DeSantis and his stupid laws

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

4 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Well, I already know you are fine banning things you have not bothered reading or watching or can't put in context.     We've been down this road before - you seem to be for censorship in these situations, and I am strongly against that.  

I’m against the ones with explicit descriptions of sex acts in the context of a story. That’s called porn. You’re not against that in school? 

[Tree of Knowledge 824]

40 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

And to be equal, we’re going to need a lot more optional history classes. Gay history, Asian History, Latino/ Hispanic history, Native American/ Pacific Islander history. Right? 

Don’t forget about Trans History.  

[dogcows 1,029]

6 minutes ago, craftsman said:

You are for the censorship of the truth. 

Whenever you teach a lie, that is censoring a truth.

Worst post of the year…

[BuckSwope 654]

3 minutes ago, craftsman said:

You are for the censorship of the truth. 

I wouldn't ban a book that presented the same ideas as you posted.   I wouldn't call to ban a class at the same level as this AP class that included your ideas.    That's the difference, and for these examples that censorship is coming from the right side of the aisle.  It's the equivalent of safe spaces and hiding from ideas you don't like that I see idiots on the left doing.  

  If I didn't like what was being said to my kid, I would talk to the teacher and then talk to him.   

[jonmx 1,558]

5 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Worst post of the year…

Yours?  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

Harriet Tubman will be on the twenty dollar bill in a few years. Strange, no outcry. Next month is black history month. Schools around the country will focus on black history.  Again, no outcry, no protest of any note. I think we can debunk with the myth created out of thin air that half the country doesn’t want black history taught or recognized. 

[The Real timschochet 2,876]

18 minutes ago, jonmx said:

 

You can start with the whole 1619 premise big lie that the Revolutionary War was fought primarily to maintain slavery.  

Primarily? No. But the southern planters who were lukewarm to the rebels joined them only after the British promised to free any slaves who would fight with them. That’s simply a historical fact.

Im rather skeptical that 1619 teaches something different than the above. You’re welcome to prove me wrong. 

[BuckSwope 654]

4 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I’m against the ones with explicit descriptions of sex acts in the context of a story. That’s called porn. You’re not against that in school? 

I would be fine if a school decided to have a consistent application of the above, but I have never seen that to be the case.  Again, we have discussed this to death and I have given examples of other books that contain every bit of explicit content but aren't on banned list and are never brought up.    These idiots have to try harder if they want people to believe it's ONLY about the sexual content in the books.    

That's in a school setting I would be fine with either consistent application of sexual content or a rating system.  That should be something schools and their boards should have the power to do if they think it's best.  

[craftsman 1,045]

8 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Worst post of the year…

Glad you called yourself out. 

[RLLD 3,455]

6 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

IMO anybody who is being honest and rational about this has to wrestle with examples IRL of the bolded happening AND with quotes from people like Rufo who clear as day admit their purpose is to label any dumb ass idea as CRT.    Both things are going on, and I've seen examples of both.  

I think it is reasonable to be on high alert for it. And we should all oppose the denigration of others based on things like skin color….even if it is sold under some umbrella of “truth”

[dogcows 1,029]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Harriet Tubman will be on the twenty dollar bill in a few years. Strange, no outcry. Next month is black history month. Schools around the country will focus on black history.  Again, no outcry, no protest of any note. I think we can debunk with the myth created out of thin air that half the country doesn’t want black history taught or recognized. 

She was already supposed to be on there in 2019 but Trump blocked it. Mnuchin claimed in front of Congress it was for security reasons.

Did Trump think putting a black woman’s picture on money would make it less secure?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

3 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I would be fine if a school decided to have a consistent application of the above, but I have never seen that to be the case.  Again, we have discussed this to death and I have given examples of other books that contain every bit of explicit content but aren't on banned list and are never brought up.    These idiots have to try harder if they want people to believe it's ONLY about the sexual content in the books.    

That's in a school setting I would be fine with either consistent application of sexual content or a rating system.  That should be something schools and their boards should have the power to do if they think it's best.  

Many examples out there of parents reading to the school board of explicit sexual content that could be found in libraries. And then being told it’s inappropriate to read it at the meeting. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

She was already supposed to be on there in 2019 but Trump blocked it. Mnuchin claimed in front of Congress it was for security reasons.

Did Trump think putting a black woman’s picture on money would make it less secure?

I don’t know. I’m glad she will be on it though. She was a tough broad. Great. Brave American.  I’d like to see the black soldiers that have fought in every war honored as well. 

[jonmx 1,558]

16 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Primarily? No. But the southern planters who were lukewarm to the rebels joined them only after the British promised to free any slaves who would fight with them. That’s simply a historical fact.

Im rather skeptical that 1619 teaches something different than the above. You’re welcome to prove me wrong. 

Whatever the British promised to slaves was a dirty trick to create an ally, it says nothing about whether a primary motivation of the colonists to seek independence waa to protect slavery.  That is a false claim by those who want to change history and thereby create hatred and distrust towards the US Constitution and the ideals set forth within.   The modern left hates our Constitutional protections with a passion and wants to destroy the foundation of this country.  More and more this country is being run by rogue bureaucrats who are completely out of control and need to be reigned in.    

[craftsman 1,045]

4 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

I wouldn't ban a book that presented the same ideas as you posted.   I wouldn't call to ban a class at the same level as this AP class that included your ideas.    That's the difference, and for these examples that censorship is coming from the right side of the aisle.  It's the equivalent of safe spaces and hiding from ideas you don't like that I see idiots on the left doing.  

  If I didn't like what was being said to my kid, I would talk to the teacher and then talk to him.   

Censorship is not coming from the right side of the aisle. Banning lies is not censorship. It's simply not teaching our kids lies. 

Safe spaces are actual places where liberals go to hide themselves from the reality of life. The liberal collective doesn't want the fantasy land going on in it's collective brain to be exposed to the truth of life. Liberals want there to be infinite number of sexes, they want there to be a black narrative that they don't have opportunities. They want the narrative to be that black people need white liberal help by saying out loud that black people are incapable of getting driver's licenses, therefore we need to change voting processes to accommodate. The white liberals believe that black people are incapable of being smart enough to get into some universities so they need to put black people in over more qualified white people because of this black "handicap". The white liberals feel that black people are not as qualified to get jobs as white people so therefore they need to change the way companies choose employees to join their companies. Base it all on skin color. It goes on and on how the liberal collective thinks black people are inferior to white people when it comes to anything related to having skills to get on with daily life.

And you are the same way. You don't think black people have choices in life. You don't think they are smart, capable of making good decisions in life, nor are they capable of taking care of themselves without your help.

 

[BuckSwope 654]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Many examples out there of parents reading to the school board of explicit sexual content that could be found in libraries. And then being told it’s inappropriate to read it at the meeting. 

Again, you are showing the inabilty to put things in context.   Sure it was probably inappropriate to read out loud in most situations like that.   People didn't choose to consume that (like they would when they voluntarily check out that book), and it's very possible there were young kids at those meetings.    That has zip to do with whether or not that book should be removed from the shelf.   Context and situations are important.    

At the end of the day, it's YOUR opinion if something is "porn" or if it doesn't have any value.   It is on a shelf in a room - you aren't required to check it out, you aren't required to read it.   I dont' know if think it's inappropriate or not or if the sexual nature is warranted for the story - I haven't read it so I don't have a strong opinion.   It's not for me to decide these things for other people and other families.   Hence being against the removal of books as a whole.   

[craftsman 1,045]

Just now, jonmx said:

Whatever the British promised to slaves was a dirty trick to create an ally, it says nothing about whether a primary motivation of the colonists to seek independence waa to protect slavery.  That is a false claim by those who want to change history and thereby create hatred and distrust towards the US Constitution and the ideals set forth within.   The modern left hate our Constitutional protections and want to destroy the foundation of this country.  More and more this country is being run by rogue bureaucrats who are completely out of control and need to be reigned in.    

Many black people look to Africa as their source of pride and identity. Yet they refuse to acknowledge that it's their own ancestors that sold blacks into slavery for profit in the first place. Hell, Africa is today still practicing slavery and sales of their own people. It's just isn't labeled as 'slavery', it's labeled 'human trafficking' which somehow flies under the radar because it's renamed.  

[BuckSwope 654]

1 minute ago, craftsman said:

Censorship is not coming from the right side of the aisle. Banning lies is not censorship. It's simply not teaching our kids lies. 

Safe spaces are actual places where liberals go to hide themselves from the reality of life. The liberal collective doesn't want the fantasy land going on in it's collective brain to be exposed to the truth of life. Liberals want there to be infinite number of sexes, they want there to be a black narrative that they don't opportunities. They want the narrative to be that black people need white liberal help by saying out loud that black people are incapable of getting driver's licenses, therefore we need to change voting processes to accommodate. The white liberals believe that black people are incapable of being smart enough to get into some universities so they need to put black people in over more qualified white people because of this black "handicap". The white liberals feel that black people are not as qualified to get jobs as white people so therefor they need to change the way companies choose employees to join their companies. Base it all on skin color. It goes on and on how the liberal collective thinks black people are inferior to white people when it comes to anything related to having skills to get on with daily life.

And you are the same way. You don't think black people have choices in life. You don't think they are smart, capable of making good decisions in life, are capable of taking care of themselves without your help.

 

Whatever keeps your partisan worldview intact, I guess.   If banning classes and books isn't censorship, then there is not a ton we agree on.  

[BuckSwope 654]

17 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I think it is reasonable to be on high alert for it. And we should all oppose the denigration of others based on things like skin color….even if it is sold under some umbrella of “truth”

Of course.   None of this should be controversial.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

3 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Again, you are showing the inabilty to put things in context.   Sure it was probably inappropriate to read out loud in most situations like that.   People didn't choose to consume that (like they would when they voluntarily check out that book), and it's very possible there were young kids at those meetings.    That has zip to do with whether or not that book should be removed from the shelf.   Context and situations are important.    

At the end of the day, it's YOUR opinion if something is "porn" or if it doesn't have any value.   It is on a shelf in a room - you aren't required to check it out, you aren't required to read it.   I dont' know if think it's inappropriate or not or if the sexual nature is warranted for the story - I haven't read it so I don't have a strong opinion.   It's not for me to decide these things for other people and other families.   Hence being against the removal of books as a whole.   

A number of them were in middle school libraries. And they were very explicit and there is no denying the material is pornographic.  

[BuckSwope 654]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

A number of them were in middle school libraries. And they were very explicit and there is no denying the material is pornographic.  

Cool, now the line is moving as we get to younger and younger kids.   The examples I saw were HS libraries, and in my post I specifically said HS and public libraries, remember?

 

[craftsman 1,045]

17 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Whatever keeps your partisan worldview intact, I guess.   If banning classes and books isn't censorship, then there is not a ton we agree on.  

Ok, so if I write a math text book that tells the student that adding 1+5 = 92, and continue that form of adding throughout, you would call it banning if a school didn't allow that book into their curriculum? 

[BuckSwope 654]

1 minute ago, craftsman said:

Ok, so if I write a math text book that tells the student that adding 1+5 = 92, and continue that form of adding throughout, you would call it banning if a school didn't allow that book into their curriculum? 

What a dumb example.  

History is not math. 

History has facts.  It also has stories of people, their pov, their motivation, etc.    You got me, you win the internet today!!  Yes, I would also say a book that states the Declaration Independence was written is 1976 as a book that should be excluded from a history class.  

Saying that racism led to the decradation of the black communties is no more of "the truth" than saying the blacks and their choices led to the degradation of the communities.   Those are opinions, and that is what is being stopped and censored on both sides. I would say that it's a complicated mix of both of those things.   I would not be opposed to either of those POVs being presented in materials or discussion about the current state of black communities, and would prefer that both be presented in the same class.   The answer not to remove or ban on of those opinions, which in this case is 100% what the right is trying to do.  

 

[BuckSwope 654]

Thanks, crafts and HT.   You never fail to deliver.   

[jonmx 1,558]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Primarily? No. But the southern planters who were lukewarm to the rebels joined them only after the British promised to free any slaves who would fight with them. That’s simply a historical fact.

Im rather skeptical that 1619 teaches something different than the above. You’re welcome to prove me wrong. 

As far as your version of what happened in the south being historical fact, the History Channel vehemently disagrees and has a completely different vesrion of events.  The start of the Revolutionary War was fought primarily in the north,  but the British took the war to the south because there were more loyalists there as well as useful crops.  The British had some success and in 1779 the decree to free slaves was made, which actually aided the British efforts more than it hurt.  So your point is assbackwards, because most of those in the south had already joined the fight before the freeing of slaves decree was made.  The British faulted though in ruthlessly killing thousands of surrendering troops, and it was actually "Buford’s Massacre" which served as the primary rally cry which motivated the south....not slavery 

[craftsman 1,045]

5 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

What a dumb example.  

History is not math. 

History has facts.  It also has stories of people, their pov, their motivation, etc.    You got me, you win the internet today!!  Yes, I would also say a book that states the Declaration Independence was written is 1976 as a book that should be excluded from a history class.  

Saying that racism led to the decradation of the black communties is no more of "the truth" than saying the blacks and their choices led to the degradation of the communities.   Those are opinions, and that is what is being stopped and censored on both sides. I would say that it's a complicated mix of both of those things.   I would not be opposed to either of those POVs being presented in materials or discussion about the current state of black communities, and would prefer that both be presented in the same class.   The answer not to remove or ban on of those opinions, which in this case is 100% what the right is trying to do.  

 

So math doesn't have facts? And that's why you think it's dumb.

And my point is, liberals want to teach false history. Just like 1+5 = 92, they want to teach lies about blacks and whites. 

My Lord liberals are stupid. 

 

[Dizkneelande 839]

1 hour ago, craftsman said:

Why, because your like fictional?

In 2012, when Barack Obama won re-election, Gen X voters preferred Democrats in control of Congress over Republicans by 7 points, 48%-41%.

Yet in 2022, Gen X's voters preferred Republican control by 12 points, 52%-40%.

[BuckSwope 654]

8 minutes ago, craftsman said:

So math doesn't have facts? And that's why you think it's dumb.

And my point is, liberals want to teach false history. Just like 1+5 = 92, they want to teach lies about blacks and whites. 

My Lord liberals are stupid. 

 

You go to the same school that taught reading as HT?  History is different because it has facts (like math), AND those other things I listed.   

Yes, I have issues with wrong facts, no I don't have issue with teaching different views and perspectives in history.   Saying there were systemic forces applied to various communities that may have ramifications today isn't false history.   ONLY teaching that is where it goes wrong.   The answer is not to instead have you block that statement and ONLY teach that it's the black community's fault.   It's to have a class that talks about how both of those realities contribute and debate the extent as to which that happened.   That's what I want.  You seem to just want your version taught and the other shut down.   I fail to see how that isn't censorship.   

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

25 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Thanks, crafts and HT.   You never fail to deliver.   

You seem frustrated 

[BuckSwope 654]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You seem frustrated 

Nah, I'd have to take you two seriously to become frustrated.   Mostly it's being amused at the moving goalposts and misrepresentation of peoples posts. It's truly something to behold.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

Just now, BuckSwope said:

Nah, I'd have to take you two seriously to become frustrated.   Mostly it's being amused at the moving goalposts and misrepresentation of peoples posts. It's truly something to behold.  

The material was inappropriate in any library. 

[RLLD 3,455]

1 hour ago, BuckSwope said:

Of course.   None of this should be controversial.  

Agree. If the curriculum could be delivered in a non-divisive manner I bet plenty of people would be good with it.

And perhaps that is being done, but as we know enough parents have seen and heard teaching that was not in line with that.

Parents should always step in and protect their kids, from negative content.

Whether that content is violence, pornography or hateful….even if it’s a teacher doing it

[Voltaire 4,554]

3 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

There are some fundamental disagreements between many of us on this topic. One of the biggest is the issue of lies. Several of you have stated that anyone who takes this course will be fed lies about our history and culture. I do not believe this is the case and I would like those of you who have made this claim to be more specific: what, exactly, are the lies that will be told? And what in your opinion is the truth that SHOULD be told? Please try to avoid generalities and vagueness. 

Tim, you're of the opinion that the country is systemically racist against black people. There's the biggest lie.  There have been no laws or policies holding anyone back for sixty years but if any do still exist, point them out so we can seek to change it together. It's the exact opposite, our entire lives, the country has bent over backwards to help black people. The left has abandoned equal protection and colorblindness and embraced this anti-racism nonsense, which is what actually really is the only legally endorsed racism of any significance in 2023, and it goes too far.

These issues of racism against black people were true but also old and are long since solved. The left obsesses over laws and situations that date back to pre-1964 as if the country hasn't changed in sixty years. 

 

[BuckSwope 654]

41 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Agree. If the curriculum could be delivered in a non-divisive manner I bet plenty of people would be good with it.

And perhaps that is being done, but as we know enough parents have seen and heard teaching that was not in line with that.

Parents should always step in and protect their kids, from negative content.

Whether that content is violence, pornography or hateful….even if it’s a teacher doing it

Of course, that's why I beat the drum of going example by example.    I've seen some examples of dumb stuff in schools that should be addressed.   

But at the same time, I no longer trust headlines or examples right away of things like "they are teaching CRT!" because of what I posted about Rufo and the pressure from that side is.   

[BuckSwope 654]

49 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

The material was inappropriate in any library. 

A library where legal adults can check out materials?   

Just to be clear - do you agree that these books should be removed from libraries?  If you had the choice you would ban them from all libraries? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

17 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

A library where legal adults can check out materials?   

Just to be clear - do you agree that these books should be removed from libraries?  If you had the choice you would ban them from all libraries? 

Should penthouse forum be in libraries? 

[dogcows 1,029]

Lots of people on this thread love government censorship, as long as the stuff being censored is stuff they dislike.

33 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Tim, you're of the opinion that the country is systemically racist against black people. There's the biggest lie.  There have been no laws or policies holding anyone back for sixty years but if any do still exist, point them out so we can seek to change it together. It's the exact opposite, our entire lives, the country has bent over backwards to help black people. The left has abandoned equal protection and colorblindness and embraced this anti-racism nonsense, which is what actually really is the only legally endorsed racism of any significance in 2023, and it goes too far.

These issues of racism against black people were true but also old and are long since solved. The left obsesses over laws and situations that date back to pre-1964 as if the country hasn't changed in sixty years. 

 

Anybody that says issues of racism “are long since solved” is living in a fantasy world.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,589]

1 minute ago, dogcows said:

Lots of people on this thread love government censorship, as long as the stuff being censored is stuff they dislike.

Anybody that says issues of racism “are long since solved” is living in a fantasy world.

The system is no longer racist. Some people still are. There isn’t one law or regulation that exists that takes anyones race into account.  The implementation of those laws can be racist depending on the individual enforcing them. 

[jonmx 1,558]

7 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Lots of people on this thread love government censorship, as long as the stuff being censored is stuff they dislike.

Anybody that says issues of racism “are long since solved” is living in a fantasy world.

Lol...what a moron.  It is a government f-ing school.  Teachers aren't paid to express their idiotic views. They are paid to do the job taxpayers pay them for.  This has nothing to do with censorship.  You really can't make up how f-ing stupid the leftist arguements are.  

[dogcows 1,029]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

The system is no longer racist. Some people still are. There isn’t one law or regulation that exists that takes anyones race into account.  The implementation of those laws can be racist depending on the individual enforcing them. 

Take a listen to MLK Jr’s final Sunday sermon at the Washington National Cathedral. He destroys this same argument… which tells you how long racists have been pushing it.