Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board

BobcatAttack.com Message Board
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events
Topic:  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools

Topic:  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
Author
Message
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,284

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/27/2022 11:16:24 PM 
Thatís the wet dream of the NRA and the gun lovers. More guns out there? Buy more guns to protect yourself. Too many guns and too many deaths by gun in the civilized world. Our peer countries are not even close.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/28/2022 9:10:53 AM 
OhioCatFan wrote:


I'm no second amendment absolutist, but I don't follow you. If there had been a teacher or other school personnel inside the school with a gun, a "good guy with a gun" could have cut this rampage short. The fact that the police were twiddling their thumbs outside would be irrelevant.


Interesting party you're a part of. Teacher speech has to be heavily regulated by the state because they can't be trusted not to "groom" kids (that's the word elected officials used) and say scary words like gay. But they should be armed and trained to stop a school shooter.


OhioCatFan wrote:



I have no problem with any of the restrictions that rpbobcat proposed and that BTC said a high percentage of Americans agree with. However, I don't think that our major problem is the weapon used -- whether it be a gun, a canister bomb, or dynamite, as in the 1927 Bath, MI, school massacre. We are dealing with symptoms here, and not causes. Two relevant issues that get, at least in part, at root causes are, I believe, the devaluing of the lives of our most vulnerable citizens and an increasingly incapacitated mental health system.


We talk about mental health after every school shooting. What's the party you vote for done to adress it?



Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/28/2022 10:55:23 AM 
BLSS: You keep harping on what you see as hypocrisy on one side of the aisle in Congress. In some cases the examples you cite don't actually show that. To not want third graders taught that they might be some gender other than their actual gender seems compassionate and caring to me. That's an age where kids are becoming aware of normal gender differences, to teach them about "transgenderism" at that tender age only leads to confusion not to advancing any societal good. How this is a sign of hypocrisy on the part of the GOP is beyond my ability to comprehend. BTW, polls have shown that a fairly wide majority of Americans of both parties think this kind of instruction (indoctrination) is not healthy in a grade school setting.

Here's an example, on a related issue, police reform, of how your party plays the game of politics:

https://tinyurl.com/44cu8rud

Also, you trivialize the issue when you say it's just a matter of not saying the word "gay." Perhaps, this article will give you a broader look at the issues involved:

https://tinyurl.com/554rpnce

Last Edited: 5/28/2022 10:56:21 AM by OhioCatFan


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
OUPride
General User

Member Since: 9/21/2010
Post Count: 511

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/30/2022 9:27:39 AM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
With the videos circulating of the police waiting outside for 40 minutes while the shooting continues and restraining parents desperate to get inside to try and help, we can officially put the "good guy with a gun" argument to rest.



I'm no second amendment absolutist, but I don't follow you. If there had been a teacher or other school personnel inside the school with a gun, a "good guy with a gun" could have cut this rampage short. The fact that the police were twiddling their thumbs outside would be irrelevant.

In some states, I know, there are programs that allow teachers and other educational personnel in a school to have concealed carry within the school. I'm not a huge advocate of this approach, but in this case it could have saved lives.

I have no problem with any of the restrictions that rpbobcat proposed and that BTC said a high percentage of Americans agree with. However, I don't think that our major problem is the weapon used -- whether it be a gun, a canister bomb, or dynamite, as in the 1927 Bath, MI, school massacre. We are dealing with symptoms here, and not causes. Two relevant issues that get, at least in part, at root causes are, I believe, the devaluing of the lives of our most vulnerable citizens and an increasingly incapacitated mental health system.


If 20 cops with training, body armor and tactical weapons are too scared to confront an 18 year old who's using an assault rifle, what the hell is a teacher with a handgun going to do? I think the issue is exactly what kinds of weapons these people are using. Look at the situation up at OSU a few years ago. Terrorist rams his car into a crowd and jumps out with a knife. A bunch of people are injured (most from the car), but nobody dies and the first cop on the scene immediately takes the guy out. What happens if he rolls out of that car in full body armor with an assault rifle and high capacity handgun?

As for those cops, every single one of those sick cowards should lose their jobs, but they won't. In fact, the SCOTUS has ruled that cops don't have any legal responsibility to put themselves at risk in the line of duty. Cops aren't your friends. Half of them are thugs attracted to the job because that badge is a shield for being a thug and a bully. The other half are there just to milk that cop salary before it's time to start milking that cop pension. They have proven time and time again that they are most definitely NOT there to serve and protect.

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/30/2022 6:14:43 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
BLSS: You keep harping on what you see as hypocrisy on one side of the aisle in Congress.


Incorrect. I do not think the modern GOP are hypocrites. Their views are out in the open, and increasingly lack any philosophical underpinning. They're frank about both the what and the how. No hypocrisy there.

On the other hand, I do think you, OhioCatFan, are a hypocrite. And a very blatant one at that. You post Oliver Wendell Holmes quotes and lecture others about your free speech absolutism and then line up behind the state policing speech anytime it happens to align with your personal views.

And here, you go complaining to the mods about posters you don't like looking to get them banned for ideas you find objectionable.


OhioCatFan wrote:

In some cases the examples you cite don't actually show that.
To not want third graders taught that they might be some gender other than their actual gender seems compassionate and caring to me. That's an age where kids are becoming aware of normal gender differences, to teach them about "transgenderism" at that tender age only leads to confusion not to advancing any societal good. How this is a sign of hypocrisy on the part of the GOP is beyond my ability to comprehend. BTW, polls have shown that a fairly wide majority of Americans of both parties think this kind of instruction (indoctrination) is not healthy in a grade school setting.


When did we have a conversation about the correct age to teach children about "transgenderism"? The only conversation we've had about the Florida bill is one about the actual language in the bill being overly broad. I brought receipts, linked to and quoted the actual bill.

We once started to have a conversation about that. Your view was that the law is "quite limited in it's scope" which is a hilariously incorrect reading. There's simply no way to support that, which is likely why you -- as usual -- slinked off and left the conversation, only to pick it up weeks later, in a different thread, by attributing a whole bunch of things to me that I didn't say, and re-framing the conversation as if it was about the correct age to teach children about transgenderism.

Feel free to quote where in the bill that's covered. The bill you think is "limited in scope" doesn't define either "age appropriate" or "developmentally appropriate" and the first view applications of said law demonstrate the vagueness of it's writing quite well.

Here's an example: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/05/26/nation/florida-stu... /.

The law's writing is so vague that people are interpreting it to mean a valedictorian -- an 18 year old adult -- can't talk about being gay. Quite limited in it's scope, indeed.

A similar law about Critical Race Theory passed in 2021 ended up with textbooks banned because they cited the gender pay gap and stated that the "United States hadn't eradicated racism."

Here's a link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/09/flori... /


As I said in the other thread, a true free speech absolutist wouldn't be lining up to defend such overly broad, undefined legislative restrictions on a local school board and teachers. If the law was reversed, and stated that a local school boards HAD to teach sexuality and gender, you wouldn't support it.

That's why I think you're a blatant hypocrite. Because you there's no world in which you can be a free speech absolutist and line up to support such things, but you do so, and continue to come here and quote Oliver Wendell Holmes like he wouldn't be embarrassed to hear you do it.




Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/30/2022 10:08:49 PM 
BLSS: There's a lot in your last post to try to digest, but please first tell me when I tried to get any poster banned from BA. I don't recall ever doing that. In fact, I recently asked that Monroe, who I completely disagree with on virtually every politic point, be re-instated. I do recall asking a mod to delete a thread that I thought was bordering on a personal attack. I was kind of angry at that point, once the mod pointed out that I was over-reacting I backed off. I'm not for banning people I disagree with, even when I find them personally disagreeable.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/30/2022 10:49:45 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

When did we have a conversation about the correct age to teach children about "transgenderism"? The only conversation we've had about the Florida bill is one about the actual language in the bill being overly broad. I brought receipts, linked to and quoted the actual bill.


In the conversation where you said I "slinked away" my major point was that the Florida law was aimed at protecting young children in grade school from being exposed to sexual issues inappropriate for their age group. I actually posted the complete text of the law. My reading of it, which you and your sources disagree with, is that it is fairly well-focused on that issue. I suppose, ultimately, a court will decide just how focused it is, but if you listen to the sponsors of the bill and particularly, Governor Desantis, it's clear that that was the intent of the law. If a court rules it's overly broad, I'm sure they'll craft one that's better worded. But, I'm not at all sure at this point that that will be necessary.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/30/2022 11:23:16 PM 
The Boston Globe article you linked to even mentions that the Florida law "prohibits classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels." The infringement on this students free speech rights appears not to stem at all from this law, but from a particular high school principle and his actions.

There was another case that I read about where a grade school teacher said that the law prohibited him from mentioning that he was homosexual. However, apparently the law in question does not, according to some lawyers at least, require he not mention he's gay. But, one does have to ask the question why would a teacher in a grade school setting want to mention that anyway? Again, I'll repeat something I said in that previous conversation, when we are dealing with young children in a compulsory attendance school setting, it's an entirely different milieu than when we are considering free speech as it pertains to a conversation among adults.

Finally, the WaPo article you linked to talks about a bunch of folks who don't want this, that or another thing in their student's curriculum. Again, this is in the setting of a school where there is compulsory attendance. This, in my mind, is more a question of parental rights than free speech. If you remember that quote from Milton that got your dander up, it said that truth would always ultimately win if the debate was fair and open (rough paraphrase). In a public school setting its almost impossible to have such a level playing field. If we abolished compulsory attendance laws, I might take a different position on this issue.

Last Edited: 5/31/2022 10:25:34 AM by OhioCatFan


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 8,458

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/31/2022 10:49:14 AM 
OCF, the Florida law is encompassing to all grade levels, and their movement to dictate what can be taught is a blatant violation of rights that you so often seem to be in love with. And more sad, is that Florida legislators will not trust a Florida social studies teacher to teach what they are trained in, yet think they can be given guns and that will provide a safe learning environment.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/31/2022 12:13:37 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:


In the conversation where you said I "slinked away" my major point was that the Florida law was aimed at protecting young children in grade school from being exposed to sexual issues inappropriate for their age group. I actually posted the complete text of the law. My reading of it, which you and your sources disagree with, is that it is fairly well-focused on that issue. I suppose, ultimately, a court will decide just how focused it is, but if you listen to the sponsors of the bill and particularly, Governor Desantis, it's clear that that was the intent of the law. If a court rules it's overly broad, I'm sure they'll craft one that's better worded. But, I'm not at all sure at this point that that will be necessary.


Yeah, you posted a link to the bill. And I replied pointing out that what you claim to be a narrowly focused law doesn't define either of the key concepts it attempts to legislate. Neither "age appropriate", "developmentally appropriate", or even what sort of speech is covered. It refers often to "classroom instruction" without a definition of the term.

And while you think that the WaPo article stating that the valedictorian address likely didn't run afoul of the law is a point in your favor, I think it's a point in mine. Because my entire point is that of you're actually a free speech absolutist you wouldn't support broadly written legislation that officials can interpret in ways that impact free speech rights.

Further, it gives parents the right to bring lawsuits against school districts based on that vague, broad language. That incentivizes school districts to police undefined language closely, as there's a risk of huge financial penalty otherwise.

I get you support the law. I just don't see how you can support out and continue to claim you're a proponent of free speech. The government is bigger as a direct result of this law, and there's a longer list of ideas people now have to think twice about before expressing their views.

Last Edited: 6/1/2022 3:12:23 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/31/2022 12:36:48 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:

Finally, the WaPo article you linked to talks about a bunch of folks who don't want this, that or another thing in their student's curriculum. Again, this is in the setting of a school where there is compulsory attendance. This, in my mind, is more a question of parental rights than free speech. If you remember that quote from Milton that got your dander up, it said that truth would always ultimately win if the debate was fair and open (rough paraphrase). In a public school setting its almost impossible to have such a level playing field. If we abolished compulsory attendance laws, I might take a different position on this issue.


You mean this is a bill about parental rights for parents who believe very particular things. What about the rights of parents of gay children? Who want them raised in an environment that doesn't insist that certain sexual orientations are "age appropriate"? Are those parents' rights being considered? And where is the line drawn? What happens when parents start to question basic historical and scientific truths because it doesn't align with their politics, or they don't like the way it makes their kids feel?

The irony here is that a decade ago the Right was rightly critical of college campuses and the notion of safe spaces, where policies were enacted to give students a way to avoid ideas they found unsettling. Now, the Right is legislating that at K-12 levels, and doing so around ideas like gender and race specifically.

Now, they're banning books. Books like an illustrated kids book about Wilma Rudolph, because it states she faces racism in 1940s Tennessee. And a book about 9/11 because it depicts US soldiers in Afghanistan in a way a parent doesn't like. Books like Slaughterhouse 5. These aren't even books on the curriculum. These are just books that parents don't want children to have access to in a school library.

Again, very hard for me to see anything but hypocrisy in anybody who supports that and claims free speech absolutism.

Most of the party has admitted they just don't like the ideas themselves and want to legislate them away at this point. It's just the same culture war nonsense. There's no shame in admitting it.
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 5/31/2022 2:12:05 PM 
I'll try to respond more later, I've just gotten back from a work party at a local Catholic cemetery, where my Sons of Union Veterans camp took a tombstone and two base stones of a Union Civil War veteran up to the Logan Monument Company to repair and then replace, and I'm hot and sweaty, and my brain is fried.

But, I will take time now to make one gestalt level observation. I think our major difference is that you see the state as the major player and as the defacto parents of children. If a parent, for instance, thinks the earth is flat, I suspect that you feel that it is the duty of the state to teach him or her otherwise. I simply don't agree with that assertion. I purposely took an extreme example to illustrate my point. In contrast, I think parents have an unalienable right to raise their children any way they so choose, short of actual physical or psychological abuse (but that last one can be tricky, if you have an agenda-driven therapist). That's why I emphasized that I see compulsory attendance laws that are on the books, I think every state, as an invasion of parental rights.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 8,458

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 7:55:42 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
OhioCatFan wrote:


In the conversation where you said I "slinked away" my major point was that the Florida law was aimed at protecting young children in grade school from being exposed to sexual issues inappropriate for their age group. I actually posted the complete text of the law. My reading of it, which you and your sources disagree with, is that it is fairly well-focused on that issue. I suppose, ultimately, a court will decide just how focused it is, but if you listen to the sponsors of the bill and particularly, Governor Desantis, it's clear that that was the intent of the law. If a court rules it's overly broad, I'm sure they'll craft one that's better worded. But, I'm not at all sure at this point that that will be necessary.


Yeah, you posted a link to the bill. And I replied pointing out that what you claim to be a narrowly focused law doesn't define either of the key concepts it attempts to legislate. Neither "age appropriate", "developmentally appropriate", or even what sort of speech is covered. It refers often to "classroom instruction" without a definition of the term.

And while you think that the WaPo article stating that the valedictorian address likely didn't run afoul of the law is a point in your favor, I think it's a point in mine. Because my entire point is that of you're actually a free speech absolutist you wouldn't support broadly written legislation that officials can interpret in ways that impact free speech rights.

Further, it gives parents the right to bring lawsuits against school districts based on that vague, broad language. That incentivizes school districts to police undefined language closely, as there's a rush of huge financial penalty otherwise.

I get you support the law. I just don't see how you can support out and continue to claim you're a proponent of free speech. The government is bigger as a direct result of this law, and there's a longer list of ideas people now have to think twice about before expressing.


+1

OCF, I do not see how you can interpret this legislation as being narrow in focus, because it is not.

But hey, here in OHIO, the Senate is about to pass a bill to arm teachers! Heaven forbid they trust teachers to do what they are trained to do, but now they can carry a gun.
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 8,458

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 7:59:48 AM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
I'll try to respond more later, I've just gotten back from a work party at a local Catholic cemetery, where my Sons of Union Veterans camp took a tombstone and two base stones of a Union Civil War veteran up to the Logan Monument Company to repair and then replace, and I'm hot and sweaty, and my brain is fried.

But, I will take time now to make one gestalt level observation. I think our major difference is that you see the state as the major player and as the defacto parents of children. If a parent, for instance, thinks the earth is flat, I suspect that you feel that it is the duty of the state to teach him or her otherwise. I simply don't agree with that assertion. I purposely took an extreme example to illustrate my point. In contrast, I think parents have an unalienable right to raise their children any way they so choose, short of actual physical or psychological abuse (but that last one can be tricky, if you have an agenda-driven therapist). That's why I emphasized that I see compulsory attendance laws that are on the books, I think every state, as an invasion of parental rights.


Parents who teach their children these things are committing abuse, they care committing psychological abuse! When parents ignore science and facts, they are the ones doing a grave injustice. Not schools, not teachers, not the government. And when government assists in this? Welcome back to the 1950's, and NO, it was not as great a time as some want to romanticize about.
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 10:50:00 AM 
BillyTheCat wrote:
OhioCatFan wrote:
I'll try to respond more later, I've just gotten back from a work party at a local Catholic cemetery, where my Sons of Union Veterans camp took a tombstone and two base stones of a Union Civil War veteran up to the Logan Monument Company to repair and then replace, and I'm hot and sweaty, and my brain is fried.

But, I will take time now to make one gestalt level observation. I think our major difference is that you see the state as the major player and as the defacto parents of children. If a parent, for instance, thinks the earth is flat, I suspect that you feel that it is the duty of the state to teach him or her otherwise. I simply don't agree with that assertion. I purposely took an extreme example to illustrate my point. In contrast, I think parents have an unalienable right to raise their children any way they so choose, short of actual physical or psychological abuse (but that last one can be tricky, if you have an agenda-driven therapist). That's why I emphasized that I see compulsory attendance laws that are on the books, I think every state, as an invasion of parental rights.


Parents who teach their children these things are committing abuse, they care committing psychological abuse! When parents ignore science and facts, they are the ones doing a grave injustice. Not schools, not teachers, not the government. And when government assists in this? Welcome back to the 1950's, and NO, it was not as great a time as some want to romanticize about.


Hard to debate you when we totally disagree on the premise. Parents are responsible to raising children not the state, IMHO. You disagree. We'll just have to leave it at that.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 8,458

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 10:59:39 AM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
BillyTheCat wrote:
OhioCatFan wrote:
I'll try to respond more later, I've just gotten back from a work party at a local Catholic cemetery, where my Sons of Union Veterans camp took a tombstone and two base stones of a Union Civil War veteran up to the Logan Monument Company to repair and then replace, and I'm hot and sweaty, and my brain is fried.

But, I will take time now to make one gestalt level observation. I think our major difference is that you see the state as the major player and as the defacto parents of children. If a parent, for instance, thinks the earth is flat, I suspect that you feel that it is the duty of the state to teach him or her otherwise. I simply don't agree with that assertion. I purposely took an extreme example to illustrate my point. In contrast, I think parents have an unalienable right to raise their children any way they so choose, short of actual physical or psychological abuse (but that last one can be tricky, if you have an agenda-driven therapist). That's why I emphasized that I see compulsory attendance laws that are on the books, I think every state, as an invasion of parental rights.


Parents who teach their children these things are committing abuse, they care committing psychological abuse! When parents ignore science and facts, they are the ones doing a grave injustice. Not schools, not teachers, not the government. And when government assists in this? Welcome back to the 1950's, and NO, it was not as great a time as some want to romanticize about.


Hard to debate you when we totally disagree on the premise. Parents are responsible to raising children not the state, IMHO. You disagree. We'll just have to leave it at that.


From the age of 5 to 18, your children spent more awake time with their teacher than they did you (assuming you were a working adult). Parents should be raising their children, but if you have not noticed, many are failing mightily at that task.
Back to Top
  
bobcatsquared
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,204

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 12:47:06 PM 
As a parent I always thought of my children's teachers as the most influential adults in their lives with the exception of me and my wife. And, with very few exceptions, I believe my trust in them was rewarded without the new push in red states for more restrictions (censorship) on teachers.

As a teacher of 29 years, I trust my co-teachers do not fail their students in a way OCF is concerned about or in a way that requires our legislators in Columbus to limit what we can and cannot teach concerning race and gender.

Where I don't feel comfortable, however, is arming my co-teachers with guns as a first line of defense against an active shooter. Not sure I want the teacher across the hall brandishing a loaded gun with a hallway full of panicked sixth graders.

Just my 2 cents.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 3:31:34 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:


But, I will take time now to make one gestalt level observation. I think our major difference is that you see the state as the major player and as the defacto parents of children. If a parent, for instance, thinks the earth is flat, I suspect that you feel that it is the duty of the state to teach him or her otherwise. I simply don't agree with that assertion. I purposely took an extreme example to illustrate my point. In contrast, I think parents have an unalienable right to raise their children any way they so choose, short of actual physical or psychological abuse (but that last one can be tricky, if you have an agenda-driven therapist). That's why I emphasized that I see compulsory attendance laws that are on the books, I think every state, as an invasion of parental rights.


Sorry, but nothing I've said suggests that I think it's the role of the state to raise children. That's a truly absurd interpretation of my point here, which to be abundantly clear, reduces the state's power to control what's taught to children.

It's your stance here that's expanding the power of the state to influence what's taught to children. That you think it's happening in service of parents doesn't change that simple fact. I'm pushing for less regulation; you're supporting more. This bill's only about the 'Parental Rights' of a certain group of parents, and today a group of Americans have less ability to express ideas freely than they did before this law was passed.


As for your hypothetical, I don't disagree. If a parent wants to teach their child that the Earth is flat, they're welcome to do so. But their desire to do so should not dictate the curriculum other students are taught. Because one parent believes the Earth is flat and has an inalienable right to teach their child whatever nonsense they choose does not give them the right to impose that on others. This bill gives them legal recourse to attempt to do so. And then leaves it to the state to determine the decision. And you think my opposition to this bill makes me the one who favors the state raising children? The state has more say today than they did before this bill was passed.

Further, I don't think you're making a super compelling point regarding 'compulsory attendance.' Compulsory attendance doesn't apply only to public schools. If a parent has real misgivings about the curriculum of a public school, compulsory attendance laws to not prohibit them from sending their kid to a private school or choosing to homeschool them. In other words, parents have the right and ability to educate their children however they see fit.

But when they choose to do so through the public school system, they're inevitably going to lose direct control over the curriculum.






Last Edited: 6/1/2022 4:00:49 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 4:07:21 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
BLSS: There's a lot in your last post to try to digest, but please first tell me when I tried to get any poster banned from BA. I don't recall ever doing that. In fact, I recently asked that Monroe, who I completely disagree with on virtually every politic point, be re-instated. I do recall asking a mod to delete a thread that I thought was bordering on a personal attack. I was kind of angry at that point, once the mod pointed out that I was over-reacting I backed off. I'm not for banning people I disagree with, even when I find them personally disagreeable.


I've received a couple of DMs on this site to that effect. Maybe that's not true, who knows. But I've heard it a couple of times.
Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,639

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 5:09:57 PM 
bobcatsquared wrote:
As a parent I always thought of my children's teachers as the most influential adults in their lives with the exception of me and my wife. And, with very few exceptions, I believe my trust in them was rewarded without the new push in red states for more restrictions (censorship) on teachers.

As a teacher of 29 years, I trust my co-teachers do not fail their students in a way OCF is concerned about or in a way that requires our legislators in Columbus to limit what we can and cannot teach concerning race and gender.

Where I don't feel comfortable, however, is arming my co-teachers with guns as a first line of defense against an active shooter. Not sure I want the teacher across the hall brandishing a loaded gun with a hallway full of panicked sixth graders.

Just my 2 cents.


Worth much more than 2 cents and certainly more than most anyone else's comments on the subject.

Also keep in mind that most peoples' view of "Rights" is to forward and embrace what they feel is "right" - sad commentary on their responsibility as citizens.
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 8:06:00 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
OhioCatFan wrote:
BLSS: There's a lot in your last post to try to digest, but please first tell me when I tried to get any poster banned from BA. I don't recall ever doing that. In fact, I recently asked that Monroe, who I completely disagree with on virtually every politic point, be re-instated. I do recall asking a mod to delete a thread that I thought was bordering on a personal attack. I was kind of angry at that point, once the mod pointed out that I was over-reacting I backed off. I'm not for banning people I disagree with, even when I find them personally disagreeable.


I've received a couple of DMs on this site to that effect. Maybe that's not true, who knows. But I've heard it a couple of times.


If one of those people was a mod, please PM me his name. I need to talk with him, because itís not true, unless someone hacked my account or I PMed them from the Twilight Zone.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/1/2022 8:38:59 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
Sorry, but nothing I've said suggests that I think it's the role of the state to raise children. That's a truly absurd interpretation of my point here, which to be abundantly clear, reduces the state's power to control what's taught to children.


I do think that's where your position ultimately ends up logically. If a school's curriculum calls for teaching X, Y, or Z at a specific grade level, you seem to be against the rights of parents through their legislature to specify that they don't think "Z" is appropriate for children at that grade level. Here let's not argue about the Florida law, take this as another hypothetical. So, it seems to me that you do, at least in the public school context, place rights of state (via its school system) above the rights of parents.

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
It's your stance here that's expanding the power of the state to influence what's taught to children. That you think it's happening in service of parents doesn't change that simple fact. I'm pushing for less regulation; you're supporting more. This bill's only about the 'Parental Rights' of a certain group of parents, and today a group of Americans have less ability to express ideas freely than they did before this law was passed.


Again, I don't think you are really pushing for less regulation. You may be against the Florida law or similar laws in other states, but you really want the State Department of Education to wield great power over what teacher's say to students and what they teach them. And, these state departments of education often get their ideas for the federal Department of Education. Wouldn't a better approach be to abolish both federal and state departments of education and allow each school district to adopt the curriculum that they desire? Or how about, and this is radical, let teachers design their own curricula! That's the way it was done in the US in 19th Century, which gave us some great thinkers, scientists and leaders. Why do we need any bureaucracy at all involved in telling teachers what they should teach?


Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
As for your hypothetical, I don't disagree. If a parent wants to teach their child that the Earth is flat, they're welcome to do so.


I'm glad to see that we agree on something!

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
But their desire to do so should not dictate the curriculum other students are taught. Because one parent believes the Earth is flat and has an inalienable right to teach their child whatever nonsense they choose does not give them the right to impose that on others. This bill gives them legal recourse to attempt to do so. And then leaves it to the state to determine the decision. And you think my opposition to this bill makes me the one who favors the state raising children? The state has more say today than they did before this bill was passed.


Again, I'd prefer that we trust teachers to decide free of any curriculum imposed from the outside. I think we'd have a much freer and robust exchange of ideas in the classroom under such a scenario. And, some parents still might object to X, Y, or Z being taught, but they can they take it up directly with the teacher involved and have a one-on-one dialogue. The resolution would then by one that's culturally specific to the school and the local environment as well as the people involved. No using "state guidelines" as a crutch to lean on and a cudgel to smash all debate.

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
Further, I don't think you're making a super compelling point regarding 'compulsory attendance.' Compulsory attendance doesn't apply only to public schools. If a parent has real misgivings about the curriculum of a public school, compulsory attendance laws to not prohibit them from sending their kid to a private school or choosing to homeschool them. In other words, parents have the right and ability to educate their children however they see fit.


The problem is that many parents can't afford or don't have the connections to send their children to a private or parochial school.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/2/2022 9:38:42 AM 
OhioCatFan wrote:

I do think that's where your position ultimately ends up logically.


The context of this conversation is that you are currently arguing in favor of the state dictating what can be taught in schools. The level of cognitive bias necessary to position that as less state control over schools is truly baffling.


OhioCatFan wrote:

If a school's curriculum calls for teaching X, Y, or Z at a specific grade level, you seem to be against the rights of parents through their legislature to specify that they don't think "Z" is appropriate for children at that grade level.


No, not at all. Parents have always had a say in school curriculums through locally elected school boards which typically consist of parents. Historically, that's who sets the curriculum at the district level. What you're currently in support of is a bill that circumvents that and replaces a democratic process with legal challenges.


OhioCatFan wrote:

Again, I don't think you are really pushing for less regulation. You may be against the Florida law or similar laws in other states, but you really want the State Department of Education to wield great power over what teacher's say to students and what they teach them.


You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding how how curriculum's are developed and approved. Those are local (district) level decisions.

OhioCatFan wrote:

And, these state departments of education often get their ideas for the federal Department of Education. Wouldn't a better approach be to abolish both federal and state departments of education and allow each school district to adopt the curriculum that they desire? Or how about, and this is radical, let teachers design their own curricula!


You are -- right now -- arguing in favor of a law that creates more power for the state in determining what a teacher can and cannot say. I apologize for calling you a hypocrite. It's clear now you're just not following the obvious logic here. The law you're supporting does the opposite of what you suggest as the best course of action.

OhioCatFan wrote:

That's the way it was done in the US in 19th Century, which gave us some great thinkers, scientists and leaders. Why do we need any bureaucracy at all involved in telling teachers what they should teach?


You're arguing for more bureaucracy, not less. It's truly baffling to me that you still think otherwise. This entire conversation is about a vaguely written law in which state level legislators dictate what teachers at an individual level can and cannot say, and then empowers special interest groups with legal recourse which can find individual school districts financially liable if they're in violation. Interesting definition of "less bureaucracy."

OhioCatFan wrote:

Again, I'd prefer that we trust teachers to decide free of any curriculum imposed from the outside.


And yet, you support this legislation doing the exact opposite. You get why it's very hard not to see hypocrisy here, right?


OhioCatFan wrote:

I think we'd have a much freer and robust exchange of ideas in the classroom under such a scenario. And, some parents still might object to X, Y, or Z being taught, but they can they take it up directly with the teacher involved and have a one-on-one dialogue.


If this is what you think is best, why would you support legislation that gives parents legal recourse with a lawsuit? What you say you want and what you support are two wildly different things.


OhioCatFan wrote:

The resolution would then by one that's culturally specific to the school and the local environment as well as the people involved. No using "state guidelines" as a crutch to lean on and a cudgel to smash all debate.


Not even sure what to say, except that, again, this is the exact opposite of what the law you're supporting does.


Truthfully, man, I think you're just lost right now. You think the GOP is the party of small government and believe in those ideals, and are willing to defend GOP legislation on those grounds even when there's not a thread of logic supporting it. The GOP isn't the party of small government anymore. It's largely just a populist, culture-war heavy party. They no longer care about small government, the first amendment, or any of a number of things they historically cared about. This bill -- and similar critical race theory bills -- are a good example. It's just culture war non-sense that expands the state's role, and people like you line up to support it and in your support of it illustrate a stunning level of cognitive bias.

As I said before -- it's okay to admit you just don't like the idea of teacher's talking about homosexuality and transgenderism. That's what the rest of the GOP does -- and it's why I don't think their view is hypocritical but think yours is. You try and dress this all up as some idealistic crusade against big government when the logic there doesn't follow even a tiny bit. You're cool with ideas being legislated away when they're ideas you don't like.

You're not a first amendment absolutist. You're just a member of the new GOP.

Last Edited: 6/2/2022 9:44:03 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 12,691

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/2/2022 11:34:15 AM 
BLSS:

One final word, and then I think it's time for me to slink away again since this debate is actually getting nowhere. You can then have the last word and declare yourself the winner.

From my point of view laws like Florida's are only needed because we don't have what I referred to as my radical solution. Absent those laws the state and federal education bureaucracies dictate what's taught and the local school boards and parents have less discretion. While theoretically there is still some control at the local level it's often quite illusory. And, let me stress again, that when we are dealing with children in a "captive audience" situation there is no level playing field upon which Milton's dicta could operate.


"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,568

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL in Ohio High Schools
   Posted: 6/2/2022 11:44:14 AM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
BLSS:

One final word, and then I think it's time for me to slink away again since this debate is actually getting nowhere. You can then have the last word and declare yourself the winner.

From my point of view laws like Florida's are only needed because we don't have what I referred to as my radical solution. Absent those laws the state and federal education bureaucracies dictate what's taught and the local school boards and parents have less discretion. While theoretically there is still some control at the local level it's often quite illusory. And, let me stress again, that when we are dealing with children in a "captive audience" situation there is no level playing field upon which Milton's dicta could operate.



Yeah man, I know. That's the point I've been making all along. You're supporting a law that in no way comports with the ideals you claim to support. Hence my accusations of hypocrisy. Happy to pick this up next time you claim free speech absolutism and then support the exact opposite.
Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  26 - 50  of 50 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2
View Other 'General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             







Copyright ©2022 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties