ADVERTISEMENT

It isn't in schools

Well, so much for pulling the kids out of horrible public schools and enrolling them in those virtuous private schools.
What’s amazing to me is that these parents are paying $40k a year to send their kids to this school.

It makes me wonder if this new religion will be (is?)the marker of the elite class (McWhorter calls them the Elect) going forward.
 
What’s amazing to me is that these parents are paying $40k a year to send their kids to this school.

It makes me wonder if this new religion will be (is?)the marker of the elite class (McWhorter calls them the Elect) going forward.

Hopefully more a case of one dean being inappropriate than a sign of a trend.

We have had teachers with inappropriate relationships with students. Not sure how many inappropriate deans there have been over the years but God help us if this really is a trend.
 
Hopefully more a case of one dean being inappropriate than a sign of a trend.

We have had teachers with inappropriate relationships with students. Not sure how many inappropriate deans there have been over the years but God help us if this really is a trend.
According to some parents I know of students there, the school stands behind the Dean and has emailed parents asking them not to disseminate this story.
 
According to some parents I know of students there, the school stands behind the Dean and has emailed parents asking them not to disseminate this story.

That just seems crazy. I would be taking my 40k elsewhere at the very least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUCrazy2
What’s amazing to me is that these parents are paying $40k a year to send their kids to this school.

It makes me wonder if this new religion will be (is?)the marker of the elite class (McWhorter calls them the Elect) going forward.
The parents are unaware. They’re trying to climb the ladder and send their kids to better schools than they were able to. They don’t realize the institutional capture that has occurred the last few decades. For the first two centuries of this countries history you didn’t have to worry about these freaks in schools, so learning that behavior takes time. Time to root the cretins out, time to blow up the public education system, time for shift your kid to a school where they won’t be playing with dildos.
 
The parents are unaware. They’re trying to climb the ladder and send their kids to better schools than they were able to. They don’t realize the institutional capture that has occurred the last few decades. For the first two centuries of this countries history you didn’t have to worry about these freaks in schools, so learning that behavior takes time. Time to root the cretins out, time to blow up the public education system, time for shift your kid to a school where they won’t be playing with dildos.
Uh, this isn’t a public school.
 
Are the parents you know okay with all this?
No, but not enough to rock the boat.

Like with anything, money talks and big donors will have most of the sway here.

I’m actually not totally opposed to some of this sex ed stuff but think it is better reserved for seniors, not 14 year old freshmen.

And I also think, no matter what the context, schools should be open and transparent about what they are doing and respect parental values.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812 and DANC
I forgot…you are an advocate for state sanctioned religion.
Which one?
Who says it is immoral for me to kill you, steal your land and steal your wife just because I feel like it? Is it immoral when a grizzly bear does that to another grizzly bear? Why should humans be any different?

Many societies have tried to pluck to flowers of morality out of their religious seed bed in their quest towards moral secularism. All of those societies have failed.

The secularization of America is the largest threat the country faces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snarlcakes
Who says it is immoral for me to kill you, steal your land and steal your wife just because I feel like it? Is it immoral when a grizzly bear does that to another grizzly bear? Why should humans be any different?

Many societies have tried to pluck to flowers of morality out of their religious seed bed in their quest towards moral secularism. All of those societies have failed.

The secularization of America is the largest threat the country faces.
I think you meant this post for Brad.
 
Who says it is immoral for me to kill you, steal your land and steal your wife just because I feel like it? Is it immoral when a grizzly bear does that to another grizzly bear? Why should humans be any different?

Many societies have tried to pluck to flowers of morality out of their religious seed bed in their quest towards moral secularism. All of those societies have failed.

The secularization of America is the largest threat the country faces.
Who says it is immoral to marry and have sex with a 13-year-old, enslave another human being, or commit genocide? Who says we should not treat women like property or rape the female children of our enemies? Not the Judeo-Christian god, that's for sure.
 
Who says it is immoral for me to kill you, steal your land and steal your wife just because I feel like it?
Me, you, everyone on this board, and 99.9% of human beings.

You don't need a supernatural being to explain the rules of being a human anymore than you need a supernatural being to explain the rules of tic-tac-toe or basketball. You need common acceptance by a group of people. That's it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cortez88
Me, you, everyone on this board, and 99.9% of human beings.

You don't need a supernatural being to explain the rules of being a human anymore than you need a supernatural being to explain the rules of tic-tac-toe or basketball. You need common acceptance by a group of people. That's it.
So you believe our rights are grounded in law, accordingly the government can remove those rights if they see fit or with enough votes, and that would be just.

I believe we are endowed by our creator (meaning god) with certain unalienable rights. Maybe you disagree.
 
Guess that's a good reason not to send kids to private schools.

Of course, some people will pretend this single instance proves it is widespread or even approved by liberals.
1. Do you approve? If not, why do you go so far out of your way to put fingers in your ears and say "nuh uh" as opposed to just saying, "that's not right"? Edit to add: You did end up saying this later in the thread. Kudos. I don't know why that gets to be so hard on these sometimes though.

2. If not widespread, how many times is too many?

3. If not widespread, how do people like Libs of TikTok or Project Veritas have such an easy time finding content?
 
I believe we are endowed by our creator (meaning god) with certain unalienable rights. Maybe you disagree.
Yes, I disagree with this.

I do believe that we should treat each human being as an end to himself and that that principle results in things like rights. I derive that principle from reason, informed and driven by my own moral sentiments (feelz), that arise out of my brain which has evolved, partially, for that purpose. When enough humans feel strongly enough about this, we enact laws.
 
Yes, I disagree with this.

I do believe that we should treat each human being as an end to himself and that that principle results in things like rights. I derive that principle from reason, informed and driven by my own moral sentiments (feelz), that arise out of my brain which has evolved, partially, for that purpose. When enough humans feel strongly enough about this, we enact laws.
Why do you hate America?

(jk)
 
Yes, I disagree with this.

I do believe that we should treat each human being as an end to himself and that that principle results in things like rights. I derive that principle from reason, informed and driven by my own moral sentiments (feelz), that arise out of my brain which has evolved, partially, for that purpose. When enough humans feel strongly enough about this, we enact laws.
Accordingly, you believe if enough people used their brain to come to the conclusion that all Jews should be sent to camps and killed, and we enact laws to that extent, there is nothing immoral about that, just as long as the agreement is broad enough.
 
Accordingly, you believe if enough people used their brain to come to the conclusion that all Jews should be sent to camps and killed, and we enact laws to that extent, there is nothing immoral about that, just as long as the agreement is broad enough.
We can do this to each other all day. It won't solve anything and we aren't going to convince each other. I respect you have certain beliefs, even if I think they are false, and I admit I have false beliefs (we all do).

I respect many of the teachings of Jesus and Christianity, in general. Peace.
 
It's either supernatural or power.
I think that having a belief in something outside of humanity as an underpinning helps to keep morality grounded and consistent (not that religious people will consistently act more morally, but that the actions themselves are likely to be viewed the same from year to year).

I think humans have an uncanny ability to logic their way into the acceptance of anything they truly want and therefore secular ethics and morality will often revolve around how many people you can convince to agree. There are no fundamental truisms, there is only what we create.

"Murder is bad."
"Well of course it is."
"Why."
"We have no right to take another's life."
"Why?"
"Because it isn't right."
"What about war? As punishment for heinous crimes? In order to protect your family? What if it is convenient? They tax your economic well being? They are handicapped?"

"We shouldn't steal."
"What if they are poor, are historically disadvantaged, and/or insurance will cover it anyway? What if we empower someone else to do it and call it taxes or redistribution?"

I think without God underpinning morality, it is a relativistic concept and if it is relative, then there is no such thing as true morality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snarlcakes
We can do this to each other all day. It won't solve anything and we aren't going to convince each other. I respect you have certain beliefs, even if I think they are false, and I admit I have false beliefs (we all do).

I respect many of the teachings of Jesus and Christianity, in general. Peace.
I am Rastafarian.
 
I think that having a belief in something outside of humanity as an underpinning helps to keep morality grounded and consistent (not that religious people will consistently act more morally, but that the actions themselves are likely to be viewed the same from year to year).

I think humans have an uncanny ability to logic their way into the acceptance of anything they truly want and therefore secular ethics and morality will often revolve around how many people you can convince to agree. There are no fundamental truisms, there is only what we create.

"Murder is bad."
"Well of course it is."
"Why."
"We have no right to take another's life."
"Why?"
"Because it isn't right."
"What about war? As punishment for heinous crimes? In order to protect your family? What if it is convenient? They tax your economic well being? They are handicapped?"

"We shouldn't steal."
"What if they are poor, are historically disadvantaged, and/or insurance will cover it anyway? What if we empower someone else to do it and call it taxes or redistribution?"

I think without God underpinning morality, it is a relativistic concept and if it is relative, then there is no such thing as true morality.
While I find it uncomfortable, I'm OK with the concept of no true morality.

That said, you can have a concept of morality that has evolved in humans. When applied to specific instances--with God or religion or without it--you will always run into the problems your examples reveal. That observation is what kills Kant's project with the categorical imperative.
 
Me, you, everyone on this board, and 99.9% of human beings.

You don't need a supernatural being to explain the rules of being a human anymore than you need a supernatural being to explain the rules of tic-tac-toe or basketball. You need common acceptance by a group of people. That's it.
The issue with your claim is most people do believe in a supernatural being. You're assuming if we strip out religions, everyone just continues on hunky dory(couldn't find a better word). I'm not sure that would be the case. I think we would see more police states like China. Also, common acceptance by a group, just turns into who is most powerful.
 
The issue with your claim is most people do believe in a supernatural being. You're assuming if we strip out religions, everyone just continues on hunky dory(couldn't find a better word). I'm not sure that would be the case. I think we would see more police states like China. Also, common acceptance by a group, just turns into who is most
The issue with your claim is most people do believe in a supernatural being. You're assuming if we strip out religions, everyone just continues on hunky dory(couldn't find a better word). I'm not sure that would be the case. I think we would see more police states like China. Also, common acceptance by a group, just turns into who is most powerful.
I think they would. Our concepts of right and wrong are motivated by our feelings. Those won’t change without the lack of belief in a supernatural being.

I don’t believe in a god. I’m moral.
 
I think they would. Our concepts of right and wrong are motivated by our feelings. Those won’t change without the lack of belief in a supernatural being.

I don’t believe in a god. I’m moral.
Of course your moral. You’re a child of God and designed in his image. I had to 😁

I disagree with your assumptions and think Chesterton puts it best what happens when you remove God from society/cultures. “ When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.” I think we’re currently getting a glimpse, today. I know you’re not going to change your mind, but hopefully you give the God thing another try sometime.
 
Of course your moral. You’re a child of God and designed in his image. I had to 😁

I disagree with your assumptions and think Chesterton puts it best what happens when you remove God from society/cultures. “ When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.” I think we’re currently getting a glimpse, today. I know you’re not going to change your mind, but hopefully you give the God thing another try sometime.
Never say never
 
  • Like
Reactions: snarlcakes
Seems much ado about nothing. Probably should just change her name to Karen.
Her original complaint might have been much ado about nothing (or at least about very little), but any retaliation whatsoever by the school is beyond the pale.

Also, I went to graduate school. I immediately recognized this: "Her professors and administrators viewed social justice as a critical lens through which Western society must be viewed to deconstruct cultural norms and values rooted in white supremacy, racism, and oppression of marginalized people."

That's just standard Marxist, critical, feminist theor(ies) right there. Nothing scary at all about it. Not sure how you can apply it to psychotherapy, though. It's not really a theoretical model that lends itself to individualized diagnostics.
 
This should be its own thread but Colorado HS edu group is trying to get school board to segregate lgbt kids to their own school. Sounds crazy but so is the school board.

I assume these groups will make a push across the country since they’re funded by you know who.
 
To me and you, maybe, but I don't think it's the part that gets most hackles up.
I hate that excuse. I'm not saying you are using it here, but the people who are doing stuff like this do use it.

Such defenses always turns to: oh well, a certain segment of the population (maybe it's even most people, but most people are ill-informed idiots) are only complaining because of [fill in bad reason/bad motivation here]. Therefore, we can't be criticized because anyone making a criticism is coming from the same place/dog whistling to those people/motivated in the same way.

It's illogical and, I think, dishonest, but used all the time.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT