Backintheday544

No argument is falling apart. Your stance as schools shouldn’t teach ideology. We discussed how Christian ideology is being discussed or offered as an opinion in schools now. We then took that into context of the VA Executive Order and found that teaching faith based ideology such as creationism is a clear violation of the Executive order as it puts faiths that have a Supreme being to spur the creation in creationism above faiths that do not have a supreme being. The EO explicitly says we can’t do that. So if you want to get rid of ideology such as CRT in VA, we need to get rid of all ideological studies that even if they’re things that you or the others on the right support.

Religion is a thing here because it’s specifically mentioned in the EO. If it wasn’t mentioned in the EO then you would have a point. Unfortunately, it is, so we need to view concepts with religious based backing as divisive. You with your response calling me a Godless liberal yet again proved its divisive. If you were a VA teacher, I’d have no other option but then to report you under the VA EO. For the purposes of this Executive order “inherently divisive concepts” means advancing any ideas in violation of Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including, but not limited to of the following concepts (i) one race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith is inherently superior to another race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith; (ii) an individual, by virtue of his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex or faith, is racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or subconsciously, (iii) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex or faith, (iv) members of one race, ethnicity, sex or faith cannot and should not attempt to treat others as individuals without respect to race, sex or faith, (v) an individual's moral character is inherently determined by his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith, (vi) an individual, by virtue of his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race, ethnicity, sex or faith, (vii) meritocracy or traits, such as a hard work ethic, are racist or sexist or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. Then you go the definition of taught. A teacher bringing it up in a classroom setting to me seems like teaching. If it’s just brought up as an option, what happens in the classroom? Does the teach say, hey everyone I’m not teaching right now so this isn’t being taught to you, but there is this thing called creationism that I want to mention. Creationism means blah blah blah. Ok done not teaching you students, I will go back to teaching you other things now. In the same token, CRT isn’t being taught. And I’d say if it does come up it’s just mentioned as an option along with other theories on race.

Then your opinion means even more than others here. If you sub in a VA science class where that day they ask you to teach creationism, 1) would you do it now that an argument is made it violates the VA EO, 2) would you report yourself to the VA education board?, 3) would you be worried about teaching it knowing that some Karen will report you to the VA education board?

Yes, abstinence education has historically been pushed by evangelicals. The issue of religion is coming up due to an EO signed by Youngkin. I understand that reading isn’t your forte but in the EO which has been quoted several times, you cannot teach any idea that puts one faith above another. Faith deals with religion so religion is a topic that should be discussed as right wing teachers violate the EO.

Except it won’t. 1. There is a massive teacher shortage and the far right is making it worse. The ability to fire a teacher at the call of any right wing Karen is a terrible idea. 2. Our education system should expose our kids to many ideas. Creating a school that is just an echo chamber of ideas will further decline public discourse similar to what biased media already has. You bring up sex Ed. Great point that we can tie to the creationism argument as well. Any teacher teaching abstinence should be fired under your argument. Surveys show sex Ed is actually pretty popular. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/7a/ac/7aacf0ad-fd1c-4dcc-b65f-47e3c3754e0d/sex_education_-_a_national_survey_on_support_among_likely_voters_logo.pdf The idea of teaching abstinence is actually religious based. Going back to the VA EO, that means this teaching is divisive and we should email the VA education department to report any teacher teaching abstinence.

Creationism is not taught as an option. It’s part of the curriculum. So if that’s your opinion you have 2 stances to take in VA. Allow CRT and creationism or say no to creationism and CRT.

But we just defined theories such as creationism as divisive under the wording of the governor. So you care that creationism and other Christian centric education is divisive per the EO and you’re against them per you. So you’re anti-creationism being taught. You’re anti-any God/Supreme based being being taught in public schools. great! Please spread your beliefs to other Virginians.

Great! So after this discussion if you think something like CRT shouldn’t be taught in schools then Christian ideologies such as creationism shouldn’t be either (yes creationism is in other religions but there are religions where creationism isn’t a thing) Or say you’re a liberal and the free exchange of ideas is a cool thing!

Yea he nixed CRT which wasn’t taught in schools anyways with the EO and the crux of this argument is his EO also nixes Creationism from being taught in VA. We can start with creationism but what other Christian ideology is also being taught in schools that we should nix? The theory promotes a Supreme being to do the creating. There are religions that do not have a supreme being concept. Teaching such ideology makes people of a faith without a supreme being concept feel inferior and thus violates the governors EO.

So let’s teach CRT in VA Beach (love the Cavalier btw) as something that’s offered as an option to theories. (Again, it’s not taught in VA anyways but for sale of argument) And the EO doesn’t have an exclusion for options to theories on there.

With the news coming out about Trump and tearing up documents he shouldn’t, it could be a great time to revisit the Trump-DeSantis ticket. The main is if they are a ticket, the Dems automatically won Florida under the constitution. In order for the Dems not to win, Trump would need to pay NY taxes as a resident or DeSantis would need to leave Florida and then no be governor if they lose (looking back at the last election the Dems ran the Cryptkeeper and kicked Trumps ass so it’s a great possibility) So, if an org so inept they didn’t know don’t tear up documents, would they even think of this? The Trump team has shown before they don’t care about the constitution but if it’s in a national election can they ignore it?

What part of creationism doesn’t imply some Supreme Being that created everything?

No. The outcome is fine. Here’s the wording from the EO: For the purposes of this Executive order “inherently divisive concepts” means advancing any ideas in violation of Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including, but not limited to of the following concepts (i) one race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith is inherently superior to another race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith; (ii) an individual, by virtue of his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex or faith, is racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or subconsciously, (iii) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex or faith, (iv) members of one race, ethnicity, sex or faith cannot and should not attempt to treat others as individuals without respect to race, sex or faith, (v) an individual's moral character is inherently determined by his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith, (vi) an individual, by virtue of his or her race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race, ethnicity, sex or faith, (vii) meritocracy or traits, such as a hard work ethic, are racist or sexist or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. - Creationism assumes what? A Devine being. - do all religions have a Devine being? No. - Per the EO - “advancing any ideas in violation of Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including, but not limited to of the following concepts (i) one race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith is inherently superior to another race, skin color, ethnicity, sex, or faith;” - If a teacher is teaching some Devine entity created everything, wouldn’t that advance the idea that a faith with a Supreme Being is superior to a faith without a Supreme Being?

I didn’t say I had an issue with creationism. I said creationism is an ideology that is being taught. If you are against ideology being taught such as CRT, then you should also be against teaching an ideology like creationism. Why should one party pick and choose which ideology is taught? Further, to tie this to VA. VA has an email where you can tell on teachers for teaching divisive topics. You can see the executive order for what exactly divisive is, but it’s main target is CRT. I’d say creationism also falls under divisive theory as it puts Christians and other religions with a Supreme Being thinking they are better than religions that do not have a Supreme Being. Then you shouldn’t design the curriculum if CRT is taught or not either. (Even though to tie this back to VA, it’s not taught)

“the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution.” Why should it be taught or mentioned at all if it’s an ideology vs scientific? Not just ideology, but a Biblical ideology that could be divisive in leading kids to think l w religion is better than others.

Thanks for point this out! This is the 3rd richest county in the US. As proud Republicans like yourself, you adhere to a policy of local government. So it’s great they’re getting together locally to find solutions that apply to them vs looking at big government. I think we can all agree that the wealthy have problems the poor can’t understand or that the wealthy have enough money where major concerns of the poor aren’t an issue so they can focus on issues important to them. Maybe Erie county and Wyoming county should pull themselves up by the bootstraps and be as rich as Fairfax county so one day they may be concerned with issues like this vs things like getting by just paying their bills.

So we should dump creationism from the high schools?

I totally understand you not reading all the books available to you may have hurt your reading comprehension. As a liberal, I’m totally cool with your disability. I think this article spells it out a bit more: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a38213693/virginia-school-board-burn-books-evil-related-material/ “Two board members, Courtland representative Rabih Abuismail and Livingston representative Kirk Twigg, said they would like to see the removed books burned. “I think we should throw those books in a fire,” Abuismail said, and Twigg said he wants to “see the books before we burn them so we can identify within our community that we are eradicating this bad stuff.”” So yes, there is conservatives looking to burn books in public education they disagree with. It’s not a lie. It’s a direct quote from the horses mouth. All ideology? CRT, creationism, etc.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/spotsylvania-school-board-appoints-chair-who-was-in-favor-of-burning-books-fires-superintendent/2933066/ https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/11/virginia-school-board-book-burning https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/world-news/us/955460/why-us-book-bans-back-in-fashion (Not burning but banning alternative views from conservatives) Yea has happened forever like when they teach creationism.

Would you consider it fascist to burn books a group doesn’t agree with or restrict what people can be taught in schools because it doesn’t meet the people trying to restrict the idea’s ideology?

Darn it! BLM should have demanded diplomatic recognition when Trump abdicated when he had to hide from BLM protestors.

I didn’t say it was a main reason but was part of his platform and campaign promises. People voting for him knew if he had a chance to elect a Supreme Court Justice, it’s what he would do. Knowing that, people didn’t find it objectionable and voted for him in record numbers. And going into the voting booth, you knew Biden would pick a black woman for Supreme Court Justice if elected. So when you did your mental calculus on who to vote for, that probably would play some part of your decision as you weigh both parties platforms.

It seems like it’s the same issue people are having here with Biden fulfilling a campaign promise. Trump picked someone solely due to their sex. After RBG passed his quote was “it will be a woman” If the most qualified person was a woman then that’s fine, but to narrow your scope before picking is a disservice. Its not something Trump ran on. So when you voted for Trump you didn’t know he would pick a Justice not based on qualification. Here Biden said what he would do and he’s doing it. Trump says he will build a wall. If you don’t support a wall and you vote for him, don’t be surprised when he tries to build a wall. Same here. Everyone that voted for Biden knew his stance on a Supreme Court Justice and he’s fulfilling his promise.

Color me shocked a politician is going to do something he says he’s going to do. I don’t like it and think the job should go to the best qualified liberal judge. Just like I didn’t like when Trump said he would pick a woman (something I don’t believe he even ran saying he would do) But yes, voting for someone who says they will do something gives that person carte Blanche to do the thing he said he would do prior to you voting for him.

That’s a silly debate. He said it like over a year ago. People made the decision whether they liked that or not. And now he’s following through. Right or wrong, the debate ended when a record number of US people voted for Biden and as such voted for his very publicly announced policy decision on how he would pick a Supreme Court Justice.