I'm not saying it's moral or not, but creating and supporting a child confers rights and privileges that are not extended to every random cause-head with an axe to grind. I can't believe I'm defending the notion that parental responsibility is parental authority. Maybe it is just a long-standing consensus of opinion, but it's one with a long history of success and no justification for undermining it.
Oh ho ho!!! Look at Mister Non-conformist argue traditionalism! Register Republican, join a church, and get it the fuck over with, Grandpa!
Traditionalism is "We always do it this way, because this is the way we've always done it." I'm arguing against undermining a family unit concept with a proven track record for personal politics, which are no good reason at all.
So it's just poo you fling at people you don't like. There's no grand conspiracy in schools you can point to. Okay then. Thought as much.
The "we always did it this way" people always think their crap has a proven track record. You just said absolutely nothing.
So you're completely clueless. You really think parents are in the dark about what their kids are reading in school? Wow.
It's UA. If HE was in the dark about what the book said, how could Momma and Poppa Albert possibly know? I mean they did their best for him. Abandoned him at an orphanage hoping his mutations were mild enough he could pass, and maybe one day fuck Billy West.
Yes, we know. You're a very principled good man and if there was a racist parent who you knew would beat their child for intermingling you'd absolutely report the child to them for holding hands with a black kid. The fact you think this gives you some kind of moral superiority is why I'm glad you don't have children.
This was a major surprise to me when I left New England, where they've been commonplace for decades. One time in high school, my friend Ellie and I got so bored that we decided to drive around the rotary near my house for 45 minutes to see how many complete circles we could make. (The answer was 75.) (This was 1997 or 1998, and gas was $1 a gallon. 89 cents if you went to the right Circle K.) This was, of course, a New England ROTARY designed to bring the traffic from five major roads together without killing anyone, not one of those tiny wimpy-ass Midwestern "roundabouts" whose main purpose is to make idiots slow the fuck down. Not well. Rural Michiganders still bitch up a storm every time a new one comes in.
Nothing more than a couple of schools that had to be pestered a bit to publish book lists, no. And most parents aren't going to give a shit what's on it. There is no rational or practical argument against an opt-in book list.
I think many are, yes. Nothing necessarily damning about that. They may just not take an interest. But that's their decision to make. As is how to name and dress that child. Undermining that crosses a line.
The fact that you bullshitters think that "violent, abusive wrongthink" angle gains you anything is laughable. Not a single one of you chucklefucks is going to nut up and confront a hard line Muslim family for enforcing strict adherence to their beliefs in and outside the classroom, because you are far more interested in polishing your "cultural sensitivity" halos, so you can cut the shit any time with your selective soapboxing.
"Hard line" Muslim families here send their kids to private Muslim schools, or to religious studies through their mosque. Same as the Jewish families have always had the choice to make. Or the various Christians who have everything from Sunday to weekday schools have had a choice to make. Nobody's faith alone is cause to deny access to books or shape the curriculum in the public school system. Dude, just accept that your "beliefs" require exclusionary practices which makes you a shitty bigot in most people's view. Either evolve beyond that or continue to be called out for it...
Yes there is, actually. If you can't bother yourself to see what your kid is reading, that isn't carte blanche to ban books for others. The fact that you think that's okay is why I'm relieved your ex has kids with someone else. So if they decide to dress that male child in a skirt even if that child doesn't want to, that's okay? If they insist that child's name is Betsy, even if he hates it, that's fine too? Got it.
So that gets you off the hook for addressing what you would consider abuse in another context. They don't. My "beliefs" amount to "live and let live," which categorically excludes undermining parents simply because their beliefs offend your social politics.
What a weird way of defending that you would report a kid to his racist parents for not being racist enough because parental rights. And you have no idea the conversations I've had with Muslims.
It's important now to remember that by his own admission UA has never spoken to any Muslim in his adult life.
sigh da fuq are you on about with "abuse"? did I miss a strawman or just fail to acknowledge one? See, I look at live and let live is that parents shouldn't be undermining the curriculum or library because something in there might offend their social politics. Fun thing on that note... back in tenth grade, my high school offered an elective history credit in "communism". Basically going from Marx to the Revolution to the evolution of the Soviet Bloc. You had to get a permission slip signed to take it which seems so absurd in retrospect. But that was life in 1984...
