• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

14 Wacky "Facts" Kids Will Learn in Louisiana's Voucher Schools

Don't expect Thrilla to answer in any honesty to this. The guy has been downplaying slavery while arguing he's not downplaying it but doing it anyways. The good wifebeater syndrome if I've ever seen one.

Yeah. I wasn't really holding my breath.
 
not a fan of falsehoods being taught in schools.

whether it be that dinosaurs and man walked the earth together, or Columbus discovered America...

That really pisses me off. Even ignoring the fact that the Amerindians had lived for thousands of years on the continents before Columbus discovered the continent, Vikings had already landed in Canada.

It's worse, though, when elementary schools teach his exploits as if he was some sort of hero. It's white supremacist propaganda.
 
Last edited:
My reaction has nothing to do with unions. It has to do with using taxpayer dollars to teach children that "Africa needs more religion" or that "slaveowners were kind".

I grew up in a rustbelt city with a long tradition of parallel school systems, public and parochial (Catholic). There were extremely strict limits on using any taxpayer dollars for any religious activity, religious instruction, etc.

What has happened to these kind of limits? And why is Louisiana blessing any science textbook that teaches bad science?

Right.

Generally, school curriculum is going to reflect the social and religious attitudes and beliefs of the citizens of the state and then the same even more so at district school board level. Teachers unions don't have a great deal of influence over specific curriculum. If the people don't want it their voices will be heard and changes will be made. Unfortunately, it would seem that the good people of Louisiana want to follow a very conservative Christian slanted curriculum. I certainly do not agree with any of the reasons in the OP and I would hope most people don't. It does seem that Louisiana may be more likely to agree with it than other people and places.

The truth is most school systems in America are pure crap these days. I live in Arizona, I think Arizona ranks 48th in education. Sooner or later, it's going to cost Arizona a lot of potential revenue, unless new or large relocating manufacturers and/or distributors are looking for dummies who will work at close to minimum wage. Louisiana is no different.
 
That really pisses me off. Even ignoring the fact that the Amerindians had lived for thousands of years on the continents before Columbus discovered the continent, Vikings had already landed in Canada.

It's worse, though, when elementary schools teach his exploits as if he was some sort of hero. It's white supremacist propaganda.

Flip Wilson used humor to say just that at a time when white America wouldn't have accepted it otherwise. It's brilliant IMHO, Wilson challenged the standard Columbus bull**** while making people laugh. I think Wilson was the one having the laugh.

 
well ,I had a response ready to go.. but after seeing you put in with the compulsive liar... I think i'll choose not to bother.

ciao :)

Yes, yes. I'm sure it would have been a terribly compelling response. :roll:
 
Yes, yes. I'm sure it would have been a terribly compelling response. :roll:


you and the compulsive liar are convinced i'm a slavery supporter, so meh.. it probably would not be compelling to you.

we'll just stick to the lie that all slave owners beat and abused their slaves and call it a day... mmmk?
 
I believe slave owners were kind. They had quite an investment in their slaves. They were valuable assets. I think the majority of slave owners probably did not abuse their slaves any more than they would abuse their horses.

Slavery by it's very definition is NOT kind, Maggie.
 
you and the compulsive liar are convinced i'm a slavery supporter, so meh.. it probably would not be compelling to you.

we'll just stick to the lie that all slave owners beat and abused their slaves and call it a day... mmmk?

Hey look! The "compulsive liar" was right: you've entirely failed to give me an honest response to my arguments. I don't know who you think you're fooling (possibly yourself), but it's certainly not me. Have fun with the self-delusions, though.
 
There were good and bad slave owners. Grow up ffs!

That's like saying there are good serial killers... ones that don't torture their victims first, and bad ones. Just because some slave owners didn't treat their slaves horribly doesn't alter the fact that they owned SLAVES.
 
a very true statement...

she's talking about their individual treatment though, and not, as i see it, saying Slavery is ok as long as the slaves aren't beaten.

One really can't separate the two.
 
Hey look! The "compulsive liar" was right: you've entirely failed to give me an honest response to my arguments. I don't know who you think you're fooling (possibly yourself), but it's certainly not me. Have fun with the self-delusions, though.


I didn't "fail" to give you an honest response to your argument.. I flat out told you in my previous that you wouldn't be getting a response
 
I didn't "fail" to give you an honest response to your argument.. I flat out told you in my previous that you wouldn't be getting a response

Because there is no honest answer to it and pretty much everyone here has seen through your apologetics. :shrug:
 
I didn't "fail" to give you an honest response to your argument.. I flat out told you in my previous that you wouldn't be getting a response

Actually, you've given me several. None has been honest. Play the victim all you want. The fact is, if you had a real argument, you'd have presented it by now. You're using my alleged collusion with Hatuey to justify this current bout of petulance. It's not very convincing.
 
One really can't separate the two.

that would result in a slaveowner that beats, abuses, or kills his slaves being on the exact same level as a slaveowners that treated his slaves humanely or even "kindly"( educating them, not beating them, etc,etc.)
is not one worse than another?

I think it's a given that all slaveowners were bad/evil (given the fact that they engaged in slavery).... but i don't it's a given that all abused their slaves.
there were, infact, slaveowners that took on a paternalistic ideology concerning their slaves.. they took on a moral responsibility and treated them like their "children" ( this was rare though).. a great number looked at it from a businesslike point of view, in that they treated slaves like an investment... the labor cash cow
and then there was the abusers, also a great number.. who treated them with malicious cruelty.
the "businessman" probably didn't treat them as badly as the "abuser", but he was worse than the "father figure".... if that makes sense.


I don't think it's impossible to oppose slavery and still point out that not all slaveowners abused, beat, or killed their slaves.
 
Because there is no honest answer to it and pretty much everyone here has seen through your apologetics. :shrug:



you have been told numerous time that I do not support slavery nor apologize for it... and yet you still continue to levy false charges against me.

I honestly don't care what a compulsive liar thinks about me... but when you bring these idiot claims into he public eye, i'm forced to waste my time clarifying myself unnecessarily.
it sure would be nice if the staff would step in in order to knock of your lies about me, but i do understand that intentionally lying is not against the forum rules, so there isn't much they can do.

sooo.. if you would be so kind as to **** off and die, it would be appreciated.
 
that would result in a slaveowner that beats, abuses, or kills his slaves being on the exact same level as a slaveowners that treated his slaves humanely or even "kindly"( educating them, not beating them, etc,etc.)
is not one worse than another?

I think it's a given that all slaveowners were bad/evil (given the fact that they engaged in slavery).... but i don't it's a given that all abused their slaves.
there were, infact, slaveowners that took on a paternalistic ideology concerning their slaves.. they took on a moral responsibility and treated them like their "children" ( this was rare though).. a great number looked at it from a businesslike point of view, in that they treated slaves like an investment... the labor cash cow
and then there was the abusers, also a great number.. who treated them with malicious cruelty.
the "businessman" probably didn't treat them as badly as the "abuser", but he was worse than the "father figure".... if that makes sense.


I don't think it's impossible to oppose slavery and still point out that not all slaveowners abused, beat, or killed their slaves.

Yes... a parent who beats you to a pulp or kills you in front of the other children if you try to run away from home to set an example.
 
Actually, you've given me several. None has been honest. Play the victim all you want. The fact is, if you had a real argument, you'd have presented it by now. You're using my alleged collusion with Hatuey to justify this current bout of petulance. It's not very convincing.

what have I been dishonest about... be specific.

you picked up the liars talking points about me and ran with it without hesitation... I didn't ask you to or give you reason to... you chose to.

I'll present arguments to those whom are deserving ( like CC, so far).. Hatuey has proven himself not to be deserving... you are well on your way.
 
Yes... a parent who beats you to a pulp or kills you in front of the other children if you try to run away from home to set an example.

we are all aware that you believe every slave owner abused, beat and/or killed his slaves.... no need to reiterate
 
we are all aware that you believe every slave owner abused, beat and/or killed his slaves.... no need to reiterate

Who says that? Are you arguing slave owners didn't punish slaves who tried to run away? Again, this is the 4th page where you argue that they weren't all that terrible even though their entire position of slave owner is dependent on them instilling enough force and fear for the slaves to not run away. 6 posters have seen through your argument now. The writing is the wall my man. :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom