Texas Senate bill drops teaching requirement that Ku Klux Klan is "morally wrong"

[Warning]

No, I'm against the KKK, slavery, segregation, and racism. But I'm also against childism. No kid should be forced to learn about the KKK under the threat of punishment. It's disgusting.

Teaching children about the dangers of dumb people acting as a group and showing them historical examples in the form of the KKK or the Nazi's or any other fascist to help teach that lesson is extremely invaluable and crucial to maintaining a healthy society. Warning them of these particular dangers is no more disgusting than it is to warn them not to cross a busy street without looking for traffic.

[Beefhammer]

For someone who claims that all of today's problems will be solved with magical technology developed by future people, you sure want the future to be filled with blithering idiots.

Just like him apparently. He's obviously threatened by smarter people.

- - - Updated - - -

He's all over the place; hates children, wants to force women to have children (make them pro-natalism), thinks history is a waste of time, thinks the future isn't worth worrying about.

His posts are a giant warning sign to the rest of us to just ignore him. Feeding him, like those Russian propoganda trolls, only give them power.

[Santti]

I don't post enough these days to care about the coming infraction but fucking hell. Have you ever had a take on an issue that wasn't absolute dog shit? I am yet to see it. At this stage I think the community is praying for you that you're a persona account because if these are actual opinions that you hold then you're the dumbest fuck I've ever seen on these forums and that's a massive achievement on your part, staggering infact.

I don't think they are his actual beliefs. He's the one to always swim against the current. Doesn't matter what the talk is about. If he believes majority think fire is hot, he boldly takes the position to argue the opposite.

He's not worth it to take an infraction for. But is definitely worth the extra click to ignore him. And use that handy adblock technique that nukes everyone on your ignore list entirely, never to be seen again (unless someone quotes him).

[PC2]

He's all over the place; hates children,

I don't hate them, they're awesome. I don't know why you would say something like that.

wants to force women to have children (make them pro-natalism),

No I don't believe in forcing people to do things. If humanity starts shrinking then I'd try to spread (pro)natalism because I want humanity to grow instead of shrinking and moving closer to extinction. That's what I said in the thread you are referencing from a week ago.

thinks history is a waste of time,

No, that only relates to my avatar and thinking that you should predict the future based on generalizing historical observations. The point there is you should 'explain' history instead of generalizing from history.

thinks the future isn't worth worrying about.

Yes because we should work on solving problems instead of sitting around worrying about them.

I'm almost convinced he's just some weird take on hedonism.

There is no problem with hedonism or decadence. Hedonism won't cause society to decay or anything like that, but at the same time it doesn't offer a lot of meaning either, so I don't think it should be anyone's guiding ideology.

[Edge-]

No I don't believe in forcing people to do things.

Still waiting for your position on teach kids math and language.

Also, how do you feel about speed limits? Seat belt laws? Safety regulations? Those are force people to do things under threat of penalty. Seems like you hold a, "Laws are immoral and wrong" based on your comment.

If humanity starts shrinking then I'd try to spread (pro)natalism because I want humanity to grow instead of shrinking and moving closer to extinction.

Populations rise and fall, it's perfectly natural. Infinite growth, by contrast, isn't natural and is also a fantasy.

[TEHPALLYTANK]

No, I'm against the KKK, slavery, segregation, and racism. But I'm also against childism. No kid should be forced to learn about the KKK under the threat of punishment. It's disgusting.

So you're against the entire concept of public education, do you think this interpretation of your stance is accurate?

[Endus]

I don't hate them, they're awesome. I don't know why you would say something like that.

Because you clearly stated this;

But I'm also against childism.

"Childism" is advocacy for children's rights and freedom from prejudice. If you're "against childism", you're opposed to children's rights and freedoms being protected and think they should be a subjugated group.

He's saying that because you said that. Exactly that. Outright, clear as day.

Maybe you just used a word you did not understand and got it completely wrong, but that's on you, not Calfredd.

No I don't believe in forcing people to do things. If humanity starts shrinking then I'd try to spread (pro)natalism because I want humanity to grow instead of shrinking and moving closer to extinction. That's what I said in the thread you are referencing from a week ago.

Population reduction is not in any way "moving closer to extinction".

Seriously, learn what words mean before you use them.

No, that only relates to my avatar and thinking that you should predict the future based on generalizing historical observations. The point there is you should 'explain' history instead of generalizing from history.

Yes because we should work on solving problems instead of sitting around worrying about them.

These two statements are directly contradictory.

It's not possible to identify something as a problem to be solved without first modeling future outcomes based on current patterns, and learning that it becomes a problem if we continue on as we are.

You literally cannot start the process of solving a problem until you identify that it is a problem, and your position on modeling prevents you from being able to do so.

Your own positions contradict each other.

Hell, back up a step. You can't possibly argue that a reduction in human population would in any way pose any risk of potential extinction, because the only way to draw that conclusion is to predict a future based on generalizing historical observations.

You don't believe the shit you say yourself, since you clearly won't hold yourself to your own supposed principles.

[Shadowferal]

Well, homeschooling and private tutors obviously aren't the way to go.

[PC2]

Because you clearly stated this;

"Childism" is advocacy for children's rights and freedom from prejudice. If you're "against childism", you're opposed to children's rights and freedoms being protected and think they should be a subjugated group.

He's saying that because you said that. Exactly that. Outright, clear as day.

Maybe you just used a word you did not understand and got it completely wrong, but that's on you, not Calfredd.

Population reduction is not in any way "moving closer to extinction".

Seriously, learn what words mean before you use them.

These two statements are directly contradictory.

It's not possible to identify something as a problem to be solved without first modeling future outcomes based on current patterns, and learning that it becomes a problem if we continue on as we are.

You literally cannot start the process of solving a problem until you identify that it is a problem, and your position on modeling prevents you from being able to do so.

Your own positions contradict each other.

Hell, back up a step. You can't possibly argue that a reduction in human population would in any way pose any risk of potential extinction, because the only way to draw that conclusion is to predict a future based on generalizing historical observations.

You don't believe the shit you say yourself, since you clearly won't hold yourself to your own supposed principles.

Meh, you know what I meant when I said "childism". That's all that matters. When it comes to education we should give children the same rights as adults instead of being prejudiced against them. If a kid wants to learn about the KKK then great, but you shouldn't coerce them into it by making it a mandatory requirement.

[Edge-]

Meh, you know what I meant when I said "childism".

We literally cannot know what you think in your head when you make up your own definitions for words.

When it comes to education we should give children the same rights as adults instead of being prejudiced against them. If a kid wants to learn about the KKK then great, but you shouldn't coerce them into it by making it a mandatory requirement.

Again, if a child doesn't want to attend school to learn math, language, history, or anything else, should this be allowed? Why aren't you answering this question?

[Endus]

Meh, you know what I meant when I said "childism".

Something completely different than what the word actually means?

No. I didn't. How could I? I can't read minds.

Stop trying to shift the blame to others for your mistakes.

That's all that matters. When it comes to education we should give children the same rights as adults instead of being prejudiced against them. If a kid wants to learn about the KKK then great, but you shouldn't coerce them into it by making it a mandatory requirement.

Do you apply the same standard to all education, and argue that school attendance should be entirely at the child's discretion?

Yes or no. Simple question.

And I'm not talking about occasional truancy. I'm talking a 5 year old saying "I don't like school" and then never being expected to ever go back to school ever again in their entire lives, and their parents unable to require them to.

[Shadowferal]

Yes...yes...and educated child should be no different than a stupid child...wait wut?

Considering the differences on posts I'd say that some adults...are clearly at a disadvantage when it comes to such an education. I've known 8yr olds smarter than this.

[Lenonis]

Why aren't you answering this question?

You know why. We all know why. Let's not pretend.

There is only one reason why someone would object to teaching about history but only the parts that relate to painting white supremacy in a bad light.

[Schmeebs]

Meh, you know what I meant when I said "childism". That's all that matters. When it comes to education we should give children the same rights as adults instead of being prejudiced against them. If a kid wants to learn about the KKK then great, but you shouldn't coerce them into it by making it a mandatory requirement.

This is an asinine statement. By your definition all instruction is coercion and nobody should ever learn anything and we should all sit around and become piles of jelly.

[PC2]

Again, if a child doesn't want to attend school to learn math, language, history, or anything else, should this be allowed? Why aren't you answering this question?

Of course it should be allowed, they'll learn much faster if they learn about the things they're interested in learning about. When you force kids to learn about all these topics at certain times when they're not interested in them then you're slowing down the rate at which they gain knowledge.

[Edge-]

Of course it should be allowed, they'll learn much faster by only learning about the things they're interested in learning about. When you force kids to learn about all these topics at certain times when they're not interested in them then you're slowing down the rate at which they gain knowledge.

What if the only topic they want to learn about is playing Fortnite? Is that a cool education in your eyes? Will that prepare the child for success when they reach adulthood?

[Lenonis]

Of course it should be allowed, they'll learn much faster by only learning about the things they're interested in learning about.

Ladies and gentlemen you heard it here. Children will learn faster when they can decide to opt out of education.

I think maybe you are an example of why that's a bad idea.

[Zan15]

Of course it should be allowed, they'll learn much faster by only learning about the things they're interested in learning about. When you force kids to learn about all these topics at certain times when they're not interested in them then you're slowing down the rate at which they gain knowledge.

Have you had kids?
I mean, really son did you raise kids?

If this was the case I would have only had been taught computer games when I was a kid.
In High school it would have been girls gymnastics and swim class....cause there is so much to learn there. wink wink.


i can only imagine how empty school and most core classes would be based on your logic. The very things that make them a contributing member of society.

[unfilteredJW]

PC2 has officially earned a gold pair of clown shoes. All his takes have been bad, but holy shit, this takes the cake.

slash slow slow clap

[Xyonai]

The thing is these chucklefucks assume that these lessons are being taught to, like, Elementary or even Middleschoolers. Like I'm damn sure most history lessons that would go into the gory details about the rise of the KKK or Nazis in general would be more geared towards High Schoolers, who have the mental maturity to actually absorb the lessons of said topics.

But no, a Conservative sees 'being taught in schools' and rages against indoctrination and assumes that A: These hard hitting subjects are being taught to fucking second graders or B: That teenagers are too stupid to actually comprehend these things. They're more than capable of it, but Cons just want to coddle our kids into being idiots and Reactionaries just want to loudly shit themselves over anything they see as teaching anything that makes white people look bad.