Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, June 21, 2022

The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that Maine may not exclude religious schools from a state tuition program.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Welcome to the new First Amendment where freedom of religion means you are free to force it on other people and their kids.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Now there's no reason not to tax churches.

#1 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-06-21 01:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 6

From the cited article...

...One of the schools at issue in the case, Temple Academy in Waterville, Maine, says it expects its teachers "to integrate biblical principles with their teaching in every subject" and teaches students "to spread the word of Christianity." The other, Bangor Christian Schools, says it seeks to develop "within each student a Christian worldview and Christian philosophy of life."...

So... government funding of religion.

First, SCOTUS declared that corporations are people.

Now SCOTUS declares that religious institutions are businesses.

Perhaps religious institutions should also wallow in some of the other advantages that businesses have like, for instance, paying taxes.


#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 01:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Disgusting.

#3 | Posted by qcp at 2022-06-21 02:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I'm all for this as long as it doesn't divert resources away from teaching children about the joys of ------- and --------- in the LGBTQWZ++ Community.

#4 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-21 02:37 PM | Reply

They already get government aid by being allowed to exist.

If they want more government aid they should pay taxes.

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-21 02:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

#4 | POSTED BY MAO_CONTENT AT 2022-06-21 02:37 PM | FLAG: INCEL RAN OUT OF ZIMA

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-06-21 08:08 PM | Reply

From what I've seen as of late from the courts, it is surpressing the right to personal religious beliefs.

The government is not supposed to be endorsing or surpressing any particular religions the way I see it.

It's a thin line between suppressing and endorsing religions for someone who should be neutral.

The snowflakes have this idea their delicate ears should be protected from even hearing about religion. Sorry...freedom of speech and all that.

This time the courts supported religious freedom. The government isn't actually endorsing any particular religion.

This is why I voted for Trump wanting more conservatives on the court.

Bought time.

#7 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-21 09:44 PM | Reply

So Bill Johnson wants tax payer monies going to religious organizations?? That's scummy considering they pay no taxes.

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-21 09:48 PM | Reply

@#7 ... The snowflakes have this idea their delicate ears should be protected from even hearing about religion. Sorry...freedom of speech and all that. ...

Methinks your comment [intentionally?] mischaracterizes the concerns in an attempt to trivialize them.

... This time the courts supported religious freedom. The government isn't actually endorsing any particular religion. ...

Religious freedom also means freedom from religion.

While your comment asserts that "[t]he government isn't actually endorsing any particular religion", the government is endorsing, and supporting via tax-payer funds, religion.

Why should the government support religion with tax-payer money?

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 09:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

This is welcome news to all the Muslim primary schools that have been sprouting up in old abandoned Christian churches in the Baltimore area.

#10 | Posted by pumpkinhead at 2022-06-21 09:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The MAGAts are making madrasas great again.

#11 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2022-06-21 10:05 PM | Reply

#10 - only if the conditions are the same, i.e. no easily accessible public schools and local laws allowing for distribution of public money t ensure a quality education. From what I read in the ruling, it affects only a small percentage of students. Most Muslim enclaves are in the US are in the cities and have easy access to public schools. This ruling does not change anything for them.

#12 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 10:13 PM | Reply

"This time the courts supported religious freedom"

This ruling is not about religious freedoms. If it was, school boards could turn their schools into little sky fairy believing mills.

#13 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 10:19 PM | Reply

"So Bill Johnson wants tax payer monies going to religious organizations?? That's scummy considering they pay no taxes.

#8 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR AT 2022-06-21 09:48 PM | REPLY"

Public schools don't pay taxes and their funding is 100% from tax payers.

#14 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 10:25 PM | Reply

Lamp,

"Why should the government support religion with tax-payer money?"

That's a loaded question. I'm not suggesting the government "should" support any particular religion.

But the government shouldn't be harming religions either.

Allowing vouchers for some private schools but not the ones with religious intention is harming them.

Ask the judges...not me.

I don't have a problem with the ruling at this point.

Down the road...I might change my mind depending on how this gets exploited.

#15 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-21 10:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Public schools don't pay taxes and their funding is 100% from tax payers.

#14 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-06-21 10:25 PM | REP

That's the purpose of a public schools. Taxpayer funds them so everyone can get an education. Religious schools are private and are tax exempt. God you're a Dummkopf Jeff. Useless too.

#16 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-21 10:31 PM | Reply

Public schools don't pay taxes and their funding is 100% from tax payers.

#14 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-06-21 10:25 PM | REP

That's the purpose of a public schools. Taxpayer funds them so everyone can get an education. Religious schools are private and are tax exempt. God you're a Dummkopf Jeff. Useless too.

#17 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-21 10:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#17 - Bellringer is right, Lauramohr. Public schools pay no taxes (call it tax-exempt if you want)

You said, " Taxpayer funds them so everyone can get an education."

Taxpayers will be funding these isolated cases of religious schools where there are no public schools for the sam reason.

#18 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 10:35 PM | Reply

So, my tax money can't go to legal abortions because of the religious objections of a few. Now my tax dollars are going to religious organizations that I abhor.

---- conservatism, may the conservative justices receive a healthy dose of ---- warts

#19 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 10:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Why do I think that this will become a problem when tax dollars go to Islamic madaras.

#20 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 10:39 PM | Reply

... That's a loaded question. I'm not suggesting the government "should" support any particular religion.

But the government shouldn't be harming religions either. ...

Your comment consists of two entirely different concepts.

Let's take them individually...

... I'm not suggesting the government "should" support any particular religion. ...

Government should not support or not support religion. Period. Full stop.

... but the government shouldn't be harming religions ...

I agree.

In this case, SCOTUS has gone beyond preventing religions from being harmed.

SCOTUS has moved to benefiting religion at the expense of government. In this case, a specific religion.

...One of the schools at issue in the case, Temple Academy in Waterville, Maine, says it expects its teachers "to integrate biblical principles with their teaching in every subject" and teaches students "to spread the word of Christianity." The other, Bangor Christian Schools, says it seeks to develop "within each student a Christian worldview and Christian philosophy of life."...

That is wrong, imo.

Oh so wrong.


#21 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 10:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No he's not correct. A public school is a government institution. It's not a tax exempt school. Huge difference between them a private school which is tax exempt.

#22 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-21 10:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#22 - "A public school is a government institution. It's not a tax exempt school."

public schools are indeed "tax exempt". If you claim I am wrong, please provide and example of one school in the US that pays taxes. Just one.

#23 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 10:44 PM | Reply

Some districts employ a concept that lefties despise known as "school choice". In those districts why should kids lose their tax dollar funding should their parents choose to send them to a Catholic-based school?

SCOTUS got this one right. Apparently Truthhurts thinks the government should fully fund slaughter of the unborn but should deny school choice districts the opportunity to allow high quality religious based schools to be available.

#24 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 10:45 PM | Reply

Laura Mohr is profoundly ignorant on almost everything she weighs in on.

#25 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 10:46 PM | Reply

In those districts why should kids lose their tax dollar funding should their parents choose to send them to a Catholic-based school?
SCOTUS got this one right. Apparently Truthhurts thinks the government should fully fund slaughter of the unborn but should deny school choice districts the opportunity to allow high quality religious based schools to be available.

#24 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Because choices should have consequences, you infantile turd. You want to send your child to a regressive disfunction factory called a catholic school that is your choice to harm your child. I should have ZERO of my tax dollars go to religious organizations that I abhor.

Period full stop

You obviously miss my point you ignorant lying piece of ----. My tax money is prevented from going to entities that I support because of the "religious" beliefs of a childish psychotic group of religious whackos. The SC now says that I, an avowed athiest, am not permitted the same right or consideration.

Well, again, ---- conservatives. they are, as a group, the worst of human kind.

#26 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 10:51 PM | Reply

Laura Mohr is profoundly ignorant on almost everything she weighs in on.

#25 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Every

Single

Comment

You

Post

is

a

Lie

Truth Hurts Donut

#27 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 10:52 PM | Reply

@#24 ... Some districts employ a concept that lefties despise known as "school choice". In those districts why should kids lose their tax dollar funding should their parents choose to send them to a Catholic-based school? ...

So your comment seems to admit religious schools, "Catholic-based school."

Think if you can, separation of church and state.


#28 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 10:53 PM | Reply

I'm an atheist who abhors anything religious. But this ruling isn't about religion. It is about making schools accessible to those wo don't have access to public schools. I guess Lauramohr would rather that a multi-million dollar school be built in a rural area for a handful os students. Well, Lauramohr, who will pay for this school? The local taxpayers, who are most likely to be agrarians who in no way can come up with the money to build this school, and if forced to to so would go bankrupt. The only alternative is for the farmers' kids to go uneducated. Since an education is guaranteed to all children by law, this obviously isn't an option.

#29 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 10:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#25

You're projecting.

;)


But I suspect you know that already.

:)

#30 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 10:54 PM | Reply

@#29 ... I'm an atheist who abhors anything religious. But this ruling isn't about religion. It is about making schools accessible to those wo don't have access to public schools. ...

Such a self-contradictory comment is not seen here on this most august site frequently.

But there it is.

#31 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 10:57 PM | Reply

I'm fortunate to know a number of homosexuals with whom I'm friends, family, and co-worker.

80% of them are hard-working, well-adjusted, and non-neurotic folks who are conservative in their politics and overall worldview. Just good ------- people----like Bill Johnson.

You keep doing you, Bill. You're more of an ambassador for the cause than you'll ever know.

/ That's my "pride month" post.

#32 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-21 10:59 PM | Reply

I'm an atheist who abhors anything religious. But this ruling isn't about religion. It is about making schools accessible to those wo don't have access to public schools. I guess Lauramohr would rather that a multi-million dollar school be built in a rural area for a handful os students. Well, Lauramohr, who will pay for this school? The local taxpayers, who are most likely to be agrarians who in no way can come up with the money to build this school, and if forced to to so would go bankrupt. The only alternative is for the farmers' kids to go uneducated. Since an education is guaranteed to all children by law, this obviously isn't an option.

POSTED BY JAKESTER

Yet they have the $ to build a religious school.

Does your brain hurt from the stupidity?

#33 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 10:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This sort of this is what the 2016 election was all about. Just my canuck opinion.

#34 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-06-21 11:00 PM | Reply

Citizens can go to public school board meetings to voice their opinions. They can vote on their district's annual budget as well as school board members. The same cannot be said for private religious schools. They can get tax payer money without any accompanying accountability. Bottom line: No taxation without representation.

#35 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-06-21 11:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

TAX THE CHURCHES!

#36 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:00 PM | Reply

hahaha

billjohnson, by his own admission, does not represent "gay" people

Or so it seems to me

#37 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 11:01 PM | Reply

The only alternative is for the farmers' kids to go uneducated

Which a 'classic liberal' like you would love, since they'd vote republican.

#38 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:01 PM | Reply

Well, you get the idea. :-)

#39 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-06-21 11:01 PM | Reply

"Yet they have the $ to build a religious school.
Does your brain hurt from the stupidity?"

Religious schools are built with private funds. Public schools aren't.
Does your brain hurt from the stupidituy?

#40 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:01 PM | Reply

Citizens can go to public school board meetings to voice their opinions. They can vote on their district's annual budget as well as school board members. The same cannot be said for private religious schools. They can get tax payer money without any accompanying accountability. Bottom line: No taxation without representation.

#35 | POSTED BY GAL_TUESDAY

When you can rape children like the catholic church did/does without consequence, representation, as you describe, is small potatoes

#41 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 11:02 PM | Reply

"Which a 'classic liberal' like you would love, since they'd vote republican.

#38 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE "

Wrong. We liberals embrace education. What made you think otherwise? Serious question.

#42 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Such a self-contradictory comment is not seen here on this most august site frequently.
But there it is.
#31 | POSTED BY" LAMPLIGHTER "

There is no contradiction in wanting education brought to childrenby whatever means and hating religion.

#43 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:04 PM | Reply

Yet they have the $ to build a religious school.
Does your brain hurt from the stupidity?"
Religious schools are built with private funds. Public schools aren't.
Does your brain hurt from the stupidituy?

POSTED BY JAKESTER

You're the moron arguing that they don't have money to build schools, or did you forget?

stupidituy? Gee, you're dumb!

#44 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 11:04 PM | Reply

#44 - sorry, I don't do ad hominem. I'm here for informed debate. If "you're dumb" is all you have, I think a reassessment on what dumb is is necessary on your part.

#45 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:07 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Isn't it an irony that someone who implies they know what's best for education can't come up with anything more intellectual than "You're dumb"? I find that really funny.

#46 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:09 PM | Reply

#44 - sorry, I don't do ad hominem. I'm here for informed debate. If "you're dumb" is all you have, I think a reassessment on what dumb is is necessary on your part.
#45 | POSTED BY JAKESTER

Maybe you could explain how rural/agrarian communities don't have money to build public schools, but you advocate that religious schools take their place. Wouldn't those religious schools need to have buildings to educate the kids?

It's YOUR argument, I'm just trying to understand it.

#47 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 11:09 PM | Reply

I don't attacks! RUBBER AND GLUE! NYAH

-goatmanster

#48 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:09 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#32 ... I'm fortunate to know a number of homosexuals with whom I'm friends, family, and co-worker. ...

Instead of trying to prop up your cred here by showing who you might associate with, maybe your current alias might want to try to prop up its cred by posting rational comments.

Your current alias has a long credibility row to hoe.

Jus' sayin'

:)

#49 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:09 PM | Reply

It's YOUR argument, I'm just trying to understand it.

#47 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-06-21 11:09 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

He's just here to piss liberals off and troll. That's why his "argument" is derpy.

#50 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:10 PM | Reply

" We liberals ... "

You're not fooling anyone, dumfuq.

#51 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:11 PM | Reply

Isn't it an irony that someone who implies they know what's best for education can't come up with anything more intellectual than "You're dumb"? I find that really funny.

#46 | POSTED BY JAKESTER

Given the logic of your arguments, you were probably educated in a religious school.

truth hurts

#52 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-21 11:11 PM | Reply

We liberals

Who do you think you're fooling with that ----?

Serious Question.

#53 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:11 PM | Reply

Citizens can go to public school board meetings to voice their opinions.

Not really getting it ... they don't have a school board ... it really is parental consent, and nothing different than school choice when there are no schools to choose from.

The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, arose from an unusual program in Maine, which requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents' educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with nearby public schools, or they can pay tuition at a private school chosen by parents so long as it is, in the words of a state law, "a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution."

When you can rape children like the catholic church did/does without consequence, representation, as you describe, is small potatoes

Why can't the school be an Islamic madrassa, or Torah type school?

TAX THE CHURCHES!

Do we tax the schools? I am not sure where you are going with this or whats the point.

We liberals embrace education.

I agree, but not these liberals, they really are the stupidest, most tribal "liberals" I have ever run into.

#54 | Posted by oneironaut at 2022-06-21 11:13 PM | Reply

" but you advocate that religious schools take their place. "

I didn't advocate that. Indeed this USSC ruling doesn't advocate that. It allows the money to be given to the parents. They don't have to send their kids to a religious school with it. They can contract with other public schools outside of their district.

Shouldn't you familiarize yourself with the ruling before you talk about it? And you call me dumb? LOL

#55 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:13 PM | Reply

@#24 ... Some districts employ a concept that lefties despise known as "school choice". ...

I suspect that most folk also like the aspect of "choices has consequences."

Do try harder. You're embarrassing your current alias...

#56 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:13 PM | Reply

"Wouldn't those religious schools need to have buildings to educate the kids?"

Some private religious schools use the church property itself for the classes. At least that's what the religious school my niece sends her kids to does.

#57 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-06-21 11:14 PM | Reply

"You're not fooling anyone, dumfuq.

#51 | POSTED BY DANFORTH "

Oh, dea. The obsessed one is back to hijack and derail another thread.

#58 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:14 PM | Reply

""You're not fooling anyone, dumfuq."

And of course he starts it with all he knows -- a logical fallacy. This one being of course argumentum ad populum.

#59 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:15 PM | Reply

@#42 ... We liberals embrace education. What made you think otherwise? Serious question. ...

If you ask me why I might think otherwise, my first question might be...

Why does your alias presume to speak for liberals?

Has your alias been elected as a spokesperson?

Jus' askin'

#60 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Make a new name already.

Your cover is blown.

#61 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Given the logic of your arguments, you were probably educated in a religious school."

No, public schools except for kindergarten. It was private.

#62 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:18 PM | Reply

Truthhurts,

You are a seriously miserable person. Hopefully you have friends/family nearby who care about you and keep a watch over you.

#63 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:19 PM | Reply

I am not sure where you are going with this or whats the point.

If religion wants to play political games and force everyone to pay for their stuff...then they should pay the price of admission like everyone else.

Tax them.

#64 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:19 PM | Reply

" I'm fortunate to know a number of homosexuals with whom I'm friends, family, and co-worker."

Do you regularly refer to them as twink and swish, like you do here?

#65 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:19 PM | Reply

"My tax money is prevented from going to entities that I support"

Same here, you stupid piece of ----.

Go cry me a river.

#66 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:20 PM | Reply

#60 - I do not respond to questions based on false premises.

Is this your best shot?

Do you care to get back on topic? Or are you going to go all Danforth on us?

#67 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:20 PM | Reply

#59

Gee, Goatman, it seems like everyone is on to you.

Oops.

#68 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:21 PM | Reply

Same here, you stupid piece of ----.

You are a seriously miserable person. Hopefully you have friends/family nearby who care about you and keep a watch over you.

LOL

#69 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:21 PM | Reply

The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, arose from an unusual program in Maine, which requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents' educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with nearby public schools, or they can pay tuition at a private school chosen by parents so long as it is, in the words of a state law, "a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution."

Carson v. Makin.

For 6-3 majority, Chief Justice Roberts holds that Maine's "nonsectarian" requirement for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause

From Sotomayor dissent:

"If a State cannot offer subsidies to its citizens without being required to fund religious exercise, any State that values its historic antiestablishment interests more than this Court does will have to curtail the support it offers to its citizens."

twitter.com

#70 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-06-21 11:22 PM | Reply

Instead of trying to prop up your cred here by showing who you might associate with, maybe your current alias ...

Bitch, I was scrawling on this yellow bathroom wall way back when your dads were taking to drag time story hour and practicing your phonics with you.

I don't have an "alias".

---- outta here with that ----.

#71 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-21 11:22 PM | Reply

"Do you regularly refer to them as twink and swish, like you do here?

#65 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-21 11:19 PM"

He probably does and his friends probably laugh about it. I have a gay cousin who posted this video on his facebook page a month before his wedding:

www.youtube.com

Some people embrace self-deprecating humor. Some people don't seek victimhood and don't seek to be offended by ----.

#72 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:23 PM | Reply

@#54 ... Do we tax the schools ...

No, we do not tax schools.

But I do give your alias credit for the lame attempt to change the topic of debate.

It is not about taxing schools, it is about taxing private companies.

Should a private company that runs a bowling alley under the auspices of being a religious institution be tax-exempt?



#73 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:23 PM | Reply

"#59 -Gee, Goatman, it seems like everyone is on to you.
Oops."

#59 is my post, not Goatman's. And this thread is not about either of us. Please cease hijacking threads to feed your obsession with us.

Oops

#74 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Says the guy so offended by his "unfair" banning he made a new name to come back.

You're the most butthurt person here, jeffy.

#75 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:24 PM | Reply

" Or are you going to go all Danforth on us?"

Translation: Out me, and refuse to back down when I double down on my lie.

So my view is ...
Yeah! Go Danforth on him!!!

#76 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:24 PM | Reply

I have a gay cousin

Nice anecdote. No one cares.

#77 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:24 PM | Reply

Two more on the killfiles. Who needs to read the ramblings of sick obessives?

Adios, danforth and alexandrite.

#78 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:26 PM | Reply

" #59 is my post, not Goatman's."

Riiiiight.

Have you ever posted on this site under any other name(s)? If so what name(s)?

( This is where Goatman dances around before changing the subject. )

#79 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:26 PM | Reply

" Two more on the killfiles."

Admit you're a defeated coward without using those specific words.

#80 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:27 PM | Reply

Adios, danforth and alexandrite.

#78 | POSTED BY JAKESTER AT 2022-06-21 11:26 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

I've been killfiled by goatman like 10 times. He always comes back for more.

#81 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:28 PM | Reply

Mao Content never hides who he is. He started out as Mao TSE Dung and every incarnation has had Mao in it.

#82 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-21 11:30 PM | Reply

@#67 ... I do not respond to questions based on false premises.

Is this your best shot?...

I note your current alias' inability to answer a simple question.

Most telling.

thx.

btw, your current alias really needs to try harder. Jus' sayin'

The more your alias posts, the less cred it seems to earn.

#83 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:30 PM | Reply

He was once "Titan Uranus" which is pretty clever.

Hope you are well, mao.

#84 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:31 PM | Reply

"Do you regularly refer to them as twink and swish, like you do here?
#65 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-21 11:19 PM"
He probably does and his friends probably laugh about it. I have a gay cousin who posted this video on his facebook page a month before his wedding:
www.youtube.com
Some people embrace self-deprecating humor. Some people don't seek victimhood and don't seek to be offended by ----.
#72 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

^
LOL, you're calling Pinche Mao a Gay.

#85 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-21 11:31 PM | Reply

@#71 ... ---- outta here with that ---- ...

Promise?

Note to RCade, if this alias ever posts again....

#86 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:32 PM | Reply

"Some people don't seek victimhood and don't seek to be offended by ----."

How does that change the fact some people clearly intend to offend?

I mean, does it upset you when you're referred to as a------------?

#87 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:32 PM | Reply

@#78 ... Who needs to read the ramblings of sick obessives? ...

Projecting again?

Jus' askin', that's all...

#88 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:34 PM | Reply

Now we Retortin like the days of yore ... .

#89 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-21 11:37 PM | Reply

"Projecting again?"

Yes, he is. The alternative is for him to admit what we all know.

And god knows Goatman's ego is waaaaaay to big for that.

#90 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:37 PM | Reply

"#59 -Gee, Goatman, it seems like everyone is on to you.
Oops."
#59 is my post, not Goatman's. And this thread is not about either of us. Please cease hijacking threads to feed your obsession with us.
Oops
#74 | POSTED BY JAKESTER

Good grief, didn't we resolve that you & Goatman are one in the same months ago before you decided to take a hiatus? And yet here we go again. SMH

#91 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-06-21 11:38 PM | Reply

"The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, arose from an unusual program in Maine, which requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents' educations in one of two ways."

It seems a bit rash, that some policy which affects some tiny fraction of Maine, now has become a policy with far-reaching implications for the whole country.

I have to wonder if this is exactly the sort of legislating from the bench conservatives used to say they opposed.

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-21 11:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I note your current alias' inability to answer a simple question"

It's impossible to answer a question based on a false premise. This is an easily embraceable concept.

#93 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:39 PM | Reply

#71

"I don't have an "alias".

---- outta here with that ----."

That's his schtick. Even with people like me who have been here longer than him, as if that makes sense.

#94 | Posted by willowby at 2022-06-21 11:39 PM | Reply

"And yet here we go again. SMH"

My sentiments exactly. But obsession is a sickness some simply cannot shake.

#95 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:40 PM | Reply

" Good grief, didn't we resolve that you & Goatman are one (and) the same months ago before you decided to take a hiatus?"

Goatman? What say you? Did you tell the truth before, and are lying now???

#96 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:40 PM | Reply

It's impossible to answer a question based on a false premise. This is an easily embraceable concept.

#93 | POSTED BY JAKESTER AT 2022-06-21 11:39 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Go perform a certain anatomical impossibility.

#97 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:40 PM | Reply

"Projecting again?"

How original

#98 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:42 PM | Reply

@#71 ... Bitch, I was scrawling on this yellow bathroom wall way back when your dads were taking to drag time story hour and practicing your phonics with you. ...

Oh please.
drudge.com


Mao_Content

Chewpa Miverga

Seniority: 237

Contact User
No Home Page

Joined 2019/02/20
Visited 2022/06/21


Your current alias has been here a couple three years.

Or are you admitting that you've had prior aliases?

If so, why did you feel the need to come back with a new alias?


#99 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:42 PM | Reply

"It's impossible to answer a question based on a false premise. This is an easily embraceable concept."

You're lying again ... which is also an easily embraceable concept.

#100 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:43 PM | Reply

#94 If your real life name is Willowby, then it's not an alias. If it isn't, then it is. I've only ever posted here as Gal_Tuesday, but Gal_Tuesday is still my alias. Capisce?

#101 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-06-21 11:43 PM | Reply

Mao TSE Dung
Jak se Mao
Pinche Mao
Mao Content.

#102 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-21 11:43 PM | Reply

Anybody here wabt to discuss the topic?

#103 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:43 PM | Reply

He makes a new one every once in a while. But there's never any doubt it's him.

#104 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-21 11:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Anybody here wabt to discuss the topic?"

LOL, you plonk anyone who discusses anything with you.

#105 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-21 11:45 PM | Reply

"I mean, does it upset you when you're referred to as a------------?

#87 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-21 11:32 PM"

I consider the source. I ignore people who deserve to be ignored.

#106 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:46 PM | Reply

" way back when your dads were taking to drag time story hour"

Anybody else notice Mao is always the first to bring up -------, anallingus, and drag in every conversation?

#107 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:46 PM | Reply

#104

Exactly.

#108 | Posted by willowby at 2022-06-21 11:46 PM | Reply

Lamp- Mao is one of the original like 20 people here. Like Corky, myself and a few others.

We were here before sign ins were a thing. Before moderation. The guys not hiding his identity.

#109 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:47 PM | Reply

" I ignore people who deserve to be ignored."

I get that, but does the repetitive------------ charge follow you around?

#110 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:47 PM | Reply

I consider the source. I ignore people who deserve to be ignored.

#106 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-06-21 11:46 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

OK Groomer.

#111 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:47 PM | Reply

"does the repetitive------------ charge follow you around?

#110 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

Not that I've noticed.

#112 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:49 PM | Reply

#111
Now, C'mon. Just because he's a------------ doesn't mean he's a groomer.

I mean, probably, but you can't be 100% sure.

#113 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:50 PM | Reply

Back when we were allowed to laugh at things...

www.youtube.com

Fast forward to the 0:30 mark to see what I'm referring to.

#114 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:51 PM | Reply

" Not that I've noticed."

Well, they probably feel hesitant to point out you're a------------.

#115 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:52 PM | Reply

I've only ever posted here as Gal_Tuesday

You have appropriate opinions that don't make Roger angry and cause him to delete your account.

I don't have that luxury.

#116 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-21 11:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#112 - I wonder if Danforth is able to ask questions not based on false premises? I wonder if he'll still do this after he grows up?

#117 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:53 PM | Reply

@#93 ... It's impossible to answer a question based on a false premise. This is an easily embraceable concept. ...

Au contraire mon ami.

You can substantiate why you might think it is a false premise.

But I do note that your alias seems to want to avoid answering a simple question.

Why is that?


#118 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:53 PM | Reply

Anybody else notice Mao is always the first to bring up -------, anallingus, and drag in every conversation?

I secretly want you, Swish.

I need a drama coach ;)

#119 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-21 11:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You know guys...boaz disgarees with rogers all the time, and not only has he never been banned, he never felt the need to make new accounts to come back.

Is this is a white privilege thing? Like y'all too good for the rules you agreed to?

#120 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-21 11:54 PM | Reply

"Well, they probably feel hesitant to point out you're a------------.

#115 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-21 11:52 PM"

They probably have children, are protective of them and don't want to draw my ire.

#121 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-21 11:55 PM | Reply

" I secretly want you, Swish."

Oh ffs, Mao, that's never been a secret. Just like your ----------.

But sorry; I don't ... um ... play on that team.

But Good luck with the future! I hope you lose your virginity some day.

#122 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:57 PM | Reply

"You can substantiate why you might think it is a false premise."

I have, but I guess you missed the dozens of times I've said it. So take notes this time.

That I have an alias is a false premise.

Say, here's a novel idea. Do you have any desire to discuss the topic? Or would you, like Danforth, prefer to hijack the thread to talk about me?

#123 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-21 11:58 PM | Reply

" They probably have children, are protective of them and don't want to draw my ire."

Great, sensible points.

Which begs the question: Have you been replaced by the late shift guy?

#124 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-21 11:59 PM | Reply

@#98 ... How original ...

My view is...

If the shoe fits.

Your alias may have a different view. So let's hear it.

btw, cool tune for this time of the year...

The Jamies - Summertime, Summertime
www.youtube.com

#125 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-21 11:59 PM | Reply

"#120 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE"

One thing I've noticed is that certain people here can say some really offensive and abusive things with impunity. I recently received a 3-week suspension and I have no idea why. This is a private site and I will not bitch about how it's moderated. When I point out that, like Animal Farm, some here are more equal than others it is an observation and nothing more.

#126 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"But I do note that your alias seems to want to avoid answering a simple questio"

So says the guy who won't answer my simple question asking if anyone wants to talk about the topic.

#127 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:01 AM | Reply

" That I have an alias is a false premise."

You're defining the terms, dishonestly.

Let me define the terms: have you ever posted on this site under a different name? If so what name or names?

We all know the answer. The only question at this point is will you tell the truth or not?

I know where my money is laid.

#128 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:02 AM | Reply

"Have you been replaced by the late shift guy?

#124 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-21 11:59 PM"

I'm bummed. I know you cracked a funny and I should be chuckling but, alas, I don't get the reference. :-(

#129 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:02 AM | Reply

So, Lamplighter, would you like to discuss the topic, or would you rather discuss your fantasies about me and my aliases? If the latter, would you be kind enough to start another thread on it so we can get back to track on this one?

#130 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:03 AM | Reply

" One thing I've noticed is that certain people here can say some really offensive and abusive things with impunity. "

Like call people groomers, like you did again and again and again?

And for the record,------------, I've only called you that to see how you would feel if you were unfairly charged.

Anything to say, as a groomer or a------------?

#131 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:04 AM | Reply

This is a private site and I will not bitch about how it's moderated.

I will.

It's ------- --------.

Three dumps will result in the suspension of your posting
privileges. You have 2 dumps.

If you go 21 days without another dumps, your account will
be cleared back to 0 dumps.

#132 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 12:05 AM | Reply

" your fantasies about me and my aliases?"

If you've already admitted it, it's not a fantasy.

Are you calling Gal a liar?

#133 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:06 AM | Reply

"You have 2 dumps."

One on each hooter, or one in the mouth and one in the ------?

#134 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:09 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#116 ... I don't have that luxury. ...

Not really.

The "luxury" your current alias seems to lack is the apparent ability to prevaricate and get away with it.

See: #71 and #99

Yer up...

#135 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:10 AM | Reply

#126

I've said for years this is rcade's personal Animal Farm. He owns it, so it's his prerogative.

#136 | Posted by willowby at 2022-06-22 12:11 AM | Reply

I've taken 2 dumps today. Does that mean I have to wait 21 days before taking another one otherwise I'm suspended?

#137 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:13 AM | Reply

@#126 ... I recently received a 3-week suspension and I have no idea why. ...

More details are needed.

Where/when did you receive that three week suspension?

What were the details in the message that informed you of such?


I've more questions, but let's start there...

#138 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:13 AM | Reply

I guess no one wants to talk about the topic.

Eleanor Roosevelt was right.

#139 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:14 AM | Reply

Have you been replaced by the late shift guy?

"I don't get the reference. :-( "

You were suddenly making sense.

I didn't know what else to make of it.

#140 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:15 AM | Reply

"Like call people groomers, like you did again and again and again?"

For all of a week. Further, I was accusing people of wanting to "groom" young children into embracing gender fluidity at a young age where ---- is already really confusing. I saw a definition of "groomer" that fit that description and it had nothing to do with pedophilia. Once I learned the term "groomer" was a pedophilia thing I stopped slinging the accusation.

#141 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:16 AM | Reply

#140 I was making sense? No wonder you were befuddled.

#142 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:17 AM | Reply

@#132 ... Three dumps will result in the suspension of your posting
privileges. You have 2 dumps.

If you go 21 days without another dumps, your account will
be cleared back to 0 dumps. ...

Maybe, instead of complaining about suspensions, your alias might want to look at what it posts.

As I noted in #135, your current alias seems to have an issue with posting coherent comments.

Jus' sayin'

#143 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:18 AM | Reply

"Eleanor Roosevelt was right."

Another Goatman tell. Lucky us.

Hey Goatman, post that ER quote again, just like you used to all the time!

#144 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:19 AM | Reply

" I was making sense? No wonder you were befuddled."

Everyone would be!

#145 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:20 AM | Reply

@#136 ... I've said for years this is rcade's personal Animal Farm. He owns it, so it's his prerogative. ...

Yup.

I've found this site to be most accommodating of differing opinions.

So, what's yer point?

#146 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:20 AM | Reply

" I saw a definition of "groomer" that fit that description and it had nothing to do with pedophilia"

For you and no one else.

Should I go back to your------------ accusations?

#147 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:22 AM | Reply

It seems all the knee-jerkers don't grok this part of the opinion:

The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, arose from an unusual program in Maine, which requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents' educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with nearby public schools, or they can pay tuition at a private school chosen by parents so long as it is, in the words of a state law, "a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution."
No one is going to have Jesus shoved down their throat unless they opt for it. If that wasn't the case, the atheist in me would be very much against this ruling.

Discuss

#148 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:24 AM | Reply

#147 Which------------ accusations?

#149 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:25 AM | Reply

Danforth,

I've never accused you of being a------------.

#150 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:27 AM | Reply

Great Minds Discuss Ideas.
Average Minds Discuss Events.
Small Minds Discuss People.

Eleanor Roosevelt

#151 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:27 AM | Reply

@#137 ... I've taken 2 dumps today. ...

You might want to look at the fiber in your diet.

But aside from that, your comments have started to look quite snow-flakey. (is that a word?).

Really, what's yer issue here?

And that's a serious question.

I've hung in there through your various aliases. At times I've had a quality discussion with your alias du jour.

So, what's with this 2 dumps business?

#152 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:27 AM | Reply

The "luxury" your current alias seems to lack is the apparent ability to prevaricate and get away with it.

bob

Seniority: 179

Party: Independent

Ideology: None

Private E-mail
Visit Home Page

Joined 2013/04/13
Visited 2022/06/21

Status: user

Nobody's "prevaricating" Bob.

I'm simply dragging my glistening -------- across your face (like I used to do with Boyd's wife) while pointing out to you that I've been posting on this site with a transparent Nom de Plume (or various iterations thereof) for about a decade longer than you have.


#153 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 12:27 AM | Reply

" I've never accused you of being a------------."

I never said you did. But you did accuse others of being groomers, without any reason or proof.

How does it feel,------------?

#154 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:28 AM | Reply

#151
Thanks for posting the quote, Goatman.

#155 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:30 AM | Reply

@#139 ... I guess no one wants to talk about the topic. ...

Actually, many folk wanted to talk about the topic.

But some aliases (ahem) have endeavored to deflect to a different topic.

So... if you want to comment upon the original topic, please do so.

Yer up....


#156 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:30 AM | Reply

" Which------------ accusations?"

Oh please, don't pretend you don't know: The same ones that have been chasing you since your groomer days.

#157 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:32 AM | Reply

@#153 ... I'm simply dragging my glistening -------- across your face (like I used to do with Boyd's wife) while pointing out to you that I've been posting on this site with a transparent Nom de Plume (or various iterations thereof) for about a decade longer than you have. ...

So, you acknowledge that your presence on this most august site is a lie.

Thanks for that admission.

#158 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:32 AM | Reply

"So... if you want to comment upon the original topic, please do so.
Yer up....

#156 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER "

You mean like I did in post 148?

#159 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:34 AM | Reply

#157 I don't know what your angle is but I'm not interested in playing. Quit being cryptic. I am not going to "defend" myself from your baseless crap.

#160 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:34 AM | Reply

" No one is going to have Jesus shoved down their throat unless they opt for it."

You're quoting the old law.

The new law allows Biblical principles to be integrated into every lesson.

#161 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:37 AM | Reply

Danforth,

For some reason you want to pick a fight.

I'm not interested.

You wanna punch something?

Go punch the clown.

#162 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:40 AM | Reply

"The new law allows Biblical principles to be integrated into every lesson."

Which isn't as bad as CRT principles being integrated into every lesson. 2+2=5 is OK because math is inherently racist or some ----.

#163 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:42 AM | Reply

Lamplighter, yer up.

#164 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:43 AM | Reply

#146

Didn't get the reference at all. Not surprising.

#165 | Posted by willowby at 2022-06-22 12:43 AM | Reply

"I don't know what your angle is but I'm not interested in playing. Quit being cryptic. I am not going to "defend" myself from your baseless crap"

Thanks for admitting flinging ----- at folks is baseless, and thanks for demonstrating how frustrating it must be to defend yourself from out-and-out ---------.

Maybe next time you'll think twice before accusing someone of something horrific.

#166 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:44 AM | Reply

" Which isn't as bad as CRT principles being integrated into every lesson. 2+2=5 is OK because math is inherently racist or some ----."

Really?!? Straw at this time of night?!? GFY, and get back on topic.

#167 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:46 AM | Reply

#166 The only person on this site I accuse of something horrific is Reinhegetsbot or however the ---- that creep spells its name.

#168 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#164 ... Lamplighter, yer up. ...

Why?

Your comment really needs to provide more context.

thx.

#169 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:49 AM | Reply

#167 At this point, what is the topic?

When I scroll up I see that it's about a SCOTUS ruling about religious-based schools.

Yet here I am being accused of baselessly and relentlessly accusing countless people on this site of being pedophiles. Of course, I've done no such thing but this is where we are apparently at with being "on topic."

#170 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:51 AM | Reply

"The only person on this site I accuse ... "

That wasn't the parameter. You were regularly accusing folks you never met (teachers) of actively grooming.

You remember that, don't you? That was you, right?

#171 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:51 AM | Reply

#164 - Lamplighter, if I was Danforth, I'd accuse you of being a coward and running off. (he loves the word coward) But thank god I'm not him. So I presume your lack of response is your needing to attend to something really important like changing out the TP roll in your guest bathroom.

#172 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:52 AM | Reply

@#162 ... For some reason you want to pick a fight. ...

Projecting again?

Jus' askin'

#173 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:52 AM | Reply

Falling back on the trite "projecting" again?

Just askin'.

Jesus, dude. There are hundreds more bon mots out there. Choose a new one for ----- sake.

#174 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 12:55 AM | Reply

" here I am being accused of baselessly and relentlessly accusing countless people on this site of being pedophiles."

Well let me state unequivocally and for the record, you're not.

But this entire exercise was just to make you feel uncomfortable, and it seems to have succeeded.

Maybe in the future, you should think twice before accusing others of horrific actions without any evidence.

#175 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 12:55 AM | Reply

@#172 ... Lamplighter, if I was Danforth ...

But you are not "Danforth".

So, instead of deflecting to someone who you may not be, why don't you just state your concern.


Fever Tree - Imitation
www.youtube.com Situation

#176 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 12:59 AM | Reply

#176 - So I think it's safe to presume you have nothing on topic.

#177 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:01 AM | Reply

"You were regularly accusing folks you never met (teachers) of actively grooming.

You remember that, don't you? That was you, right?

#171 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-22 12:51 AM | REPLY"

Yep. Under a completely different understand of what the word "groomer" means.

This is what I had in mind with "groomer":

www.google.com

Pretty cool, huh?

It certainly raises the question of age appropriateness but it's not pedophilia.

#178 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:02 AM | Reply

"So, instead of deflecting ... while

Says the guy who has done nothing more than deflect away from the topic to talk about his imaginative "aliases" while ignoring my requests to get back on topic.

Jesus, dude. Get a grip. Let's talk about the topic (and it's not me!) OK?

Yer up.

#179 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:04 AM | Reply

Lamplighter, I'm trying to drag you kicking and screaming to talk about the topic. But you keep deflecting. You even implied I wasn't wanting to talk about the topic. Yet you keep ignoring -- even after I pointed it out -- my post 148.

Get back on track. Quit being one of Eleanor's lowlifes. Respond to my post 148.

Please.

#180 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:09 AM | Reply

That is one of the most unconstitutional decisions I've seen come from the Court. The non religious should not be forced to subsidize religious instruction.

#181 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2022-06-22 01:12 AM | Reply

"This is what I had in mind with "groomer""

Drag queens are groomers?!? Wtf is wrong with you?

You're pretending people choose their sexuality. I didn't; Did you? And do you have to on a daily basis?

FFS, I've seen drag queens for decades. Never changed my interest in babes. But you do you.

#182 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:13 AM | Reply

I love how jeff when caught lying just alters the definition of "groomer" to suit his needs.

You absolutely know you've been running around calling people the equivalent of a pedophile, you gutless ------.

#183 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-22 01:15 AM | Reply

@#179 ... Says the guy who has done nothing more than deflect away from the topic to talk about his imaginative "aliases" ...

Looks like I hit a nerve.

:)

I do note that your comment did not address what I asked. In doing so, attempted to deflect.

I also note that your alias has not commented upon other questions I have asked.T

Why might that be?

#184 | Posted by lamplighter at 2022-06-22 01:15 AM | Reply

It kinda reminds me of the "OK" sign with a hand.

When I was a kid it meant "Okay", as in, I agree with you. It was also a game we played where if you looked at the "hole" the index finger and thumb made you had to finger draw an "x" on your shoulder and the person who made the sign got to punch the "x". Now, a twist to the game was if you could avert your eyes and poke a finger through the index finger/thumb hole without it being grabbed then the person making the gesture had to draw an "x" on HIS shoulder and get punched.

It was two tons of fun until leftist scolds ruined it like they do with just about everything else.

#185 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:17 AM | Reply

It certainly raises the question of age appropriateness but it's not pedophilia.

#178 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-06-22 01:02 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Yeah, those poor kids have probably already been indoctrinated to believe in eternal torment from an invisible God, transubstantiation, and vicarious redemption through the crucifixion murder of a person...

But god damn it, men in women's clothes reading books is just too much for their little minds.

#186 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-22 01:17 AM | Reply

@

#180 ... Lamplighter, I'm trying to drag you kicking and screaming to talk about the topic. But you keep deflecting. ...

You have way too high an opinion of your comments here.

My opinion of your comments so far is more of trolling. But I may not be correct in that determination.

So...

How am I deflecting?

#187 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:19 AM | Reply

"Looks like I hit a nerve."

Don't break your wrist high-fiving yourself.

"I also note that your alias has not commented upon other questions I have asked.T
Why might that be?"

I answered this and asked you to take notes, but you didn't. So for the third time, I don't answer questions based on a false premise.

Last time I explain this to you.

You never answered my question of whether you'd like to discuss the topic.

My bad. You have tacitly answered it in spades.

Eleanor is right. Small minds want to discuss people.

#188 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:20 AM | Reply

Hope you are well, mao.

POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE

Alejandro, I'm doing well. Better than I deserve. Thanks for asking. Raising kids and rope horses in SE Texas (where I never thought I'd be) and drilling wells offshore in Guyana and Suriname to pay for it all. I hope it's all working for you in Michigan. One Blue One Gold.

Imma get back into character now.

#189 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 01:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#182 Stop peddling in straw.

I explained that my understanding of the term "groomer" is different than yours. I went on to illustrate what I thought the term meant WHILE AT THE SAME TIME acknowledged it was different than your definition of the term "groomer". Yet, here you are pretending I'm accusing drag queens of being pedophiles when I've done nothing of the sort.

#190 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:20 AM | Reply

" It certainly raises the question of age appropriateness "'

Nonsense. You're putting the adult's prejudices on the kids. Only adults have problems with drag queen story hour. The kids don't know and don't care who's overly made-up.

#191 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:22 AM | Reply

Mao- We are doing great here. Cheers.

#192 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-22 01:25 AM | Reply

"How am I deflecting?"

I've asked you several times to respond to my post 148. But you deflect to me and congratulating yourself to "hitting a nerve".

Do you really not recognize you've done this? Things you have actually typed yourself/

Incredible.

#193 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:26 AM | Reply

"Nonsense. You're putting the adult's prejudices on the kids. Only adults have problems with drag queen story hour. The kids don't know and don't care who's overly made-up.

#191 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-22 01:22 AM | REPLY"

Oh really? Why is it being pushed at all? Why is it even a thing?

#194 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:26 AM | Reply

Jeff- you aint wrong about Reinheitsgebot...That guy creeps me out.

Goatman- Still quoting Eleanor? Another tell.

#195 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-06-22 01:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" my understanding of the term "groomer" is different than yours"

Groomer is pedo-creeper. If you think you've been accusing them of being drag queens while you've been accusing them of being pedo-creepers, you owe A LOT of people A LOT of apologies.

#196 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:27 AM | Reply

Lamplighter, clearly you don't want to talk about the topic.

And I don't want to talk about your obsession with me.

So we really don't have anything left to say to each other in this thread, do we?

Given that, the obvious, have your last word and I'll keep looking for someone who wants to talk about this topic.

Good night.

#197 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:28 AM | Reply

@#188 ... My bad. You have tacitly answered it in spades.

Eleanor is right. Small minds want to discuss people. ...

OK, I got it.

When I ask for an explanation, I get an ad hominem attack.

Thanks for showing your true stripes.


#198 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:29 AM | Reply

" Why is it being pushed at all? "

To entertainingly tell a story to kids in a library.

Now ... Tell us why you're foursquare against.

#199 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:30 AM | Reply

@#197 ... Lamplighter, clearly you don't want to talk about the topic.

And I don't want to talk about your obsession with me. ...

You think too highly of yourself.

... Good night. ...

Have a great night!


#200 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:31 AM | Reply

@#195 ... Goatman- Still quoting Eleanor? Another tell. ...

So, I'm not the only one who noticed that?

#201 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:33 AM | Reply

" Imma get back into character now."

Before you do ... Were you the guy who turned me on to Matthew McConaughey and Barry Corbin for Southwest Texas dialects?

#202 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:33 AM | Reply

A repeat of my post 148 in case anyone is actually more interested in the topic than other posters:

It seems all the knee-jerkers don't grok this part of the opinion:

The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, arose from an unusual program in Maine, which requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents' educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with nearby public schools, or they can pay tuition at a private school chosen by parents so long as it is, in the words of a state law, "a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution."
No one is going to have Jesus shoved down their throat unless they opt for it. If that wasn't the case, the atheist in me would be very much against this ruling.
Discuss

#203 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 01:33 AM | Reply

@#189 ... Imma get back into character now. ...

So... your alias has various characters here?

Do tell...


#204 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:36 AM | Reply

"Discuss "

I tried; you plonked me. Here was my post:

"No one is going to have Jesus shoved down their throat unless they opt for it."

You're quoting the old law.

The new law allows Biblical principles to be integrated into every lesson.

#205 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Look. Mao Content is a great guy. He just loves ruffling feathers around here. He's rough around the edges but a good person nonetheless.

#206 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 01:40 AM | Reply

@#203 ... A repeat of my post 148 in case anyone is actually more interested in the topic than other posters: ...

So now your alias is trying to pull the discussion back on topic.

Kudos.

But what about your post #29

...I'm an atheist who abhors anything religious. But this ruling isn't about religion....


That's a part of how we got here.


#207 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:40 AM | Reply

"Groomer is pedo-creeper. If you think you've been accusing them of being drag queens while you've been accusing them of being pedo-creepers, you owe A LOT of people A LOT of apologies.

#196 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-22 01:27 AM"

Then I issue those apologies. It wasn't at all my understanding of what that term meant.

"To entertainingly tell a story to kids in a library.

Now ... Tell us why you're foursquare against.

#199 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-22 01:30 AM |"

Drag is something that is adult-oriented. It's a somewhat erotic thing that, until very recently, was limited to adult audiences. I don't know why a drag queen is needed to read to young kids "Winnie the Pooh" books to young kids. Please explain the desperation and desire to expose young kids to adult-themed concepts like drag.

#208 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:40 AM | Reply

Before you do ... Were you the guy who turned me on to Matthew McConaughey and Barry Corbin for Southwest Texas dialects?

No Sir.

I was the guy at the Love's in Beaumont asking for a drama coach on the CB.

#209 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 01:42 AM | Reply

" Drag is something that is adult-oriented."

Nonsense. The first time a kid asks, you answer "The man likes to dress up in women's clothes and wear make up. Big deal".

That's all it takes. Everything else is an adult's hang-up.

#210 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"No Sir."

Thanks for your honest reply.

I need to find that guy and thank him.

#211 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:49 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" It wasn't at all my understanding of what that term meant. "

What do you mean? You were told at the time. Repeatedly. You repeated the accusation for days on end.

#212 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:52 AM | Reply

But Barry Corbin is a graduate of my alma mater and Matthew is from my town.

#213 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 01:54 AM | Reply

@#208 ... Drag is something that is adult-oriented.

"Adult-oriented"

That seems to be a determination of a choice.

Why that determination?

#214 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-06-22 01:56 AM | Reply

"The fabulous history of drag - BBC Bitesize" www.bbc.co.uk

Beginning with the Bard
Drag began out of necessity, although that's not to say its participants didn't enjoy it. When Shakespearean theatre was shiny and new in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, the stage wasn't just a place of entertainment. It had strong links to the church and with that came rules that only men could tread the boards. If that play you were in featured a few female roles, then it was up to a couple of the men in the cast to dress as members of the opposite sex so the story didn't suffer.

#215 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 01:57 AM | Reply

" But Barry Corbin is a graduate of my alma mater and Matthew is from my town."

As I recall, I was needing an authentic West Texas dialect, and someone turned me on to those two. Again ... not you?

#216 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:01 AM | Reply

It probably was, but that was years ago if it was.

Dialects are funny things to learn ... ..there are very few famous folks from West Texas to use as examples.

Tommy Lee Jones is good, too.

Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada is a masterpiece if you're trying to capture what it's about

#217 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 02:08 AM | Reply

I don't like Tommy Lee Jones, but Jesus ------- Christ he nailed it with that one

#218 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 02:10 AM | Reply

Apparently, young kids can't take in a story unless it's read by a drag queen. That makes no sense but it's where the left demands we try to be. Apparently this is a hill they want to die on.

#219 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:14 AM | Reply

Tommy Lee Jones was brilliant in his role as "K".

#220 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:15 AM | Reply

@220 - "Forma una linea aqui, por favor"

#221 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 02:19 AM | Reply

It's kinda like a Jedi mind trick - they only way young kids will pay attention during story time is if the reader is Drag.

Seriously, why is this even a thing?

#222 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:21 AM | Reply

I saw Tommy Lee Jones at Cooper's BBQ in Llano about 20 years ago.

#223 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 02:25 AM | Reply

" It probably was, but that was years ago if it was."

Maybe a decade ago. I've done the role three times now.

Anyway ... a sincere thanks. You set me on the right track.

#224 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:27 AM | Reply

" Apparently, young kids can't take in a story unless it's read by a drag queen."

Are you a fuqqin moron? There's an entire industry of performers who do educational gigs at libraries. The kids are taught by guitarists, clowns, magicians, storytellers, and yes, drag queens. The kids seem to pay attention to all of them, if they're good ... and that's the only barometer ... that is, unless some adult has offloaded their prejudices on the kid.

#225 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:35 AM | Reply

" Dialects are funny things to learn ... ..there are very few famous folks from West Texas to use as examples."

As I recall, that was my problem. You suggested Corbin in particular, which worked perfectly.

My next role is Fred Rose. Chicago to NY to LA to Nashville. I hope to God I can find an actual recording of an interview.

#226 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:45 AM | Reply

Truth,

"billjohnson, by his own admission, does not represent "gay" people"

Where did you get that from?

I've never explicitly said who I think I do or don't represent.

I represent me and my own views limited as they are.

#227 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 06:22 AM | Reply

About drag queens reading to children.

Children aren't aware of the social implications or history of drag queens and the culture they are from.

Kids likely just see drag queens as clowns.

#228 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 06:28 AM | Reply

This nation is getting easier and easier to
leave upon retirement. 'F' Religious Theocracies!
I don't believe in your fictional, 2000+ year,
Bronze Age Myth of a 'No show' God!

Separation of Church and State forever!

Without it, America is doomed to fall into
theocratic darkness...

#229 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-22 06:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Earth,

"Separation of Church and State forever!"

I agree.

The government should not be supporting or harming any particular religion or belief.

Harming religions is in effect supporting atheism, which must be treated just like any religion.

Atheists are just as organized and political as any religion.

#230 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 06:50 AM | Reply

Atheists are just as organized and political as any religion.

Is that why there are tax-free atheist meeting halls all over the place?

#231 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-06-22 07:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yeah Bill, but Atheists don't come knocking on your
door to try to sell you our belief set. We don't insist
that you adopt our belief set or teach it to your
children in school. That's what 'Christians' are trying to do now
in public schools, blur the line between separation of church
and state. The republicans first wanted funding for private schools,
that wasn't enough, so then they wanted freedom of home schooling,
that wasn't enough, so now they want to invade public schools with
theological teachings... And ALL OF THIS is just an effort to dumb down
the public (via younger generations) into accepting religious and
theological BULL as they indoctrinate a whole new generation and make them
more pliable and accepting of their worldview and politics...

Thank God (just an expression) that my son is an adult and in college and
not an impressionable child anymore. I weep for the youth of America
and for the direction this nation will take...

#232 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-22 07:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Earth,

"Atheists don't come knocking on your
door to try to sell you our belief set"

Is that the criteria?

Of course atheists try to indoctrinate believers to their way. Everytime you condemn people for believing in God, that's what you're doing.

Don't kid yourself.

#233 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 08:13 AM | Reply

Redial,

So the definition of a religion is it must hold meetings?

Is that the criteria?

#234 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 08:18 AM | Reply

Is that the criteria?

It's a sign of being organized. Do you see atheists donating to one giant bank account to advance their cause? That's another sign of being organized. Do you see atheists with a hierarchy of people in funny hats and robes running the show? That's another sign of being organized..

#235 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-06-22 08:24 AM | Reply

If you want to see a meeting hall for atheists just go to any public school that bans all references to God in the classrooms.

#236 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 08:24 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

If you want to see a meeting hall for atheists just go to any public school

Are religious people not allowed to attend public schools? I did not know that.

#237 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-06-22 08:33 AM | Reply

If you want to see a meeting hall for atheists just go to any public school that bans all references to God in the classrooms.
POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2022-06-22

Religion has no place in public schools. Keep it in your houses of worship.

#238 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 09:30 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Wrong Bill. We don't have 'Sunday Schools'
filled with little impressionable minds to
indoctrinate. Sure, we may teach our own children
what we believe, and why we believe it, but that
is every parent's right.

There is no 'large scale indoctrination farm'
of the youth, as there is with Christianity or organized
religion, mass indoctrinating the youth of this country.
Besides, most people come to Atheism or Agnosticism later
on in life, after they've discovered how fake and false
religion is.

There are no zealot atheists that go and knock on
strangers doors, and block their driveways, to reveal
the 'glories of non-belief in a Creator', as there are
with Christian Zealots.

And I didn't personally call out or condemn individuals
above for believing the way they believe, I attacked the
movement instead. I simply stated that I am not fine with it,
and in my view religious theocracies 'Suck Donkey --------'...

There is a difference. It is okay to attack a movement, as
long as one rationally explains why, it is not okay to launch
personal attacks--although admittedly, I have succumbed to doing
so from time to time, when individuals are particularly obtuse.

#239 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-22 09:40 AM | Reply

No one is going to have Jesus shoved down their throat unless they opt for it. If that wasn't the case, the atheist in me would be very much against this ruling.
Discuss
#203 | POSTED BY JAKESTER

It's communities signing agreements. This isn't parents choice as bellringer so dishonestly (shocking, I know) portrays it to be.

According to long standing legal doctrine that is government endorsement of a particular religion, which violates the first amendment.

But this SCOTUS is full of religious nut jobs who plan on remaking legal doctrine in God's image.

#240 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 10:13 AM | Reply

It's communities signing agreements. This isn't parents choice as bellringer so dishonestly (shocking, I know) portrays it to be.

Its either or ...

The case, Carson v. Makin, No. 20-1088, arose from an unusual program in Maine, which requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for their young residents' educations in one of two ways. They can sign contracts with nearby public schools, or they can pay tuition at a private school chosen by parents so long as it is, in the words of a state law, "a nonsectarian school in accordance with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution."

According to long standing legal doctrine that is government endorsement of a particular religion, which violates the first amendment.

#241 | Posted by oneironaut at 2022-06-22 10:24 AM | Reply

How is that being interpreted as the State being required to fund religious schools?
SCOTUS got this wrong in an obvious and enormous way. This isn't even close.
And all the religious wackos joined hands, of course.

#242 | Posted by YAV at 2022-06-22 10:53 AM | Reply

Earth,

"zealot atheists that go and knock on doors"

Is that the criteria?

You must knock on doors to be a zealot?

#243 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 10:55 AM | Reply

Earth,

"after they've discovered how fake and false
religion is"

Sounds pretty zealot to me.

#244 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 10:57 AM | Reply

psychosis

a severe mental disorder in which thought and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality.

ignore for a moment the concept that psychosis is a "severe mental disorder" as that is an applied definition of a condition.

"contact is lost with external reality"

Religion is, by definition, losing contact with external reality.

Religion can be defined 3 things-god, god's imposition of morality and a human's relationship to the former 2

Yet, the ONLY evidence of god is our existence. And THAT requires a hierarchy of power (i.e. god, humans, everything else), of which there is zero evidence.

I have bad news for you. There is no objective, universal morality. None, nada, zilch. Meaning an objective morality separate from the individual There are impulses that are the result of interior instincts-generally the instinct for self preservation and procreation.

Religion plays on these instincts to fool people into community, but religions are playing on ignorance and fear.

Our founding fathers were wise to separate church and state, because the state can easily use religion to enact injustice (and vice versa).

Religion should be a personal thing. With that I have zero problem as human's need things to get through life-comfort, support, value. Let people get these things from religions.

AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT IMPOSED ON OTHERS. Period full stop.

Because, here is a hard fact for you. There are many people to whom religion is a great "evil". And these people have rights. They have the inherent, inalienable right to not be subjected to the imposition of "evil" upon them.

So, TLDR, ---- off with your religion you psychotic nutbags

#245 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 11:01 AM | Reply

The problem with the atheists zealots is they refuse to accommodate any exposure to religious beliefs.

Religious beliefs are only permitted to e shared at home, in churches or whispering in corners to them

That's just unAmerican.

#246 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-22 11:01 AM | Reply

Exactly, TruthHurts.

#247 | Posted by YAV at 2022-06-22 11:03 AM | Reply

That's just unAmerican.

#246 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

The US is not an inherently religious, let alone Chreestian, nation. Try again.

#248 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 11:12 AM | Reply

The problem with the atheists zealots is they refuse to accommodate any exposure to religious beliefs.
Religious beliefs are only permitted to e shared at home, in churches or whispering in corners to them
That's just unAmerican.

#246 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Jesus ------- christ, do you realize how prevalent religion is in our society? I can't handle money without seeing In God we Trust, I can't listen to the pledge of allegiance (which you hear at every public meeting) without hearing UNDER GOD, I can't listen to a political speak without hearing references to faith and god-even the 1/6 hearing yesterday I was subjected to the Az governor touting how he believes the Constitution was ordained by god and his faith guided his decision making progress. I am subjected to religionists arguments over abortion, the SC is making what is supposed to be objective decisions based on religious beliefs. I can't turn on the tv without hearing arguments about a war on christmas, all the time I hear celebrities and athletes thanking god for this that or the other thing, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a church in this country, all but 1 (I believe) politician is a theist

You have zero concept of how intrusive and wide spread religion is in our society.

#249 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 11:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Groomer is pedo-creeper."

If the shoe fits... Take high school teacher Alden Bunag, "Socialist high school teacher fighting for a better society for my students to graduate into. Artist, dancer, singer, photographer, writer, creative educator." Insisted the right were the real groomers, and that they were just projecting. Of course Alden then goes on to get arrested for distributing porn to children, and further one of his leftist buddies who also got arrested for something similar had a video of Alden sexually abusing a student.("making love" as the left would put it) But apparently there's no cause for concern with teachers being hyper interested in talking sex with children, that's totally normal according to the left, just like Biden showering with his teenage daughter.

#250 | Posted by LEGALLYDORKY at 2022-06-22 11:19 AM | Reply

from slightly above...

"he problem with the atheists zealots is they refuse to accommodate any exposure to religious beliefs.
Religious beliefs are only permitted to e shared at home, in churches or whispering in corners to them
That's just unAmerican.

#246 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON AT 2022-06-22 11:01 AM | REPLY

Exactly, TruthHurts.

#247 | POSTED BY YAV AT 2022-06-22 11:03 AM | REPLY"

Wrong again, both of you...

I, and the majority of atheists/agnostics don't give a flying goat feck
what you teach your children...in YOUR CHURCH...in YOUR HOME...

Again, it comes down to what you try to enforce in PUBLIC SCHOOLS...

public schools have NEVER been about religion, they have been about learning
the basics, and about how to learn to 'critically think'. How to weigh evidence,
how examine problems and areas of learning with an objective impartial eye.
Everything that Religion doesn't do... And THAT is the real reason that the Right
hates public education. Not because they are superior to private schools, not because
they are 'ramming atheism or any other 'ism'' for that matter down people's throats,
but because they teach children to CRITICALLY THINK FOR THEMSELVES...

And the religious control freaks on the right CANNOT STAND THAT...

The only 'atheist zealots' I know, are those trying to sell books...
And they have a right to express their opinions, in lecture halls, where people
come to either pay to hear them, or come to debate ideas.

When did America become such a land of SNOWFLAKES afraid to debate anything?

And religion already HAS a place....it's called Church, it's called Synagogue, it's
called Temple (depending upon your denomination and leanings). One can also debate
religion IN a public forum---but ONLY IF ALL SIDES GET EQUAL TIME. Otherwise its
back to 'attempted indoctrination'...and that's what the Right really wants...more
venues to indoctrinate the young. They haven't been able to grow their party in private
schools, so now they want to invade public schools, and replace math and science with
Jesus and the Apostles.

Well sorry, if many of us don't agree that is the time or the place. As stated before,
you already have such places....(see above).

#251 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-22 11:37 AM | Reply

"Take high school teacher Alden Bunag"

So because pedos exist, we shouldn't teach kids frank, honest facts about sex?!?

Are you kidding?

#252 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 11:49 AM | Reply

"Alden then goes on to get arrested for distributing porn to children"

Who does he think he is?
Only The Internet should be distributing porn to children!

#253 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 11:50 AM | Reply

Everytime you condemn people for believing in God, that's what you're doing.

#233 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Who's condemning you for believing in God? That's not what atheists are about. If you have need of religion; if it gives you direction, peace, comfort, whatever, more power to you. I'm happy you're able to have what you need. I don't need it, but I would never prevent you from having it. Just keep it away from me please. I'm not interested.

#254 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-06-22 11:53 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" So because pedos exist, we shouldn't teach kids frank, honest facts about sex?!? "

When they reach an age where it's appropriate, of course.

Introducing these things to first graders is wrong and it's why the groomer label gets tossed around.

#255 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 11:57 AM | Reply

I have to laugh at earlier comments on taxing schools. This has to be some sort of idiotic right wing talking point.

We do not Public Tax schools because they are a government institution. It is just so incredibly idiotic to compare a public institution to a private enterprise - even when they are both "schools" and say "we don't tax schools". No ---- Sherlock. We don't tax the county clerk, the road department etc - they are a part of the government. Taxes are collected to fund schools... People are not charged to attend public schools... If we are funding private religious schools because "there are no public schools" it is because the community isn't willing to pay for them and therefore we should not be funding private religious schools either.

The GOP is and has been going after public education.

#256 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2022-06-22 11:58 AM | Reply

"The GOP is and has been going after public education."

They'll even surround a school and not let anyone in to confront the school shooter.
#AllLivesMatter

#257 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 11:59 AM | Reply

#255

Any time the teacher starts including their personal sexualy identity into the mix is a red flag, too. A small child doesn't need to know whether his or her teacher is into ----- or dicks, or something in between.

#258 | Posted by LEGALLYDORKY at 2022-06-22 11:59 AM | Reply

Pedophilia transcends political persuasion. Pedophiles will seek out employment in places where they can interact with children, whether that's being a socialist teacher or conservative preacher. Normals who work in those areas should expect high levels of scrutiny, and any parent who is too trusting of these people is nuts.

#259 | Posted by LEGALLYDORKY at 2022-06-22 12:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Introducing these things to first graders is wrong"

But what if the first graders ask about it. In other words, what if it has already been introduced by someone else?

#260 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Everytime you condemn people for believing in God, that's what you're doing.

#233 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

Another theory with no evidence ballotboy?

As long as you don't pick my pockets or break my bones I could care less what kind of god or how many you believe in.

#261 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-06-22 12:05 PM | Reply

"The problem with the atheists zealots is they refuse to accommodate any exposure to religious beliefs. "

So many "theories" and with no evidence and so little time!

#262 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-06-22 12:07 PM | Reply

"If we are funding private religious schools because "there are no public schools" it is because the community isn't willing to pay for them and therefore we should not be funding private religious schools either."

But kids have a right to an education. In fact kids are required to have an education until age 16 or younger in farm states. Far cheaper to pay a private school to take the kids, than build a new school.

#263 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:10 PM | Reply

it's why the groomer label gets tossed around.

#255 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

No, it's not.

It gets thrown around because righties are intellectually vacuous, low life pieces of ---- who ran out of ideas decades ago.

All they have left is demagoguery.

#264 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 12:11 PM | Reply

When they reach an age where it's appropriate, of course.
Introducing these things to first graders is wrong and it's why the groomer label gets tossed around.

#255 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

I could argue that indoctrinating children into religion also does harm and introducing it to first graders is, likewise wrong.

#265 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 12:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Especially when "Biblical principles" are taught even in things like science class.

#266 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 12:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

----- or dicks, or something in between

The taint?

#267 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 12:15 PM | Reply

This ruling applies to school choice. Why should parents who choose to send their child to a Catholic High School that has the highest college admission rate in the district be denied funds but if they send their child to a nearby public school it's free?

#268 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:22 PM | Reply

This ruling applies to school choice. Why should parents who choose to send their child to a Catholic High School that has the highest college admission rate in the district be denied funds but if they send their child to a nearby public school it's free?
#268 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Simple, because Americans should not have to fund religious institutions with public money. It really is that simple.

#269 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 12:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

No, it's not.

It gets thrown around because righties are intellectually vacuous, low life pieces of ---- who ran out of ideas decades ago.

All they have left is demagoguery.

#264 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2022-06-22 12:11 PM | FLAG: "

Then why in the heck was there a massive freak out on the left when Florida signed into law a prohibition of introducing these issues in K-3?

You've hitched your cart to the wrong horse, son.

#270 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:24 PM | Reply

"Why should parents who choose to send their child to a Catholic High School that has the highest college admission rate in the district be denied funds but if they send their child to a nearby public school it's free?"

Huh?
Public school isn't free. It's paid for out of taxes.
You're basically asking why isn't private school paid for out of taxes.

#271 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"signed into law a prohibition of introducing these issues in K-3"

They signed a lot more than that. As was explained to you repeatedly.

#272 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:25 PM | Reply

#269 School "choice". Unless that choice offends Truthhurts and then it's eff you?

#273 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:26 PM | Reply

#269 School "choice"

^
Do we get "Police Department choice" too?
Why shouldn't we?

#274 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#272. Yes, they did. The put "age appropriate" after third grade. It's certainly subjective but it's a concept that has been around for centuries. An overwhelming majority would agree that Penthouse magazine has no place in an elementary school library.

#275 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 12:29 PM | Reply

"Introducing these things to first graders is wrong"

Wrong my [REDACTED]. When my kid found out some of her friends had two dads in kindergarten and we told her about it she said, oh, okay, and moved on with her life. If you're getting into the finer details of human sexuality with a first grader, the problem isn't about what's appropriate for children.

#276 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2022-06-22 12:30 PM | Reply

"#272. Yes, they did. The put "age appropriate" after third grade."

They did still more than that. Look to the remedies for aggrieved parents.

#277 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:31 PM | Reply

Introducing these things to first graders is wrong and it's why the groomer label gets tossed around.
#255 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Plenty of parents are very open with their kids about the fact that they have sex, well before first grade.
Are those parents groomers?

#278 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 12:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Then why in the heck was there a massive freak out on the left when Florida signed into law a prohibition of introducing these issues in K-3?
You've hitched your cart to the wrong horse, son.

#270 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You lying POS, you KNOW the reason. The law goes WAY beyond preventing what you say it prevents. Period Full Stop.

But you know this, it has been explained to you ad nauseum, thus making you, wait for it, a lying piece of ----.

#279 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 12:40 PM | Reply

#268 because it's not the governments place to pay for religious instruction.

Parents have a choice. They can pay for that choice.

#280 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 12:44 PM | Reply

#270 ahhh yes the old "if you have nothing to fear" nonsense.

It's because it's demagoguery. DeSantis is making teachers "others" for political points and to rile up his ignorant, toothless, anti-education base.

#281 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 12:45 PM | Reply

272. Yes, they did. The put "age appropriate" after third grade. It's certainly subjective but it's a concept that has been around for centuries. An overwhelming majority would agree that Penthouse magazine has no place in an elementary school library.

POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-06-22 12:29 PM | REPLY

Penthouse no but I betcha if you take an average grade school in the 70's and 80's you could find full color pictures of naked men and women in the classroom and nobody had a cow over it either. You're just being intellectually dishonest partisan hack job though.

#282 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 12:46 PM | Reply

#272. Yes, they did. The put "age appropriate" after third grade. It's certainly subjective but it's a concept that has been around for centuries. An overwhelming majority would agree that Penthouse magazine has no place in an elementary school library.

#275 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER A

christ you are a ------- lying piece of ----.

Here is the ACTUAL law:

www.flsenate.gov

3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards

They "put" the "age appropriate" after an "OR" meaning it is a completely different requirement, you lying piece of ----.

But you know this, meaning you are willingly lying.

#283 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#269 School "choice". Unless that choice offends Truthhurts and then it's eff you?

#273 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Don't like it? then revoke the 1st amendment you lying hack

#284 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 12:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#268 because it's not the governments place to pay for religious instruction.
Parents have a choice. They can pay for that choice.
#280 | POSTED BY JPW

Catch up ...

en.wikipedia.org

#285 | Posted by oneironaut at 2022-06-22 01:00 PM | Reply

" 268 because it's not the governments place to pay for religious instruction.

Parents have a choice. They can pay for that choice.

#280 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2022-06-22 12:44 PM | FLAG: "

School choice involves, wait for it - choice. That's what this ruling cements. You are a new father. I hope the district where you reside is a school choice district that enables you to send your child to the school of your choosing with taxpayer funding. I wish that for all parents. Of course not nearly every district is school choice.

#286 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:02 PM | Reply

An overwhelming majority would agree that Penthouse magazine has no place in an elementary school library.

Disingenuous statement. I challenge the poster to cite examples of such a thing occurring.

#287 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-06-22 01:03 PM | Reply

#284. It's not a first amendment issue, you miserable sack.

#288 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:04 PM | Reply

#287. That it doesn't occur solidifies my point.

Truthhurts is beside himself with anger that in Florida parents have recourse of it were to occur.

#289 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:06 PM | Reply

This isn't the 1950s.

If kids want to learn about sex and sexuality, they have the internet.

#290 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-06-22 01:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That it doesn't occur solidifies my point.

So, what's the point of the law?

#291 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-06-22 01:07 PM | Reply

#283. I'm reading it the same as you are.

Is the concept of age appropriateness completely foreign to you?

Movie theaters won't let a 16 year old watch an R rated movie unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. Are you enraged about that too?

#292 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:08 PM | Reply

" So, what's the point of the law?

#291 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2022-06-22 01:07 PM | FLAG: "

To make sure that it doesn't happen. To put down legal guardrails.

#293 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:10 PM | Reply

#284. It's not a first amendment issue, you miserable sack.

#288 | POSTED BY BELLRINGE

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Gee, you're dumb.

How is FORCING taxpayers to fund religious schools NOT respecting an establishment of religion?

BTW choice does not mean free, choice means you get to choose between 2 options-each option having pros and cons.

You lying hack piece of ----

#294 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:14 PM | Reply

" It's because it's demagoguery. DeSantis is making teachers "others" for political points and to rile up his ignorant, toothless, anti-education base.

#281 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2022-06-22 12:45 PM | FLAG: "

You k ow what? I retract my comment about wishing you live in a choice district.

You are such a condescending bigoted pos that I hope you find yourself in a situation where your child's schooling is such at odds with your parental values that you are forced to deal with this crap personally. I hope the outcome is good but you are so lacking in empathy and are so ------- bigoted that you will never understand Jack ---- unless you are forced to experience it personally.

#295 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:15 PM | Reply

#287. That it doesn't occur solidifies my point.
Truthhurts is beside himself with anger that in Florida parents have recourse of it were to occur.

#289 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Is the lying piece of ---- aware that Florida passed a law last year allowing parents to remove their child from any class that they disagreed on the curriculum?

So, why pass the law other than to humiliate and harm LGBTQ people?

And can you explain how it is logical or legal to prohibit a public school from teaching about a legally allowed institution like same-sex marriage?

#296 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:17 PM | Reply

#294. You are a very dumb man. " You are in more dire need of a ------- than any white man in history"

Seriously. Go find a hooker. No adult male should be as miserable as you are.

#297 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:17 PM | Reply

#283. I'm reading it the same as you are.
Is the concept of age appropriateness completely foreign to you?
Movie theaters won't let a 16 year old watch an R rated movie unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. Are you enraged about that too?

#292 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You do realize that you are changing your argument, right? Before you were arguing that age appropriate applied to K-3. Now it is 16 year olds.

you dumb ----

The lying piece of ---- disingenuous hack refuses to acknowledge that individual parents can now dictate what is taught in schools

#298 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:19 PM | Reply

#296. Again. The concept of age appropriateness is lost on you. Further, I kinda thought school was about teaching things like reading, writing and math.

You're pissed that one state put a couple of roadblocks on public schools being left wing indoctrination factories.

#299 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:20 PM | Reply

#294. You are a very dumb man. " You are in more dire need of a ------- than any white man in history"
Seriously. Go find a hooker. No adult male should be as miserable as you are.

#297 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

The level of lying and cognitive dissonance you vomit on a daily basis reveals you to be a sociopath of the highest order.

Seriously check yourself into a mental health hospital, for the good of society

#300 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:21 PM | Reply

#298. Please provide a PO Box so I can send you a carton of tissue. You need a good cry.

#301 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:22 PM | Reply

#296. Again. The concept of age appropriateness is lost on you. Further, I kinda thought school was about teaching things like reading, writing and math.
You're pissed that one state put a couple of roadblocks on public schools being left wing indoctrination factories.

#299 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

so, in other words, you cannot justify or explain how a public school can legally or logically be prohibited from teaching about a legal public institution like same-sex marriage.

Because the law does that you know. At a minimum, no K-3 grade teacher can discuss same-sex marriage, but they CAN discuss heterosexual marriage.

#302 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:23 PM | Reply

" You do realize that you are changing your argument, right?"

I did no such thing. You are just so blinded by hatred and rage that your reading comprehension vanishes when you see: Posted by Bellringer.

#303 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:23 PM | Reply

#300. Look up the word "introduce".

#304 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:24 PM | Reply

#298. Please provide a PO Box so I can send you a carton of tissue. You need a good cry.

#301 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Disingenuous, lying, non-sequitur spewing, piece of ---- hack says what?

#305 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:25 PM | Reply

You're pissed that one state put a couple of roadblocks on public schools being left wing indoctrination factories.

#299 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Truthhurts is living up to his name in describing you.

Which is why you're saying dumb ---- like above.

Also, this thread isn't about FL and Don't Say Gay.

It's about government funded religious indoctrination of children using public monies. Yet another case of the right really being fine with what they accuse others of so long as it's them doing it.

#306 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 01:29 PM | Reply

"signed into law a prohibition of introducing these issues in K-3"
They signed a lot more than that. As was explained to you repeatedly.

#272 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

#272. Yes, they did. The put "age appropriate" after third grade. It's certainly subjective but it's a concept that has been around for centuries. An overwhelming majority would agree that Penthouse magazine has no place in an elementary school library.

#275 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

#283. I'm reading it the same as you are.
Is the concept of age appropriateness completely foreign to you?
Movie theaters won't let a 16 year old watch an R rated movie unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. Are you enraged about that too?

#292 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

" You do realize that you are changing your argument, right?"
I did no such thing. You are just so blinded by hatred and rage that your reading comprehension vanishes when you see: Posted by Bellringer.

#303 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

so, age appropriateness is about MORE than K-3
IOW you change your argument, you lying piece of ----.

#307 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Ballsucker, can you explain why a public school teacher in Florida is prohibited from teaching about a legal institution?

#308 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:32 PM | Reply

I didn't change my argument at all. The entire sub issue we are now discussing is age appropriateness.

#309 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:33 PM | Reply

TruthHurts: At what point do you accept the simple truth that Bellringer is nothing more than a troll? You are spending a lot of energy responding to a person who in all likelihood is insincere in every single one of his posts and responses. Stop feeding the troll.

#310 | Posted by moder8 at 2022-06-22 01:34 PM | Reply

#308. They are not prohibited from that. Quit erecting a straw man.

#311 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:34 PM | Reply

#308. They are not prohibited from that. Quit erecting a straw man.

#311 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Here is the language from the law:
"3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards"

Explain how a teacher can teach/discuss/instruct about same-sex marriage without touching on sexual orientation?

You dumb ----

#312 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:37 PM | Reply

#310. I thought you had me killfiled. Truthhurts is a d-bag but he isn't a coward who is scared of opposing viewpoints, like yourself.

#313 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:37 PM | Reply

And I do want to point out that it is a fairly common (and appropriate) method to teach family trees in K-3. Kids learn about different cultures, varying family dynamics, varying family structures which promotes healthy empathy.

#314 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:40 PM | Reply

Wrong again, both of you...

I must have misunderstood because I'm in agreement with you Earthmuse, and I didn't read what TH said as being in conflict.

#315 | Posted by YAV at 2022-06-22 01:40 PM | Reply

#310. I thought you had me killfiled. Truthhurts is a d-bag but he isn't a coward who is scared of opposing viewpoints, like yourself.

#313 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

He can see me copying and pasting your posts you dumb lying ----

#316 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#312. I'm struggling to come up with a scenario where a teacher would feel compelled to broach the issue in K-3 when the curriculum is focused on the basics like arithmetic, reading and writing, basic science and basic history.

1st grade teacher: Tomorrow I need to instruct my class on butt sex between two men.

That is absurd yet you seem to want it to happen.

#317 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:41 PM | Reply

#316. Okay.

#318 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:42 PM | Reply

#312. I'm struggling to come up with a scenario where a teacher would feel compelled to broach the issue in K-3 when the curriculum is focused on the basics like arithmetic, reading and writing, basic science and basic history.
1st grade teacher: Tomorrow I need to instruct my class on butt sex between two men.
That is absurd yet you seem to want it to happen.

#317 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Do you know/understand the value of teaching family trees to young children?

#319 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:43 PM | Reply

" 1st grade teacher: Tomorrow I need to instruct my class on butt sex between two men."

The only person making that suggestion, ever, is YOU.

I thought you'd be more circumspect after your groomer debacle.

#320 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 01:45 PM | Reply

basic science and basic history

You do understand that something like a family tree introduces the concepts of genealogy (science) and history in a manner that children can easily understand and relate to, right?

#321 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:45 PM | Reply

" 1st grade teacher: Tomorrow I need to instruct my class on butt sex between two men."
The only person making that suggestion, ever, is YOU.
I thought you'd be more circumspect after your groomer debacle.

#320 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

He does spend alot time thinking about adults talking to young children about that sort of thing. One could call that a tell

#322 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:46 PM | Reply

TruthHurts is 100% correct and accurate.

Bellringer you were corrected, it was pointed out, the law is clear as can be - there are TWO "OR" statements in there in the law - so that -------- about K-3 is just that - complete --------. You've been told this, repeatedly. It's been explained.

So you are either stupid beyond belief or you've decided to keep lying and lying and lying.

#323 | Posted by YAV at 2022-06-22 01:47 PM | Reply

#319. Yes. It was never the focus of anything g when I was in school. Certainly not K-3.

The Holocaust museum is invaluable but I would never expose a first grader to it. Heck, I'd hesitate exposing an 8 th grader to it.

#324 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:49 PM | Reply

#323. I've acknowledged the "or", Yav.

#325 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:50 PM | Reply

#319. Yes. It was never the focus of anything g when I was in school. Certainly not K-3.
{{SNIP}}

#324 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Perhaps that explains your lack of empathy, you lying piece of ---- hack

#326 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:51 PM | Reply

" The only person making that suggestion, ever, is YOU"

Yet that's what the law prevents, among other things, and y'all are beside yourselves with anger over codifying "age appropriateness ".

#327 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:53 PM | Reply

Yet these same right-wing -------- supported NRA candidates year after year so they were OK with children being exposed to classmates, or themselves, being ripped to shreds by gunfire, painting the blood of their dead classmates on themselves, pretending to be dead...

Stop hiding behind your fake "concern" for the children, "Bellringer."

#328 | Posted by YAV at 2022-06-22 01:54 PM | Reply

In fact, i would argue that teaching young children the different family dynamics is critical. Obviously hate filled parents are not teaching their children properly about the existence of LGBTQ people. It seems to me that the appropriate fallback for that is to assure that children are taught that in school-that their friend and classmate who is the child of two gay men or is expressing gender non-conforming behavior is not the spawn of the devil or sin. But that may be the dreamer in me

#329 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:54 PM | Reply

Moder8 is a coward. Truthhurts has a different problem - he simply cannot abide anyone disagreeing with him.

#330 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:54 PM | Reply

Yet that's what the law prevents, among other things, and y'all are beside yourselves with anger over codifying "age appropriateness ".

#327 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

yet, those "other things" are sort of the point you lying piece of ---- hack

#331 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:55 PM | Reply

#328. That is seriously dumb. You must have manure for your brains.

#332 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:55 PM | Reply

Do you know/understand the value of teaching family trees to young children?

#319 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-06-22 01:43 PM | REPLY

Sure.

Teacher:
"Now here's the reason why this branch will never fork, you see uncle Adam married Steve and Steve doesn't have a vagina. So, unless they qualify for an adoption, they won't produce children."

Child:
"whats a vagina?"

#333 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-06-22 01:56 PM | Reply

Moder8 is a coward. Truthhurts has a different problem - he simply cannot abide anyone disagreeing with him.

#330 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Wrong again, liar. I only point out that you, in particular, are a lying piece of ----. IOW it is not the disagreement I take umbrage with, but your constant lying.

And you being a piece of ----.

#334 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:57 PM | Reply

#329. What you are seeking is to impose your own personal values onto other people's children via government. That is not a "good guy" position.

#335 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 01:57 PM | Reply

Child:
"whats a vagina?"
#333 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

You have an issue with teaching children about biology?

#336 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 01:58 PM | Reply

#329. What you are seeking is to impose your own personal values onto other people's children via government. That is not a "good guy" position.

#335 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Leaving aside the objective truth that LGBTQ people are both normal and subject to harassment/harm (you know personal values), you have yet to explain how the government can prohibit a teacher from teaching about a legal and government sanctioned institution.

#337 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:00 PM | Reply

You have an issue with teaching children about biology?

#336 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-06-22 01:58 PM

In kindergarten? Yes, moron.

#338 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-06-22 02:01 PM | Reply

#329. What you are seeking is to impose your own personal values onto other people's children via government. That is not a "good guy" position.

#335 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

BTW, that is done ALL the time

#339 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:01 PM | Reply

" that's what the law prevents, among other things"

Don't look now, but you're saying if you were a teacher and there was no law against it, that would be your lesson plan.

Again, the only person even SUGGESTING talking about ---- sex is YOU.

You sound like a closet groomer. And I DO know the meaning of that word.

#340 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:02 PM | Reply

In kindergarten? Yes, moron.

#338 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

You don't think kindergarten teachers deal, on a daily basis, with questions regarding penises and vaginas?
WOW

#341 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:02 PM | Reply

" What you are seeking is to impose your own personal values onto other people's children via government. That is not a "good guy" position."

Now deliver that line to your mirror.

#342 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:03 PM | Reply

You don't think kindergarten teachers deal, on a daily basis, with questions regarding penises and vaginas?
WOW

#341 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-06-22 02:02 PM
They shouldn't. And they shouldn't be talking about sexuality either. The whole point.

#343 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-06-22 02:04 PM | Reply

They shouldn't. And they shouldn't be talking about sexuality either. The whole point.

#343 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Here in the real world, kindergarteners regularly ask questions, express curiosity about "sexuality". Teachers instruct them in an age-appropriate manner.

Here in the real world same-sex and trans people exist and operate in legally sanctioned manners (i.e. same sex marriage). You advocate that teachers not be permitted to operate in the real world and prohibit them from teaching legally sanctioned things like same-sex marriage.

NO ONE is advocating talking to young children about butt sex-that only exists in Jeffj's fevered imagination.

#344 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:09 PM | Reply

" They shouldn't."

Shouldn't what ... Answer when asked? Or allow any questions?

Your suggestion is to pretend it never happens.

#345 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:10 PM | Reply

#329. In Florida that can start as early as 4th grade. Age sensitive material goes through a review process with PTA input and normally involves a permission slip from parents in order for their child to be a participant.

Do you honestly have a problem with that, Truthurts?

#346 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:10 PM | Reply

1st grade teacher: Tomorrow I need to instruct my class on butt sex between two men.

That is absurd yet you seem to want it to happen.

#317 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Unless you have evidence that this is actually what's going on the only thing absurd here is your argument.

#347 | Posted by jpw at 2022-06-22 02:13 PM | Reply

#347. It's why lefties are beside themselves over the " don't say gay" law.

#348 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:18 PM | Reply

#329. In Florida that can start as early as 4th grade. Age sensitive material goes through a review process with PTA input and normally involves a permission slip from parents in order for their child to be a participant.
Do you honestly have a problem with that, Truthurts?

#346 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

I advocate that public schools teach children to be good people and citizens. that includes teaching them age-appropriate lessons in family dynamics and teaching them about legally sanctioned things like same-sex marriage. As an aside, since same-sex marriage is a right confirmed by the Supreme Court, I don't know how the don't say gay law can be constitutional.

Of course, the Fl law doesn't limit that to 4th grade or late, you lying hack

Keep in mind, liar, that now the parents can CHOOSE to take their children out of public schools and put them in tax payer funded religious schools where they can learn their bigotry to the parent's hearts' content.

#349 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:19 PM | Reply

#347. It's why lefties are beside themselves over the " don't say gay" law.

#348 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Your assertion is that "lefties" are upset over the don't say gay bill is because they want teachers of young children to instruct kids in butt sex.

You really have gone off the deep end you lying piece of ----.

And you wonder why I consider you a piece of ----.

#350 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:21 PM | Reply

www.cefks.org

This has been existence for a while here in Kansas

#351 | Posted by eberly at 2022-06-22 02:21 PM | Reply

" I advocate that public schools teach children to be good people and citizens. that includes teaching them age-appropriate lessons in family dynamics and teaching them about legally sanctioned things like same-sex marriage. As an aside, since same-sex marriage is a right confirmed by the Supreme Court, I don't know how the don't say gay law can be constitutional."

Age appropriate. You actually grasp the concept. So what in the hell are we arguing about?

#352 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:24 PM | Reply

To make sure that it doesn't happen. To put down legal guardrails.

So we need a law to prevent what wasn't happening, from happening?

What's preventing you from admitting the law was specifically created as a means of keeping LGBT people from being accepted as normal members of society.

#353 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-06-22 02:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" I advocate that public schools teach children to be good people and citizens. that includes teaching them age-appropriate lessons in family dynamics and teaching them about legally sanctioned things like same-sex marriage. As an aside, since same-sex marriage is a right confirmed by the Supreme Court, I don't know how the don't say gay law can be constitutional."
Age appropriate. You actually grasp the concept. So what in the hell are we arguing about?

#352 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Even YOU admitted that the law does more than that.

" The only person making that suggestion, ever, is YOU"
Yet that's what the law prevents, among other things, and y'all are beside yourselves with anger over codifying "age appropriateness ".

#327 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Again, gee, you're dumb

#354 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:26 PM | Reply

Now you are the one contradicting yourself. You finally not only acknowledged the concept of age appropriate material in school but support the notion but have lost your feces over a law that codifies it.

#355 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:27 PM | Reply

" What's preventing you from admitting the law was specifically created as a means of keeping LGBT people from being accepted as normal members of society.

#353 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2022-06-22 02:25 PM | FLAG: "

Explain to me how the law does that.

#356 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:30 PM | Reply

Now you are the one contradicting yourself. You finally not only acknowledged the concept of age appropriate material in school but support the notion but have lost your feces over a law that codifies it.

#355 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

AAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDDDD we come full circle.

The law does more than that. And, oh btw, noone was teaching the kids in an non-age appropriate manner

#357 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:30 PM | Reply

" It's why lefties are beside themselves over the " don't say gay" law.

You win dumbest comment of the year award. And it's only June! You must be proud!!!

Meanwhile, watch Florida drop their standards when they can't recruit enough teachers.

#358 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:31 PM | Reply

When I attended a private catholic liberal arts college in the late 80s early 90s.....I was the beneficiary of a "Kansas State private school tuition grant".

It was need based but it was public funds for a private religious based school.

And how is any of this different than eligibility for Pell Grant to be used towards a private (accredited) college?

#359 | Posted by eberly at 2022-06-22 02:33 PM | Reply

Then there is this and it's not a one off

mobile.twitter.com

#360 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:33 PM | Reply

" Explain to me how the law does that."

It's been explained: teachers aren't allowed to teach about something that's completely legal.

How can gay marriage be legal, but free speech about gay marriage be illegal?

And why are you avoiding the passages which allow parents to directly sue the teacher?

#361 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#357 unless you discount books targeted to young teens that explicitly talk about butt sex and has graphic drawings of --------.

#362 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#357 unless you discount books targeted to young teens that explicitly talk about butt sex and has graphic drawings of --------.

#362 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Young teens shouldnt be taught about sexuality?

#363 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:37 PM | Reply

"And can you explain how it is logical or legal to prohibit a public school from teaching about a legally allowed institution like same-sex marriage?"

You're half conceding his point by limiting the discussion to marriage.

#364 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2022-06-22 02:38 PM | Reply

"And can you explain how it is logical or legal to prohibit a public school from teaching about a legally allowed institution like same-sex marriage?"
You're half conceding his point by limiting the discussion to marriage.

#364 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE

Not really, I am targeting a specific example.

#365 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:39 PM | Reply

" Meanwhile, watch Florida drop their standards when they can't recruit enough teachers.

#358 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-22 02:31 PM | FLAG: "

Most teachers want to teach in person and without masks and have no desire to try to encourage kids to reject their biological bodies in favor of gender fluidity.

In the last couple of years Florida has had an unprecedented number of net increase in population from other states. They won't have a problem finding teachers who want to actually teach without a left wing indoctrination agenda.

#366 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

" Young teens shouldnt be taught about sexuality?

#363 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-06-22 02:37 PM | FLAG: "

Fair question. I think it can be done without the use of pornography but when we talk about age appropriateness, yeah, I'll cede a point to you on that question.

#367 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 02:42 PM | Reply

" Most teachers want to teach in person and without masks and have no desire to try to encourage kids to reject their biological bodies in favor of gender fluidity."

That's not the belief you're starting with. You're convinced, sans laws, every teacher thinks about ------- as much as you.

#368 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 02:48 PM | Reply

Jeff is just sad he doesn't get to participate in butt sex

#369 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:53 PM | Reply

"Not really, I am targeting a specific example."

Gay sex is just as legal as gay marriage. I think the stronger argument focuses there.

#370 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2022-06-22 02:54 PM | Reply

Given the age demographic that jeffj is so worried about, same sex marriage is more likely to come u p

#371 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 02:56 PM | Reply

Jeff is just sad he doesn't get to participate in butt sex

POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-06-22 02:53 PM | REPLY

I can pencil him in for next week sometime. ROFLMAO teeheehee giggles.

#372 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 03:09 PM | Reply

Explain to me how the law does that.
#356 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

By giving parents legal standing to sue if their kids are exposed to material the parents find objectionable.

Do you understand the explanation, or not?

#373 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 03:10 PM | Reply

Then there is this and it's not a one off
mobile.twitter.com
#360 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

^
Is this supposed to be illustrative of the kind of support and tolerance you simply will not support or tolerate?

#374 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 03:13 PM | Reply

"#368 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-06-22 02:48 PM | FLAG:
(CHOOSE)"

Nice straw man, Swish.

#375 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 03:21 PM | Reply

Great. Now public money in some states will be used to teach students in science class the Earth is only about 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs took a ride on Noah's giant floating petting zoo.

#376 | Posted by anton at 2022-06-22 03:23 PM | Reply

Tax the churches.

#377 | Posted by anton at 2022-06-22 03:24 PM | Reply

Jeff is just sad he doesn't get to participate in butt sex

#369 | Posted by truthhurts

is this how you expect to be taken seriously ?

"well do ya....punk ? "

#378 | Posted by Kempster at 2022-06-22 03:26 PM | Reply

So we need a law to prevent what wasn't happening, from happening?

#353 | Posted by ClownShack a

uh yeah dope...

we know how this works.

people like you ask that question at the same time it's happening or being implemented. Then after the fact when normal people

are upset and speaking to school boards, for instance, then the leftist extremist freak show tries to put them om some terrorist list.

It's called "preventive parenting." Something every parent has a right to regardless of what the extremist freak show IN DC has to

say about it.

#379 | Posted by Kempster at 2022-06-22 03:36 PM | Reply

Explain to me how the law does that.
#356 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Why? You don't care.

#380 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-06-22 04:07 PM | Reply

normal people
#379 | POSTED BY KUMDUMPSTER

Citation necessary.

#381 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-06-22 04:09 PM | Reply

It's called "preventive parenting."

It is?
I thought preventive parenting was when you paid attention to the kid, not the school board.

Perhaps the best way to keep a difficult baby from becoming an impossible child is to practice preventive parenting--something some parents do naturally. When a baby is resistant to novelty, parents must finesse how they present new things. Well before the first day of pre-school, parents can begin slowly exposing the child to the idea: go for a drive to the school one day, return for a walk around the halls the next. "Give the child lead time," says Dr. William B. Carey, professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania, "but insist the change be made." content.time.com

#382 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 04:32 PM | Reply

AAA-AAAANN-NNDD-DDD

Any chance you could stop doing that? Long unbroken character strings mess up the site formatting.

#383 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-06-22 04:43 PM | Reply

What's preventing you from admitting the law was specifically created as a means of keeping LGBT people from being accepted as normal members of society.

#353 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2022-06-22 02:25 PM |

Nonsense. I know people who are gay in the South. Hell, I grew up with a gay sister. She has a college education and a successful career. She's not suffering because parents don't want sickos talking about sex with their K-3rd grade children.

Find a new crutch to lean on if you can't make it as a gay person in American.

#384 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-06-22 04:48 PM | Reply

" In the last couple of years Florida has had an unprecedented number of net increase in population from other states. They won't have a problem finding teachers"

Not without dropping standards.
~signed, Actual Math

#385 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 04:54 PM | Reply

The christian nationalist SCOTUS "majority" is illegitimate, and Biden is a pathetic coward for not using every second of his time to drive home this point and excommunicate any Congressman who disagrees. He won't make an ounce of difference in this country until the unelected third branch of the legislature is fixed.

#386 | Posted by JOE at 2022-06-22 05:04 PM | Reply

This ruling applies to school choice. Why should parents who choose to send their child to a Catholic High School that has the highest college admission rate in the district be denied funds but if they send their child to a nearby public school it's free?

#268 | Posted by BellRinger

Taxes are collected to fund PUBLIC GOVERNMENTAL schooling. In the case of Public Taxpayer funded schools basically anyone who lives in the correct location in the community has access to attend. In many cases you just have to live in the school district and not even a certain "radius" of the school. In your argument can ANYONE attend that Catholic High School? From experience the answer is no. It is a religious indoctrination center which violates separation of church and state as tax money is going to fund religious indoctrination.

If the argument is still these are the only schools in the area, the correct answer is the people need to tell the government they need a school not they need to fund a religious grooming center.

#387 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2022-06-22 05:23 PM | Reply

#387 School "choice" is about, you know, "choice".

It seems you don't want parents to have that option if they don't choose the school you think they should choose.

#388 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 05:46 PM | Reply

It seems you don't want parents to have that option if they don't choose the school you think they should choose.

POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-06-22 05:46 PM | REPLY

Parents are free to take their demon spawn anywhere that they want to. If it's a private school they need to pay for it themselves. When you take monies away from public schools you make the public school systems harder to function. Besides private schools pay no taxes so they shouldn't get tax money.

#389 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 05:56 PM | Reply

"#387 School "choice" is about, you know, "choice"."

Does the school get to choose too, or just the parents?

#390 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 05:59 PM | Reply

Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada

Godamit, now I'm going to have to watch that. I got too much to do, but that mf'r looks good. I gotta find out why they gotta bury a Mejicano so much.

#391 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-06-22 06:06 PM | Reply

#389 With school choice, in most districts parents have more than one public school to choose from in addition to private schools. So, moving a child from Public School A to Public School B takes funding away from Public School A.

#392 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 06:10 PM | Reply

"So, moving a child from Public School A to Public School B takes funding away from Public School A."

So it moves taxpayer dollars to private enterprise.
This is corporate welfare.

#393 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 06:12 PM | Reply

Remember when you said you oppose all subsidies? You lied. You support School Voucher subsidies.

#394 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 06:12 PM | Reply

"Taxes are collected to fund PUBLIC GOVERNMENTAL schooling."

In school choice districts taxes are now collected to fund SCHOOLING.

"In your argument can ANYONE attend that Catholic High School?"

They usually have an academic entrance exam because, in spite of your bigoted portrayal of them, Catholic high schools tout their college prep prowess.

#395 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 06:13 PM | Reply

Does the school get to choose too, or just the parents?

Does the baby get to choose too? Or just the parent aborting them?? Why is it called "Pro-Choice" am I right?

#396 | Posted by oneironaut at 2022-06-22 06:19 PM | Reply

"They usually have an academic entrance exam"

Well then that's biased, and you shouldn't support taxpayer dollars being spent for the betterment of just some students.

#397 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 06:20 PM | Reply

"Does the baby get to choose too? Or just the parent aborting them?"

Like I said, you never bring any value to the discussion.

#398 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 06:21 PM | Reply

Arm fetuses.

If a fetus is a person, the fetus has 2nd amendment rights.

#399 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-06-22 06:32 PM | Reply

"They usually have an academic entrance exam because, in spite of your bigoted portrayal of them, Catholic high schools tout their college prep prowess."

If they're really good schools, they'd take the kids who failed the test and teach them to succeed.

But they are not intended to be really good schools. They are institutions to perpetuate segregation. Including serving as gatekeepers to higher education and higher socioeconomic status.

#400 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 06:35 PM | Reply

I can't wait for the Satanic Temple to start a school and then demand taxpayer dollars to pay for the little hellions education. You can't discriminate against them.

#401 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 06:45 PM | Reply

#401 It will take way more than 2 students for it to have sufficient funding to operate as a school.

This is a difficult concept for liberals but most parents actually care about the wellbeing of their children and seek to put them into an environment where they can thrive.

#402 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-06-22 06:48 PM | Reply

Catholic high schools tout their college prep prowess.

#395 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Since they are concurrently indoctrinating them in religion, I would argue that is a net evil.

#403 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 06:50 PM | Reply

This is a difficult concept for liberals but most parents actually care about the wellbeing of their children and seek to put them into an environment where they can thrive.

#402 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

A significant number of parents raise sociopaths and society needs to train them to protect us from them.

#404 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 06:52 PM | Reply

" This is a difficult concept for liberals but most parents actually care about the wellbeing of their children and seek to put them into an environment where they can thrive."

Weren't you complaining about broadbrushing less than 24 hours ago?

#405 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 06:54 PM | Reply

This is a difficult concept for liberals but most parents actually care about the wellbeing of their children and seek to put them into an environment where they can thrive.

#402 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

BTW no one is preventing parents from putting their children in the religious indoctrination factories if they so choose. What is objectionable is using tax payer money for that purpose, because, you know, the whole alleged separation of church and state thing.

#406 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 06:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Since taxpayer money is going to the religious institutions, should not the public now have the right/responsibility/authority to dictate how that money is spent?

You know, as in, don't teach kids nonsense!

#407 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-06-22 06:56 PM | Reply

"I can't wait for the Satanic Temple to start a school and then demand taxpayer dollars to pay for the little hellions education. You can't discriminate against them."

Jesus Christ, Lauramohr, you are completely clueless about the USSC ruling that this topic is about.

#408 | Posted by jakester at 2022-06-22 07:13 PM | Reply

"Nice straw man, Swish."

You're the guy who brings up ------- in every discussion. I was just pointing out what YOU'RE doing. That's NOT the definition of a strawman...dumfuq.

#409 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-22 07:28 PM | Reply

This is a difficult concept for liberals but most parents actually care about the wellbeing of their children and seek to put them into an environment where they can thrive.
#402 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Oh, I think I'm getting it.
Like parents would want to send their kids to a school without any poor kids... or only the poor kids the school chooses to accept, because they show promise.

Thanks for explaining it so well.

#410 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-22 07:42 PM | Reply

I went to a Jesuit high school.
It was the early nineties, so take that for whatever it's worth.

It cost money to attend, but the school did a lot to help families who couldn't afford sticker price.

There were kids from a ... reasonably wide array of socio economic backgrounds. It was definitely wider than the milky white public school i would have attended if i hadn't gone there. My family didn't have a lot of money.

We had to take a couple semesters of Theology.
Prayer services were optional, but most attended.
There were some jewish students. I guess they figured it was a safari before something else.

We had to do community service - some hours at food banks etc.

I don't think private schools such as the one I went to should be receiving public tax dollars.

#411 | Posted by schifferbrains at 2022-06-22 08:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I gotta find out why they gotta bury a Mejicano so much.

Simple.

You think them MFers stink when they're alive ... ..

#412 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-22 08:17 PM | Reply

Religion has no place in public schools. Keep it in your houses of worship.

Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-06-22 09:30 AM

How else are the going to indoctrinate kids while simultaneously screaming about how libruls are indoctrinating kids?

Gotta keep grooming them so the cash and supply of young talent keep flowing for the priests.

#413 | Posted by Nixon at 2022-06-23 07:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

this is what happens to your nation when the Talibaptists rule...

destroy the SCOTUS, attempt to destroy the Presidency forever,
and destroy the nation...

#414 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-23 10:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Truth,

"A significant number of parents raise sociopaths".

A lot of parents are sociopaths themselves.

I've known both liberal and conservative versions.

#415 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-23 11:11 AM | Reply

That much we can agree on Bill...
there are sociopaths on both sides.

Aristotle, 384"322 BC, argued as much (2400 or so years ago),
in his 'Doctrine of the Mean'. In it he
argued that one tends to stray from logic and reason
the further one shifts one's ideology to one side or
the other.

The same holds true today.
To think rationally,
one must have a reasonably open
and flexible mind...

One cannot be consumed by ideology.

#416 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-23 02:30 PM | Reply

Earth,

However, if you believe in God, you are not able to play it both ways.

I'm not able to be open minded that maybe atheists are right.

Its not that I'm consumed with ideology.

I'm simply not able to deny my life experiences.

It's not I think I shouldn't. It's just what I believe is true.

#417 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2022-06-23 04:27 PM | Reply

"I'm not able to be open minded that maybe atheists are right."

I do appreciate your rather brave statement.
How about the Greeks, or pre-Constantine Romans. Could they maybe be right?

#418 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-06-23 04:49 PM | Reply

Raised as a Catholic myself, I began to leave the church around age 14-16 years, and had finished leaving it by about the age of eighteen. I've never really seen it as that traumatic a decision, to lack faith in a non-present
(at least in any corporeal form) God/Creator. And while I acknowledge a slight possibility (depends on the day and time you ask me) of a Clockwork God, or as Aristotle coined it (a 'Prime Mover' deity--that which puts all else into motion), to me it makes little sense to fall on my knees daily in worship of a non-invested, uncaring deity, that just lets the the universe react to Natural Laws of Physics and Evolution. No, once I came to the conclusion that there sure didn't seem to be an ethically invested God readily apparent in my waking world, then most all of the guilt I initially felt for 'falling away' rapidly dissolved. Besides, the argument of which is more important, Morality vs. Religion was long ago settled in my mind. It is far more important to live a moral life, than one consumed by religious fevor, which is so prone to hubris and self-righteousness...

#419 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-06-23 08:51 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort