• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Second Term

JayUtah said:
You sidestepped the point. The fear was expressed that schools would be free to teach such things as Creationism. You said that a Supreme Court decision prohibited that and that any such attempt would be swiftly stopped. But in fact funds now being collected ostensibly for public education are, in my state, being funneled towards private education with literally no standards or oversight. The fear is real and your proposed solution is factually impotent.
Click to expand...
Yeah the number of times people have been told 'oh he just can't do that' in respect to some idiot idea from Trump, only for him to do it and get away with it, should have silenced such claims by now.
 
Garrison said:
So just to check I've haven't been deceived by the evil MSM, Trump is proposing ethnic cleansing so he can build a beach resort?
Click to expand...
Nothing that specific. He has mentioned "clearing out" Gaza, and that there is some nice beachfront property there. He hasn't said anything like "If Israel gives me a couple hundred acres of Gaza I will let them ethnically cleanse the area without a fuss", but it's pretty clear he is open to the idea.
 
Hey now. If there are no Palestinians in Gaza, there will be no Palestinians getting killed, or starving, in Gaza..... There will be no Palestianian crimes. No Palestinian suffering. Gaza will be the paradise they always wanted.....
 
JayUtah said:
"Education choice" is code for private schools funded from public education funds. They are free to teach whatever they want. This is rapidly becoming the status quo in my state.
Click to expand...

and whatever they want is christianity
 
It's kind of a specious use of "free country" to assert that people in it who do indeed have the freedom to separate their children from public schooling, because they either don't like the curriculum or the student body there, should still be able to access the public funding for the schools they want to be separated from. Yelling "freeeeedom!!" doesn't absolve you of a responsibility to support your own; proposing that others fund your ides of it is just the freedom of libertarian-styled theft.
 
Last edited:
Once you make the decision that your public education funds can be used for any private interest remotely styled as education, you can sidestep the Establishment clause by simply not inquiring about what the curriculum includes. This is in line with recent Supreme Court decisions that say public funds have to be made equally available to both religious and nonreligious beneficiaries, even if the religious beneficiaries use it for religiously motivated activities. There is a debate to be had on that regard, but the question at hand was whether Supreme Court decisions that control whether a state-operated educational institution can apply its discretion to provide religious instruction would be binding on a private institution that merely receives state funding, but provides religious instruction.
 
JayUtah said:
You sidestepped the point. The fear was expressed that schools would be free to teach such things as Creationism. You said that a Supreme Court decision prohibited that and that any such attempt would be swiftly stopped. But in fact funds now being collected ostensibly for public education are, in my state, being funneled towards private education with literally no standards or oversight. The fear is real and your proposed solution is factually impotent.
Click to expand...
I didn't "sidestep" it. I thought I was being clear when I facetiously wrote, "Sucks to live in a free country...oh, wait." By that, I was acknowledging your point that private schools can teach whatever they want, and even though there is a downside to that, it beats the alternative of the federal government dictating, essentially, how parents can educate their children.
 
jt512 said:
I didn't "sidestep" it. I thought I was being clear when I facetiously wrote, "Sucks to live in a free country...oh, wait." By that, I was acknowledging your point that private schools can teach whatever they want, and even though there is a downside to that, it beats the alternative of the federal government dictating, essentially, how parents can educate their children.
Click to expand...
Your claim was that the courts would prevent schools from teaching religious doctrine. That claim is false, and you galloped off on a tangent.
 
JayUtah said:
Your claim was that the courts would prevent schools from teaching religious doctrine. That claim is false, and you galloped off on a tangent.
Click to expand...
Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP> for rule 12.


I omitted the word "public."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How is Musk's great govt. employee buy-out doing? The govt. claims that about 20,000 employees have signed up for it (out of nearly 2,000,000 govt. employees). In recent years, about 3 times that number have retired each year. What are the odds that most of the people who signed up are people who were planning on retiring this year and look at it as a way to stop working a few months early and still get paid?
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
How is Musk's great govt. employee buy-out doing? The govt. claims that about 20,000 employees have signed up for it (out of nearly 2,000,000 govt. employees). In recent years, about 3 times that number have retired each year. What are the odds that most of the people who signed up are people who were planning on retiring this year and look at it as a way to stop working a few months early and still get paid?
Click to expand...

Some fun reading on that:

 
JayUtah said:
From what?

You claim the courts will protect any who fear that public education will devolve into religious indoctrination. I've outlined the way in which states are successfully evading that protection, not as a hypothetical, but as ongoing fact.
Click to expand...
OK, so what I wrote initially was actually correct. By "public education" I meant "public schools," which, in the United States, means the ones that aren't privately owned, that is, those that are part of public school districts.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
How is Musk's great govt. employee buy-out doing?
Click to expand...
There has been considerable speculation in legal circles about how enforceable the early-retirement agreement is. The citations apparently to the legal authority for it do not support it as a thing the government can do. Now I get that the Musk-A-Trump coup cares little for existing law. But the fear is that the administration will stiff these departing employees and that the employees will have no legal recourse.
 
jt512 said:
I didn't "sidestep" it. I thought I was being clear when I facetiously wrote, "Sucks to live in a free country...oh, wait." By that, I was acknowledging your point that private schools can teach whatever they want, and even though there is a downside to that, it beats the alternative of the federal government dictating, essentially, how parents can educate their children.
Click to expand...
Do you think children have any rights when it comes to how they are educated, or is it just their parents?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom