Poll: Is it OK to put children in cages?

Incorrect. This nation clearly was founded upon the ideal that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

Again, you are a history teacher?

So. Being a history teacher in no way means I agree with all those concepts. Why infer otherwise?

Being a history teacher, I would think you'd be aware of certain facts. I'm not asking you if you agree with the statement "all men are created equal...". I am telling you that it's a founding principle of this nation. There's no disagreeing with that. It's a fact. And it goes towards refuting your earlier assertion that non-citizens should be treated differently from citizens and that it was a "mistake" for things to have been interpreted otherwise.

I'm aware of these facts. But you don't reasonably expect any history teacher to be well versed in every aspect of world or American history do you? Any more than you would expect any doctor to be well schooled in all types of medical treatment.

Would you go to an orthopedic surgeon to treat your brain tumor? I very much doubt it.

What should it mean?

A surgeon has to learn basic medicine before he can train in a specialism.

Shouldn't a history teacher in an American school be expected to know the Declaration of Independence and the basic meanings within it? It's a bit different from, say, being expected to have full knowledge of Ancient Greece.

Agree and I do.

I also know that the Declaration of Independence is not a governing document of the United States. It has no force of law. The U.S. Constitution wasn't even conceived of when the Declaration of Independence was written.

Jesus Christ, you have real reading comprehension problems. You're like a fucking child.

Nobody argued that the Declaration of Independence had any force of law. The point was raised in order to show the ideals behind the founding of this country and to refute a point you made about treating citizens and non-citizens the same protections was "a mistake".

And, for the third time.....YOU'RE A HISTORY TEACHER?????

I weep for the future of the children who had fallen under your influence.

I wasn't talking about Citizens United. Corporate personhood goes back much farther than that.

Well, it's a declaration of sovereignty as a nation and as such it influenced the US Constitution. Doesn't the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment echo the values expressed in the extraction above?

I'm a history teacher and an excellent one. I don't indoctrinate my students will political correctness and other modern liberal "talking points".

And be honest, you can talk about "ideals" this country was founded on but this country from a strictly practical standpoint the only "men created equal" were white men who owned property.

Care to explain. And what is wrong with treating corporations effectively like people in regards to things like campaign contributions?

Corporations are not evil.

On whose assessment?

Weren't you a history teacher when you were being disciplined and ultimately got fired, ending up as a chemistry teacher or similar?

Don't get me started on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. I think it is severe judicial overreach to apply it to anything beyond the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments as it was originally intended.

Not for any of my history teaching. No employer has ever had a problem with that.

So you're saying that the decision of the Supreme Court over and over to apply it to immigrants within US borders is wrong?

So in other words you're saying that immigrants, including presumably their children, should not be treated as equal huma beings deserving equal protection of laws?

How is anything I said politically correct? Does the so-called excellent history teacher really need me to drum out more examples that support my assertion? Let me know and I will happily inundate you with such things. But, silly me, I thought you'd be smart enough to recognize the most basic of arguments in this affair.

Yet, you just said upthread that you agree with those so-called "Talking points" that outlined those "ideals".

And, no, they didn't mean "white men who owned property". You, as a history teacher, surely know this.

What were you teaching during your various firings?

There's a thread somewhere where Dayton posted a study guide and, IIRC, it's pretty rife with attempts at indoctrination.

I've always said that noncitizens within the U.S. should not enjoy the same rights as American citizens. And no that DOES NOT mean that they are less than human or animals. I know El Chup loves to trot out that if you do not think a group of people should enjoy the same rights as yourself that you regard them as "sub humans or animals".

Prove it.

Post your study guide and I will be VERY happy to do so.

I was teaching secondary social studies (American, World, Arkansas History, Civics, American Govt. Geography, Contemporary American History, Economics).

Not a word was ever raised about the content of my lessons or the teaching methodology used.

You made the claim. You find it.

No, you told him to prove it. Ergo the onus is on you.

This is where you run away from yet another thread. Go on.

If you are not affording them the same rights you are discriminating against them and treating them as your inferior. Subhuman, well untermensch, was a term coined by the Nazis to describe people whom they considered inferior and it wasn't just used against Jews but people of different races and nationalities. Sound familiar?

There is a reason civilised societies afford equal rights to all peoples within their borders. It's so the horrors of the past aren't repeated. I would have expected an "excellent history teacher" to know that dehumanising people is the first step on that dangerous ladder, the ladder that leads to oppression.

So the "excellent" history teacher was actually teaching quite a bit of history when he was sanctioned and then fired. Noted.

I guess you really showed the Arkansas School Board just how "excellent" you are.

In order to fully do that, I'll need access to the guide.

But, from memory, I can recall that you flat out said that Jimmy Carter was one of the weakest Presidents ever. That, right there is just one example of indoctrination.

EDIT: Here's part of the thread where you got taken apart: https://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/dayton3s-greatest-hits.98559/page-96#post-3006443

Once again, had nothing to do with lesson content or methodology.