The Glade 4.0

Tally, I really don't see how the government can weigh one set of beliefs over another. I get wrapped around the axel about a right of association where it comes to religious freedom. I get wrapped around the axel when it comes to people being discriminated against. Where those issues and the spheres of strictly constitutional rights influence they present overlap ... specifically where they overlap, no where else ... I generally see that as an area that the government should just stfu and avoid.

A baker shouldn't have the right to refuse to bake a cake for someone who's gay, period, but shouldn't be punished for not putting something on the cake that he objects to because of some valid religious morality, like portraying Mohammed, or two male figures, obscenity, or even a political message one might reasonably find offensive. Leave that to small claims courts to work out, put the damages at the cost of the cake. That'll cut down on all the foolishness. Take out the reward for those pitching a fit, I'm betting you'll see less fit pitching.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

According to who, exactly? the same people claiming she said schools need guns to deal with grizzly bears, when she said nothing of the sort?



That's a recommendation for him, since the EPA is the pack of wolves. It's an agency of environmental crusaders who left college thinking they'd "change the world" and they need a good spanking.



Unless they have some sort of hold on him it would be very hard for any other state to exploit that. Anyone familiar enough with other countries to make a decent choice as SoS will necessarily have "ties". The vague fears the State Department is currently crowing about are basically resentment that he didn't come up through the normal career diplomatic-political channels, and also isn't a liberal. They're trying to disguise that as "concern", but like much of the rest of the discontent among Washington. government career/establishment types its really resentment that Trump isn't adhereing to "the rules" that were never actually rules to begin with.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

But.... she did.



She's **** clueless about education.



Advance god's kingdom my ***. **** your fundie bullshit indoctrination.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Note the underlined portion. It was a discussion of a specific school, and she was talking about its existing fence to keep out grizzlies, and the possibility of a gun at that school or others in the relatively small portion of the country where grizzly bears live. The problem here is not what she knows about education, its that you don't know anything about grizzly bears. At no point did she say schools in general should have guns, for grizzlies or otherwise.

[/quote]

Allowing people to choose a school unencumbered by having to pay twice isn't "fundie indoctrination bullshit". Nor is it getting rid of "science". Private schools still have to be accredited. You'll note that even "fundie" universities such as Liberty University are fully accredited - and that accreditation is controlled by academics who are overwhelmingly liberal. Worries about "indoctrination" and "fundies" and "science" mean literally nothing coming from you guys; what they means is "I want to suppress religious teaching of any kind by making it too expensive, then pretend it's 'separation of church and state'."

This is precisely why this judge is a good choice - he knows people trying to disguise authoritarianism as "freedom" when he sees it, and there's several of you here that are among the worst offenders. I predict some good meltdowns shortly.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/f ... hools.html

Sure, they have to be accredited now... but when that's an issue in their way, they'll just suspend that requirement. Like they did in Michigan to remove reporting on charter schools.


But that's ok right? All in the name of "Choice" right? Let's "advance God's Kingdom here" because nothing could go wrong right?

Unlike you, I would prefer to not live in a **** theocracy.

Not to mention the other issues with charter schools in MI.


Imagine that. The ones that are "successful" are also the most "selective". Which also leaves the special ed kids out in the cold. I meaan, who in their right mind in the admissions department would ever accept a learning disabled kid and take that chance that that student will bring their average down unless there were laws in place protecting those students. Its all about the money of course.

I prefer to live in a world where everyone has an education. Unfortunately, as shown by the results of the previous election, that is not the case.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

We're going to need to see more details on that. Who was in charge of that reporting? Michigan has some pretty powerful teacher's unions. Why are they monitoring charter school performance specifically? Because they're not public schools? Circular arguments abound.

As for theocracy, letting people choose where to send their children isn't "theocracy". It's cute how you're putting choice in quotes, "choice" is bad if people make choices you don't approve of, amirite? Theocracy is one of those words people like you throw around casually. If you lived in one, or were in danger of it you wouldn't be exposing yourself on the internet like this, especially not to someone in my position.



There are schools that specialize in those kids, idiot. I used to teach in one. Maybe if we were less interested in "monitoring" charter schools for "performance" so teachers unions can have ammunition against them, their special ed kids wouldn't count against them.

It's a trivial exercise to adjust averages based on kids with special ed needs. Statistical controls for different circumstances are hardly novel. The only reason not to do it would be... to rig the system against schools that take them in. If charter schools are going to be evaluated separately from public schools, but those ratings are not going to control for the types of students they accept then they would be entirely right to reject special ed kids - since the supposed "Advocates" for these kids are trying to use them as a weapon.

Which is exactly what you're doing, and the NYT is doing. Trying to imply some sort of chicanery is going on, when in reality its really just about making sure people have only one option, where only the approved messages are taught. Don't talk to me about "indoctrination' l you'd happily do your own indoctrination in a heartbeat given half a chance.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

So... they're failing because the measurements aren't fair.

I guess that's a good an excuse as any.

Also LOL @ "Someone in my position" Dude, you're a **** border cop(or, at least you were last I checked). Delusions of grandeur much?

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

It's nice to know that you don't accept the concept of statistical controls when it doesn't give the result you want.



Actually no. I've moved up to bigger and better things than chasing aliens. Nevertheless, if we were living in the kind of authoritarian state you wish for, (since you're more afraid of having to change your newfound faith than you really are of Nazis, theocrats, or the Sith or whatever it is) , you wouldn't be casually ranting on the internet to someone you know to be a law enforcement official. How do you imagine things work in that sort of nation?

Even if I couldn't do anything myself, I could pretty easily pass the information to someone else and it would eventually make its way to whatever "secret police" organization existed. I almost certainly would, too - or at least you'd have to assume that I would since if I got caught not having turned you in I might be on the hook myself.

As for my personal delusions of grandeur... Ok bro. You just go right on thinking that. I doubt you'll be able to figure out what that article has to do with this but... maybe you will retrieve some shred of intellect.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about personal condemnations from a guy who lived with him mother, unable to afford a car until his mid 30's, and shorty there after received his first blowjob which promptly sucked all all the intellectual honesty and common sense out of him.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

I dunno. I'm a little jealous. I'd be a shitlib too, if it meant regular blowjobs of that magnitude.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

And again we're back to childish personal attacks. Way to be guilty of the things you accuse others of.

Agreed.

Mus should learn to control himself.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

I should learn to control myself.

Because I'm the one spouting personal attacks.

Right.

I'll just keep on doin what I'm doin. Y'all amuse me.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

And yes. They are incredible.

Also, BINGO! I got BINGO here! I only needed "shitlib" on my card. Thanks for that.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

You're right. Passive-aggressively implying other people are nazi sympathizers is way better. Truly, you're the height of maturity.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

You're too smart to pretend you really don't see the difference between me naming politician for the parallels I see (and then you throwing your lot in with him) and crude name calling. So stop with the intellectual dishonesty and just admit Takiss and Rynar and some of the others are over the line.

I dunno, Mus took a shot at DE with the 'Border Cop' remark. I think everything else that happened is pretty much fair game.

That's the trouble with everyone drawing their own line. I'm not sure if they do it to keep people out, or keep themselves in. I'm leaning towards the latter. How terrified some must get of thoughts different than their own.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

There has been a report in this thread but since this is Hellfire I am not going to do anything about it. Besides, you're all kind of being assholes and it seems you're okay with that.

I feel like the only one that can be a jerk in Hellfire is the one reporting somebody for being a jerk in Hellfire.

_________________
The Dude abides.

Aren't you supposed to use mod voice when you do that?

_________________

LOL wow .. just like old times - only different! :p

So it's your position that overt name calling would be better if it could be linked to parallels with politicians? Or is your method of attacking people better only because it's a veiled insult rather than an overt one?

You're in no position at all to lecture. That's the problem here. You think calling for "maturity" actually means something. Hillary Clinton had "maturity" too - but that didn't change the fact that she was a self-interested semi-competent nincompoop.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Just to share...

This is the point in any conversation where I attempt to diffuse the situation with humor. I start with a, perhaps, humorous yet insightful remark, followed closely by a pithy comment... mostly 'cause I like pithing people off.

Just FYI

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Sorry, it's been a long time.