When Government silences the opposition

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

No, I don't think his post was contradictory. 

Nola was referring to the contradiction of banning books.  Those books are not banned; they are restricted in SCHOOL libraries.  Those books are available in book stores.

Schools and state run universities are still subject to state laws.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

No, I don't think his post was contradictory. 

I didn't say his post was contradictory. 

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Everyone knows that a majority of Americans classify "freedom of speech" in much broader terms than what the 1st amendment and Supreme Court alone dictates. 

Do they? What do you mean by "broader terms." Be more specific. 

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Republicans and Conservatives typically defend their "Free speech" beliefs by claiming that social media companies who censor or delete speech that violates their guidelines are violating peoples free speech.

When the state gets involved, yes that's a reasonable claim. There is First Amendment caselaw to this end.

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

free speech in the broad cultural sense that most people apply it

Jiggery-pokery. 

 

So at the very least, you're saying he must be referring to something other than the First Amendment? Otherwise, not even you would dispute my response? Good deal. 

[homersapien 11,379]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

So at the very least, you're saying he must be referring to something other than the First Amendment? Otherwise, not even you would dispute my response? Good deal. 

First amendment issue aside, how do you feel about a state banning books based on a given citizens complaint?

[CoffeeTiger 5,109]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Nola was referring to the contradiction of banning books.  Those books are not banned; they are restricted in SCHOOL libraries.  Those books are available in book stores.

Schools and state run universities are still subject to state laws.

Well, hopefully these kids realize that any books their parents, preachers, and politicians forbid them from reading are probably books they need to read. 

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

On 7/24/2023 at 5:00 PM, DKW 86 said:

I am as anti-Maga as can be. I am also pro-fairness and pro-truth. For 4-6 years we heard on every news broadcast how "the walls are closing in," "the beginning of the end," "bombshell, bombshell, bombshell..."

I truly do see both sides in this. I see both sides and can still detest trump and know that Biden is in fact laughingly demented. And I howl laughing when people on both sides try to tell me that their side is more righteous. I just LMAO....

I don't think either side is more righteous.

I do think it's self evident that the one thing every one of the left's policies has in common is that they all oppose, undermine, and sometimes deliberately seek to weaken or destroy or replace traditional Judaeo-Christian values.   Whether someone thinks that's more or less righteous is up for debate, I suppose, but I don't think it's really reasonably debatable that it's true.

Practically/policy speaking, even if both parties are pushing us toward oblivion, which many populists on both sides like to argue these days, as with so many things in life it comes down to a matter of degree and speed.  Republicans act like they want to take their time getting there.  Make the trip last as long as they can, enjoy the sights along the way.  Bottom line, I feel like at age 53 I can outrun the effects of the vast majority of Republican policies.  

The left, on the other hand, acts like they've got about a 10 year window to completely ruin the country and if they can't get it done in that time frame then they lose their chance and have to go home frustrated.  I don't think anyone under about age 75 or so can outrun Democratic policies.

Case in point, I heard on the radio that the money supply has increased 40% in the last two and a half years.  Gee, I wonder why inflation is as bad as it is?  I just can't figure it out...it can't be Bidenomics, because the media says that's doing us all a favor (as Biden prepares to print another 100+ Billion to split between Ukraine and Israel.)

Edited October 25, 2023 by Shoney'sPonyBoy

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Well, hopefully these kids realize that any books their parents, preachers, and politicians forbid them from reading are probably books they need to read. 

I can guarantee that they will realize that the books parents, preachers, and politicians want to ban are the ones they WANT to read, whether they need to or not.   Those who read something other than texts, that is.

Like when the PMRC finally prevailed and got their album lyric rating system and Frank Zappa was the first one to release a record with the warning label on it.  It was a 100% instrumental album.

[AURex 2,000]

Thing is, with the state of today's education system, most kids do not want to read anything more demanding than a TikTok or IM post. If it is not required reading in school and not discussed in class, they are not going to read it. 

 

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

8 hours ago, AURex said:

Thing is, with the state of today's education system, most kids do not want to read anything more demanding than a TikTok or IM post. If it is not required reading in school and not discussed in class, they are not going to read it. 

 

What makes you think they are reading what is assigned in school or discussed in class?

Heck, for that matter, what makes you think they are even capable of reading it?

Two-thirds of high school graduates read below grade level and almost 20% (1 in 5) are functionally illiterate.  That's graduates.  That doesn't count the ones who dropped out.

But, they know all sorts of woke stuff, including the fact that white people are evil, that the leading cause of death for unarmed black males is being killed by police officers, that very soon people are going to start spontaneously combusting from Climate Change crisis, that the probability is that they are really the opposite gender, and they know exactly and in explicit detail how to have gay sex.

So they get taught the stuff that really matters.  If you think you only have 10 years to ruin the country, that is.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Shoney'sPonyBoy

[homersapien 11,379]

Good grief.

Edited October 26, 2023 by homersapien

[CoffeeTiger 5,109]

6 hours ago, Shoney'sPonyBoy said:

But, they know all sorts of woke stuff, including the fact that white people are evil, that the leading cause of death for unarmed black males is being killed by police officers, that very soon people are going to start spontaneously combusting from Climate Change crisis, that the probability is that they are really the opposite gender, and they know exactly and in explicit detail how to have gay sex.

So they get taught the stuff that really matters.  If you think you only have 10 years to ruin the country, that is.

Is that really what children are being taught in American public schools, or is that just what the Conservative media you read and listen to tells you children are being taught? 

Because I can assure you there is a very big difference between those two. 

[homersapien 11,379]

I suspect parents have more to do with teaching their kids to read books than the school system. By the time schools start assigning books to read, its likely too late to instill the habit.

I always compliment parents at the library who are helping their kids check out a stack of children's books.

Edited October 26, 2023 by homersapien

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Is that really what children are being taught in American public schools, or is that just what the Conservative media you read and listen to tells you children are being taught? 

Because I can assure you there is a very big difference between those two. 

I'm of course being somewhat hyperbolic, but how many videos would you like me to post of parents complaining at school board meetings about exactly that sort of stuff?

One thing that's not debatable however, is what they are NOT learning.  They aren't learning reading, writing, and arithmetic, are they?

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

18 hours ago, homersapien said:

I suspect parents have more to do with teaching their kids to read books than the school system. By the time schools start assigning books to read, its likely too late to instill the habit.

I always compliment parents at the library who are helping their kids check out a stack of children's books.

So what do we need a public school system for, then?

I'm giving statistics for kids who have graduated from the system.  Why do they spend 13 years in public school if it's the parent's job to teach them something as basic and fundamental as literacy, without which very little learning about anything else is possible?

I do agree that with only rare exception, parents are the prime influencer of how kids turn out academically.  But then back to the first question.  Why do we need public schools, at least in their current form?  Why not just put a national curriculum online and have a few teachers available at public libraries for tutoring students past bumps in the road that they and their parents can't get past and leave the rest up to the students to work through the curriculum at their own pace?

Edited October 27, 2023 by Shoney'sPonyBoy

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

On 10/25/2023 at 1:03 PM, homersapien said:

First amendment issue aside, how do you feel about a state banning books based on a given citizens complaint?

Give me a hypothetical? Do you mean in the context of a school library, or banning a literary work across the board? 

[AURex 2,000]

Pandemic remote schooling was a disaster. Teachers are going online saying that students are years behind from where they should be in math, literacy, writing, rhetoric. That is NOT on the school systems. That is on parents.

[auburnatl1 4,935]

5 hours ago, Shoney'sPonyBoy said:

So what do we need a public school system for, then?

I'm giving statistics for kids who have graduated from the system.  Why do they spend 13 years in public school if it's the parent's job to teach them something as basic and fundamental and upon which very little learning about anything else is possible without, to read?

I do agree that with only rare exception, parents are the prime influencer of how kids turn out academically.  But then back to the first question.  Why do we need public schools, at least in their current form?  Why not just put a national curriculum online and have a few teachers available at public libraries for tutoring students past bumps in the road that they and their parents can't get past and leave the rest up to the students to work through the curriculum at their own pace?

It’s not crazy. One of the things that’s been discussed is the “flip” technique. Zoom national, elite teachers for lectures and concepts, use local teachers for homework review and tutoring.

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

10 hours ago, AURex said:

Pandemic remote schooling was a disaster. Teachers are going online saying that students are years behind from where they should be in math, literacy, writing, rhetoric. That is NOT on the school systems. That is on parents.

You must have a short memory. The school system and state governments were held hostage by the teacher union’s demands for COVID protocols before going back to work.  The parents had no control over the negotiations being held.

If you are saying the parents were responsible to have their children excel in remote learning, well that is a stretch.  Parents who are unfamiliar with any educational material are now suddenly thrust into helping their children through home schooling?  Yeah blame it on the last line of defense when those above take no responsibility.

[homersapien 11,379]

On 10/26/2023 at 4:55 PM, Shoney'sPonyBoy said:

So what do we need a public school system for, then?

 

Because democracy cannot work without a well educated populace. And to expect all citizens to have access to private schools is foolish. Public schools are a cornerstone of our democracy.

[homersapien 11,379]

22 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Give me a hypothetical? Do you mean in the context of a school library, or banning a literary work across the board? 

Florida

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/more-than-350-books-banned-in-florida-schools-since-last-july-16817328

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

On 10/27/2023 at 4:03 PM, homersapien said:

Florida

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/more-than-350-books-banned-in-florida-schools-since-last-july-16817328

I think curricular choice is within the constitutional discretion of the legislature. I think the legislature can grant parents generally a say in when and how to introduce subjects to their children.

I think a school can teach Benedict Arnold is a traitor, and line its libraries with books consistent with that end, even if a student or parent prefers a revisionist account that he is a hero. 

I think it is ironic that dissenters (see the link you posted) profess they have no idea what Florida's law means, yet (when convenient for their cause) readily claim the law is one-sided and chills LGBTQ people from expressing sexual orientation or requires schools to remove such content from libraries.

Henry Whitaker authored a well-written brief on these issues recently. My views align with Florida's position on the matter. 

[PUB78 1,358]

Another scary example.

https://wng.org/opinions/a-coercive-secular-hegemony-1698873119?mkt_tok=NzEwLVFSUi0yMDkAAAGPLyiCRUSJeiMz26f1dt8BFnbwqH-N3TL8uRR2XPepAcAdZByLAg_60vpKKqztDUWpP2rL-7kpPaMWYjil3a6hWzt-EVDIRqhU-6gtpY0flLst

[CoffeeTiger 5,109]

35 minutes ago, PUB78 said:

Another scary example.

https://wng.org/opinions/a-coercive-secular-hegemony-1698873119?mkt_tok=NzEwLVFSUi0yMDkAAAGPLyiCRUSJeiMz26f1dt8BFnbwqH-N3TL8uRR2XPepAcAdZByLAg_60vpKKqztDUWpP2rL-7kpPaMWYjil3a6hWzt-EVDIRqhU-6gtpY0flLst

Hardly. A government official shouldn’t be able to discriminate on the basis of their personal religious beliefs. 
 

It is an insult to people of faith who serve in judicial offices to suggest that because they hold an orthodox Christian view of marriage, they are incapable of acting impartially in cases involving same-sex persons

 

Christians May be offended or insulted at the accusation that they can’t judge impartially,  but that doesn’t make the accusation wrong. If a judge is willing to let their religious beliefs override everything else in their life then they do not Need to be judges or put into a positions of authority where they have to make impartial judgements against people who they believe their religion tells them to discriminate against. Discrimination and impartiality are almost impossible to avoid in those situations…especially when the judge already refuses to perform some of her job/services to gay people. 
 

Christians are 100% within their rights to disagree with or dislike lgbtq people. Or not want to sell contraception’s. 
BUT it is on the Christian to make the sacrifice and not put themselves into positions and jobs that would require them in the normal process of their job to violate their religious beliefs. 
 

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

23 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Hardly. A government official shouldn’t be able to discriminate on the basis of their personal religious beliefs. 
 

It is an insult to people of faith who serve in judicial offices to suggest that because they hold an orthodox Christian view of marriage, they are incapable of acting impartially in cases involving same-sex persons

 

Christians May be offended or insulted at the accusation that they can’t judge impartially,  but that doesn’t make the accusation wrong. If a judge is willing to let their religious beliefs override everything else in their life then they do not Need to be judges or put into a positions of authority where they have to make impartial judgements against people who they believe their religion tells them to discriminate against. Discrimination and impartiality are almost impossible to avoid in those situations…especially when the judge already refuses to perform some of her job/services to gay people. 
 

Christians are 100% within their rights to disagree with or dislike lgbtq people. Or not want to sell contraception’s. 
BUT it is on the Christian to make the sacrifice and not put themselves into positions and jobs that would require them in the normal process of their job to violate their religious beliefs. 
 

 

In goose-for-gander fashion, the extension of this logic utterly fails. 

[auburnatl1 4,935]

I think this is an interesting but completely irrelevant debate - if it’s really about kids. 1) very few schools utilize the library any more, especially after 3rd grade  2) most kids see whatever they want on their  phones or tablets. And if you put on parental controls, their  friends parents don’t 3) paper based text books in general are losing funding (too expensive - ebooks) and going the way of the dodo 

[homersapien 11,379]

20 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

I think this is an interesting but completely irrelevant debate - if it’s really about kids. 1) very few schools utilize the library any more, especially after 3rd grade  2) most kids see whatever they want on their  phones or tablets. And if you put on parental controls, their  friends parents don’t 3) paper based text books in general are losing funding (too expensive - ebooks) and going the way of the dodo 

It's about forcing your ideology on to society at large.