@wildgrass saidNo1 had the solution on the drags mans stories thread. The state has no business getting between parents and their children, therefore privatise all education at all levels and let the market decide. With education removed from the purview of the goobermint, parents can expect a reduction in tax allowing them direct that money to the whichever school reflects their values.
These laws in a number of states are written (seemingly purposefully) vague. In this case, the law bans books containing "pornographic or indecent" content. In effect, given the numerous examples provided in this thread, this leaves the Bible up for grabs, at the whim of whatever the current politics are of the administrator charged with enforcing it.
My favorite among t ...[text shortened]... legislation is when they banned teaching "controversial topics" leaving teachers with just.... math.
@vivify
Works for me. I have ALWAYS said I want freedom FROM religion, not freedom OF religion. And that would be because ALL those religions are man or woman made.
The stories those idiots who write those religious screes just write anything down they can that sounds wise and such and then say GOD told me to say this, these are HIS words.
Like as if this god has testicles or something, being the most powerful being in the entire universe and it still needs to reproduce like we do?
@athousandyoung saidBump
[quote]Christine Hayes:
The Bible is NOT for children! I have a 12 year old and 8 year old and I won't let them read it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Hayes
Christine Hayes is an American academic and scholar of Jewish studies, currently serving as the Sterling Professor of Religious Studies in Classical Judaica at Yale University, specializing in Ta ...[text shortened]...
[youtube C. Hayes Hebrew Bible Lectures]mo-YL-lv3RY[/youtube]
Quote from 21:30 in above lecture
@wildgrass saidLaws that vague would inherently be unenforceable on First Amendment grounds anyway.
These laws in a number of states are written (seemingly purposefully) vague. In this case, the law bans books containing "pornographic or indecent" content. In effect, given the numerous examples provided in this thread, this leaves the Bible up for grabs, at the whim of whatever the current politics are of the administrator charged with enforcing it.
My favorite among t ...[text shortened]... legislation is when they banned teaching "controversial topics" leaving teachers with just.... math.
Any law that purports to prohibit something as vague as "indecent" materials is void for vagueness.
This is Constitutional Law 101.
@soothfast said===suffice it to say it was traumatizing for me, and I still carry the scars===
This just goes to show (and sh76 totally misses the point here) that what right-wingers deem to be "obscene" or "harmful to children" is informed by their hatred and fear of people who are different in ways that they find personally revolting. It has nothing whatsoever to do with sexually explicit content or sexual bodily functions per se.
Talk about harming children? ...[text shortened]... made the adjustment so much easier, and it was like a great weight had been lifted off my shoulders.
While your deep scaring is, unfortunately, obvious based on your posting style, that little soothfast couldn't handle certain ideas doesn't make them pornographic or equivalent thereto.
@wajoma saidNeedless to say, that isn't my position. While I oppose mandatory schooling laws, I think having a public school system is a good idea that creates many positive externalities.
No1 had the solution on the drags mans stories thread. The state has no business getting between parents and their children, therefore privatise all education at all levels and let the market decide. With education removed from the purview of the goobermint, parents can expect a reduction in tax allowing them direct that money to the whichever school reflects their values.
@no1marauder saidThat's not possible, because when parents are forced to support a system they disagree with that limits their ability to support the one that they do.
Needless to say, that isn't my position. While I oppose mandatory schooling laws, I think having a public school system is a good idea that creates many positive externalities.
@wajoma saidI won't waste time explaining the concept of externalities to you AGAIN.
That's not possible, because when parents are forced to support a system they disagree with that limits their ability to support the one that they do.
Of course it's possible and in fact was the norm before say 100 years ago.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidI’m dumb on the subject in you eyes, will you explain it to me. I feel I have experience raising my children. Do you have any so we can be on the same starting level.
I won't waste time explaining the concept of externalities to you AGAIN.
Of course it's possible and in fact was the norm before say 100 years ago.
Any way if it’s a better way based on logic and sound reasoning I’m all for it!
Please explain.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidYour catch phrases and airy fairy undefined terms like 'actual harm' (remember dodging that one) and 'externalities' (especially in relation to the state brainwashing system) mean nothing. When your god state forces a parent to pay for a school library and curriculum filled with bibles or a school library and curriculum filled with kiddie fiddler books, that limits their ability to pay for the opposite.
I won't waste time explaining the concept of externalities to you AGAIN.
Of course it's possible and in fact was the norm before say 100 years ago.
and I will continue explaining this to you.
@sh76 saidNice (albeit transparent) attempted assault on my "inner child," friend. But I've got way too much armor built on that front. However, such a snippy, defensive little personal jab has finally convinced me that you're now pretty much in the same class as the worst right-wingers here, and henceforth I shall treat you as such.
===suffice it to say it was traumatizing for me, and I still carry the scars===
While your deep scaring is, unfortunately, obvious based on your posting style, that little soothfast couldn't handle certain ideas doesn't make them pornographic or equivalent thereto.
Kind of a pity, because I remember when you were more reasonable.
And once again, you (willfully) miss the point. A total whiff. Your wiring seems to preclude you ever getting a grasp on the point.
Who was it that said that a truly educated mind is one that can entertain ideas without accepting them as true?
Ah, found it:
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
— Aristotle
@wajoma saidThis is just another "taxes are theft" argument which has been covered many times on this board.
Your catch phrases and airy fairy undefined terms like 'actual harm' (remember dodging that one) and 'externalities' (especially in relation to the state brainwashing system) mean nothing. When your god state forces a parent to pay for a school library and curriculum filled with bibles or a school library and curriculum filled with kiddie fiddler books, that limits their ability to pay for the opposite.
and I will continue explaining this to you.
If the People's elected representatives decide that a public education system is a sufficient public good that it should be financed by taxes individual taxpayers don't get to exercise a personal veto over that spending. There couldn't be any effective government if such an absurd proposition was adopted in a political system.
@soothfast saidThe 'thought' that there are people who wish to force their ideals on their fellow man is a thought we're all too well aware of.
Ah, found it:
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
— Aristotle
Death by goobermint:
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM