www.smithsonianmag.com/.../
Of course, you also have a teacher in Florida last week showed his school a video saying: “Every year our state celebrates and memorializes that valiant, brave fight and the countless sacrifices by our men and women during that known as the Civil War, but may be more correctly titled the War To Prevent Southern Independence.” nbc-2.com/.../
But I'm the bigot for saying those things were bad.
@goaded your the bigot for wanting to replace one bad with another.. I dont want either.. you are fine with a slanted view as long as it paints the false picture you want.. thats why you are a bigot.
Once again you incorrectly assume that I just want different lies to be taught. I want what is taught to be the truth, which is that the civil war was about slavery. The confederacy wanted to be allowed to expand slavery to new US territories, against the decision made democratically by the USA as a whole and went to war.*
After they lost and the 14th Amendment was passed, there has followed a century and a half of laws and normalised behaviour, often violent, often fatal, that were designed to keep black people down. (Tulsa, Wilmington NC, lynchings, gerrymandering, etc.) And those attitudes are still evident today (Ahmaud Arbery, the officials recently recorded talking about killing black people, etc.).
Are any of those things untrue? Doesn't leaving those facts out of history or social science lessons bias the lessions?
* "Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [to the assumption of the equality of races]; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "
@goaded I'm not assuming anything I'm taking your words and believing them, you don't want the truth you want half truths and partial truths all to paint a biased picture to "even the playing field" all to push your bigoted ideology..
I was being polite. Clearly, you're intentionally misinterpreting my words which I think are pretty clear and simple facts. Feel free to explain exactly what among them are "half truths and partial truths". If you can't point to anything I suggested as being incorrect, then why should those things be excluded from the curriculum?
Here's what I suggested: I want what is taught to be the truth, which is that the civil war was about slavery. The confederacy wanted to be allowed to expand slavery to new US territories, against the decision made democratically by the USA as a whole and went to war.
After they lost and the 14th Amendment was passed, there has followed a century and a half of laws and normalised behaviour, often violent, often fatal, that were designed to keep black people down. (Tulsa, Wilmington NC, lynchings, gerrymandering, etc.) And those attitudes are still evident today (Ahmaud Arbery, the officials recently recorded talking about killing black people, etc.).
@goaded nonsense.. I pointed out how CRT is a half truths telling of history all to paint a biased slanted view, you have posted 30+ posts defending the biased view and giving excuses on why it has to be a biased view all to "level the playing field"
All you are doing is tying to justify your bigoted ideology.. it's not going to work, I see you for who you are.. and suspect you see yourself as the same.. Who are you really trying to convince with your word salad posts, me or yourself? Because you are wasting your time with me.. you will never be able to justify your bigoted viewpoint with me..
So nothing I said was incorrect or even a half or partial truth because then you'd have said precisely what and why, right? I'm open to correction, not so much to being dismissed and groundlessly insulted.
Let's make this simple: was the American civil war about slavery?
@goaded all of what you have said was an attempt to justify your bigoted ideology and wanting to push forth a bigoted lesson plan that is just bigoted to another race, you just want to flip the coin of bigotry to the other side and have been trying to justify it by pointing out how bigoted the other side of that same coin has been through history.. I want to get rid of the coin..
Yes, you keep saying that, totally without justification. How do you propose getting rid of "the coin"? The coin is the teaching of American history; do you want to stop that altogether, just because you don't want to hear all the truth?
The two sides of the coin are not the same. One is lies (e. g. "the civil war wasn't about slavery"), the other is truth (e. g. "it absolutely was").
Either there's a good reason to exclude the true information I listed, or it should be included in courses about the civil war and slavery, American history generally. You haven't even tried to give a reason to exclude the true reasons for the civil war.
@goaded I have told you.. when it comes to topics that will create bigotry and racism tell the WHOLE story so it's not one sided.
Before you come back with whatever lame excuses you can come up with to try and justify why it's ok to teach a one sided story to create the bigotry you want.. Don't bother I will reject all of it
@goaded there is no reason to justify bigotry and you are correct you shouldn't bother because you will never convince me that a different type of bigotry is ok because of the bigotry of the past. Bigotry is bigotry
Honesty is honesty. I've said many times in this conversation that I don't want lies taught, even by omission. The facts I am proposing are added to the curricula have been omitted. I would have no problem with adding the facts you suggested at the beginning of the conversation, about how slavery has always been around and still is today.
Why do you have a problem with ensuring no child is taught that the civil war wasn't to do with slavery, or that it was a "war of Northern aggression"? Bear in mind, these have been state government standards into the 21st century.
In other words, what would you change about the curricula of (mostly) Southern states to make them less bigoted?
So, what do you think I'd omit in order to hide the truth? Name something specific.
I've shown you what the VP of the Confederacy said about why they were succeeding, and it was explicitly because black people, in his opinion, were lesser than white people. That's quite a major omission from curricula that claimed the war was about states' rights, not slavery, don't you think? That's a lie of omission that lasted six generations.
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [to the assumption of the equality of races]; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." www.battlefields.org/.../cornerstone-speech
@gorydetails I don’t know I guess it would depend on the mystical course that doesn’t exist. It’s like “social studies” I guess. Really it’s a bullshit term. But systemic racism should be taught and studied. As I’m sure it is in some fashion.
@gorydetails what systemic racism? Yes. CRT? Not as an existing course. It exists like String theory exists. Do I need to go over the basics of logic with you assholes?
@gorydetails in my view yes, when colleges go out of their way not to pick the best student because of race, that’s bad. Asian students are usually products of immigrant families whom research has shown works harder.
@OddBeMe But I want to know if that’s taught in this mythical CRT that you’re describing. Your jo bud thinks it’s only to teach about Tulsa and Wilmington.
@gorydetails did you read the word mystical? It’s not actually a course anywhere yet. Those of us who went to college know professors make the syllabus for their courses.
So if there was a CRT class, I’d think all racism would apply. But looking at stats, racism against blacks is the harshest. So…
@OddBeMe oh, it’s not really a course anywhere, you just get mad when school boards or legislatures forbid this nothing from being taught. If you actually looked at stats, you’d see that white on black violence pales in comparison to black on white. It’s not even close.
@gorydetails "school boards or legislatures forbid this nothing from being taught"
Sigh. This is how the right-wing noise machine works.
1. Take a phrase 2. Change its meaning 3. When other people start using the new meaning, point at that as proof they were right
CRT: university level course on systematic racism against black people over the entire lifetime of the country Republicans: No! CRT is teaching anything that makes us white people feel bad, and that's exactly why they're doing it! Schools: OK, we'll ban anyone teaching anything that makes white people feel bad Republicans: See! That was CRT all along!
Global Warming Republicans: Call it climate change, it's less scary Everyone else: Whatever, OK, so climate change is happening as the globe warms... Republicans: Why aren't they calling it Global Warming any more? See! They didn't really believe it!
@OddBeMe you're jealous of the attention going to someone else. Now tell me what % of that warming is due to man? CO2 being a greenhouse gas is a sham. Sea levels aren't rising.
@goaded Critical Race Theory is an offshoot of cultural Marxism. It frames whites as the oppressors (bourgeois) and black people (proletariat) as the victims of them.
@gorydetails OK, let's go with that, then. Would teaching that the civil war was about slavery (specifically the possibility to expand slavery to new territories) be CRT?
@goaded I can't answer that. Because you're doing the usual of presenting a strawman, and expecting me to respond to that. As you've already been bitch smacked enough about, you prefer a biased, incomplete teaching that conforms to your worldview of wyte people bad. You don't want the truth. You want continued racial strife in the US. Possibly because you want the US weak on the world stage, possibly because of your own self-loathing that you want to be projected on us.
@gorydetails It's not a straw man, because there have been people teaching for decades that the war was not about slavery, and still are (a Florida teacher made a whole video about it and showed it to their pupils, just a few days ago).
It's either CRT (which by your definition is cultual marxism which "frames whites as the oppressors (bourgeois) and black people (proletariat) as the victims of them."), or it's not. If it's not, why shouldn't it be taught in schools? If it is, then how does that simple truth about 150 years ago frame today's whites as oppressors?
The British Empire did terrible things, Nazi Germany, too, but they were generally done decades or centuries ago. There's no shame in being British or German today because those times have been acknowledged and renounced. Why can't America do that? Why don't you want America to do that?
@goaded Do you think the average farmer in the South who fought in the civil war thought it was about slavery? Considering only about 25% of the population owned slaves?
@gorydetails Back to changing the subject again, I see. The questions I posed are easy to answer by anyone who can bring themselves to agree with anyone outside their cult.
The average person would have just done what they were told. The leaders started the war because they disagreed with the idea that all people were created equal, they believed that the negro was less than white people. They stood up and said so in public, and they attempted to secede for that reason.
@goaded Right, so as you were called out before, CRT is nothing but taking a biased view of history. You just love it because it fits your world view. Thanks for confirming what you have been schooled on continually.
@gorydetails No, what you want to call CRT is calling out what many Americans have been taught, and in some cases still are being taught, as not just a biased view of history but a clearly inaccurate one.
Average people don't start wars. Leaders start wars and their motivations are out there for anyone to see, provided they haven't been lied to in schools for six or more generations.
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. "
Why is it you want the lies to keep being taught? Nobody alive today is responsible for the civil war in any way; it's nothing to do with the white people of today. Except for people like you wanting to avoid the truth. That, that's your doing.
@gorydetails It's not interesting or even surprising that you'll refuse to answer a simple question as to whether children should still be being taught lies (happening today), preferring to deflect by talking about an extreme left position which isn't.
Should it be allowed to teach children that the civil war wasn't about slavery and white supremacy or not?
@gorydetails No, I didn't, I answered in detail. And that wasn't why you asked, you wanted not to answer the question of whether children should be taught lies about the civil war. Let's make it even more obvious what you're like: Was the civil war about slavery or not?
@goaded JC your still going on about this? what is it not 100 posts trying to defend your bigoted views and still nobody is buying your excuses? Save yourself the trouble you pointing to other bigoted teachings is not a justification for you wanting more bigoted teachings with just the opposite side of the same bigoted coin.
We get it.. your in favor if being bigoted to "even the score" we all understand that. you dont have to keep trying to justify why you are a bigot and in favor of more bigoted teaching, we will never take your bigoted side.. ever
And you're back making baseless accusations. Opposing bigotry being taught is not bigotry. Demanding children not be taught lies is not demanding they are taught lies. This is obvious to everyone.
OK, look, if you don't want to talk any more, fine, if you just don't want the notifications, you can mute the question, but every time you tell me I'm for telling new lies instead of stopping lies being taught, I'll tell you you're wrong. Because you clearly are.
You seem to have the opinion that CRT is nothing but lies, but you can't tell me what those lies are. What I don't understand is why you won't agree that ensuring children are taught the facts that the civil war was fought over slavery and that people of the time thought (and said) black people were less than white people would be better than the lies that it wasn't and they didn't.
@goaded I have pointed out the lies by omission from CRT you have spend post after post trying to justify the lies all to even the playing field. Does CRT teach about the 1st slave owner in the us? (it doesn't) want to take a guess on why?
There was not any "1st slave owner in the us", there would have been hundreds of them when the country was founded. If you mean the first slave owners in North America, that would have been native Americans, I expect (but were their children automatically slaves, too?). It was a very different country than the 19th century United States. The British had slaves in their colonies, but they stopped the practice throughout the empire in the first half of the 19th century (they did it peacefully, but at huge expense that we only just finished paying off).
These are facts that you seem to think I should be afraid of for some reason. I'm not. The same as with facts about slavery elsewhere in the world.
Include as many facts as you like, but recognise that some states have been teaching lies for over 150 years and make suggestions what to do about it.
Only if it really is relevant and it really is left out by "CRT". That would be a century or two before the civil war when literally the entire world had slaves, right? There's an article about black slave owners here, if you're interested. www.theroot.com/did-black-people-own-slaves-1790895436 It would be worthwhile extra reading for people studying the subject. It turns out there are assholes with all skin colours, as you'd expect because they're all human.
It feels a bit like you're clutching at straws, because I don't see anything that justifies anyone lying about the reasons for the civil war 150 years later, which is one wrong I would like to see righted. Is wanting that "CRT"?
There's nothing hard about acknowledging people centuries (or even decades) ago were wrong; they didn't know better, we do now.
@goaded lol why would it not be "relevant"? Unless you are trying to paint a biased picture like what CRT is doing.. What do you mean clutching at straws? I posted all the selective history that CRT has done and you have not been able to debate logically on any of them (this one included) if anyone is clutching at straws its you. And thats rich taking about we know better now.. you dont.. you are still perpetrating the same bigotry but just towards a different race, by supporting CRT..
You keep saying things like I "have not been able to debate logically", but I don't know what was the last time you answered a question I asked you. Not to mention your frequent insults.
You've not "posted all the selective history that CRT has done", you've simply posted more facts about a huge subject, while ignoring the lies about that subjects that have been taught for six generations or more. I don't think you want to understand that I have never asked for a single lie to be told, because the facts tell the whole story. That's not bigotry, bigotry is dismissing something as nothing but lies when it's not.
@goaded your questions are just misdirection.. I don't play that game.. I said CRT is a biased view of history and they lie by omission.. I have proven that.. everything that you are doing is just nonsense.. all of it.. not a single thing you have posted refuted what I said about CRT.
All you can do is whataboutism, as I have said you pointing to other things through history is not a justification for pushing a new bigoted agenda with CRT..
You have failed spectacularly in this whole "debate"
"I said CRT is a biased view of history and they lie by omission" You have not by any measure proven that. It seems like your position that if "CRT" (as if that were an entity) leaves out any fact about slavery they're "lying by omission".
As I see it, there are facts that have been left out of history lessons for over a century that shouldn't have been. Feel free to demand other facts be introduced, but they won't affect history.
Also, I'd appreciate it if both you and @gorydetails could answer the question: Was the civil war about slavery or not?
@goaded I'm sure you would appreciate us allowing you to try and change the subject is not going to work. This thread that I started was about CRT, your question has nothing to do with what I said about CRT at all. Stay on topic or go away
If you want to talk about the civil war, you can ask that in the gag society and politics category, But to constantly try and change the subject all because you got embarrassed here is pointless
Why am I not surprised in the slightest that neither of you will admit the civil war was fought because of slavery? You're the one who pretends that CRT (which isn't really a thing) is racist and is nothing but lies of ommission, but you are fine not contradicting a racist lie that's been taught in some states for six generations to continue.
@goaded your question about the civil war has nothing to do with what I originally said about why CRT is being opposed, please stay on topic
If you want to talk about the civil war start your own discussion about it as your own GaG question.. it's not complicated, a 10 year old could figure this out. Why are you struggling so much?
But we're talking about CRT, slavery, and the civil war here, so it seems like a reasonable place to ask to see if we have any facts in common. Was the civil war fought over slavery and the related white supremacy, or not? I say yes, it was, you're spending a whole lot of energy on avoiding answering.
@goaded no as I have said I dont give in to the typical tactics of changing the subject when you don't like how the debate is going. I made my case about CRT, you can't give a logical counter argument so you are reduced to change the subject.. no thanks..
I'm not changing the subject. You say CRT is "selective history and not accurate", but all history is selective (it would take a lifetime to learn all the known facts about slavery, for example) and seem to think that existing history as taught is accurate although I've given a concrete example of how some states outright lied about the causes of the civil war (which lie you seem unwilling to condemn).
@goaded non of that is a counter argument for CRT being selective history. It's just an attempt to redirect the debate elsewhere.. why are you even trying? I have called you out on this like 10 times so there is no point, It won't work. What is wrong with you that you won't ask your questions in the place that's literally designed for you to ask questions? This is very bizarre behavior. Either there is something mentally wrong with you or you are just trolling.
Ah, so you're back to the insults. I'll take that as a "yes, all history is selective", because it obviously is. "CRT" won't be an exception, so now all you have to do is explain how it is "not accurate". Perhaps you could state one "CRT" assertion that is not true?
@goaded act like a troll and get called one.. go ask your question in the actual area to ask questions.. how is this simple thing beyond your capacity to understand?
I'll take that as an admission you can't come up with a single inaccuracy in what you call "CRT" is reporting as history, to go along with the fact that all history is selective, and leave you with the opportunity to admit that the civil war was fought over slavery.
@goaded lol run along troll I posted the problems of CRT in my second reply, pretending I didn't post them will work as well as your attempt to change the subject.. Now go ask your question about the civil war as a new question and I will be happy to embarrass you there
@goaded already went over this and destroyed all your reasons, why are you so afraid to ask a question where you are supposed to? I'm assuming you know I will embarrass you for everyone to see? I mean this embarrassment your going through now is buried 100+ posts so not many people will see it.. So the fact that you won't ask your question tells me you know how wrong you are..
I'm beginning to think that you really believe you "destroyed all [my] reasons", and you've embarrassed anyone but yourself by failing to answer pretty much any point I made. Nuts.
@goaded I have, not a single thing was a counter to why conservatives opposed CRT.. I gave my reasonings... Backed it up with facts.. and all you have provided was excuses on why you think it's ok to continue on with a biased teaching.. Your whole argument has outed you as the bigot that you are. You know I will expose you to more people if you create your own question so you try and save face in a thread where your bigotry is buried and that's why you don't create your own question.
Oh, bullshit. You simply wouldn't answer either question there, either. Is all history "selective" or not? Was the civil war fought about slavery?
And you've not backed anything up with facts. All you've done is made vague accusations with no proof that CRT (which isn't taught in schools) leaves out some things you'd like taught which boil down to "other people did slavery too" which has no bearing on whether it was morally right and ignores the explicitly racist nature of American slavery and its aftermath.
@goaded because neither question has anything to do with CRT and why Republican's oppose it. try and stay on topic.. If you want me to embarrass you about the civil war then ask the question in the correct area.. we both know you won't do that
You're persistant in your attempts to say black is white, up is down, and "CRT" is evil, I'll give you that. I'm not going to play your game when we both know the civil war was about slavery. Why don't you ask it, if you're so confident you're right? I, for one, promise to answer it.
Of course it has to do with what you like to call CRT. The facts that people like you who oppose genuine history being taught want to to keep it that only 8% of 12th-graders know that the civil war was fought over slavery. You dress it up as making kids feel bad about themselves for something that happened 150 years ago, but it's really so that kids aren't ashamed of their parents believing lies. I didn't object to any of the facts you posted being taught, because they're facts. The facts show that the US has a racist history that is still ongoing, and will be until people like you admit reality and stop covering it up. www.theatlantic.com/.../
@goaded how is that an argument for anything for the reasons that CRT is opposed? You are being completely illogical. We have already gone over if there is been selective history being taught in the past that is not a coater argument for what I said about CRT in the present. All that argument does is show how bigoted you are. You point out the bigoted teachings against blacks in the past.. but support a bigoted teaching against whites with CRT.. that makes you a bigot. if this realization makes you uncomfortable then you need to reevaluate your ideology..
Now go ask about the civil war and what's being taught about it and I will wreck you in there as well
What you've been doing over and over again is ignoring the fact that I've said states should stop teaching lies and teach all the truth, including what has been left out for six generations. You call that "bigoted teaching against whites".
You can't really believe you're looking reasonable in this conversation, can you?
@goaded no you want the states to stop teaching one lie and replace it with another lie (CRT).. thats why you are a bigot.. I want all lies removed.. You want one lie replaced with another lie.. to "even the playing field" now go ask your question
You keep saying I "want the states to stop teaching one lie and replace it with another lie", when I've told you multiple times that you're full of it when you say so. You've presented no counter-facts to what "CRT" (again, not a thing taught in schools but misused to mean "things Republicans don't want taught") teaches, only vague accusations of "lies of omission", with no clue whether they're being taught or not.
Oh, yes? Where? What does it involve, exactly? What lies do they tell? How do you know that? Is it actually genuine CRT, or just "stuff Republicans don't want taught"?
Because the only link posted as evidence that it's taught in schools so far in this question is literally to an article about teachers saying it isn't taught.
@goaded here is something to make your life easier.. if its a controversial subject and liberals are saying its not happening.. believe the opposite.. remember when gender affirming care it was clamed there was no surgery being done on minors? yeah i remember that lie as well..
there is tons more links that a quick google search shows that its a lie that its not being taught.. So please spare me the BS.. you know its taught and you are 100% on board with it because of your bigotry..
Well, that first link includes "Motivated by the work of Manhattan Institute senior fellow and City Journal contributing editor Christopher F. Rufo", who is the guy who set out to create a moral panic and define CRT as "anything bad", I can ignore that. The NYPost article relies on that one.
The second one includes: "the notions that all white people (including white children) are inherently and irredeemably oppressors of black people".
Now, if that's being taught, I'd be as opposed to it as you are.
I just don't believe it is, feel free to prove me wrong. How would a Australian high school teacher know in detail what's being taught in US schools, anyway?
Like I said at least once, white people today aren't responsible for slavery or (mostly) even Jim Crow and segregation, but they are responsible for continuing lies like the idea that the civil war wasn't fought over slavery, and that racism is a thing of the past.
@goaded I said why CRT is opposed, you have gone from, trying to justify the lies by omission "to even the playing field" then you dropped that because it paints you as a bigot.. your next attempt was to do everything to change the subject over and over.. now that hasn't worked so your into the denial and attack the source part of the liberal debating playbook?
Why would you think I would accept your dismissal of the source? Prove the source wrong..
Tell me, have you ever tried simply answering a post, rather than going to insults and lies? Here's what the man has said: “The goal is to have the public read something crazy in the newspaper and immediately think ‘critical race theory.’ We have decodified the term and will recodify it to annex the entire range of cultural constructions that are unpopular with Americans.”.
@goaded calming there is a negative when there is proof of a positive is not a counterargument. you are doing the exact same thing as denial/attacking the source its just by proxy and still will not work. You have to prove the finding as being wrong.. you can't and you know it
What the hell are you talking about? I've pointed to an actual case of lies to students: only 8% of 12 grade students could say slavery was the cause of the civil war, and you've not shown any proof that "CRT" (even as redefined by Rufo) has lied to children.
What "finding" do you think I have to prove wrong? Why do you believe an Australian high school teacher knows more about what's being taught in US schools that US teachers?
@goaded I have pointed to CRT being taught and articles backing that up and why. You can't just wave away the articles and operating in denial or dismissive of the source
Your Slavery/Civil war point is pointless to why CRT is being opposed.. you seem to have jumped back into the "change the subject" part of the playbook
You've pointed to articles by the very people who have been pushing the moral panic about CRT and who have stated explicitly that they want it to mean anything they don't like.
But what the hell!
Do "white people have white privilege" in the United States? Do "white people have unconscious biases that negatively affect non-white people"?
@goaded those are racist questions and accusations. Making a judgment on a person not based on the character of the person but based on the color of the skin is the definition on racism.
I'm not surprised in the least that you have devolved the debate that you are incapable of actually debating to dive into your racist ideology.. So we are in the attack the person you are debating part of your playbook are we?
Hah, it's funny to see right-wingers try to quote MLK. He was looking forward to a time that obviously hasn't happened yet.
They're not racist questions, they're about reality. Do white people have unconscious biases that negatively affect non-white people, or not? Do white people have white privilege? The answer to both, like it or not, is yes. Just look at interview rates for typical "white" or "black" names.
@goaded normally I won't let you attempt to change the subject but we can take a small deture to point out how racist you are.. you are making a judgment on white people based on skin color. Your whole racist ideology comes crumbling down when you look at Asians and how they are the most prosperous race in the US
now if you want to talk about how racist you are I suggest you create a new question in the correct area. This debate is about why CRT is opposed.. try and stay on topic
@goaded You need to get off your undeserved and unearned high horse. The shitty history of your nationality and nation are the sole reason we have about 60 million less Jewish people in the world than we should right now, and the reason we had two world wars during the 20th century.
The shitty history of your continent is the reason that the Union needed a Naval blockade of the Confederacy during the American Civil War. While just about all European countries had outlawed slavery by 1850 within their own borders, they continued to turn a blind eye and openly support (or at least sympathize with) the Confederacy by continuing to trade with them during the Civil War and purchasing the Confederacy's products that were directly produced by and from slavery. Indirect, financial, and/or by proxy support is still support.
Let's not forget the Africans and African nations that helped Europeans (and eventually Americans) round up their neighbors for a profit. Or did you falsely believe all this time that Africans just voluntarily jumped on slave ships when Europeans/Americans asked them to every time they showed up at their shores like Uber Pool? Also, when liberals talk about reparations, are we including those Africans that sold their neighbors for money during the centuries-long slave trade? What about me and my family's ancestors, who weren't even in the United States prior to 1890? Should we pay also? Get bent.
Critical Race Theory is not only bullshit, it's racist, dangerous, and abusive. Teaching Caucasian children that they need to feel guilty about themselves simply because they were born Caucasian is racist, gaslighting, and mental, emotional, and psychological child abuse and manipulation. Teaching non-Caucasian children that they're automatically disadvantaged because they weren't born Caucasian is also racist, gaslighting, and mental, emotional, and psychological child abuse and manipulation. So shove that once you're bent.
Finally, I went to school in the 1980s and 1990s, and we were taught about the Tulsa massacre, Japanese internments during World War II, the Vietnam military massacre, the Confederacy's Constitution, lynchings in the south, the shit treatment of the Irish, Italians, Jewish, and others, and a litany of other terrible transgressions during American history. So as usual, you have absolutely no idea what you're posting about on this thread, or just about everything you've ever yammered about on this site... especially anything to do with the United States.
With all of its issues, flaws, and problems, the United States Of America is still, by far, the best country on the planet, and the greatest nation in human history. No amount nonsensical racism, liberalism, fascism, socialism, communism, or revisionist history typed with your Jimmy Dean sausage fingers will ever change that.
@NYCQuestions1976 Invite everyone you like, I can see how the people you like would think what you wrote was an impressive putdown (rah rah, USA!), but it totally misses the whole point of CRT.
The point is that, unlike much of the US (the former Confederate states in particular), we've admitted our past and come to terms with it. The number of people in Europe who don't know about WWII or think it would be good if Germany rose again is essentially zero. You can't say the same about "The South Will Rise Again", can you?
Did being taught those uncomfortable historical facts in New Jersey make you feel like you were an oppressor? Were you being taught you need to feel guilty about yourself "simply because you were born Caucasian"? I don't think so. You believe a propagandist's idea of what "teaching CRT" would be, and that's being used to stop children in some states being taught what you were.
Yes, countries bought products that were the result of US slave labour. Are you saying the British should have intervened in the US civil war?
The founding colonies outlawed the import of slaves from Africa in the late 18th century, the British Empire making the trade illegal in the early 19th. You don't even want to talk about the late 19th.
Let's not forget the laws passed in the wake of the civil war that were specifically to keep black people from voting or succeeding, not to mention the violence like Tulsa (which was covered up by authorities and the press for 50 years) which still echoes a century later with the murder of Ahmaud Arbery (which was also covered up by the authorities).
Reparations, in the unlikely event that they'd ever get paid, would not "just" be for slavery, but for a whole lot of things since.
The British Empire was once the greatest power on the planet, too. Don't forget that.
@goaded No, I meant EVERYONE and ANYONE. Invite @msc545@OddBeMe@Still-alive and others as well. Even though I disagree with most of their opinions and their overall view of the United States, unlike you, at least they're actually IN the United States. Also unlike you, I've got no desire to exist in an echo chamber.
The rise of Germany again? Yeah right! The Union Of European Socialist Republics have skewed so far left that you've allowed the rise of the Diet Soviet Union, which has forced otherwise neutral nations (Finland and Sweden) to join NATO for protection, and you've been allowing predominantly Muslim nations in the Middle East to walk all over you for years.
My explanation of Critical Race Theory was right on point, and there's a difference between that and teaching factual history. Critical Race Theory is a form of intellectual child abuse.
British intervention in the Civil War? No. How about just numerous regimes in Europe not supporting the Confederacy? Or maybe Europeans were really just fine with slavery, as long as it wasn't in their own back yards.
European ships were still bringing slaves to the southern United States right up to the Civil War, and continued to trade with the Confederacy and buy their products during the Civil War. Don't be naïve and/or obtuse just because the trade was "officially" outlawed by European countries.
Who forgot any of that? I just mentioned the events YOU felt were omitted, plus a few others you didn't mention.
Who's going to pay me and the rest of GaG our reparations for dealing with your stupidity?
The British Empire was indeed once powerful, and we were smart, and the first, to successfully disengage from them. Don't forget that.
@NYCQuestions1976 "My explanation of Critical Race Theory was right on point, and there's a difference between that and teaching factual history."
Really? How do you know that? You're all full of wild claims about it, but short on actual proof, like, say, lesson plans or state standards. Laws against "CRT" don't make exceptions for historical facts that upset some people.
A few anecdotes about bad teachers can be used on both sides (e. g. the one who showed students a video that gushes about the "valiant, brave fight and the countless sacrifices by our men and women during that known as the Civil War." nbc-2.com/.../ )
I do love your implication that Sweden and Finland are joining NATO because of the EU and not because one of their neighbours just got invaded by Russia. @Soteris
@goaded Critical Race Theory doesn't deal in historical facts. It uses history as an emotional weapon to fool non-Caucasians, particularly African Americans, in the United States into believing that they can't exist and succeed on individual merit. It tells them that they need unnecessary government intervention in their everyday lives simply because of the existence of Caucasian Americans. It's racist, dangerous, and abusive.
The only privilege here is Green Privilege. If you've got a lot of green, then you've got privilege. Skin is irrelevant. Now, if you want to say that far more Caucasian Americans and Asian Americans have more green than all the other minorities here, then that's a legitimate conversation.
Maybe Finland and Sweden's neighbor Ukraine got invaded by the Diet Soviet Union because the Union Of European Socialist Republics have become soft over the last few decades, and also overly dependent on the energy from the Diet Soviet Union. That's just my educated guess. I'm not going into it any more than that, because I don't live there, and I'm not a hypocrite.
@NYCQuestions1976 "Critical Race Theory doesn't deal in historical facts. It uses history as an emotional weapon..." Really? How do you know that? You're all full of wild claims about it, but short on actual proof, like, say, lesson plans or state standards. Laws against "CRT" don't make exceptions for historical facts that upset certain people.
Ukraine got invaded because Putin thought he could take the whole country in a matter of days or weeks. It took 10 months for Germany to eliminate its reliance on Russian energy. It's gone now, and probably never coming back. None of this is anybody's fault but Putin's.
@goaded Well this sure is quite the shitshow and you waited this long to finally invite me? I honestly feel left out!
Aaaanyways. can't say CRT is my favorite topic, mainly because Republicans just keep using it as an excuse to whitewash their own history of things they dont want to teach children. Be it how America genocided the natives or enslaved black people or whatever else they feel uncomfortable with in their own history they blame it on CRT and tries to have it removed from schools.
The ACTUAL CRT is just a tool. More specifically a tool used in social studies and law to examine history through a different perspective that makes it easier to identify racism. It is not, and never was supposed to be a full account of human history or whatever else @gorydetails was on about by calling it "a biased view of history". No shit its "a biased view of history", that is literally its fucking purpose as a tool to make examining easier.
Before anyone freaks out and starts calling it a "Lie" or whatever else stupid, the things discovered through using CRT does not stop being racist if you examine it through other perspectives including a complete overview with historical context. Turns out that racism is still racism, weird huh?
Also if you apply CRT to USA you will find racism inside USA. If you apply CRT to Africa then you will find racism within the various African countries. It is a tool, you can choose how you use it. It is not limited to a certain time period, geographic region or race. You can also use it to find racism against white people. Its a tool.
@goaded As for Sweden and Finland joining NATO? That has more to do with geopolitics and diplomacy than pretty much anything else. The idea that Finland and Sweden are trying to join right now when Russia is getting its shit kicked in completely goes against the idea that it is a response to a threat since Russia is objectively speaking the weakest it has been since the collapse of the soviet union right now.
This is not Sweden and Finland acting in fear, they are trying to capitalize on an opportunity to gain benefits. If Russia did not have nukes I would put good money on Finland being tempted to declare war to retake the land the Soviet Union took from them previously. Countries do not fear when their main rivals collapses, they try to get a few kicks in themselves.
@Soteris Read this thread and try again. I'm not the one who first referred to the Ukraine as a "neighbor" of Finland and Sweden. My "neighbor" post was a response to your silly socialist friend.
@NYCQuestions1976 You are indeed the person who said "Maybe Finland and Sweden's neighbor Ukraine got invaded by the Diet Soviet Union because the Union Of European Socialist Republics have become soft over the last few decades, and also overly dependent on the energy from the Diet Soviet Union."
@Soteris To be fair, it was me that referred to neighbours, but two "houses" down is still a neighbour. I'm still waiting for any of them to explain how teaching the truth about the civil war (as has been taught in New Jersey for decades and not in, say, Texas) makes white children ashamed of anyone but people who lied to them about it or non-white children feel like victims. They believe propagandists' version of what CRT supposedly is, all coming back to essentially one person: Rufo.
@goaded I never really understood this part of Conservative culture. History is not something you read about to be proud of your heritage, it is something you read about to learn from. It is full of terrible people doing terrible things alongside amazing people doing amazing things. If you dont get disturbed by reading your history then you are not actually reading history.
@Soteris I couldn't agree more. I'm sure someone will be along in a minute to explain exactly how teaching factual history is Nazi fascism and child abuse.
@goaded When they start teaching Critical Race Theory in African countries and elsewhere in the Eastern Hemisphere, then maybe I'll consider it necessary here. Students in the United States (particularly middle school and up) have no blockades when it comes to learning about all of our history. The good, the bad, the great, the horrible, and everything in between. Anything that you believe and perpetuate to the contrary is propaganda and agenda.
@Soteris I also believed that the Diet Soviet Union was getting its ass kicked, at least until we had that classified intelligence leak here. Now I'm not so sure, which I'm sure we can all agree, if it's true, sucks out loud.
Anyway, this is what was part of my original post on this thread:
"The rise of Germany again? Yeah right! The Union Of European Socialist Republics have skewed so far left that you've allowed the rise of the Diet Soviet Union, which has forced otherwise neutral nations (Finland and Sweden) to join NATO for protection, and you've been allowing predominantly Muslim nations in the Middle East to walk all over you for years."
Nowhere did I use the words "neighbor" or "neighbors" or "neighbor's" until I responded to @goaded 's post, when that's what he typed first. Just because I used his words to respond to him doesn't mean that I don't understand geography and cartography.
@gorydetails "BS" tool? We use tools all the time to help us understand the world around us. Without tools, both physical and intellectual, we are nothing. CRT, as tools go is very powerful in that it makes it very easy to identify when and where there exist racism. What more could you ask from a tool we designed to identify racism?
@NYCQuestions1976 Pretty sure that CRT is just basic education. Like Newtons laws or whatever, any modern educational course revolving around things such as history or laws will include a course on CRT.
As for how Russia is getting its shit pushed in? I mean that is just demonstrably true. They are the aggressors, their goal was conquest of the country. Either they win the war, which they obviously have not done yet, or they are losing. On an overview look there is no in between, especially this long after it has began.
This is not to even talk about the winning conditions established by the Russians which included things such as weakening NATO and the EU in which case they have accomplished literally the opposite, AKA losing. I have also taken a look at some of the leaked documents and if anything, it also just agrees with my conclusion that Russia is losing.
No one is going to look at a loser such as Russia and decide that they should join NATO out of fear. That is not rational.
@NYCQuestions1976 sorry just woke up. Diet Soviet Union? No Putin is full right winging his way to fascist state. But you are right about Muslim countries walking all over us, or we would have invaded Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
And “Critical Race Theory is a form of intellectual child abuse.” Uh wha? It’s literally a form of study that looks at racism in certain systems. PERIOD.
@Soteris right oh. Except CRT isn’t being taught officially as basic education. I’m sure racism is, but honestly we should focus on actual systemic bigotry that can ossify in any government or company.
@Soteris It just strikes me as odd that two countries that pride themselves on being peaceful and neutral (more Sweden than Finland on the second one) and generally independent from military and defensive alliances would choose now of all times to join NATO. Unless the other part you mentioned is far more true than I realized? That Finland would actually be aggressive and *start* a war with the Diet Soviet Union if not for the threat of nuclear weapons?
If the Ukraine is indeed still winning, and winning decisively, it doesn't explain what was revealed in the leaked documents: That we're far more involved than the Biden administration was sharing with the public, we're greatly increasing our non-medical assistance to the Ukraine, and they're spying intensely on the whole war itself. Then again, I've seen the way the current administration handles themselves over the last 2½ years, so maybe their actions here, like with everything else, have no logical explanations.
@OddBeMe "Diet Soviet Union" is just my way at jabbing at Putin, because he wants to be as powerful (obviously not politically aligned) as those old Soviet leaders, and he never will be. Sort of like Jerry Jones will never be George Steinbrenner.
Correct about Saudi Arabia. They're right up there with Iran, China, and the Diet Soviet Union. We also placate Turkey a lot, like how we've always been "careful" about how we support the Kurdish people over the decades. Then Trump removed our support for them altogether, which I was 100% against. Biden hasn't restored or support for them either. They've been loyal allies to the United States and Europe in the Middle East, far more than Saudi Arabia. It's not right.
I learned a lot of our dark history in school decades ago without Critical Race Theory being around. It may be a "tool", but it's being used as a weapon. Critical Race Theory doesn't just teach forgotten or buried historical facts. It uses history as an emotional weapon to fool non-Caucasians, particularly African Americans, in the United States into believing that they can't exist and succeed on individual merit. It tells them that they need unnecessary government intervention in their current everyday lives simply because of the existence of Caucasian Americans centuries ago. It's racist, dangerous, and abusive.
The only privilege here is Green Privilege. If you've got a lot of green, then you've got privilege. Skin is irrelevant. Now, if you want to say that far more Caucasian Americans and Asian Americans have more green than all the other minorities here, then that's a legitimate conversation.
@NYCQuestions1976 "It uses history as an emotional weapon to fool non-Caucasians, particularly African Americans, in the United States into believing that they can't exist and succeed on individual merit." How do you know that? Because you've been told it by Carlson and Rufo, or do you have actual evidence? State education standards, for example. I'd be willing to bet that DeSantis would declare what you were taught decades ago in New Jersey is CRT.
Critical Race Theory is about America, and the idea of white supremacy that made it acceptable to treat people like property, even their children, as long as their skin was a certain colour. I just learned that Florida has a Confederate History Month; do you think they teach all the bad things that happened in the antebellum south?
@goaded Who? Carlson and Rufo? I listen to Boomer and Gio in the mornings on my way to work, and I listen to Carton and Roberts in the afternoons on my way home.
Whatever Ron DeSantis would classify my New Jersey education as is fine with me. He went to Yale and served in the United States Navy. Meanwhile, you've done neither of those things. Also, New Jersey might be "blue" when it come to national issues, but we're very purple and red on various things within our own borders. We're not Florida or Texas, but we sure as hell aren't New York or California.
In Germany and in other countries in Europe, do they teach about how despite all the bad things that happened in the antebellum south, when the Civil War broke out, numerous European regimes continued to support the Confederacy (openly, secretly, and/or by proxy) by buying their products, and conveniently not paying attention when European ships continued to bring Africans to the Confederacy to be used as slaves to make money, even though just about all European nations had outlawed slavery within their own borders, which made it necessary for the Union to deploy a Naval blockade?
If the answer in Germany is no, I'll actually let it sside, since I'm confident that it probably doesn't make Germany's Top 10 Atrocities list.
@NYCQuestions1976 So you have no actual evidence that CRT is as dastardly as you want to make out, and you have no problem with the New Jersey education you got would be classified as CRT (and thus banned) in Florida. Thanks for clearing that up.
Oh, and European nations would have been trading slaves with the United States, not the Confederacy, for most of that time you're talking about.
@goaded Telling certain children that they're automatically at fault for the imaginary plight of their peers because of history and race is more than dastardly, it's child abuse.
Telling certain children that they're automatically disadvantaged victims of their peers because of history and race is more than dastardly. It's child abuse.
The timetable in question is the American Civil War. So during the Civil War, the Union deployed Naval blockade around the Confederacy for no reason, and/or European ships were bringing Africans through the Union states first to get them to the Confederacy for sale? As Joe Pesci once said, " I would LOVE to hear THIS!"
Regardless, even if you're bringing up the years/decades prior to the Civil War, it just makes you even more of a hypocrite, because the countries in Europe (and the Africans that were capturing and selling their neighbors) were still just as guilty as the United States for slavery in the south. They fully enjoyed those slave labor products, and conveniently looked the other way as money poured into their economies from "outlawed" European-owned African transport ships.
True, CRT is probably not often included into basic education. That being education that everyone is expected to receive. But anyone specifically studying for higher levels within law and social studies wold definitely be taught about CRT and how to use it. Probably also those who study history as well. This would be true regardless from what country you get this education unless they make an explicit decision to ban it for stupid reasons like many places in USA are doing. Ironically that will just harm American students since they will be less educated compared to their peers from around the world.
@NYCQuestions1976 "Telling certain children that they're automatically at fault for the imaginary plight of their peers because of history and race is more than dastardly, it's child abuse." How do you know that is happening? Is it part of a state or education standard somewhere? Why do you think children can't be told about bad things from history without making them feel guilty? You already said you were taught these things, and you don't think you were made to feel guilty, do you?
Florida, with its Confederate History Month, would call what you learned CRT and ban it. That's what you're really fighting for, not against a couple of badly thought out lessons by individual teachers.
The Royal Navy blockaded Africa for over sixty years to hinder the slave trade. Perhaps you're talking about European countries buying the results of slave labour? Should 19th century countries have been more woke? Trade with countries at war is not unusual; in case you hadn't noticed, people are still trading with Russia and Ukraine despite the war going on there.
"Between 1808 and 1860 the West Africa Squadron captured 1,600 slave ships and freed 150,000 Africans. Around 2,000 British sailors died on their mission of freeing slaves with the West Africa Squadron." en.wikipedia.org/.../Blockade_of_Africa
@goaded Critical Race Theory is cut from the same thought cloth as reparations. Both trying to make modern Caucasian Americans pay, emotionally and financially, for the sins of their ancestors, while also telling modern non-Caucasian Americans that they've got no shot at individual success based on merit without government intervention because of what happened to their ancestors.
My ancestors were just about all Irish and Italian (with a bit of other Western European peppered in), and none of them were in the United States prior to 1890. They also were treated like shit when they got here. Should I and my current family members be entitled to reparations also? The correct answer for me, my family, and everyone else in the United States in the 21st century is NO.
European nations were "woke" enough to ban slavery within their own borders, but were still totally fine with capitalizing on the results of slavery in their economies and pockets.
Was the Royal Navy blocking the slave trade for humanitarian purposes? Or was the Royal Navy trying to keep those people working in the British Empire's own African colonies? Or maybe the Royal Navy was just trying to cut the rest of Europe out of the slave trade and hog the profits solely for the British Empire? I bet on the last two combined.
@NYCQuestions1976 You keep making claims about "CRT" without any proof to back them up. I've yet to see you show that what's taught in schools today that is labelled "CRT" by Republicans is any different than you were taught in NJ. In fact, I think you agreed that Florida would ban what you were taught. Certainly, I don't think you were taught to hate yourself.
"European nations were "woke" enough to ban slavery within their own borders, but were still totally fine with capitalizing on the results of slavery in their economies and pockets." Not just "their own borders", the French and British Empires covered a large part of the world in the early 19th century. Both of them freed all their slaves (eventually), and paid off the owners.
You'd lose your bet. Where's the profit in freeing 150,000 slaves? Why do you think that buying goods that are the result of slave labour is just as bad as actually owning slaves? It's not like the northern states weren't buying cotton from the south before the war, either.
@goaded You can deny or sugar coat it all you want. There's a difference between, "Here's what happened centuries ago, and why it happened." and, "Here's what happened, why it happened, and since it was your ancestors, it's currently your fault." or, "Here's what happened, why it happened, and since it was your ancestors, you're currently a victim."
Maybe Britain and France freed their slaves in their empires on paper, but let's not be obtuse and pretend that those "free" people didn't have Jim Crow-like existences in those empires.
The north was the same country before the start of the Civil War, not a different country with one policy for themselves, and conveniently ignoring that same policy outside their borders to maintain incoming profit and products. Also, the only reason slavery wasn't addressed during the Revolutionary War (something that Benjamin Franklin and a few others warned that will eventually cause a war if it wasn't addressed at the time, but was overruled) is because the Thirteen Colonies needed to be united in their efforts to defeat Britain. Then politicians like Henry Clay kept working out compromises that continued to push off the breaking point until it finally came to a head in 1861.
@NYCQuestions1976 I'm not denying or sugar-coating anything. Once more, you can't show me anything that shows what Republicans are labelling "CRT" is any different from what you were taught in school in NJ, let alone that it involves children being told it's their fault.
American white supremacy and racism is not ancient history, it is still happening, not just by individuals, but in the system (probably not in your state). Jim Crow laws were passed in my parents' lifetime, Ahmaud Arbery was murdered a few years ago and it was covered up by the authorities.
You like to talk about Germany and the Nazis, but children here are taught about what happened, and that it is their responsibility to ensure that it never happens again. At least in some places in America they're teaching how wonderful the confederacy was.
The British Empire made the African slave trade illegal and it enforced the law. Saying that doesn't matter because slaves were still traded or people bought raw materials from the southern states (which wasn't illegal) is like saying the American government doesn't care about drug trafficking. Caring about how other countries govern themselves and boycotting them is not a 19th century thing. Feel free to show me some evidence of "Jim Crow-like existences in those empires", until then I'll assume you're making stuff up.
@NYCQuestions1976 CRT is a tool. It does not say whos fault it is or if you should feel bad, only history itself provides those answers. CRT simply presents history and/or law in a format that is easier to understand on the basis of racism. Nothing more, nothing less. If you are upset about the results of what CRT tells you then you are upset about actual history.
@Soteris No, because tools can be (and are being) used as weapons. There's a difference between, "Here's what happened centuries ago, and why it happened." and, "Here's what happened, why it happened, and since it was your ancestors' fault, it's also currently your fault." or, "Here's what happened, why it happened, and since it was your ancestors who were victims, you're also currently a victim." The latter part is being promoted by liberals in this country and going on in classrooms and it needs to stop, because it's emotional and psychological child abuse. History is about HISTORY. Period. As in, "It happened, it's done, move on." Not, "It happened, it's done, so you're currently guilty/a victim, so pay up/you're owed."
@goaded Teaching Germans about the Nazis is barely par for the course. What about the rest of what I've mentioned? Also I'm sure those slaves who were "freed" in all those British and French colonies in the 19th century all immediately started living phenomenal lives. Not. Glass houses.
@NYCQuestions1976 You're not going to show (rather than just keep pretending) that CRT means teaching white children they're to blame for slavery and racism are you? If anti-CRT laws stop teachers from teaching what you learned in school about American history (without, presumably, major psychological damage), then that's what the thing Republicans like to call CRT is: the bits of American history they don't want taught.
Not teaching those things means that the country doesn't come to terms with its past (and present), and that in itself is shameful and perpetuates the kinds of attitudes that have Georgia DAs covering up murders.
Being freed from slavery seems like a pretty good deal to me. I don't know why you're upset that they weren't given reparations. This was the early 19th century we're talking about, the vast majority of people were poor whether they'd ever been slaves or not.
Not to mention that you have absolutely no idea what their lives were like.
@NYCQuestions1976 So I am guessing that you are in favor of gun control then? After all, if something can be misused then it should be regulated right?
Oh, it's a music video because you have no answers. Very funny.
How about this question: would you approve if a Republican governor in New Jersey blocked teachers from teaching the aspects of American history you were taught, on the basis that it's "CRT"?
@goaded It's not a music video. It's Billy Joel's hit album, "Glass Houses". One of many of his hit albums.
New Jersey has had Republican governors. What's your point? I told you, New Jersey votes blue in national elections, but we tend to be very purple and somewhat red at the state and county level, and blue again in local areas like Newark and Camden (not surprising, unfortunately for them). I personally grew up in a "purple-leaning-red", blue-collar suburb of New York City, and currently live in a very similar area.
In fact, in the last governor's race, Phil Murphy (Democrat) was expected to win reelection by a 15% to 25% landslide statewide over a relatively unknown Republican state representative, Jack Ciattarelli. Murphy won reelection by only around 2.5%, mainly because he was heavily pushing a liberal agenda, particularly more pandemic mandates and keeping kids home from school even more during his first term. To his credit, instead of doubling down and blaming others after his unexpected narrow reelection like many politicians do, he thanked his supporters and recognized how lucky he was to be reelected by saying, "For those of you who voted for me, thank you for your support. For all of the many rest of you out there, I hear you." Within weeks, he had rolled back (or at least stopped pushing) a lot of his liberal agenda, except his silly green energy agenda, which is annoying, but it is what it is for now.
@NYCQuestions1976 But you are against CRT which is a "tool", the same way you think guns are a "tool" (which it is not but that is a whole other argument).
So, what is the problem with teaching CRT in schools if it is just a tool in your opinion? It is up to the students to apply their own discretion on how to use it after all. The problem is not CRT, but the "crazies" right? Then teaching students who are not crazy should not be a problem. There, solved the whole issue for you. Time for a victory ice cream!
@NYCQuestions1976 OK, so it's an album on YouTube, my bad. It was a very simple yes or no question: would you approve if a Republican governor in New Jersey blocked teachers from teaching the aspects of American history you were taught, on the basis that it's "CRT"? Why didn't you answer it?
@Soteris Up to students to apply their own discretion? We're talking about young elementary school children, not college-age young adults.
Weaponizing education IS a problem. Critical Race Theory is part of that problem. Liberals want to teach guilt and victimhood, not history. Liberals want to teach personal pronouns, not literature and language arts. Liberals want to teach that numbers are racist, not mathematics. Liberals want to teach feelings and paranoia, not science.
It's a stupid sickening socialism shit show.
@goaded I answered your question, but you haven't answered any of mine. I was taught history, not Critical Race Theory, so you're not really making any sort of point or sense.
@NYCQuestions1976 I do not care how old or young the students are. I care about the fact that CRT is a tool and that they are the ones who either uses it or abuses it and that it has nothing to do with teaching them CRT in the first place.
@Soteris The students aren't abusing anything. They're being mentally and emotionally gaslighted by liberal activists with nonsensical bullshit agenda in the guise of education.
@NYCQuestions1976 So? There are plenty of examples of organizations and groups who mentally and emotionally gaslight gun owners under the guise of the 2nd amendment, freedom and "AMERICA!". What makes CRT so different?
@NYCQuestions1976 Ah, so you're at the "I answered your question" (you didn't, it was a simple yes/no question) stage of denial and distraction. If what you were taught would be banned by anti-CRT legislation, that makes it CRT, doesn't it? Or is it just that the legislation is overly broad and unfit for any purpose other than stopping children learning what Republicans don't want them to learn?
Nobody, least of all you, has shown that children are being taught that they're to blame for slavery and racism, which is what you seem to think is the difference between history and "CRT". The only thing being taught is (was) history.
@Soteris The First Amendment (freedom) is a RIGHT for citizens in the United States in our CONSTITUTION. It isn't a tool or a theory or gaslighting.
The Second Amendment is a RIGHT for citizens in the United States in our CONSTITUTION. It isn't a tool or a theory or gaslighting.
So basically your saying that your fine with what you consider mental and emotional gaslighting, as long as it's universal? Obviously I disagree, but at least that's not hypocrisy.
@goaded "Nobody, least of all you, has shown that children are being taught that they're to blame for slavery and racism,"
Okay well that takes care of the reparations argument! About time! Good job! 👍
@goaded It's not a distraction. You're just annoyed that your "logic" completely caved in on itself more quickly than the gravitational forces at the center of a black hole.
Sure, "as far as (you) can see", all the way from the Eastern Hemisphere.
@NYCQuestions1976 Of course it was a distraction, that's all you do. You couldn't possibly answer a simple question because it would show you up for the hypocrite you are. Would you be OK with not allowing the American history you were taught in NJ being banned from schools, like the anti-"CRT" laws in Florida do?
@NYCQuestions1976 The entire constitution is written by man and even the founding fathers had no illusions about its fallibility and the need to REGULARLY amend it to correct for the current national situation and culture. The worship of either amendment or other part of the US constitution is a really unhealthy part of current American culture and if you care for the comparison then it goes entirely contrary to how the founding fathers envisioned it.
It is quite clear that you have already bought into the gaslighting if you worship the constitution as more than just a legal framework for the federal government.
@goaded The only reason I'm entertaining this conversation as much as I have this weekend is because the weather here has been super shitty, much like your black hole logic and reasoning.
You keep asking a question that assumes a falsehood as a fact. I already answered you. You just don't like the answer. Teaching children Critical Race Theory isn't about teaching history. It's about teaching children that Caucasian Americans are to blame for everything negative, and thus that needs to lead to reparations for non-Caucasian Americans. The word "History" isn't even in the title!
History Race Theory? No. Critical History Theory? No. Critical Race History? No.
@Soteris The Constitution is the written legal framework for laws that provide protection for the rights and freedoms of individuals, and protection from government infringement. You're completely misusing the word "worship", but I'd rather be accused of "worshipping" individual rights and freedoms than being accused "worshipping" government infringement.
@NYCQuestions1976 You came into this saying essentially "hold my beer", maybe you should admit defeat and take it back. What "falsehood as a fact" am I supposedly assuming? If "Teaching children Critical Race Theory isn't about teaching history", then why does anti-"CRT" legislation stop aspects of history being taught?
@NYCQuestions1976 Oh, I am using the word "worship" entirely accurately. Americans has an unhealthy obsession with a large number of words ranging from "Communism" to "AMERICA!" to "FREEDOM" and anything else that is even tangentially related to politics. I mention politics because that is where this all comes from. Politicians wants to control you so they train you to respond to certain words and phrases, mostly in an emotional way. "LOCK HER UP!" for example or "BUILD THE WALL!" carries a lot of emotional baggage for many Republicans that allows the elite to play you like a fiddle.
You have long since departed from the founding fathers in how they tried to rationalize the country and had hopes for the people to hold power to account. You are a sheep and your mind is the playground of the elite. Even CRT has been ingrained in your mind as something evil, something that should be resisted. As if it is a weapon used in schools to corrupt the youth and you bought this conspiracy, hook, line and sinker. Why? Because you are an American! and your culture has been corrupted entirely for the benefit of the powerful.
As for why the word "History" is not part of the name Critical Race Theory? Because Critical Race Theory is a cross disciplinary tool. It can and is used for more things than just examining history. Furthermore, Critical Race Theory does not contain history, it is used to examine history and other things but it itself is not history so why would you call it "history" by your own argument? It is a theory, which is why it is called a theory, it involves races, which is why it has that in the name and it involves critiquing information as well as it is derived from Critical Theory which is why it has "Critical" in the name. It makes more sense than what you are expecting.
@goaded There's no history being blocked. Only the blaming, the finger pointing, the guilt trips, and the victim grooming.
@Soteris Your entire diatribe, and every example encased therein, proves that you're only against gaslighting and indoctrination when it happens to spit in the face of your beliefs. The epitome of hypocrisy.
Also, you're still using the word "worship" incorrectly. I'll give you a correct and accurate example:
"The GaG users @Soteris and @goaded worship big fat stupid bloated wasteful intrusive albatross grim reaper socialism government."
@NYCQuestions1976 How, exactly, should a teacher ensure that they don't teach anything that makes a child "feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race, color, sex, or national origin."?
They're going to self-censor on the assumption that some parents are going to throw a hissy-fit over anything that they disagree with. I'll bet you a dollar the law won't apply to anyone teaching about Confederate History Month in Florida.
"Florida Education Association (FEA) President Andrew Spar said in a statement to ABC News... "The legislation’s sponsor appeared to indicate Tuesday that, under his bill, a teacher can cover the three-fifths compromise, which in the 1800s said that a Black person would count as three-fifths of a White person, but cannot express the idea that it is morally wrong to classify people of a certain color as being less than others."" abcnews.go.com/.../story?id=82348795
@goaded If you don't know the difference between, "This is what happened." and, "This is what happened, and since it involved your ancestors, you're currently at fault/a victim.", then you need to either go back to school yourself, or you need to check yourself into the nearest mental institution.
So you're relying on "appears to indicate". Strong argument. You just love "hearsay" and "so it seems" nonsense masquerading as evidence.
@NYCQuestions1976 Hey, I am not the one having a double standard here. You believe that tools should not be regulated against based on if it could be misused or not and that they should not be kept out of the hands of law abiding citizens. In fact, you say that we should even make it an American right to give said tools to them with no other precondition. CRT is a tool in this regard just the same as you think guns are so why are you treating them completely differently?
@Soteris I have no double standard, with this or anything else. It couldn't be a double standard anyway, because the Second Amendment (an existing individual right) and Critical Race Theory (used to promote propaganda) aren't opposing equals.
"In fact, you say that we should even make it an American right to give said tools to them with no other precondition."
It has nothing to do with anything I said or posted or believe. It is, in fact and reality, ALREADY a written guaranteed RIGHT under the Second Amendment for law-abiding citizens of the United States to own legal firearms.
It is NOT a right for people with a non-factual agenda and spreading nonsensical propaganda in the guise of actual history to gaslight children into believing that they're automatically disadvantaged victims or guilty perpetrators now in the 21st century based on the actions of their ancestors.
@NYCQuestions1976 If you think that what students are being taught is "This is what happened, and since it involved your ancestors, you're currently at fault/a victim", why don't you prove it? In a racist environment, pointing out that racists (like many student's parents) are assholes is going to upset some students.
What Republicans don't want taught is that some people still think going to war against their democratically elected government was fine and not treason at all, and that the racism that caused that war is still part of American culture. Guess what. All the other countries that you want to pretend were just the same never passed laws explicitly or implicitly based on the colour of people's skin. There's racism, sure, but not backed up by the power of the government.
I never said "appears to indicate" and the only time I said "so it seems" was over a week ago and not part of an argument*. So, basically, you're lying about what my arguments are. Par for the course.
*"But we're talking about CRT, slavery, and the civil war here, so it seems like a reasonable place to ask to see if we have any facts in common."
@NYCQuestions1976 So Americans have a right to own guns because the 2nd amendment exists and not because it would be a good idea or an obvious right to do so if the 2nd amendment never existed or if it was repealed.
@Soteris To add, change, and/or repeal an amendment to the Constitution, you need ¾ of the States (38 of 50) to agree.
@goaded It's not an educator's place or job to offer up their opinions on their students' parents directly to their students. It's none of their business. Their jobs are to teach the subjects that they're hired to teach, and that's all. If a teacher, as a "mandated reporter", has a LEGITIMATE LEGAL CONCERN for a specific student, they're required to report that legitimate legal concern to the proper authorities. Teachers telling their students that their parents suck because they believe they might be saying bad words at the dinner table is NOT a legitimate legal concern, it's highly inappropriate, a suspendable offense, and probably a fireable offense.
The "appears to indicate" was in one of the paragraphs in your second-to-last response.
@NYCQuestions1976 Are you intentionally misreading what I say? I wasn't talking about a teacher insulting a parent, I was talking about teachers explaining how people who think black people are sub-human are wrong might upset some students whose parents believe that way.
And, yes, I noticed "appears to indicate" was part of a quote after I'd posted.
@goaded "In a racist environment*, pointing out that racists (like many student's parents*) are assholes is going to upset some students."
"I was talking about teachers explaining how people who think black people are sub-human* are wrong might upset some students whose parents believe that way*."
*All assumptions and opinions by you, with no actual evidence. Also, how would a teacher even know that (or anything at all) about a student's parents (besides basic required information like names, contact information for progress reports/consent/emergencies, etcetera), without inappropriate and intrusive behavior?
@NYCQuestions1976 The teacher doesn't have to know anything about the parents. That's the whole point about these laws; they make teachers self-censor just in case someone's parent is a racist who will sue them. Dare they even say that people who think black people are sub-human are wrong if it might even possibly lead to them being sued into bankruptcy?
It works the same way as the laws that allow completely independent people to sue people who even indirectly help someone get an abortion. They're reminiscent of authoritarian states which pit citizens against each other. There's a reason Russia thinks they can hold areas of Ukraine as long as they have the support of a minority of the population.
@NYCQuestions1976 What I am basically saying is that you dont have an excuse. You are hiding behind a piece of paper and avoiding the actual meaningful conversation because you know you can't win.
@goaded Teachers are paid to TEACH, not be activists and/or infringe their opinions on their students' parents directly to their students. If there are teachers who want to be activists, then they can do it off the clock on their own time, not on the taxpayers' dollars.
@Soteris Once you've used the words "hiding" and "excuse" in an attempt to argue against an individual's rights and freedoms, and don't understand why an individual's rights and freedoms are indeed "meaningful", then that's an enormous problem, and you've already lost.
@Soteris You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bill of Rights. The 2nd amendment (or any amendment) doesn't GIVE rights. It RESTRICTS the government from infringing on rights I already have by birth. I have the right to self preservation and self defense. The 1st amendment doesn't give me the right to free speech. I have the right to free speech as a free human being. The amendment places restrictions on how the government can infringe on that right.
@NYCQuestions1976 You are not providing an argument in support of your positions on the 2nd amendment and guns beyond the fact that someone at one point wrote it down and that somehow makes it sacrosanct. I do not worship a piece of paper, like you do, and I argue that rights and freedoms exists independently if they are written down or not as a matter of pure logical conclusion.
You dont. You hide behind the fact that the 2nd amendment has been written down and we can't change it without a super majority which is incorrect but besides the point. You are not arguing that what you say is correct, just that it reflects how the system is currently set up.
@gorydetails It is you who misunderstand. I dont care about what the bill of rights say or did not say. I am only interested in how @NYCQuestions1976 is trying to use it to justify his double standards on CRT and gun control. Nothing of which revolves around me and everything is about what he believes.
@Soteris I don't misunderstand at all. You clearly stated that you believe the 2nd amendment gives Americans the right to have guns. It does not do that.
@Soteris "I do not worship a piece of paper, like you do..."
Inaccurate, and even if it was accurate, you worship government, especially socialism government, which is far worse.
"You hide behind the fact that the 2nd amendment has been written down and we can't change it without a super majority which is incorrect but besides the point."
No, you're incorrect (as usual), which is EXACTLY the point. You need a super majority (⅔ vote) in Congress to PROPOSE a new amendment to the Constitution (or to modify or remove a current amendment), or by a Constitutional Convention called by Congress in response to applications from a super majority (⅔) of the state legislatures. Once either process happens (good luck), then ¾ (38 of 50) of the States' legislatures have to RATIFY the new proposed amendment. Otherwise, the proposed amendment (or proposed modification or removal) fails.
@NYCQuestions1976 I do not worship governments, either socialist or otherwise. I believe in institutions and how they are useful for running a country but I do not have faith in them or even let myself become biased. I am first in line to bash any government if I notice them doing a fuckup.
And again, you are falling back on hiding behind the paper that the constitution is written on by arguing for how hard it is to change it, as if it is relevant to our conversation. It is not. You also proved me correct by pointing out that congress could propose new amendments rather than the states and thus proving me correct.
But you are free to prove me wrong. Why do you think we should bank CRT but not guns? Is it because someone wrote on a paper at some point or do you actually have an argument backing it up?
I explicitly said it was not about teachers' opinions about particular parents, but that the laws force them to not teach things that are true because some parents might take exception. e. g. "black/gay/trans people are not sub-human". Or is that something only an "activist" teacher would say? Is it just an "opinion" that nobody is "sub-human"?
Me: "The teacher doesn't have to know anything about the parents. That's the whole point about these laws; they make teachers self-censor just in case someone's parent is a racist who will sue them. Dare they even say that people who think black people are sub-human are wrong if it might even possibly lead to them being sued into bankruptcy?"
You: "Teachers are paid to TEACH, not be activists and/or infringe their opinions on their students' parents directly to their students."
@Soteris Everything you've posted is based on your worship of government. Specifically socialism government. It permeates through your words. Calling it "a belief in an institution" is just silly semantics.
Entrapment? No, because once you've labeled an individual's rights and freedoms as "hiding" and "non-meaningful", you've already lost. Parents have the right to not have their children abused by faux guilt and gaslighted by Critical Race Theory.
"You also proved me correct by pointing out that congress could propose new amendments rather than the states and thus proving me correct."
Also NO, because that's not what I posted. I NEVER stated that only the States can PROPOSE changes to the Constitution. I wrote that it takes 75% of the States to add, change, and/or repeal an amendment (the finality of the process), which is ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT! Who cares what can be PROPOSED by ⅔ of Congress when you need ¾ of the States to RATIFY (that's another word for APPROVE or ACCEPT) said proposal? I mean, SERIOUSLY: Take the L like an adult like @gorydetails suggested. You're pontificating on something of which you've got zero comprehension. Ah, perfect segway...
@goaded You've got some nerve to lecture me on comprehension. Your entire argument is built on a foundation of a teacher's ability to do things other than teach, along with "so it would seem", "appeared to indicate", and "might possibly be". All of it, in its entirety, is utterly nonsensical and ridiculous. You're just annoyed that Florida has an educated popular successful veteran governor who stands up to woke socialism bullshit and won reelection in a landslide (just under 59½% of the vote) in a state where the non-Caucasian population is around 47½%.
@NYCQuestions1976 You show no indication of having understood my point, preferring to go off on a tangent about how teachers are supposedly doing things they're not, and now ignoring everything I said and talking about DeSantis instead and being "woke".
What is "woke", anyway? Is acknowledging the existence of trans people "woke"? How about gay people? Is saying "black people aren't sub-human" woke? Some people, like the majority, would call that simple human decency. Just like CRT, it means "anything Republicans don't like".
Of course, you'll ignore those simple questions because you're incapable of giving a straight answer, especially if it might involve agreeing with me.
I expect you're absolutely fine with the Florida legislature changing the laws so that DeSantis can run for president without resigning as governor first and also can hide how he spends taxpayer money on travel to that end.
@goaded I understand your point just fine. You want government, via teachers in the classroom using Critical Race Theory, to gaslight Caucasian children into believing that they're currently and automatically guilty because their ancestors might've been aggressors, and gaslight non-Caucasian children into believing that they're currently and automatically disadvantaged because their ancestors might've been victims.
@NYCQuestions1976 You're clearly not telling the truth about understanding my points or about what I want. You've decided on that straw man and you're going to keep repeating it to distract away from my very simple questions.
A Florida anti-"woke" Republican lawmaker just said the quiet part out loud: “Our terrorist enemies hate homosexuals more than we do.”
I asked you if it was "woke" to accept the existence of trans people, or gay people, or to say that white supremacy is nonsense and harmful. You, of course, didn't answer. But clearly both "woke" and "CRT" are just labels to put on "anything we don't like".
@NYCQuestions1976 I shall quote you:@Soteris To add, change, and/or repeal an amendment to the Constitution, you need ¾ of the States (38 of 50) to agree."
That is what you said and that was ALL you said in this regards. You made no mention of congress which is objectively incorrect and I called you out on it. Also, trying to go back and arguing what you meant to say was "ratify" is pathetic since you literally specified "add, change and/or repeal" which is not the same as ratify and is definitely not what that sentence means in context. If you think it does then maybe you should learn some English because god damn.. But this is besides the point.
I doubt you even know what institutions are, much less what a government is and least of all my positions on the government structures. I mean seriously, I bash governments left and right every single day on this very forum and you act like I am worshiping it? Grow up.
And yes, I have entrapped you in a contradictory position where you on one hand oppose government regulation of guns, because its written down or something (You really have not made a good case for why you believe in this) and on the other hand you think the government has the authority to ban CRT being taught in schools.. for some reason. You can't apply the same beliefs to both of these positions and reach different conclusions like you did. Either the government has the authority to prohibit your access to these tools or it does not. Pick one.
@gorydetails No, I have perfectly well entrapped him into either admitting that the government has the authority to prevent you from accessing CRT and guns, or they do not. Personally, I am not that bothered with what he picks or if he evolves his position to be something less stupid.
@Soteris No, it's not entrapment, because Critical Race Theory isn't an individual right (it's not even factual history... it's a theory, which is literally right in the name), and any laws against teaching Critical Race Theory aren't and wouldn't be unconstitutional.
"To add, change, and/or repeal an amendment to the Constitution, you need ¾ of the States (38 of 50) to agree."
Yes that is EXACTLY what I wrote, because Congress can make BILLIONS of PROPOSED modifications and changes to the Constitution, but if THREE QUARTERS of the STATES don't approve of those modifications and changes after those Congressional proposals, then guess what happens?
N O T H I N G !
Now it's time for you to go be stupid somewhere else.
@goaded Again, you're just annoyed that DeSantis won in a landslide in a state that's nearly half non-Caucasian and aren't falling for your socialism bullshit. You need to find something else to do with your time.
@NYCQuestions1976 Bullshit. All you have done is post are unsupported claims and refuse to answer even simple questions or respond to actual events like a Florida anti-"woke" Republican lawmaker who said: “Our terrorist enemies hate homosexuals more than we do.”
I asked you if it was "woke" to accept the existence of trans people, or gay people, or to say that white supremacy is nonsense and harmful. You, of course, didn't answer. But clearly both "woke" and "CRT" are just labels to put on "anything we don't like".
@goaded Nothing you've asked or posted claimed is based on or in reality. It's all "appears to indicate" and "so it would seem". Key West has one of the biggest gay populations in the country. Care to guess where it's located? Do they live there because they're all self-hating?
By the way, how did we go from, "Critical Race Theory doesn't even exist." to "Critical Race Theory is just a tool.", which is what liberals and socialists are saying now? I mean overall, and not just in this thread. At what point does the liberal lying and bullshit morph into a full-blown pyramid-ponzi scheme? It's got to be pretty damn close right now.
You're just annoyed because you so deeply want children in this country to be gaslighted, guilted, and programmed by Critical Race Theory, so it'll eventually lead to socialism-style financial redistribution in the form of reparations, and it's never going to happen.
@NYCQuestions1976 Seriously? Can you even read? "teaching-critical-race-theory-isn-t-happening-classrooms-teachers-say". That's not the same thing as claiming CRT doesn't exist, it's a university level law degree course and has been for decades.
@goaded Children don't go to law school, and law school isn't even part of this discussion. So Critical Race Theory went from "non-existent" in elementary schools to "existing, but not being taught" in elementary schools, to "it's just a tool" in elementary schools. Fascinating. It really is a liberal pyramid-ponzi scheme built on lies. Or at the very least, misdirection.
@NYCQuestions1976 What a load of bullshit. It existed for decades, but it was never taught in schools because "Children don't go to law school". Which is exactly the same as ""existing, but not being taught" in elementary schools".
Is it woke to acknowledge the existence of trans people, gay people? Are you part of the "we" that Republican legislator was talking about when he said “Our terrorist enemies hate homosexuals more than we do.”
You've got nothing against him saying something like that but you're up in arms against teachers in case one of them tells children that that sort of comment is disgusting.
@goaded So you supposedly heard that someone apparently said something terrible somewhere, and your response and remedy is to gaslight all children everywhere by teaching them Critical Race Theory? What an obnoxious overreaction.
@NYCQuestions1976 Oh, look, another straw man to avoid answering a simple question. Not a pattern at all. Here's the video, and in case you think he misspoke, a few other Republican statements.
Oh, and your whole argument is you "supposedly heard that [a teacher] apparently said something terrible somewhere" so it would be good to have laws to make it easy to sue teachers if they teach your child somthing you don't like, like racism is bad, trans people are people, etc.
@goaded You must be looking in a mirror, because that's actually the basis of your own argument.
Teachers get removed from the classroom for inappropriate behavior all the time. They almost never get fired though, unless the behavior is criminal.
Teachers are paid to TEACH children in elementary school, not give their opinions. If a student grows up, goes to college, and decides to waste their time (and probably their parents' money and/or student loans) on some sort of Critical Race Theory degree, then good for them, as long as they pay back their loans (which is MY tax dollars) and they don't cry and complain when no one hires them because they've got no skills from wasting their time in college learning nothing useful and tangible for the real world.
@NYCQuestions1976 You think it's only an opinion that black people are just as much people as white people? Or that trans people exist? Or gay people exist?
Oh, and that video of the Florida lawmaker saying what he did (that you implied I hadn't really seen, remember?), that's going down the memory hole now, is it? “Our terrorist enemies hate homosexuals more than we do.”
@goaded Since you believe that your opinion is so spot-on and absolute, let me ask you this:
Do you think that your silly socialist friend is homophobic? He posted on another question that the Diet Soviet Union is "getting their shit pushed in" by the Ukraine. That's a homophobic slur. Should he be admonished? Censured? Suspended from GaG? Banned? What about in real life? Fined? Punished? Fired? Cancelled? Jailed? Executed?
@NYCQuestions1976 I don't know who you're talking about and you're obviously avoiding the question as usual. You think it's only an opinion that black people are just as much people as white people? Or that trans people exist? Or gay people exist?
@goaded You ask dumb questions, which pair nicely with your dumb opinions. My questions and opinions are better, and you know damn well who I'm referring to in my question.
@NYCQuestions1976 Nope, and you don't answer any of my questions. Do you think it's only an opinion that black people are just as much people as white people? Or that trans people exist? Or gay people exist?
@NYCQuestions1976 And do you think that's only your opinion? How about that black people are just as much people as white people? Or that trans people exist?
@NYCQuestions1976 Oh, look, another straw man and attempt to avoid the question: is it only an opinion that black people are just as much people as white people? Or that trans people exist?
@NYCQuestions1976 It's funny, I'd have no problem saying that "people are people, no matter what colour their skin is", why do you? Nor that trans and gay people exist.
@NYCQuestions1976 It doesn't, because it isn't happening. What is happening is that right-wing state governments are making teaching realities like the civil war was started by people who believed black people were sub-human and they were wrong. You know, stuff you'd consider a teacher's "opinion".
@goaded It isn't happening at all? Or it's only a tool? Get your shit straight.
A state where approximately 47.5% of the population is non-Caucasian (higher than the national average), reelected a popular and accomplished governor in a gigantic landslide (approximately 59.5% of the vote). So no one is falling for your nonsense.
@NYCQuestions1976 Didn't Florida Republicans ignore the will of the people when it comes to allowing former felons to vote, and didn't DeSantis send out police to arrest people who only voted while ineligible because they were told by the state they were eligible? Isn't DeSantis being sued by Disney for unlawfully using the power of the government to retaliate against a corporation, just like he boasted of doing in the book he wrote? Wasn't that because Disney dissed his anti-LGBT law? Isn't Florida 10th in the nation for covid deaths per million, overtaking New York and New Jersey (your state, right?)?
You're confusing your arguments, I wasn't talking about it being a tool, although that's probably a reasonable position. I was saying it isn't taught in K-12 schools; considering two people have now brought up the same article where K-12 teachers say it isn't being taught in their schools as proof that it is (?), I'd say you don't have a shred of evidence that it is.
Unless you redefine CRT as "truths Republicans don't like". Same as they've done with "woke".
@goaded So you're in favor of allowing former felons to vote? That's almost as stupid as allowing illegal immigrants to vote. Unless it's someone who's a 2-for-1 (an illegal immigrant AND a former felon) being allowed to vote. Then it's actually doubly stupid, and probably something else you and your insanity supports.
Apparently the people in Florida were so upset about former felons not voting that they reelected DeSantis in a landslide with approximately 59.5% of the vote.
Disney was stripped of it's favoritism and autonomy. No big loss. They're a company, not a person. Oh and Disney cares so much for those who are non-heterosexual, that when they had a day and night dedicated to everyone who's not heterosexual, they actually charged MORE than their normal outrageous prices. Where's the fairness in that?
New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and few other blue states were cramming Covid patients into retirement facilities like sardines, causing far more death than necessary.
Critical Race Theory is called a theory because it's not true. Otherwise it'd be called Critical Race Fact.
Now unlike last weekend's washout, it's actually stunningly gorgeous here, and I've things to do that are far more important and fun than dealing with your foaming at the mouth obsession with Florida and DeSantis and silly stupid socialism.
@NYCQuestions1976 Just like the majority of Florida voters in 2018. Are they all stupid, or just the ones who voted for DeSantis?
"Critical Race Theory is called a theory because it's not true. Otherwise it'd be called Critical Race Fact." That's possibly the most stupid thing you've ever said, and that's saying something.
Those "blue" states you mention were hit hard and early by the virus. DeSantis' Florida has long since overtaken most of them in deaths per capita, and lied about it all the way. Florida is manipulating its covid death numbers! ↗ Somehow, for example, 420 people died of covid in Florida in the last two weeks, yet the number of deaths in the last week was reported as 25. New York, with a comparable population lost 22 over those two weeks, New Jersey 10, even Michigan with half the population of Florida only lost 96.
The top ten for deaths per capita are Arizona, West Virginia, Mississippi, New Mexico, Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee, Michigan, Kentucky, and Florida. They've all had more than one in 250 people die of it and only eight countries worldwide have worse numbers.
I'm not citing myself as a source, I'm linking to something (https://www. girlsaskguys. com/trending-news/a66611-florida-is-manipulating-its-covid-death-numbers ) that is well sourced. Florida's authorities are still obviously lying about the number of deaths in the last week, just compare any two reports at this site: ww11.doh.state.fl.us/.../
@goaded I told you I wasn't going to be responding to this over the weekend. It was finally a beautiful weekend here, and my family took our annual trip around Manhattan in my cousin's boat to kick off the Summer. Question coming once I put the videos on YouTube. I can't directly post videos to questions or polls on here. It is what it is.
Wikipedia and socialism sites aren't sources.
Cuomo lied about New York's Covid numbers until he resigned for other issues. Where's your outrage over that?
@NYCQuestions1976 The source is the Florida government's own web site. Hundreds of deaths since the report from two weeks ago, and yet "tens" of covid deaths in the last week. Every report for a year or more.
@goaded "Hundreds of deaths since the report from two weeks ago, and yet "tens" of covid deaths in the last week. Every report for a year or more."
Not everyone who dies in Florida (or anywhere else) dies from Covid. People do die from other things. News flash: Humans weren't immortal prior to the pandemic.
@NYCQuestions1976 Oh FFS, they're reports about covid deaths, I didn't think I had to spell out the obvious even to you.
The source is the Florida government's own web site. Hundreds of COVID deaths since the report from two weeks ago, and yet "tens" of COVID deaths in the last week. Every report for a year or more. (They also don't count COVID deaths in their state of non-Floridians.) ww11.doh.state.fl.us/.../
@goaded Each archived report over the last 13 months (starting in April 2022) is a TWO WEEK report. So of course each WEEKLY interim report will have less than an archived two week report. You add them together. That's called mathematics. They used to teach that in school before liberals and socialists decided that mathematics and numbers are racist.
Also, why would any location count a visitor's death from anything in their residential statistics in their jurisdiction? Obviously it's documented, but it's not a residential death.
@NYCQuestions1976 OMG. Yes, I told you they were every two weeks (now). What you're pretending to be unable to grasp is that there's no way there were only 20 deaths in the last week if the total deaths over the preceding two weeks was 200.
@goaded If the death rate in Florida is what you're claiming, and what you've been claiming since the start of Covid, there'd be zero people there right now. Also, who cares if the official archived report and initial preliminary reports are different? The reports are probably updated a final time before they're archived, like most government reports everywhere. If the lag was consistently a few months, then maybe MAYBE there'd be something there, but that's not the case. You're grasping at straws that don't even exist.
@NYCQuestions1976 Oh, come on, you can't really be this stupid, so you're building a new straw man suggesting I'm lying about the death rate, presumably by editing Florida's official reports.
How long do you think it takes for 20 million people to die off at a rate of even 1000 a week? Do the maths.
The lie they've been telling is that only 10-20% of the people who actually died in the last week get reported. That has the effect of making Florida look better than its neighbours, even when it was really off-the-charts worse.
@goaded So Florida is lying for years, and only you've got the correct information? Yeah okay. You're just obnoxious and obsessed over nonsense that doesn't actually exist. Two single week reports equals one bi-weekly report.
@NYCQuestions1976 Where do you manage to get all the straw for those straw men?
The information in those reports is designed to obscure the number of people who died of covid in the last week to make Florida look better on a CDC chart.
@goaded Strawmen? You're the one grasping at straws that don't exist.
So something is "designed to obscure"? Says who? You? Ha!
Do you even read or look at what you send me? Or do you just hope I won't read or look at it, and just give up? The federal government says you're wrong, and Florida isn't the only state with 0 deaths in the last week (ending May 3rd). Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Mississippi, and Vermont also all have 0 deaths. New Jersey had 2 deaths. Are all those states lying also? If so, why doesn't the CDC just correct the information on their site if it's wrong?
You really need to stop it and find something better to do with your life. Seriously now. I mean this. You're disturbingly obsessed.
@NYCQuestions1976 Yes, straw men. You take some minor point, blow it up out of all proportion, lie about what I'm saying (when the hell did I say there were no other states with zero covid deaths?) and pretend to not understand the clear, documented, facts.
All because you can't admit that you're wrong about anything.
@NYCQuestions1976 More lies. I never said anything about other states having the same number of covid deaths in the last week as Florida pretends they have, I said the manipulation Florida does is to make them look better than they really are on that map.
Am I obsessed because I won't let a lie of yours go unanswered? Perhaps, but it says more about you than me.
@goaded Manipulation? The CDC site shows otherwise. So just knock it off already. There's no manipulation in Florida. You're conflating preliminary weekly and permanent bi-weekly reports and statistics to project a narrative that doesn't exist anywhere other than in your empty head.
The problem with your argument is almost nobody's looking for black supremacy, just equality. Read what those elected officials were saying: black people supposedly have more rights that white people because you're not allowed to lynch them any more.
@goaded you don't live in America and you don't know what it's like. There are plenty of black supremacists around and there are even neighborhoods you can't go into if you are white without being killed.
Being territorial is not the same thing as expecting supremacy over other people, and apparently you can't knock on the wrong door or drive into the wrong driveway in a white neighbourhood without being shot. Maybe the problem is all the guns and paranoia stoked by people telling other white people they're under attack.
@goaded the problem is these people that are trying to be white saviors to the black man and woman while being anything but. There were laws put into place to encourage fatherless homes and things like CRT and BLM encourage black supremacy.
And then there are these cunts like Lightfoot that encouraged lawlessness in predominantly black areas to further hurt the black community like in Chicago.
Affirmative action, black history month existing without a light history month, wanting reparations for things that were never done to you, it is all part of black supremacy.
People indoctrinated into social justice dogma think that white people are born racist and have to struggle all their lives to shed that racism. It's like they think white people are born biologically evil.
@goaded how the hell are the other months white history month? White people are constantly denigrated in my country and are not given free stuff the same way minorities are. We are taught that we are bad just because we were born with a skin adaptation for the cold and low light conditions.
Every month for a couple of centuries has been white history month; how Europeans bravely fought the natives for their right to live on the land, how black people should be grateful they were brought to such a wonderful country, etc.. No you're not "that we are bad", you're being taught that historically white people in the USA treated black people badly, and we should make sure it doesn't happen again (much like German schools teach about the Nazis). It's not like you're being taught that white people should be enslaved or lynched. None of it is because "we were born with a skin adaptation".
@goaded "Every month for a couple of centuries has been white history month; how Europeans bravely fought the natives for their right to live on the land, how black people should be grateful they were brought to such a wonderful country, etc.."
That's never been taught in my school system and I'm 34. White people were portrayed so poorly that my own little sister was ashamed to be white growing up.
Essentially being painted as the people who do all the ill in the world and the poor brown people were just trying to get by and never did anything wrong.
It's okay to be white and white people have nothing to apologize for.
No one said it wasn’t ok to be “white”. But smart people realize when one community has more opportunities and rights than others and don’t get bitchy about being left out.
@goaded lmao. you idiots absolutely claimed it wasn't being taught in schools. But now that you admit it is being taught, It's good that parents are standing up to the bullshit.
That's because schools are not teaching CRT and Republicans are banning what they call CRT which is essentially anything they don't like, like accurate history lessons.
I didn't lie about that. Republicans are thinking about defunding libraries because they weren't allowed to get books they don't like taken off the shelves.
No, those (if there are any) are cover for getting rid of anything the Republicans don't like, like books about the KKK, the Holocaust, and cartoon children farting.
@goaded lmao. I can't post pictures on GaG of images from these books. It would get the reply removed for being "offensive". But you're fine with schoolchildren seeing them. I really don't know what caused your sick degeneracy, but it's not appealing. Were you molested as a child? Because often people who were molested have deviant ideas about sex.
I can. Here's the guy who got fired for reading this grossly inapproprate book:
The point is not that there may be some books that are generally accepted as inappropriate, the point is that Republicans choose that to mean "anything I don't like". Same as CRT. It's a pattern.
In the Texas case, the books include Isabel Wilkerson’s “Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents”; "They Called Themselves the K. K. K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group" by Susan Campbell; the graphic novel "Spinning" by Tillie Walden; and three books from Dawn McMillan’s “I Need a New Butt!” series.
(FYI A "graphic novel" is a comic book, not a novel containing graphic content.)
That's because you're just being your normal stupid self and making shit up. Do you understand that a "graphic novel" is a comic book, not a novel containing graphic content?
@goaded I said specifically that you're ok with children seeing graphic sexual content in books. It's your mentally deficient brain conflating that with a comic book. I'm asking why you feel that is ok. Is it because you were molested as a child?
For anyone sensible reading this, because I know you'll ignore the point yet again, there might be books that can reasonably be objected to by parents, but Republicans are using those as cover to get rid of anything they don't agree with. Just like they're using the label "CRT" to avoid teaching about the KKK, slavery and Jim Crow laws.
Told you you'd ignore the point yet again. There might be books that can reasonably be objected to by parents, but Republicans are using those as cover to get rid of anything they don't agree with. Just like they're using the label "CRT" to avoid teaching about the KKK, slavery and Jim Crow laws.
Nobody expects Playboy in school libraries, but you shouldn't be able to get rid of books that librarians, teachers and other parents think are acceptable, and that's what's happening.
@goaded So your statement that "repUbLiCAnS ARe using thOSe aS cOVeR tO geT rId of anYthing They DOn'T AGrEE wIth" is nothing but your uninformed opinion.
You don't even understand the words you're typing. A synopsis is not the whole thing. Tell me how "Cartoon boy farts. Republicans ban the book." is wrong.
@goaded I haven't read the book. You claim to be well versed on it to the point you can make the definitive statement that the "republicans" want to ban it for no good reason. Unless, of course, you have no clue about what the book contains either, and just regurgitate what your propaganda sources tell you to.
I'm going to take a wild guess here and say it's about a cartoon boy farting. That Republicans want to ban it, and fired a educator for reading it to kids is simply a fact.
At least one of you has the guts to have a public profile. I've blocked one person on here in six years, and I've not reported this idiot for anything.
As to ratting out neighbours, that's exactly the effect encouraged and desired by multiple Republican laws being passed to allow completely independent people to sue anyone they feel might be helping someone get an abortion.
But in fairness the blacks in Kansas City who shot Ralf the NaACP gave a travel warning for Missouri. Now come on if they could linch they would have I never seen such hatried I like that before in a black person
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
