All Things LGBTQ+ (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/sup...y-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

• The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a unanimous defeat to LGBT couples in a high-profile case over whether Philadelphia could refuse to contract with a Roman Catholic adoption agency that says its religious beliefs prevent it from working with same-sex foster parents.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion for a majority of the court that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services once it learned that the organization would not certify same-sex couples for adoption.

I will admit, I was hopeful for this decision by the SCOTUS but I was surprised by the unanimous decision.

While I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with same sex couples adopting and raising children (I actually think it is a good thing as it not an abortion) but I also did not want to see the state force a religious institution to bend to a societal norm.

 

[Farb]

Otherwise your thought and opinions have no validity and are merely rhetoric.

By all means, feel free to put me on ignore or don't engage since my opinions are beneath your time and effort. Makes zero difference to me.

 

[Port City JJ]

Cool, thanks for posting the rules to how you want to engage on this board. It is a debate, the onus is on both sides. Show me proof that our education is doing its job.

I provided my proof that it is failing, your turn.

You provided no proof that it's failing. You provided no proof at all.

The person making the assertion having the onus to provide the proof is a staple of debates. You not understanding this highlights your ignorance on what is actually good debate practices.

 

[Farb]

You provided no proof that it's failing. You provided no proof at all.

The person making the assertion having the onus to provide the proof is a staple of debates. You not understanding this highlights your ignorance on what is actually good debate practices.

LOL. You got it.

 

[Port City JJ]

Your "proof" says different than you say it does, which indicates to me you didn't even read it.

The first link says explicitly "The U.S. education system is mediocre" it also says its expensive. Which is contrary to what your second link says also explicitly "The United States is not investing as much in human capitol (read education) as other developed countries" and then goes on to state "Americans see no problem with the state of U.S. education." The third link is an opinion piece from a right wing think tank that focuses solely on critical race theory.

Pass this off as "proof" that the Education System is failing either:
-You are deliberately misrepresenting the contents of the article, i.e. you are purposely lying
-You didn't read the articles and just did a quick search based on "education failing" and posted the top links, i.e. you are intellectually lazy
- or -
-You read the articles and didn't comprehend what they said, i.e. you have poor reading comprehension.

You have offered no proof of your assertation.

 

[Port City JJ]

LOL. You got it.

You are responsive and you seem passionate about your belief system so I would like to have good debates with you. So in order to help you avoid pitfalls like your burden of proof fallacy, I have made available for you in good faith a link to explain logical fallacies in debate. It separates all of the formal and informal logical fallacies so you can go through them and more readily identify them. You will find many of them are used by media pundits (both on the left and the right.) It is a cumbersome list, so I found a cliff's notes version of the 15 most common.

Happy reading friend! I hope this leads to more productive dialog!

 

[MT15]

@Farb - you didn’t say it was failing, you said that education had been abandoned and it was all social justice and CRT now. You cannot show any proof of that statement, it was total hyperbole.

But I think you know that. It’s not good faith discussion.

 

[SystemShock]

Cool, thanks for posting the rules to how you want to engage on this board. It is a debate, the onus is on both sides. Show me proof that our education is doing its job.

I provided my proof that it is failing, your turn.

2 of the links you posted point to the same PISA test, and the only information about this test, is that it's given to 15 year olds, and that the 15 year olds in the US don't do as well in the math portion. That is it. That is hardly proof that the U.S. education system is failing, or that the U.S. is losing competitive advantage. Any math that a 15 year old knows, is not going to change anything. Math that MIT/Stanford/Berkeley grads know, that would be different.

The cost per student, you can't draw a straight comparison with other countries, just based on how our economy works, and how the cost per student is calculated. I personally don't know how it is calculated, but if sports coaches are classified as teachers and included in the calculation, there is no other country in the world in which schools pay a coach $10,000,000 dlls a year to coach a sport, and maintain 70,000-100,000+ seat stadiums.

The CRT stuff is just a dog whistle.

Instead of being worried about the math scores of 15 year olds, you should be worry about the growing anti-science rhetoric in the country, which does way more damage, and it is probably causing our 15 year olds to not be as good in math (whatever the math is, as it is not specified in the articles) as the 15 year olds in Shanghai.

 

[Farb]

Your "proof" says different than you say it does, which indicates to me you didn't even read it.

The first link says explicitly "The U.S. education system is mediocre" it also says its expensive. Which is contrary to what your second link says also explicitly "The United States is not investing as much in human capitol (read education) as other developed countries" and then goes on to state "Americans see no problem with the state of U.S. education." The third link is an opinion piece from a right wing think tank that focuses solely on critical race theory.

Pass this off as "proof" that the Education System is failing either:
-You are deliberately misrepresenting the contents of the article, i.e. you are purposely lying
-You didn't read the articles and just did a quick search based on "education failing" and posted the top links, i.e. you are intellectually lazy
- or -
-You read the articles and didn't comprehend what they said, i.e. you have poor reading comprehension.

You have offered no proof of your assertation.

You appear to be satisfied that we educate our children 'mediocre' with all the capital we invest.
Can your provide proof that shows our public education systems excelling?

 

[Farb]

@Farb - you didn’t say it was failing, you said that education had been abandoned and it was all social justice and CRT now. You cannot show any proof of that statement, it was total hyperbole.

But I think you know that. It’s not good faith discussion.

Show me where education in math and science is excelling?

 

[Farb]

2 of the links you posted point to the same PISA test, and the only information about this test, is that it's given to 15 year olds, and that the 15 year olds in the US don't do as well in the math portion. That is it. That is hardly proof that the U.S. education system is failing, or that the U.S. is losing competitive advantage. Any math that a 15 year old knows, is not going to change anything. Math that MIT/Stanford/Berkeley grads know, that would be different.

The cost per student, you can't draw a straight comparison with other countries, just based on how our economy works, and how the cost per student is calculated. I personally don't know how it is calculated, but if sports coaches are classified as teachers and included in the calculation, there is no other country in the world in which schools pay a coach $10,000,000 dlls a year to coach a sport, and maintain 70,000-100,000+ seat stadiums.

The CRT stuff is just a dog whistle.

Instead of being worried about the math scores of 15 year olds, you should be worry about the growing anti-science rhetoric in the country, which does way more damage, and it is probably causing our 15 year olds to not be as good in math (whatever the math is, as it is not specified in the articles) as the 15 year olds in Shanghai.

CRT/Gender theory are very real in public education, but I completely understand why the left wants to pretend they are not. So much push back when the right pushed back on something that doesn't exist.

 

[Port City JJ]

You appear to be satisfied that we educate our children 'mediocre' with all the capital we invest.
Can your provide proof that shows our public education systems excelling?

I never made the assertion that our schools are excelling. I do not think we should accept mediocre, but we don't need to throw the baby out with the bath water. I do feel that we need some significant reform in education, we are probably in agreement there, what that reform should look like will probably be a source of contention.

 

[Port City JJ]

CRT/Gender theory are very real in public education, but I completely understand why the left wants to pretend they are not. So much push back when the right pushed back.

I am college educated in Cellular and Molecular Biology (Bachelor's of Science) and I can assure you "gender theory" is absolutely scientific and everyone trying to insist there is just two genders doesn't understand science.

I'll borrow from this link

Below are excepts:

Let’s talk about chromosomes, kids!

Even if we solely talk about physical, biological sex, there is undeniably a spectrum that is most accurately divided into more than two sexes. Let’s start out by talking about chromosomes, since they are the very first thing that people like Marjorie Taylor Greene inevitably seem to bring up in these kinds of discussions.

Most people assume that a person’s biological sex is immutably determined by their sex chromosomes, that the only possible sex chromosome combinations are XY and XX, that anyone who has two X chromosomes is automatically fully anatomically female, and that anyone who has one X chromosome and a Y chromosome is automatically fully anatomically male. All four of these assumptions, however, are verifiably incorrect.

First, let’s talk about what the X and Y chromosomes actually do. The X chromosome is much larger than the Y chromosome. According to the National Human Genome Research Institute, the X chromosome is believed to carry approximately 155 million base pairs and somewhere between 900 and 1,400 genes, amounting to approximately five percent of all DNA in the entire human cell. Many of these genes are absolutely vital to the proper formation of basic organs. This means that it is impossible for a person to survive without at least one X chromosome.

The Y chromosome, by sharp contrast, only carries approximately 58 million base pairs, amounting to a grand total of only somewhere between seventy and two hundred genes. It does not contain any genes that are necessary in order for a person to survive. Instead, it only carries genes that cause a person who would otherwise be entirely anatomically female to develop male physical features.

Although XY and XX are certainly the most common sex chromosome combinations, there are many other combinations that are known to occur naturally in humans. For instance:

• Some people are born with only one complete X chromosome and no Y chromosome. This is known as Turner syndrome. This combination of chromosomes causes a person to develop female anatomy, but they are often unusually short, have an unusually short, webbed neck, low-set ears, and swollen feet and hands. They generally cannot enter puberty without undergoing hormone replacement therapy and they are generally reproductively infertile. They are at greater risk of hypothyroidism, congenital heart defects, and diabetes. The ends of their pinky fingers may be unusually turned inward towards their ring fingers—a phenomenon known as clinodactyly.
• Some people are born with three X chromosomes and no Y chromosome. These people usually develop with completely normal female anatomy, but there are sometimes subtle physical signs that they have an extra X chromosome. For instance, they often tend to be taller than the average woman, they may have an unusually increased distance between their eyes, they may have decreased muscle tone, they may display delayed language development, and they may display clinodactyly.
• Some people are born with two X chromosomes and one Y chromosome. This combination of sex chromosomes is known as Klinefelter syndrome. It usually causes people who have it to develop unusually small male genitals and be reproductively infertile. In many cases, they also have a tendency to grow unusually tall, have weaker muscles than most men, have less body and facial hair than most men, have a weaker libido than most men, and have a more feminine distribution of body fat.
• Some people are born with one X chromosome and two Y chromosomes. This combination of sex chromosomes is known as XYY syndrome. It causes people who have it to develop with mostly completely normal male anatomy, but they are often unusually tall, they may have increased levels of acne, and they are more likely to develop learning problems. Contrary to what you may have heard in popular culture, people with one X chromosome and two Y chromosomes are not more likely to become violent criminals.
• Some people are born with two X chromosomes and two Y chromosomes. People with this combination of chromosomes may display all the symptoms of Klinefelter syndrome and XYY syndrome simultaneously.
• Some people are born with three X chromosomes and one Y chromosome. These people usually display physical characteristics very similar to those seen in people affected by Klinefelter syndrome, but, in people with XXXY syndrome, the physical characteristics tend to be much more prominent.

Most people with the conditions I have described here identify as either male or female. Nonetheless, the mere fact that other combinations of sex chromosomes aside from XX and XY are possible makes discussion of biological sex a lot more complicated than most people realize.

We are really just scratching the surface too, I could go into nondisjunction during meiosis and how someone could have too much x or y or too little x or y because some of the genes got stuck at the chiasmata during crossing over, but this is a good high level understanding of how genders are actually a spectrum.

 

[Port City JJ]

I'm a cis-gendered hetero sexual guy, so I'm not pushing any agenda. The science says what the science says. If you fancy yourself the intellectual type, I dug up some scholarly articles so you can deep dive into the difference between sex forms and gender types:

Only two sex forms but multiple gender variants: How to explain?
​

Sex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic

​

 

[JRad]

CRT/Gender theory are very real in public education, but I completely understand why the left wants to pretend they are not. So much push back when the right pushed back on something that doesn't exist.

You've yet to prove this, so you're still the one pretending.

 

[Farb]

You've yet to prove this, so you're still the one pretending.

It has been proven over and over on this board, but that is met with 'it is russian misinformation', 'alt-right conspiracy theory', of course the ever useful 'racist dog whistle' or 'homophobic/transphobic'.
An election was just swung because of it. Not CRT, per se, but because of the bathroom policy being pushed by left school boards. Correct or incorrect, it is a very real issue.

 

[JRad]

It has been proven over and over on this board, but that is met with 'it is russian misinformation', 'alt-right conspiracy theory', of course the ever useful 'racist dog whistle' or 'homophobic/transphobic'.
An election was just swung because of it. Not CRT, per se, but because of the bathroom policy being pushed by left school boards. Correct or incorrect, it is a very real issue.

No, it has not. No, it was not. All you keep repeating is "it's obvious" or some similar nonsense. I already proved your "Russian misinformation" shirt wrong once, do I really need to do it again? As often as you post crap you clearly a) haven't read b) didn't bother to fact check, no one can or should take you at your word.

Name one public elementary school that taught CRT before it became a talking point. One. Naming one school that fits your criteria is not even a statistical burden of proof, but I'll still take it. Otherwise the "pushback from the right" was caused by "the right"

 

[Farb]

No, it has not. No, it was not. All you keep repeating is "it's obvious" or some similar nonsense. I already proved your "Russian misinformation" shirt wrong once, do I really need to do it again? As often as you post crap you clearly a) haven't read b) didn't bother to fact check, no one can or should take you at your word.

Name one public elementary school that taught CRT before it became a talking point. One. Naming one school that fits your criteria is not even a statistical burden of proof, but I'll still take it. Otherwise the "pushback from the right" was caused by "the right"

So, it was not taught until the right pushed back on it and since the right pushed back on it, you guys started teaching a thing that was never taught? Why, to 'own the cons'? To punish children?

What is the lefts position on this? Is it not being taught or is it being a taught and that is a good thing? I keep hearing both on this board.

https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2...-lower-merion-students-about-systemic-racism/

(it is Rufo- so fair waring)

https://blmweekd65.weebly.com/for-educators.html

https://www.upsd83.org/family_resources/social_justice__antiracism__and_equity_resources/books_for_children





https://johnmuirschool.org/reading-resources

I am bored now. I am sure the reply will be 'but I don't see it 'actually' being taught, like in front of a class and the teacher doesn't use the letters 'CRT'.

 

[JRad]

So, it was not taught until the right pushed back on it and since the right pushed back on it, you guys started teaching a thing that was never taught? Why, to 'own the cons'? To punish children?

What is the lefts position on this? Is it not being taught or is it being a taught and that is a good thing? I keep hearing both on this board.

I've already posted about this to you before. You even replied to it.

-Fox started whining about CRT being taught apparently everywhere, the response to this was "no, it wasn't" (If you can prove it, I'm still waiting. Ya'll avoid that like the plague though)
-People who don't actually know what CRT is beyond the boogeyman definition they've been fed start getting up in arms (again, something else I've repeatedly asked for and none of you answer). This is where the dog whistle vs accurate history thing comes in.
-Now CRT is getting talked about, people who actually take the time to research beyond their outrage porn (like I did for your article I responded to) get interested
-Some schools start picking up CRT. "It's not taught in K-12" was true in March, now it's not. That doesn't mean the original statement wasn't true, it means the facts have changed. But even your link is a) one school district b) only mentions "tenants of CRT", which is nebulous at best.

The people kvetching about CRT brought it to the public eye, and created the problem they want to solve. No one knew what the hell it was before it became the outrage of the week.

You really need to take a look in the mirror with your constant "you guys/talking points" nonsense. Everyone else discusses different viewpoints on various subjects. The "conservatives" are the ones who never disagree about anything.