Politics - wait for it... wait for it... 2020 isn't over yet

[Malcador]

8 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

It's easy enough to read on a screen when the screen is only two feet away from me. On an actual flag with any amount of distant between you and it, it's going to be an unreadable blur. The least they could've done is use a bolder version of the font - tiny and thin lettering is not conducive to reading on fabric whipping in the wind.

Also consider it's Mississippi. Reading may not be a practical concern.

[Guard Dog]

1 hour ago, Amentep said:

I'd actually be curious to see the links, particularly of universities, where students have been asked to leave for reading a religious text to themselves.

There's a lot of (IMO) stupidity around religion in the US - kicking someone out solely for having a Bible/Quran/Tankah/Tipitaka/The Guru Granth Sahib/etc. on school grounds is just as stupid as trying the umpteenth time to get the 10 commandments displayed at the local courthouse.

RE: In God We Trust - its the official motto of the US, is on the currency and in the national anthem (4th verse).  Supreme Court in 1952 decided that the the government's recognition of God didn't violate the separation of Church and state. My thinking is that the decision was based on the idea that the recognition of the existence of a deity doesn't create a state sponsored or funded religion. Hopefully Gromnir will correct if I got the details wrong.

Here are a few I have saved. I know of a few others I'd have to hunt:

https://wreg.com/news/student-told-he-could-not-read-bible-during-school-free-time/

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9114

https://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/05/05/teachers-ban-on-reading-bibles-in-class-sparks-protest-change/

https://wreg.com/news/teacher-principal-apologize-about-not-allowing-god-assignment/

Now it would be fair to say these are isolated incidents and many were apologized for after. But enough isolated incidents demonstrates a trend. 

[Chilloutman]

36 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Here are a few I have saved. I know of a few others I'd have to hunt:

https://wreg.com/news/student-told-he-could-not-read-bible-during-school-free-time/

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9114

https://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/05/05/teachers-ban-on-reading-bibles-in-class-sparks-protest-change/

https://wreg.com/news/teacher-principal-apologize-about-not-allowing-god-assignment/

Now it would be fair to say these are isolated incidents and many were apologized for after. But enough isolated incidents demonstrates a trend. 

Thats funny, I live in one of the most atheistic state on planet and I have never heard anyone having issue due to reading bible

[Gromnir]

3 hours ago, Pidesco said:

Well, In God We Trust certainly goes against the founding fathers,

in the words o' vol, "no."

*shrug*

went against thomas jefferson, and a few others, but hardly 'gainst founding fathers in general, who numbered more than a few clergymen amongst them. chaplains opened both o' the initial houses o' Congress with prayers... 1789. is more than a few founders who took it as a matter o' faith that of course the US supported christianity, just not any particular denomination. Justice thomas, who has been forced to hide his worship o' original intent following the near universal adoption o' textualism by the less activist elements o' the Court, believes the establishment clause, based on comments by more than a few founders as well as earlier drafts o' the First Amendment means the US cannot establish a state church, and nothing else. the establishment clause is poor understood in part 'cause the founding fathers weren't  in agreement as to what it meant. 

*sigh*

gonna use aclu site for sh!tz and giggles

HOW DO YOU KNOW THE GOVERNMENT IS "ESTABLISHING RELIGION"?
In 1971, the Supreme Court decided Lemon v. Kurtzman which created three tests for determining whether a particular government act or policy unconstitutionally promotes religion. 

The Lemon test says that in order to be constitutional, a policy must:

Have a non-religious purpose;   
Not end up promoting or favoring any set of religious beliefs; and   
Not overly involve the government with religion. 

Justice Scalia, who tended to disagree with the majority on establishment cases, wrote as follows: 

"Like some ghoul in a late-night horror movie that repeatedly sits up in its grave and shuffles abroad, after being repeatedly killed and buried, Lemon stalks our Establishment Clause jurisprudence once again, frightening the little children and school attorneys of Center Moriches Union Free School District. Its most recent burial, only last Term, was, to be sure, not fully six feet under: Our decision in Lee v. Weisman conspicuously avoided using the supposed test but also declined the invitation to repudiate it. Over the years, however, no fewer than five of the currently sitting Justices have, in their own opinions, personally driven pencils through the creature’s heart (the author of today’s opinion repeatedly), and a sixth has joined an opinion doing so. The secret of the Lemon test’s survival, I think, is that it is so easy to kill. It is there to scare us (and our audience) when we wish it to do so, but we can command it to return to the tomb at will. Such a docile and useful monster is worth keeping around, at least in a somnolent state; one never knows when one might need him."

confused yet?

other than J. Thomas, who sadly has gained a couple o' ambivalent disciples to his curious reading o' the establishment clause, there is two kinda general notions o' church v. state and sorta a spectrum in betwixt and 'tween.

absolute wall of separation-----------------------------------------------------non preferential

wall of separation weren't actual adopted until 1947 btw.

"The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another […] No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion […] In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect “a wall of separation between Church and State.”-- J. Black, everson v. board of education

the aforementioned lemon test fundamental altered establishment clause jurisprudence, so in spite o' fact every US school child learns "separation of church and state," most school teachers is educating based on a reading o' the Constitution which ain't been law of the land since 1971.

non preferential may have a kinda gut-level appeal for many folks given the widespread presence o' Religion and Faith in our federal institutions which would take us a long time to fully enumerate. assume for a moment you is a good god fearing person who thinks the State should be able to support and regulate non religious aspects o' private schools. as long as the State support affects all private schools, regardless o' religious affiliation or denomination, then perhaps is okie dokie with the first amendment? such a perspective has been a popular view o' the establishment clause by the Court... from time to time. check out la county courthouse lawn during holidays. if the government allows a nativity scene on the lawn, then every other religion and faith gets their space too. in la and elsewhere you may see dozens o' different faiths and beliefs with their holiday displays sharing lawn space with baby jeebus. 

current state o' establishment clause is a bit odd as scalia's ghoul is not lemon, which he proper describes as a pathetic monster incapable o' instilling fear in even the most panic'd libertarian weeping over an imagined parade o' horribles fated to never sees the light o' day. nope, the ghoul is J. Thomas, who perhaps is a bit too remote for even gorsuch and kavanaugh to fully embrace, but he is the guy who posited in more than one dissent over the years that barenaked existence o' a religious symbol or practice which has managed to exist in spite o' the establishment clause, somehow confers legitimacy after some unspecific amount o' time.  a religious display erected in 2020 might fail to meet lemon test minimal burdens, but if the display were constructed in the 1950s it might survive a Constitutional challenge. 

and so on and so forth.

regardless, founders, regardless o' what you and others may have been taught in school, were not having a singular notion as to what were separation o' church and state, and that phrase didn't even gain widespread usage until the late 1800s. "in god we trust," or some variation, were okie dokie with the great majority o' founders and am suspecting most took it as no less than a simple reflexive axiom as 'posed to advocacy o' religion. 

if it makes you feel better/worse, the dalai lama opened senate with a daily prayer in 2014. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Malcador]

2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

But enough isolated incidents demonstrates a trend. 

The War on Christianity is real.

[Hurlshort]

2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

 

Now it would be fair to say these are isolated incidents and many were apologized for after. But enough isolated incidents demonstrates a trend. 

You are going to need a buttload more isolated incidents to demonstrate a trend though. It's a big country.

[Gromnir]

4 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

You are going to need a buttload more isolated incidents to demonstrate a trend though. It's a big country.

is as if you have never seen gd and vol posts. 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

I wouldnt go as far to say there is  " a war on Christianity " but there are individual cases of bias and unreasonable legal outcomes against certain Christian values  in countries where the majority of citizens are Christian. For example banning Xmas trees from malls during the festive season  and the stopping of singing certain hymns  in schools 

[Gorth]

30 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I wouldnt go as far to say there is  " a war on Christianity " but there are individual cases of bias and unreasonable legal outcomes against certain Christian values  in countries where the majority of citizens are Christian. For example banning Xmas trees from malls during the festive season  and the stopping of singing certain hymns  in schools 

They are two different things though, aren't they?  Going to the mall is optional, screw it if they have some nice Christmas decorations. It's the mall owners choice (and you can shop elsewhere). School is different, most kids (in the western world) don't have school as an optional destination. It's usually decided by the catchment area you live in. Get rid of religious (and political) symbols. Private schools... meh, like malls. Nice to have but not necessary I suppose.

 

Edit: Disclaimer, I don't have kids, but I've seen people fret over those "border lines" determining which school their kids end up in when moving home

[Skarpen]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

I wouldnt go as far to say there is  " a war on Christianity " but there are individual cases of bias and unreasonable legal outcomes against certain Christian values  in countries where the majority of citizens are Christian. For example banning Xmas trees from malls during the festive season  and the stopping of singing certain hymns  in schools 

Well, I would say that. I have a lot of family and friends who emigrated either after '89 or after we joined Eurokolchoz. And the situation is similar across Europe from what I can tell. More and more banning of Christian values or religious display that surprisingly don't apply to other religions or non religious people. For example it's perfectly ok to wear a t-shirt saying "I'm atheist" but not to wear a cross in many places. My cousin in France was visited by police to be informed that at Sunday they dress to nicely when going to church so the neighbours see they are going to church and it's inappropriate. My friend in Germany was called to his son school because he sighted "Jesus Christ..." on a boring lecture. Fortunately I still live in a country that have hundreds of years of tradition in religious freedom.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

They are two different things though, aren't they?  Going to the mall is optional, screw it if they have some nice Christmas decorations. It's the mall owners choice (and you can shop elsewhere). School is different, most kids (in the western world) don't have school as an optional destination. It's usually decided by the catchment are you live in. Get rid of religious (and political) symbols.

Most malls I go to are owned by property management companies which are often owned themselves by larger listed companies. And for all listed companies public perception matters so you should always consider the demographics in the local area to draw loyal people to your mall and what the majority of people appreciate during many religious holidays like Easter and Xmas 

[Volourn]

Look at the reaction when someone says something negative about Catholicism/Christianity (see pedophile priests) and Judaism or Islam (see pedophile founder). 

if you don't think there is a tendency to vilify Catholicism/Christianity in the west (US/Kanada included) you are willfully ignorant.

And, this is coming from someone who mocks the Catholic/Christian god (which technically is the same god as the other religions) as  a child killin' mass murderin' pscyhopath.

[Guard Dog]

20 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

You are going to need a buttload more isolated incidents to demonstrate a trend though. It's a big country.

You are assuming a conclusion I did not draw. A preponderance isolated incidents is a trend. I provided a handful of isolated incidents. I didn't draw the connecting line.

[Guard Dog]

22 hours ago, Chilloutman said:

Thats funny, I live in one of the most atheistic state on planet and I have never heard anyone having issue due to reading bible

No one in any official capacity has ever done so. There is no "war" on religion in the US. But it is clear there is a cultural shift going on where (certain) religious practice is held in disfavor by a lot of folks. The reasons for that can only be speculated on but the result of it right now are incidents like I listed. Small, petty persecutions. Mostly it has little to do with religion and a lot more to do that a lot of people are just awful s--ts who can't tolerate someone in their field of vision doing something they don't like. 

[Guard Dog]

It's hardly new, many Presidents have done it. But is anyone else a little tired of the President picking fights with individual private entities in the US? https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/19/politics/trump-goodyear-cancel-culture/index.html

[Malcador]

https://www.axios.com/steve-bannon-charged-fraud-199c43c1-2e75-4535-8eb0-d96558c9f777.html?utm_campaign=organic&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=email

 

Can't really blame Bannon, good crowd to exploit.

[BruceVC]

19 minutes ago, Malcador said:

https://www.axios.com/steve-bannon-charged-fraud-199c43c1-2e75-4535-8eb0-d96558c9f777.html?utm_campaign=organic&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=email

 

Can't really blame Bannon, good crowd to exploit.

I have just seen this and its big news, I am surprised Bannon would be so careless but lets see how it unfolds 

[Volourn]

Let the guilty FRY!

 

PS. It is official. Raccoons are now racists and Nazis as the innocent and pure Antifa and BLM are torturing and murdering them for their racist crimes!

Edited August 20, 2020 by Volourn

[Malcador]

5 minutes ago, Volourn said:

Let the guilty FRY!

 

PS. It is official. Raccoons are now racists and Nazis as the innocent and pure Antifa and BLM are torturing and murdering them for their racist crimes!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/08/black-lives-matter-supporters-run-brutally-beat-raccoon-death-claim-white-people-worry-animals-video/ I assume ? 

Comments there are pretty funny.

[ComradeYellow]

3 hours ago, BruceVC said:

I have just seen this and its big news, I am surprised Bannon would be so careless but lets see how it unfolds 

Should be a good indicator of any kind of crowd-funding projects, even dopes who promise zingers on Kickstarter.

[Hurlshort]

1 hour ago, ComradeMaster said:

Should be a good indicator of any kind of crowd-funding projects, even dopes who promise zingers on Kickstarter.

Oops, your SonicMage is showing.  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

On 8/15/2020 at 5:08 PM, Hurlshot said:

I am sure it will sound like an excuse, but maybe most children aged 6-18 are not all that receptive to learning history. It is much easier to be enaged in history once you've lived long enough to have some context and insight into the world around you. 

It doesn't sound like an excuse and teachers themselves usually do the best they can, but I still think that education in the US is lacking in that regard (as well as many others). There's really no easy way to fix it and I personally have no ideas that don't involve the dissolution of the USA.

Anyways it looks we had one of the hottest temperatures recorded and a heat wave but climate change isn't a big deal (and is probably fake news) because it was cold in December.

[Gromnir]

28 minutes ago, KaineParker said:

It doesn't sound like an excuse and teachers themselves usually do the best they can, but I still think that education in the US is lacking in that regard (as well as many others). There's really no easy way to fix it and I personally have no ideas that don't involve the dissolution of the USA.

 

history, in our opinion, is taught complete wrong in most public schools, particular given the realities o' 2020. recognizing all the physical and digital resources available, is not difficult to find facts. hurl can keep posting bloom's taxonomy, but he is also compelled by state requirements and standardized tests to teach kids an enormous amount o' facts in a relative short period o' time. like it or not, kids have shorter attention spans nowadays, though they process information faster... which is why is all bass ackwards how we insist kids learn every important person and event in american and world history, with "important" changing from state-to-state and even district to district.

you says you learned more 'bout confederacy through 10 minutes o' self study than you learned in school. am suspecting a smidge o' the hyperbolic or a recognition you were a terrible student, but such an admission should not actual be a problem if history were taught better. goal shouldn't be to make certain kids learn facts but to know how to learn. most folks believe they got critical thinking skillz. *snort* research skills is also a bit more complicated than google searches and is apparent from observing these boards how poor educated many people (not just americans btw) has been insofar as research skills. analysis is kinda a linchpin in spite o' fact bloom and other learning models like to make all categories and modalities and whatnot equivalent/balanced. analysis is where we apply logic fallacies if you know 'em, and is where at a fundamental level the student recognizes facts v. opinions. 

...

two or three major events per semester should be max covered, and during that time kids should be taught how to genuine self educate, 'cause once they got such skills, they may go forth and learn for themselves 'bout the confederacy or turn o' the century evolution o' US labor. forcing kids to learn many hundreds o' facts, which is a soul numbing pursuit regardless o' the age o' the student, cannot be the most constructive use of finite time and resources. instead give students a chance to make necessary connections 'tween, for example, those issues the founding fathers were discussing during the constitutional convention and what is occurring today. evaluation and creation is kinda the post analysis  aspects o' bloom. is not difficult to see even a class o' middle schoolers creating their own better constitution after recognizing what succeeded and failed with the US Constitution... and make sure to not skip the possible fails, though is more important for the students to reach their own conclusions 'bout where the founders were mistaken than to be told what were errors.

didn't learn 'bout confederacy? shouldn't care. we should want to know what the kids did learn. if the students in an eighth grade class learned little 'bout the confederacy but instead covered, pure random, the influenza epidemic o' 1918 to a meaningful degree where students were taught research and analysis and how to construct and write coherent arguments and...

whatever.

we shouldn't give a damn 'bout what facts and events and people kids failed to learn 'bout while they were for reals becoming able to self-teach and think critical and creative as they acquired necessary writing and research skills which would benefit them a lifetime as 'posed to being relevant to a single state standardized test. 

*descends from soap box*

oh, and am not pretending teaching kids is easy. particular daunting is the task o' attempting to teach a group o' kids, some o' whom is gonna be resistant to learning unless is an honors/ap class. more contagious than covid-19 is knucklehead behaviour in a group o' kids. try and teach multiple different classes o' a few dozen kids who got a wide range o' ability and motivations and backgrounds and claim is ez would be surprising to Gromnir and am thinking the teachers who do such well is much underappreciated. that said, am nevertheless convinced most teachers is doing it all wrong.

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

[ComradeYellow]

3 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

Oops, your SonicMage is showing.  

Doesn't like something I say, therefore am someone in particular you don't like.

Classic.

Anyway at this pitiful point in American history, I kind of hope Trump wins again.  A Biden win would go back to softening and coddling the "Left" (There is no organized 'Left' in America!!), and putting America back to sleep.  At least with blatant and honest firebranding right wing politics rather than the Democratic Party 'Imperialism with a smile' gives the REAL left outside of either party the motivation and determination to toughen up and build a better movement.  Trump: To help construct the Left.

[Gromnir]

am a product o' our training.

Rule 608 – A Witness’s Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness

evidence which tends to diminish a witness' trustworthiness is admissible. prejuddical impact may overcome probative value, but is a given that one may attack the character o' a witness when such has a tendency to reveal lack o' candor.

...

we make no claims regarding who is or is not a doppelganger, though am suspecting sharp_one is still posting regular. *insert eye roll* regardless, am thinking evidence o' doppelganger shenanigans is relevant here for same reason evidence o' lack o' trustworthiness is relevant in every US local, state and fed court. liars tend to lie.

on topic

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, citing threats against her and her family, defended a police presence outside her Northwest Side home where protesters are being blocked.

at the very least, not good optics. any person in a neighborhood where protests has been anything other than perfect peaceful will no doubt question why the safety o' their families and property is needing be sacrificed on the bonfire o' liberty while the mayor uses police force to ensure her own security.

HA! Good Fun!