Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Crucify... Interesting choice of words. Of course you probably didn't know it.
I wonder who's responsible for the unfuckingconstitutional actions of one teacher? At the end of the day, it'll be the district that didn't shut her down.
Read the story and my rebuttal. This story is about one teacher and not the 12 schools in the district. Where is the story about the other schools? You seem to be willing to crucify someone and the district without proof. And you're okay with that.
Wrong on both counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old-T
Thanks for a bit of sanity, though I would say it should be more than "discouraged" IF THIS IS TRUE. It is blatantly wrong. The sad part is it wouldn't shock me if it turns out to be true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old-T
No, if true it is a lot more than one teacher. It would be the entire district and including multiple teachers.
And neither of you have an issue with that it seems.
If it is true, of course.
Please don't skip over words that are inconvenient to your argument.
As to "one school" and "one teacher", let's do a quick refresher of the article:
Sara Ebarb, superintendent of schools for the Parish. Doesn't sound like she only speaks for one school.
Rita Roark, science teacher.
Stacy Bray, math teacher.
Gene Wright, principal. Again, one would assume the principal speaks for more than "one teacher".
And this doesn't count all the others that walk by the pictures and marquees and don't seem to object.
But again, back to my original question: assuming this is true--that a few teachers, principal, and superintendent all think there is nothing wrong with promoting their version of Christianity while telling other kids that their religion is stupid--IF that were to happen, do you agree with it?
Crucify... Interesting choice of words. Of course you probably didn't know it.
I wonder who's responsible for the unfuckingconstitutional actions of one teacher? At the end of the day, it'll be the district that didn't shut her down.
Why would they shut her down? If this story is accurate, THEY SUPPORT HER!
And COG wonders why I am against local autonomy for schools.
Officials defend their employees all the time. Their opinioni is moot for this story. They do what is in the best interest of the school. Now this does not prove that any of this stuff is even true. That is your problem, proof. You have only a partisan legal document designed to advance an argument.
And still you are willing to crucify someone without proof!
The creation model for existence is a viable model and could be taught along side the something from nothing atheist extremist version of reality, if properly formatted
and presented with the scientific evidences that do exist for a creation model.
The problem is that the young earth creationist with their garbage science,
and people that want to make it a religion specific teaching will always and forever
stand in the way of an honestly presentable case for creation.
Watch or read anything from Dr Hugh Ross on old earth creation,
he is an astrophysicist and one of the leading proponents of old earth creation.
Officials defend their employees all the time. Their opinioni is moot for this story. They do what is in the best interest of the school. Now this does not prove that any of this stuff is even true. That is your problem, proof. You have only a partisan legal document designed to advance an argument.
And still you are willing to crucify someone without proof!
No, I am point blank asking you IF this is true are you good with it?
And IF it is true, you want to give a pass to the principle and superintendent because they are just supporting their employee? That alone should be reason enough to get rid of them--management should be setting the rules/standards for this, not supporting a grossly illegal and wrong practice. IF it is happening.
I am not crucifying anyone. I am saying that what was described, as described, is wrong.
Again I ask you, regardless of which public school it might happen in, are you in favor of this kind of teaching one religion and ridiculing another in a public school? If it was a picture oh Buda and daily prayers towards Mecca would you support it?
The question stands whether this actually happened in LA or not.
No, I am point blank asking you IF this is true are you good with it?
And IF it is true, you want to give a pass to the principle and superintendent because they are just supporting their employee? That alone should be reason enough to get rid of them--management should be setting the rules/standards for this, not supporting a grossly illegal and wrong practice. IF it is happening.
I am not crucifying anyone. I am saying that what was described, as described, is wrong.
Again I ask you, regardless of which public school it might happen in, are you in favor of this kind of teaching one religion and ridiculing another in a public school? If it was a picture oh Buda and daily prayers towards Mecca would you support it?
The question stands whether this actually happened in LA or not.
You finally get to it. Did it happen or not. That has been my stance since the beginning. If you can prove this through a third part or an admission from a participant then get back to me about all or any of the participants. I am so tired of people flying off the handle on heresay. And yes, especially when it comes from the left who never seem to need any proof.
You finally get to it. Did it happen or not. That has been my stance since the beginning. If you can prove this through a third part or an admission from a participant then get back to me about all or any of the participants. I am so tired of people flying off the handle on heresay. And yes, especially when it comes from the left who never seem to need any proof.
No, that was not my point and is not my point.
My very simple question to you is would you support the kind of actions described, as described.
At this point you are intentionally ignoring the question. Wonder why.
Since these seem to be very hard issues for some (JD, for example) to ponder, I will have to do my best to keep the question where he can see it easily.
To summarize: IF a public school decided to put up images of Buddha all over the school, and have daily prayers from the Quran, and ridicule kids for being Christian--would that be an OK set of policies for a school district? Is it acceptable practice to tell a grade school student that they should change schools to be with other kids of their own race. Is it cool to tell a grade school kid and his family that his religious beliefs are stupid and he should convert to become a Hindu? Is it acceptable to give tests where biblical quotes/knowledge gets you the right answer of a science test?
I am not saying this is happening anywhere particular--like somewhere in Thumperville in Bubbaland. So this is NOT a judgment on anyone, but a more philosophical question about whether JD (and others) actually believe in the constitution when it comes to religious tolerance. Or whether it depends upon which religion is favored. Just wanting to know his opinion.
I would appreciate people helping JD figure this out since it seems to be difficult for him--he is not sure if Mormonism should be required reading and the preferred religion in local schools. I know, these abstract questions NEVER are discussed on here, but I thought I would put it out there as something different to ponder.
To try and be fair and balanced (unlike some news stations that like to claim they are), here is one conservative perspective. Note that they--unlike a certain poster here--comprehend the meaning of the word "if", and can discuss the underlying issue separate from whether this instantiation is true.
No one crucifying anyone, lynching anyone, etc., but able to simply state that IF true, the actions are unacceptable. Even in Thumperville.
But JD is not yet convinced it seems. He is still pondering the moral implications of shoving large helpings of any religion down public school students' throats.
Are you always this impatient T? I have other things I have to do but if a school acted this way and it's employees acted this way I would find it unsatisfactory...if it happened. I am just willing to wait until we have some proof.
