It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

warning this can offend law abiding citizens - Which I'm not one of.

page: 46
113
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Ah OK... So your against a child's right to a competent teacher and proper education!

Second line to laugh.


Ah OK..,So you are in full support of tyranny, and will gladly call parents you don't know incompetent in order to justify your sychophantic praise of tyranny. Unlike you, I find no reason to laugh at that.




posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by sirnex
 


Dude, you keep repeating yourself ad nauseum, and one of the things you keep repeating is that there is nothing wrong here, which is precisely what I have been saying. That principal did nothing wrong. There is no basis in law to demand he be fired for what he did. It is that simple.



Dude, he wasn't fired. He was not punished in any way shape or form. If he was and this was brought up later in the conversation, then my apologies for not seeing that he was punished. If he was punished for making his speech after the ruling and inciting a religious ritual on public school grounds, then he screwed up. His bad, ya know? Probably should have got a job at a private school instead, derr.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


No one in this thread has defended that principals actions because he was punished, those defending that principal have done so in direct response to other members calling for his ouster. How have you missed that?



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Ah OK... So your against a child's right to a competent teacher and proper education!

Second line to laugh.


Ah OK..,So you are in full support of tyranny, and will gladly call parents you don't know incompetent in order to justify your sychophantic praise of tyranny. Unlike you, I find no reason to laugh at that.


Are you kidding me? Now it's a tyranny to give children a right to a proper education? AND Your a parent?! That's screwed up man, seriously.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by sirnex
 


No one in this thread has defended that principals actions because he was punished, those defending that principal have done so in direct response to other members calling for his ouster. How have you missed that?



This is a fast paced thread, I haven't had the chance to read every single reply.

Other members opinions do not reflect my own in full. I could personally care less whether he get's fired or not, nor am I calling for him getting fired for bitching about work policy.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I have this endeavor of absolute entropy.

I know nothing. I know that entities are subject to entropy.

Sooner or later, things are understood.

Control is the necessity correct?



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 





Are you kidding me? Now it's a tyranny to give children a right to a proper education? AND Your a parent?! That's screwed up man, seriously.


Are you kidding me? You think pretending that parents aren't giving their children an education through homeschooling will justify your defense of the clear and present tyranny that dictates parents must abide by state legislation telling them they must teach what the state tells them to teach is what is screwed up man, seriously. Further, you dismiss taxation as a strawman argument, but then support the state that taxes these parents to tell them what they must do in order to exercise their right to teach their children. That is seriously screwed up, man!



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   
I think that the system should be the system.

We should be entiretistic systems!

Or, should we understand that all of us, do not know #!



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



Are you kidding me? You think pretending that parents aren't giving their children an education through homeschooling will justify your defense of the clear and present tyranny that dictates parents must abide by state legislation telling them they must teach what the state tells them to teach is what is screwed up man, seriously. Further, you dismiss taxation as a strawman argument, but then support the state that taxes these parents to tell them what they must do in order to exercise their right to teach their children. That is seriously screwed up, man!



So, your under the assumption that every parent is more than qualified to give their children a proper, rich and well rounded education that covers various topics and lessons?

Damn you have way more faith in me than I do myself. I'm no where near qualified to teach my children every subject they need to learn, nor do I even have the patience.

But hey, it's great that you think children have no rights and that it's tyrannical to give children rights and that people who are not qualified to teach should be freely allowed to just wing it the best they can.

So, I'm assuming you have an eighth grade drop out teaching your kids (or have had, or will) K12 material?



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


So, you're under the impression that every legislator and judge, are more than qualified to decide what is a proper, rich and well rounded education that covers various topics and lessons?




Damn you have way more faith in me than I do myself. I'm no where near qualified to teach my children every subject they need to learn, nor do I even have the patience.


And your willingness to admit that you are no where near qualified to teach your children only strengthens my faith in you to make the right decision regarding your children. You also have the right to make that decision, as well as have the right to impatience with your children.




But hey, it's great that you think children have no rights and that it's tyrannical to give children rights and that people who are not qualified to teach should be freely allowed to just wing it the best they can.


But hey, it's tragic that you think the states tyranny is a child's right, and that it is benign and just for that state to dictate how parents can raise their own children. It is also tragic that you think you know the level of competence with every parent you don't even know, but that's what happens when you just wing it.




So, I'm assuming you have an eighth grade drop out teaching your kids (or have had, or will) K12 material?


Yeah it is clear you are assuming, as that is pretty much all you have done in this thread. Arrogance is the presumption of knowledge. Knowledge just isn't your forte.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   
For what its worth, there are no private schools within 60 miles of my house. I do not have the option of putting my child in a private school. Public school is all the option i have, as i have to work to pay the bills.

So i send my children to public school (just had my oldest graduate #12 out of 187 this past Friday night). My kids learn the three R's at school. Then when they come home, in the evening, we continue their education. We talk about things. We expand their horizons. I am willing to bet that not many 12 year olds can tell you who Francis Bacon was. It is important to me who he was, so i make sure my kids know.


Educating is something that every single parent does. If you don't, then you should pay more attention to your kids.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


If there wasn't such a state monopoly on public schools that rely too much on this notion of "too big to fail" to demand bailouts, there would be private schools in your area, and at an affordable price of which you could choose to send your children to one of those private schools that would be in your area. Supply and demand dictates that if private institutions are not forced to compete with a tax supported "free educational system", that there would most assuredly be a demand for private schools in your area.

Even if you were sending your kids to the finest private school known, it is still prudent, right and proper that you spend time with your children continuing that education. Good for you!



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Even if you were sending your kids to the finest private school known, it is still prudent, right and proper that you spend time with your children continuing that education. Good for you!



Well, and my point is that saying that parents are not intellectually fit to teach their kids is silly. We educate our kids every single night, unless we are lazy. Even if i am sitting there playing Modern Warfare 2, my youngest and i are still discussing Pythagoras, or postulating about ruins in the Mediterranean.

It doesn't surprise me to see California having that discussion. It seems that a common mindset in the California culture is to protect people from themselves, and that common people are not smart enough to make their own decisions. The latter of the two would apply to why parents might not be able to teach their kids in that state.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


We who are not socialists or government sycophants, who live here in California have taken to calling this State The Peoples Republic of California. It is, of course, a republic, but increasingly, a socialist state that endeavors to regulate every aspect of our lives, and tax the hell out of us for that privilege.

I understood that you were speaking to the silliness of parents not being competent enough to teach their children. Henry Ford never went to school, but had a profound knowledge that served him well his entire life, and his children didn't do so poorly either.



[edit on 31-5-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by sirnex
 


Dude, you keep repeating yourself ad nauseum, and one of the things you keep repeating is that there is nothing wrong here, which is precisely what I have been saying. That principal did nothing wrong. There is no basis in law to demand he be fired for what he did. It is that simple.


That's why I'm just sitting here. He's just repeating himself over and over like a stuck phonograph needle, hoping it will eventually make it true, I suppose. That, and the non-sequiturs he comes up with, just make me wish I had a cigarette to pass the time in case he manages to stumble across something relevant.

I may have to give up waiting pretty soon.

[edit on 2010/5/31 by nenothtu]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


What astounds me is that he keeps insisting that the past 40 some odd pages have been nothing more than bs, but he can be found posting his own opinions on the very first page, and all he has done is attack the principle as being stupid and ignorant, and has himself offered up misinterpretations of law to support his contention that the principal was stupid. His very first comment in this thread was this:




Sounded more like he doesn't understand what the constitution is really about. I'm sorry, but many of his analogies are extremely piss poor. If he can't even get the very basic foundation of our country, then he needs to go back to school.


His next comment, in that same post was this:




OK, so the federal government allowed people to self govern religion in public settings and saw it getting out of hand and needed to step in to remind people that public places are public, not Christian prayer outings. Big deal, he would equally bitch if federal law stated that all religious prayers should be given equal time in public events. Pray to God, pray to Allah, pray to Krishna etc etc etc.


His love of tyranny is evident in his claim that the federal government "allowed" people to self govern religion in public settings. To this guy, freedom is something the federal government "allows". Later in that same post of his, he made this remarkably inane remark, which is no doubt a strawman argument:




Big deal, build a bridge and get over it. Better yet, let his twelve year old daughter get raped because he wanted to bitch about condoms.


He pays lip service to building bridges, but in the very next sentence he advocates 12 year old daughters of men who complain about public school policies about condoms should be raped. Now there's some real bridge building.

His next comment is this:




Great, the Christian bigot bitch about condoms, got it taken out of public eye, his daughter got raped and now she can't get an abortion and at the age of twelve has to give birth to some kid whom she doesn't even know who the daddy is.


Nope, no strawman argument there; only sound reasoning...for the insane.

He follows that inane remark with this:




Wow, moron.


Sigh. Thieves always lock their doors.

He then say's this about the principal:




Man, this guy is a total tool!


And now wonders why people feel compelled to defend that principal.

His gross over generalizations began with his very first post in this thread, including this insipid remark:




So now somehow showing the history of Christian society in the Medieval times and the joke they called science is now wrong? I'm sorry if you don't like your religions history, but the truth is the truth. Nothing but a bunch of uneducated hypocritical bigots out on some holy blood fetish.


In order to justify his Christian baiting, he obfuscates the reality of what happened with remarks such as this:




The new law doesn't state that you CAN'T pray at a public event privately. What is this guy, an idiot? Oh dear God no, you can't be the only publicly recognized religion at a public event filled with people of all religious creeds! OH THE HYPOCRISY!


Sigh. Thieves always lock their doors.

This posters baiting and attacks, then disingenuous back pedaling wondering why this thread continues, would be amusing if he weren't so adamant in defending tyranny, and attacking those who abhor tyranny as being "incompetent". History has shown that The United States has had plenty of incompetent boobs holding office, but this is not that sycophants concern, his concern is regulating the lives of those people who deems to be "morons".



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 04:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by endisnighe

Taxes go towards public schools because not everyone can actually afford private school's. Even if we took away the taxes for public schools and made people pay for education, we're left with even more people who can not afford education.


No, that is just the spin and public justification for taking your wealth, your skill, your toil, to create slaves for the system from your children.



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 



For what its worth, there are no private schools within 60 miles of my house. I do not have the option of putting my child in a private school. Public school is all the option i have, as i have to work to pay the bills.


For what it's worth, that is the biggest BS "I'm being forced" argument so far.

Move.
Drive.
Switch shifts.

Can you think of any other options you are FREE to do? I can think of more and a combination of others.

Don't give me that garbage that you have no choice. No... You have a choice, but you'd rather sit there and bitch on a web forum that you have no choice because you too lazy to use the available options. Boo hoo.


So i send my children to public school (just had my oldest graduate #12 out of 187 this past Friday night). My kids learn the three R's at school. Then when they come home, in the evening, we continue their education. We talk about things. We expand their horizons. I am willing to bet that not many 12 year olds can tell you who Francis Bacon was. It is important to me who he was, so i make sure my kids know.


Great, good for you. I show my kids wild edible plants and how to cook. That does not make for an education however. I am not qualified to give them an EDUCATION.


Educating is something that every single parent does. If you don't, then you should pay more attention to your kids.


Teaching basic life skills you've learned over the years is not the same thing as a basic education. I may teach life skills that I've learned, but I don't know enough about their current curriculum to teach them on my own what they're learning in school. I appreciate your concern for the amount of attention they get, but it is not needed, they get more than plenty.


Well, and my point is that saying that parents are not intellectually fit to teach their kids is silly. We educate our kids every single night, unless we are lazy. Even if i am sitting there playing Modern Warfare 2, my youngest and i are still discussing Pythagoras, or postulating about ruins in the Mediterranean.


Not all parents are! I'm willingly and openly admitting that I am not qualified to teach my children everything there is to know. And you to are bitching and moaning about how children have no right to a proper education and how we need to dismantle the public school system because it's a "tyranny" and your ooooh forced to use it whilst dismiss other option available to you.



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



So, you're under the impression that every legislator and judge, are more than qualified to decide what is a proper, rich and well rounded education that covers various topics and lessons?


So your saying that a basic education and a child's right to a basic education and law's to protect that education and right to education are all complete BS? Your telling me that not one single child in America deserves to have a very basic education in which to function in society? Why have children if you don't think they have basic human rights?

What do you propose we do instead? Take away a child's right to education, allow unqualified parents teach whatever they want and pretend that isn't doing a disservice to your child?


And your willingness to admit that you are no where near qualified to teach your children only strengthens my faith in you to make the right decision regarding your children. You also have the right to make that decision, as well as have the right to impatience with your children.


Right, I'm making the right decision by placing my kids in a school system where it's a requirement that those teaching my children are actually qualified to do so. Your saying you want to take away that right because you think it's a form of tyranny to have that one option out of other options.

Somehow your stupidly equating a CHOICE with a TYRANNY.


But hey, it's tragic that you think the states tyranny is a child's right, and that it is benign and just for that state to dictate how parents can raise their own children. It is also tragic that you think you know the level of competence with every parent you don't even know, but that's what happens when you just wing it.


I think it's great that the state keeps people like you in check. Your telling me that the state is oh so bad and tyrannical for PROTECTING MY CHILD'S RIGHT TO EDUCATION, and YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT RIGHT AWAY.

Which is a tyranny? Protection is rights or infringement of rights? Ah right, I forgot, you don't think children have rights.


Yeah it is clear you are assuming, as that is pretty much all you have done in this thread. Arrogance is the presumption of knowledge. Knowledge just isn't your forte.


Assumption is not knowledge, nor does a sarcastic rhetoric denote knowledge. Now I'm assuming you don't allow your kids any education because you think it's a tyranny to do so.



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by teapot

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by endisnighe

Taxes go towards public schools because not everyone can actually afford private school's. Even if we took away the taxes for public schools and made people pay for education, we're left with even more people who can not afford education.


No, that is just the spin and public justification for taking your wealth, your skill, your toil, to create slaves for the system from your children.



Hell, I'm not sure what kind of a job you have, but mine allows me to scrape by. I have enough for the basics, food, rent, bills. Screw having to pay for private school with my income. Thanks, but I'd rather have that big mean tyranny making education an option for my children rather than you real tyrants trying to take that away.



new topics

top topics



 
113
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join