Just as soon as California or New York pass a law allowing people to sue gun manufacturers or sellers, or something else that Righties care about.
Oklahoma bill would fire teachers for offending Christian morals by teaching biology, allows parents to sue teachers
- Thread starter Morrison71
- Start date
This is even better than The Handmaid's Tale.Oklahoma Sen. Rob Standridge (R) has introduced legislation that would allow parents to sue any public school educators who teach anything "in opposition to closely held religious beliefs of students." Standridge has also introduced a bill that would give individual parents the power to demand the removal of any bookfrom school shelves that they believe contains LGBTQ content.
Oklahoma bill would fire teachers for offending Christian morals by teaching biology - LGBTQ Nation
The bill would allow parents to sue teachers for $10,000 "per incident, per individual." The fine would need to be paid by the teacher "from personal resources" and the educator cannot "receive any assistance from individuals or groups" or they'll be fired.www.lgbtqnation.com
The bill would allow parents to sue teachers for $10,000 "per incident, per individual." The fine would need to be paid by the teacher "from personal resources" and the educator cannot "receive any assistance from individuals or groups." If the teacher is unable to pay and receives assistance, they will be fired immediately and unable to teach in the state for five years.
"A biology teacher who explains evolution could be ratted out by a Creationist who's failing science class. A health teacher who educates students about different forms of birth control won't be in that classroom for very long if an abstinence-promoting teenager is on the roster," journalist Hemant Mehta explained.
"A history teacher who correctly describes the Founding Fathers as a mix of religious and non-religious individuals could be a target of conservative evangelicals who believe Christian pseudo-historian David Barton's lies. An English teacher who wants to challenge kids with controversial thought-provoking literature would be forced to stick to only the blandest books."
And no tax money should go to religious schools.
Majority Whip. So not a bottom feeder in the party.The party of smaller government and less litigation folks.
And the bill sponsor is a pharmacist. WTAF?
Rob Standridge | Oklahoma Senate
In 2012, Rob Standridge was elected to the Oklahoma Senate to represent District 15. For the current 56th Legislative session, Senator Standridge serves as the Majority Whip and Chairman of the Transportation Committee. He is also a member of the Health and Human Services and Energy Committees.oksenate.gov
The Taliban comparison is becoming more apt.
I think the worst part of these laws is the fact that you don’t have to have standing or prove damages. If I live in Texas and I get wind that my neighbor went out of state for an abortion, I can sue and I can win. Why should I win? I should have no standing in that case and certainly couldn’t prove damages.
Careful. You’ll upset @binsfeldcyhawk2
Oh no...then they'll put in people who will toe their line. Money will be siphoned from public education even faster than is occurring today to fund private schools. And the justification will be the failure of public education that THEY engineered.
So if it's your closely held religious belief that your children should not learn anything at all . . . that means that the teachers can't even like teach them to read or do basic arithmetic?
People like this really are holding us back. There is simply no two ways around it.
And if your faith isn't strong enough to be tested by facts, then it's very weak indeed.
People like this really are holding us back. There is simply no two ways around it.
And if your faith isn't strong enough to be tested by facts, then it's very weak indeed.
I thought the lefts mantra in these cases was: "if you've got nothing to hide then why do you care if they search/watch/investigate?"
Because they aren't limited to just "watching" per the proposed laws.
You just have to be a troll. Have to be. You can't be that much of a dumbass. Well, maybe you can.
I like to believe that all of the wingnuts who post on here are just trolls. It helps me to sleep better at night, even if it's not true.
Holding dissenting opinions does not make one a "troll". It does seem to cause consternation though, when I question or reject the approved narrative. Maybe some people will start to question their beliefs but I fear the cognitive dissonance won't let them.
So, you agree with the premise of this proposal?
The worst part is when you give up on debating "The sky is blue" they believe they won an argument, which only encourages their shit behavior.
What? They're making the rest of us pay for their goddamn tuition.
So, do you support the bill being proposed in Oklahoma? If so, why? If not, why not?
So you don't have any issue with the premise of the bill, you simply think it won't work? Got it.
What do you think it's trying to fix that it won't? And what would you change about it to actually fix what you think needs fixing?
I'd accuse the writer of this legislation of reading 1984 and think to himself, "Now that's a really good idea!" But then I remember that would involve actually reading something so it wouldn't make sense.
Do you take a similar stance to idiot bills and statements proposed by politicians on the left? Do you take a “stay calm” approach? Or do you and all the other righties on here express outrage?
The apt question is, if the first amendment didn’t exist, would Republicans agree to a constitutional amendment that limited the ability of the states or federal government in establishing an “official” religion? And they answer is of course they wouldn’t. Deep South states would rush to establish a state sponsored theocracy. Which of course accurately describes the taliban.
Yeah, everyone knew that there are only males and females ten years ago and then a bunch of retards started believing in non-science. It was jarring.
