87th Texas Legislature

[washparkhorn 9935]

(Anyone responsible for education) may not:  (A)  require or make part of a course inculcation in the concept that:

(i)  one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

(ii)  an individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

(iii)  an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of the individual's race or sex;

(iv)  an individual's moral character, standing, or worth is necessarily determined by the individual's race or sex;

(v)  an individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;

(vi)  an individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual's race or sex;

 (vii)  meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist or were created by members of aparticular race to oppress members of another race;

 (viii)  the advent of slavery in the territory that is now the United States constituted the true founding of the United States; or

 (ix)  with respect to their relationship to American values, slavery and racism are anything other than deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to the authentic founding principles of the United States, which include liberty and equality;

 (B)  teach, instruct, or train any administrator, teacher, or staff member of a state agency, school district, or open-enrollment charter school to adopt a concept listed under Paragraph (A); or (C)  require an understanding of the 1619 Project.

I can make an argument with this language every educator is in violation of this law. Overbroad is by one of many objections. Dumb.

[Anastasis 23398]

9 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

(i)  one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

(ii)  an individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

(iii)  an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of the individual's race or sex;

(iv)  an individual's moral character, standing, or worth is necessarily determined by the individual's race or sex;

(v)  an individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;

(vi)  an individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual's race or sex;

If an individual finds prohibiting teaching these things in public school offensive, it's better off for all of us that that individual resides in another state. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by Anastasis
depersonalized

[washparkhorn 9935]

13 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If an individual finds prohibiting teaching these things in public school offensive, it's better off for all of us that that individual resides in another state. 

Who is all of us? 

It is going to cost a shit-ton (and Texas does not have its own federal reserve) and educators will need to be trained. 

This appears to be socialism for lawyers with all the litigation that will commence. 

[Anastasis 23398]

1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

Who is all of us? 

It is going to cost a shit-ton (and Texas does not have its own federal reserve) and educators will need to be trained. 

This appears to be socialism for lawyers with all the litigation that will commence. 

The residents of this state.

BuT iT WilL cOsT tOo mUCh tO tRaIn tHem NoT tO tEAcH tHat OnE rAcE iS NoT iHerEntLy SuPErioR tO aNy oThEr!

[JimmyJames 12271]

It doesn’t matter what that stupid ass statute says, passing laws as to what can and cannot be taught by teachers in the classroom is stupid as shit and is full on Orwellian. Totally on brand for the Texas nazi Republican Party though. Ignore the grid and focus on complete bullshit.

[washparkhorn 9935]

. . . shall inherit the wind. 

Good luck Texas. These chaps in charge are loons trying to go back in time. The reputation of Texas will continue to suffer with them in charge. 

 

Edited July 17, 2021 by washparkhorn

[JimmyJames 12271]

Maybe we should pass a law that mandates someone learn how to teach a course in “how to properly maintain an electric grid?” 

[Anastasis 23398]

2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Maybe we should pass a law that mandates someone learn how to teach a course in “how to properly maintain an electric grid?” 

Too Orwellian. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, Anastasis said:

Too Orwellian. 

Touché 

[Anastasis 23398]

11 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

The reputation of Texas will continue to suffer with them in charge. 

I'll be sure to tell that to my new neighbor that is in process of fucking up my TCAD appraisal next go around.  Maybe I should ask him if he has a problem prohibiting teaching children that one race is superior to another. At least I will be able to determine if he gets an invite to the next BBQ. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by Anastasis

[staboner 4959]

how's it going texas? i see. trying to get another black eye done eh?

[Anastasis 23398]

Just now, staboner said:

how's it going texas? 

Pretty good man.  Been one of the mildest and wettest July's I've even seen. Highs in the mid 80s next week. 

[washparkhorn 9935]

12 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I'll be sure to tell that to my new neighbor that is in process of fucking up my TCAD appraisal next go around.  Maybe I should ask him if he has a problem prohibiting teaching children that one race is superior to another.

No one with any commonsense would teach a child that one race is superior to another. Read on. 

Edited July 17, 2021 by washparkhorn
cherry-picking is the term for the rhetorical device you deployed. The socratic method is far more effective for this type of discussion (if truth matters as a first principle).

[JimmyJames 12271]

4 minutes ago, staboner said:

how's it going texas? i see. trying to get another black eye done eh?

The grid hasn’t collapsed again yet but wait until it hits a hundred degrees three days in a row then all bets are off. Because that never happens. 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5106]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

This list?

I don't take issue with the bolded sections.  I take issue with the struck through bolded sections. The italicized bolded portions are concerning to me and I need more information to understand the legislative intent to draw a conclusion.  

 

                          (ix)  with respect to their relationship to

 American values, slavery and racism are anything other than

 deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to the

 authentic founding principles of the United States, which include

 liberty and equality;

        

   

 

58 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If an individual finds prohibiting teaching these things in public school offensive, it's better off for all of us that that individual resides in another state. 

I don't understand how ix can be enforced if we are going to continue to teach Article 1 Section 2 of the Constitution.  Or that many of our founders were slave owners.  Those things do not comport with the idea that those are deviations from the founding principles since it was the fucking founders that set it up that way.  So yeah, if you think I need to leave Texas for thinking that's some big giant bullshit, I've got to wonder what beliefs you are hiding behind the veneer you show us on this forum.  If I'm misunderstanding your point, then let's talk.   

Edited July 17, 2021 by NameAlreadyInUse

[NameAlreadyInUse 5106]

1 minute ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

 

I don't understand how ix can be enforced if we are going to continue to teach Article 1 Section 2 of the Constitution.  Or that many of our founders were slave owners.  Those things do not comport with the idea that those are deviations from the founding principles since it was the fucking founders that set it up that way.  So yeah, if you think I need to leave Texas for thinking that's some big giant bullshit, I've got to wonder what beliefs you are hiding behind the veneer you show us on this forum.  If I'm misunderstanding your point, then let's talk.  If I understood it correctly you can go fuck yourself.  

And I'll call myself out, I skipped a section of your post and maybe the section I kept was bolded and italicized.  Until you clarify I'll edit out the go fuck yourself.

[Anastasis 23398]

5 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

 

I don't understand how ix can be enforced if we are going to continue to teach Article 1 Section 2 of the Constitution.  Or that many of our founders were slave owners.  Those things do not comport with the idea that those are deviations from the founding principles since it was the fucking founders that set it up that way.  So yeah, if you think I need to leave Texas for thinking that's some big giant bullshit, I've got to wonder what beliefs you are hiding behind the veneer you show us on this forum.  If I'm misunderstanding your point, then let's talk.   

You're referring to the sections that I bold italicized as potentially problematic, right?

[Anastasis 23398]

3 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

And I'll call myself out, I skipped a section of your post and maybe the section I kept was bolded and italicized.  Until you clarify I'll edit out the go fuck yourself.

Right, I already highlighted those sections as concerning. Taken at face value, they appear to promote an extremely superficial understanding of the history of slavery in the context of the founding of this country. Also concerning, nothing about genocide. 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5106]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Right, I already highlighted those sections as concerning. Taken at face value, they appear to promote an extremely superficial understanding of the history of slavery in the context of the founding of this country. Also concerning, nothing about genocide. 

I guess I'm not understanding your take, because you marked just as many things as bad or maybe bad as you marked as ok.  Seems weird you'd get so fired up about the good stuff that you took a love it or leave it stance, as if the bad and maybe bad parts could just be ignored.  That's what got my dander up on your earlier posts.  I'd love to better understand your thought process here.

Edited July 17, 2021 by NameAlreadyInUse

[washparkhorn 9935]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Also concerning, nothing about genocide. 

I am sure I misunderstand your post. The list is of things that shall not be taught. I can't imagine you want to prohibit teaching about genocide? Right?

I assume genocide is part of the list of subjects educators may or shall teach.

[JimmyJames 12271]

I am seriously at a loss why the republicans/Nazis are worried about all this. But I think I might know. 
 

The (rich) white man owned the black slaves. It’s an indisputable fact. Why deny it?

The white man killed the red man and took over their land. Just look around you. It’s an indisputable fact. Why deny it? 
 

It’s not like Greg Abbott and his shithead supporters personally owned a bunch of slaves to pick the cotton or killed off a bunch of Indians to stake their claim. 
 

What this is is a bunch of manufactured nonsense designed to keep the RUBES down.  That’s all this is. And of course it’s working. 

[cactusflinthead 27594]

Something tells me he isn't missing Austin.

[atomheartbevo 89458]

4 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

(Anyone responsible for education) may not:  (A)  require or make part of a course inculcation in the concept that:

(i)  one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

(iii)  an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of the individual's race or sex;

(iv)  an individual's moral character, standing, or worth is necessarily determined by the individual's race or sex;

 (vii)  meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist or were created by members of aparticular race to oppress members of another race;

 (ix)  with respect to their relationship to American values, slavery and racism are anything other than deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to the authentic founding principles of the United States, which include liberty and equality;

4 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

I can make an argument with this language every educator is in violation of this law. Overbroad is by one of many objections. Dumb.

Teaching what Texas's leadership in the run-up to the Civil War put down on paper would probably get a history teacher thrown in jail, if Republicans had their way.

https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.html

Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility [sic] and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?

 

[atomheartbevo 89458]

"WE LOVE THE CONFEDERACY, BUT DON'T YOU DARE QUOTE WHAT THE CONFEDERATE LEADERS ACTUALLY SAID!"

[Anastasis 23398]

5 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I guess I'm not understanding your take, because you marked just as many things as bad or maybe bad as you marked as ok.  Seems weird you'd get so fired up about the good stuff that you took a love it or leave it stance, as if the bad and maybe bad parts could just be ignored.  That's what got my dander up on your earlier posts.  I'd love to better understand your thought process here.

I am not sure what is hard to understand.  My starting point was a statement that I wish we could try to do something more substantive, maybe actually discuss the text of the bill. I posted the full text of SB3.  I was asked about the prohibition section, and I then marked up the parts that I do and do not take issue with, and those parts that are concerning and require closer inspection. I am not sure why that resulted in you accusing me of duplicity and half ass retracting it when you saw your error, but here we are. I got not problem with you NAIU, just be less reactive. 

[Anastasis 23398]

5 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

I am sure I misunderstand your post. 

Stop playing stupid washpark. It is beneath your station. We've had enough interactions on various topics for you to develop a strong prior. And complaining about cherry picking in this exchange is chef's kiss. 

Edited July 18, 2021 by Anastasis

[JimmyJames 12271]

21 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure what is hard to understand.  My starting point was a statement that I wish we could try to do something more substantive, maybe actually discuss the text of the bill. I posted the full text of SB3.  I was asked about the prohibition section, and I then marked up the parts that I do and do not take issue with, and those parts that are concerning and require closer inspection. I am not sure why that resulted in you accusing me of duplicity and half ass retracting it when you saw your error, but here we are. I got not problem with you NAIU, just be less reactive. 

The text of the bill is irrelevant. The purpose of the bill is not.

[Anastasis 23398]

 

6 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

It doesn’t matter what that stupid ass statute says, passing laws as to what can and cannot be taught by teachers in the classroom is stupid as shit

 

Should we consider leaving the particulars of curriculum decision to the local control of the school districts?  I am inclined to think so.  If not the state lege, or the local school districts, who should be driving curriculum decisions in your opinion? 

[Anastasis 23398]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

The text of the bill is irrelevant.

i wEnT tO lAw sChoOl. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Texas didn’t secede because of slavery. Apparently it seceded to “own the libs.”
 

Need to pass a law that requires teachers to teach the “own the libs” theory of the civil war else they go straight to prison.

[JimmyJames 12271]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

 

Should we consider leaving the particulars of curriculum decision to the local control of the school districts?  I am inclined to think so.  If not the state lege, or the local school districts, who should be driving curriculum decisions in your opinion? 

Teachers.

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

i wEnT tO lAw sChoOl. 

You’re out your element again. But you do you.

[Anastasis 23398]

2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Texas didn’t secede because of slavery.

Mexico banning slavery was the primary catalyst for Texas declaring independence. 

[Anastasis 23398]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Teachers.

So local school districts. Gotcha. We are not too far apart.  

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Mexico banning slavery was the primary catalyst for Texas declaring independence. 

Yes I know that and what you quoted from me was in jest. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

i wEnT tO lAw sChoOl. 

You have been on a roll of really shitty posts the last couple of days.  Congrats, I guess.

[Anastasis 23398]

4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

You have been on a roll of really shitty posts the last couple of days.  Congrats, I guess.

Did you also go to a third tier law school?  I'm truly sorry for any offense. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Oh sure. Like he went to Harvard.

[JimmyJames 12271]

I got a lot of problems Louie!

[Pancho 44492]

 

[atomheartbevo 89458]

It's like Republicans want to get the liberals/Dems out to vote.

[StassneyHorn 6540]

Curriculum decisions at a local level will be just as political as they are at the SBOE

[Anastasis 23398]

23 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Curriculum decisions at a local level will be just as political as they are at the SBOE

Agree, but as a parent I have a much greater ability to impact those decisions when they are made directly at the local level.  The further and further the decision making moves away, the harder that becomes. 

 

[HRSchenker 2259]

What's the bill number for the legislation that caused the Dems to flee?

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

15 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Did you also go to a third tier law school?  I'm truly sorry for any offense. 

I did not go to law school.  I have some morals.

[David Dennison 18662]

17 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Yes I know that and what you quoted from me was in jest. 

Anastasis gets excited sometimes.

[JimmyJames 12271]

27 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Anastasis gets excited sometimes.

Unlike GRUHorn he can be pretty entertaining and is smart regardless. 
 

I’d rate him a slight net positive for the board given his clear vaccine positions.  GRUHorn is a 99 percent net negative as a killing fools troll. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

I don't always understand Anastasis' point, but anyone who refrains from  'driveby' posts is all right regardless of whether I agree with them.

[Anastasis 23398]

@StassneyHorn you are inside baseball right? Would be interested in hearing your perspective as you unpack what is happening here with sb3 in the context of HB 3979?

Edited July 19, 2021 by Anastasis

[tantric superman 4667]

3 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I don't always understand Anastasis' point, but anyone who refrains from  'driveby' posts is all right regardless of whether I agree with them.

He's too clever by half.