Bobby Hart under pressure

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-26-2020, 05:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Simply cause post 62 got buried in crap. 

Then again seeing yours and others behavior against Bfine, why should they speak up? Just so you have someone new to attack and slur? 

No thanks


To Samhain.
Their is no confusion. 
Recent laws in a few states now require schools to purchase books that teach LGBTQ history. 

Some might look at that as promoting it rather than keeping an open mind about it. 

Just like the left complains about teaching kids about religion in public schools. 

I made post #62. You made post #64. So by “buried” you mean it was buried under a single comment?

[fredtoast]

(06-26-2020, 05:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: To Samhain.
Their is no confusion. 
Recent laws in a few states now require schools to purchase books that teach LGBTQ history. 

Some might look at that as promoting it rather than keeping an open mind about it. 

Is teaching the history of slavery promoting slavery?

And I have no problem with teaching the history of religions.  In fact you can't teach history without talking about the impact of religion in shaping the modern world.  Just don't teach any of them as "the true religion"

(06-26-2020, 05:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Just like the left complains about teaching kids about religion in public schools. 

This is a perfect example of the problems we have with a few specific issues.

Homosexuality is NOT a religious issue.

OPPOSITION to homosexuality is a religious issue.


Too many Christians believe that NOT having rules based on their religious beliefs is discrimination against them.  The fact is we shouldn't have laws based on ANY religion.  We can't let a religious belief (opposition to homosexuality) control the rules of a public school.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-26-2020, 08:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Is teaching the history of slavery promoting slavery?

And I have no problem with teaching the history of religions.  In fact you can't teach history without talking about the impact of religion in shaping the modern world.  Just don't teach any of them as "the true religion"




This is a perfect example of the problems we have with a few specific issues.

Homosexuality is NOT a religious issue.

OPPOSITION to homosexuality is a religious issue.


Too many Christians believe that NOT having rules based on their religious beliefs is discrimination against them.  The fact is we shouldn't have laws based on ANY religion.  We can't let a religious belief (opposition to homosexuality) control the rules of a public school.

I learned the history of religion in school, but I wasn’t goin to church in school.

The left complains about organized prayer in school or organized religion in school. And when the right complains they are only complaining about Christianity. Because they don’t want Islam taught in school and they don’t want students breaking out prayer mats and facing Mecca to prayer or allowing Scientologist to conduct audits on their kids or Satanist equal time or a coven of Wiccans

That’s a disingenuous argument at best.

[*bfine32*]

(06-26-2020, 07:48 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The vast majority of JN posters didn’t even post in that thread which barely reached four pages.

Edit: A quick check reveals their were only 32 individuals who commented in that thread. That’s not even a majority of Andy Dalton haters.

Unsure that changes anything I said

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-26-2020, 08:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Is teaching the history of slavery promoting slavery?

And I have no problem with teaching the history of religions.  In fact you can't teach history without talking about the impact of religion in shaping the modern world.  Just don't teach any of them as "the true religion"




This is a perfect example of the problems we have with a few specific issues.

Homosexuality is NOT a religious issue.

OPPOSITION to homosexuality is a religious issue.


Too many Christians believe that NOT having rules based on their religious beliefs is discrimination against them.  The fact is we shouldn't have laws based on ANY religion.  We can't let a religious belief (opposition to homosexuality) control the rules of a public school.

I dont have an issue with teaching anything in school as long as its in a neutral setting. 

Opposition to sexuality is not just a religious thing. 

I dont oppose it, but I do if its not being done safely. Because the body itself has no natural protections against getting diseases. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-26-2020, 08:56 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I learned the history of religion in school, but I wasn’t goin to church in school.

The left complains about organized prayer in school or organized religion in school. And when the right complains they are only complaining about Christianity. Because they don’t want Islam taught in school and they don’t want students breaking out prayer mats and facing Mecca to prayer or allowing Scientologist to conduct audits on their kids or Satanist equal time or a coven of Wiccans  

That’s a disingenuous argument at best.

I'm not a very religious person. But if a child wants to pray in school. You shouldn't tell them they can't as long as it doesn't interfere or disrupt the classroom. Praying before they eat lunch doesn't harm anyone. 

[fredtoast]

(06-26-2020, 10:54 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Opposition to sexuality is not just a religious thing. 

I know that.

That is why I specifically said opposition to HOMOsexuality.

When I talk about addressing homosexuality with children I am not talking about the physical act of sex.  I am talking more about explaining to kids that it is okay for someone to have two mommies or two daddies.  That you shouldn't be mean to a boy just because he likes other boys or a girl who likes girls.

[fredtoast]

(06-26-2020, 10:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not a very religious person. But if a child wants to pray in school. You shouldn't tell them they can't as long as it doesn't interfere or disrupt the classroom. Praying before they eat lunch doesn't harm anyone. 

There is no rule against a student praying out loud in a situation where they are allowed to talk.  As long as they don't turn the "prayer" into a "sermon" or use it as a chance to proselytize to other students.

Or they can just pray to themselves any time they want to.

Prayers are supposed to be communications with the lord, not performances for other people to watch. I don't think people who define "prayer" as "out loud and in a group" really understand the concept.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-26-2020, 11:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I know that.

That is why I specifically said opposition to HOMOsexuality.

When I talk about addressing homosexuality with children I am not talking about the physical act of sex.  I am talking more about explaining to kids that it is okay for someone to have two mommies or two daddies.  That you shouldn't be mean to a boy just because he likes other boys or a girl who likes girls.

Sorry Homosexuality. 

Spell check flipped it.

I dont have any issues about teaching 2 mommies/daddies or any combination. 

One thing I can see that will cause major issues is that Sex Ed is taught in school. So how is that going to be handled if homosexuality is incorporated into the class?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-26-2020, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Unsure that changes anything I said

It doesn’t change the words you wrote. They’re all still there in the order you placed them. It’s just that your conclusion is incorrect hyperbolic conjecture.

Besides, your first contribution to this thread was a stereotype based upon race and an insult directed towards liberals. So enough of the fake moral outrage since you came out of the gate trolling with race baiting insults.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-26-2020, 10:54 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I dont have an issue with teaching anything in school as long as its in a neutral setting. 

Opposition to sexuality is not just a religious thing. 

I dont oppose it, but I do if its not being done safely. Because the body itself has no natural protections against getting diseases. 

Your body doesn’t have an immune system? You don’t have intact skin preventing portals of entry to bacteria? You don’t have protective bacteria flora preventing overgrowth of opportunistic pathogens? You don’t have mucous production from mucous membranes or cilliary movement to rid the body of pathogens? You don’t have bacteria in your gut?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-26-2020, 10:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not a very religious person. But if a child wants to pray in school. You shouldn't tell them they can't as long as it doesn't interfere or disrupt the classroom. Praying before they eat lunch doesn't harm anyone. 

Voluntary, student led pray that doesn’t interfere with class in a public school is protected by the First Amendment.

Organized or school lead or mandatory prayer is not

I don’t oppose what you described. I do oppose schools being used by predominantly Christians trying to turn public schools into an extensions of their churches. Keep religion in the churches and we won’t teach compulsory evolution classes in Sunday School.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-25-2020, 01:21 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Luckily, there has never been a period of time in human history where one generation has been less progressive than the last.

That's not true at all.  You don't even have to go back that far to find an example either, 60's generation vs. 80's.  You don't have to go back much farther than that to see a huge difference between the 20's and 40-50's.  Historically The Romans were light years more "progressive" than the culture that dominated Europe for close to a thousand years.  You're really basing this off the last thirty years.  I wouldn't be at all shocked if the current climate produces a very conservative generation within the next twenty years.

[BmorePat87]

(06-26-2020, 10:59 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not a very religious person. But if a child wants to pray in school. You shouldn't tell them they can't as long as it doesn't interfere or disrupt the classroom. Praying before they eat lunch doesn't harm anyone. 

It would be unconstitutional for me as an agent of the government to stop a student from praying in the cafeteria or silently at their desk.

[CJD]

(06-27-2020, 12:26 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That's not true at all.  You don't even have to go back that far to find an example either, 60's generation vs. 80's.  You don't have to go back much farther than that to see a huge difference between the 20's and 40-50's.  Historically The Romans were light years more "progressive" than the culture that dominated Europe for close to a thousand years.  You're really basing this off the last thirty years.  I wouldn't be at all shocked if the current climate produces a very conservative generation within the next twenty years.

I don't know what exactly you're referring to in regards to the 60s and the 80s, but between those two time periods, marriage between white and black people was legalized, so I'm not sure why that would qualify as society becoming less progressive. 

Are you saying that people born in the 80s are less progressive than people born in the 60s? If so, I'd have to hear your reasoning for that.

As far as the 20s and the 40s and 50s go, I think the World Wars did make patriotism more prominent which promoted nationalistic thinking a bit, but when you look at the society as a whole, it still became more progressive. Child Labor Laws were passed in the 20s and 30s and the ACLU was formed. Women's right to vote occurred in the 20s as well. I think we can both agree that a woman's place in the world has evolved with each generation, initially viewed as merely a home maker and then slowly gaining more and more autonomy as the decades went on.

In regards to Europe vs the Romans, fair enough. But I think now we're comparing apples to oranges. I should have specified that any individual society has not significantly taken a step back in its own insular history. Each society progresses at a different rate. For example, Saudi Arabia is just now allowing women to drive. They are way behind most of the civilized world, but they are still moving in a progressive direction.

There will certainly be bumps in the road, like the one we're going through right now, often caused by external wars and conflicts, but on the whole, I think we would both agree that each generation gained more progressive freedoms and rights than the last, when viewed from a macro level, right?

[fredtoast]

(06-26-2020, 11:38 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: One thing I can see that will cause major issues is that Sex Ed is taught in school. So how is that going to be handled if homosexuality is incorporated into the class?

What would change?

I don't remember my sex ed class including instructions on which sex to be attracted to.

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2020, 12:40 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote:  I should have specified that any individual society has not significantly taken a step back in its own insular history. Each society progresses at a different rate. For example, Saudi Arabia is just now allowing women to drive. They are way behind most of the civilized world, but they are still moving in a progressive direction.

In general I agree you are correct, but there are rare examples.  Iran under the Shah was much more liberal than it has been since he was deposed and replaced by a more orthodox religious leader.


Here in the US the progression is like the stock market charts.  There are up and down cycles but over all it continually rises.  There is not going to be a sudden major shift to the right as "backlash" to anything.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(06-27-2020, 12:41 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It would be unconstitutional for me as an agent of the government to stop a student from praying in the cafeteria or silently at their desk.

Until they start snoring! 

As I said. I'm not highly religious so I don't keep up with the exact rules in public schools in regards to what is isnt allowed.

[CJD]

(06-27-2020, 12:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: In general I agree you are correct, but there are rare examples.  Iran under the Shah was much more liberal than it has been since he was deposed and replaced by a more orthodox religious leader.


Here in the US the progression is like the stock market charts.  There are up and down cycles but over all in continually rises.  There is not going to be a sudden major shift to the right as "backlash" to anything.

That's a good way of characterizing it and how I visualize it in my head.

[samhain]

(06-26-2020, 05:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Simply cause post 62 got buried in crap. 

Then again seeing yours and others  behavior against Bfine, why should they speak up? Just so you have someone new to attack and slur? 

No thanks


To Samhain.
Their is no confusion. 
Recent laws in a few states now require schools to purchase books that teach LGBTQ history. 

Some might look at that as promoting it rather than keeping an open mind about it. 

Just like the left complains about teaching kids about religion in public schools. 

So what?  How is learning about a thing that happened teaching anyone to be anything?  I've been taught about comparative religion, various political movements, and lifestyles that aren't mine. I played flag football at a Baptist church when I was Catholic, and continued to be Catholic.  None of them made me anything other than what I am.  

I hate to break it to people, but if you're kid is gay, it aint because he/she read a book about LGBTQ history.  It's because, wait for it: they are gay and always have been.  

You either are or you aren't regardless of what you consume in terms of information.  All withholding said information does is repress and shame, creating more issues.  

One of my best friends is as right wing as they come. Wears MAGA hats and goes to the local megachurch. He brags about loving his 50 guns all the same. We go to Fat Tuesday dinner with his family every year here at a local cajun place. One year, he brought his teenage son. Guess what? He's flaming, outspokenly, in-your-face, no doubt gay. He did not learn that from his dad or anything he was taught in school. It's just who he is and who he's always been, and no amount of conditioning would have changed that.