Merv's Politically Incorrect Audio Blog

without friction there is no traction, without traction we are staying in place. Given how long we live, that would be rather boring.

 

Fighting against imposition of a new ideology over the status isn’t imposing anything by negation, that’s just word games. The books they wanted removed from school libraries were primarily due to sexual content (including of that between a child and adult), you’ll find opposition to that kind of material in schools is an overwhelmingly popular opinion.

It’s important to distinguish between ideas and practice. Very few people disagree with the idea that “black lives matter” but many people view BLM as a morally bankrupt organization. Similarly we have the idea of intersectionality which acknowledges that having more than one “axis of oppression” (e.g. race and sex) is more likely to mean life is harder than if you only had one (or none). That’s not very controversial but we’ve seen it used to establish a new hierarchy of privilege based on perceived oppressions (and when one can’t be found you can invent them like with self-diagnosed mental illness or microaggressions.

So back to CRT. The debate is muddled because the term CRT is being used instead of the more accurate critical race praxis (i.e. the practice of the idea) which is what is being used in schools. This let people get away with saying things like “CRT isn’t being taught in schools!” and being technically correct while still being disingenuous because they knew what the actual argument was. Now even proponents have seemingly embraced that nomenclature so whatever. I disagree with the idea that “whiteness” (and its commensurate qualities like “hard work” or “rational thinking”) is the root cause of inequity, or even that inequity is bad. We want people who strive and succeed to do better than those who don’t. That’s how we improve as a society and a species. Not to mention that the ethnic groups who seem to be doing best in this “white supremacist” country all seem to be Asian. Of course the solution to that is to view Asians as white and part of the problem rather than reexamine the flawed hypothesis.

I assume the thread has already gone over the myriad examples of democrats/liberals saying how parents shouldn’t have the right to decide what’s taught in schools (e.g. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...d-over-facebook-posts-on-education/ar-AASSUes) and institutions like the aclu flipping on government transparency because parents might disagree with the indoctrination de jour (https://www.inquiremore.com/p/the-aclu-suddenly-reverses-its-support).

 

Parents don't have the right to directly decide what's taught in public schools, at least not as we currently run public education systems. That's not a political statement, it's just factually true that public school curriculums are set by the government, not by parents. Depending on your locality you may have more or less ability as a parent to opt your child out of material you considering objectionable, but I don't know of any state where a parent has the right to completely set their child's curriculum in public schools (I think New Hampshire give the most control to parents?).

Of course parents have various ways to give input on curriculums so they can indirectly influence what their child learn in public schools

 

This is exactly why school choice is so important to parents, especially parents who disagree w/ the progressive orthodoxy that dominates instruction at all levels of education in the US. As near as I can tell, government-run schools are more fervent about teaching the progressive collectivist dogma than the RCC is about teaching their religious dogma.

 

Have we all forgotten about creationism and intelligent design being taught in science class?

 

This thread is a great reminder of why I deleted Facebook.

 

I vividly remember my 9th grade bio teacher basically telling the class evolution was bs but they made her teach it and then interjecting creationist "debunking" to refute it at every turn

 

Nope. And I think parents should be able to choose that option for their children, even if it results in misinformed kids. And you should be able to send your kids to the Progressive Academy for their religious misinformation. I would prefer that the Federal government wasn't involved in education at all, and not only because the 10th Amendment makes it unconstitutional as beyond their enumerated powers, but there is not much that is more a "matter of purely local concern." Backpack funding baby.

 

Definitely agree conservatives should continue to corner the market on religious misinformation.

 

There are plenty of conservatives that are not religious...I suppose you think any version of Christianity is religious misinformation....or is it all religion that bothers you?

 

It isn’t for me, but to each their own. Religion tends to bring out the worst in people, but I’m cool with those who pray in their churches and at home instead of forcing their fairytales on everyone else in public schools or through legislation or whatever.

 

"Plenty" in what sense? I'm pretty sure it's around 10% or less in the US for self-identified non-religious conservatives (and most of that 10% are probably theists in some sense) and white evangelicals have a virtual strangle-hold on the GOP at this point. Creationism generally is misinformation in any science education context, but mainline protestants and Catholics at least tend try to reconcile their creationism with modern science, unlike evangelicals who tend to favor young earth creationism.

 

Like the Progressive Left? I can’t tell the difference between the illiberal left and the illiberal right anymore.

 

Yeah man, except one is a belief in a myth and the other is a different way to do math plus the controversial theory that black people are equals.

 

You are talking just like the illiberal right that you aren’t a fan of.

Quick Example:

I’m just trying to show the flaw in your argument to the point on why some people like me are facepalming ATM.

 

There’s a wide gulf between respecting people’s right to be different (religion, gender, race) and teaching that your religious beliefs are the foundation of all creation.

 

I understand how God could have created a world/universe where both the laws of science and evolution are valid. The one thing no one's ever explained to me though is who/how created God. I haven't read any bibles nor researched/been educated on religion but I'd think the creation of God itself would be a fairly common knowledge story. Is there one?

 

only if he/she/they/it told someone...

 

I guess teaching creation in science class took up too much time, so people couldn't learn the Paradox of Tolerance in social studies.