|
| |
> Your pathetic ranting has clearly brought out the anti-freedom, homophobic,
> sexist agenda that is the real motivation behind all your beliefs. You have
> continually demonstrated an unsurpassable ignorance of what can and cannot be
> inferred from survey and correlational data and are now just babbling on and
> telling outright lies.
> It has been clear since your first post that you are a waste of time, but I
> wanted to keep refuting your every distortion and misuse of data until you got
> frustrated enough to expose the real core of your ideological position, which
> clearly stems from fear and hatred.
>
> Now that you have provided the supporting evidence for those who have claimed
> you are nothing but a Nazi, I will be sure to ignore you.
>
> Thomas
>
> fm wrote:
>
> > "Thomas Griffin" <tgriffin@uic.edu>
wrote in message
> > news:3B2503F4.21413B2@uic.edu...
> > > <snip?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > There is no doubt that teachers unions
are a problem.
> > > > However, if most schools were to become
private you can bet
> > > > that those teachers would also become
strongly unionized and
> > > > the same problems would result.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It's doubtful that any private school
teachers would have
> > > > the same communist mind set that exists
amongst American
> > > > public school teachers. Competent
teachers don't have a
> > > > need to demand special consideration to
artificially prop up
> > > > their inadequacies.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Is there any evidence that private and public school teachers are
> > > fundamentally different in philosophy? I doubt it.
> > > Right now, the # of private teaching jobs is highly limited, so these
> > > teachers do not have the power to unionize. They are too easy to
> > > replace. However, if all schools were private, then these teachers could
> > > and probably would unionize nationally and they would have more
> > > bargaining power.
> > >
> >
> > We taxpayers don't WANT them to have more "bargaining power".
> >
> > They have all the "bargaining power" they need, and just look at how
they
> > have misused and abused it: our children now have the world's LOWEST test
> > scores, and we taxpayers have one of the world's HIGHEST costs of education,
> > no matter how you measure it.
> >
> > Do you really want more of that?
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You are correct that Catholic schools
have more
> > > > > flexibility about how they
> > > > > discipline children--but then this is one
of the main
> > > > > reason that public
> > > > > schools should be outright outlawed as
the child abusers
> > > > > they are in the
> > > > > first place.
> > > >
> > > > If was the case, then the millions of
children with either
> > > > behavioral problems or learning
disabilities would go
> > > > completely uneducated and be unable to
attend any school.
> > > > This would be child abuse. Public
schools already fail to
> > > > even graduate a third of American 18
year olds. It's hard
> > > > to imagine that it could get worse than
that. Catholic
> > > > schools graduate 95% of their students
because they know how
> > > > to motivate students, and one way to
motivate them is to let
> > > > them know that bad behavior will result
in their
> > > > termination.If all you're familiar with
is public schools,
> > > > this might sound contradictory, but it's
worked very well
> > > > for thousands of years.
> > > >
> > >
> > > First, there is a huge difference between high school students choosing
> > > to drop out, and grade school children being prevented from attending
> > > school. Second, as I said it is not just behavior problems that private
> > > schools don't deal with, it is children with learning disabilities that
> > > would also be excluded. Educating these children cost about 3 to 5 times
> > > as much as a normal child and thus private schools have no motivation to
> > > deal with them.
> > >
> > > AS for your last comment: For thousands of years the vast majority of
> > > children did not receive and education. Did this "work"?
> > > Well, when society is a theocracy and people are not allowed to think
> > > and decide for themselves anyway, then an education is not needed. Also,
> > > if most people simple take on their family trade, then a formal
> > > education is not that vital.
> > > However, an educated public is absolutely necessary for both a
> > > democratic society and the kind of modern work environment that we face.
> >
> > Our public schools produced the ONLY industrialized nation in the world with
> > a NEGATIVE personal savings rate. Nobody else comes even close.
Japanese
> > families save ONE THIRD of every "dollar" they earn.
> >
> > What about that are you proud of?
> > http://fathersmanifesto.com/personalsavings.htm
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Furthermore any school, private or
public that teaches
> > > > children creationism and/or fails to
give them a
> > > > scientifically accurate understanding of
evolution is
> > > > directly and intentionally deceiving
students, and using the
> > > > perceived authority of a classroom
setting to propagate lies
> > > > and distortions for the sole purpose for
promoting their own
> > > > ideological agenda.
> > > > This is child abuse.
> > > >
> > > > 91% of Americans view the teaching of
"evolution" as child
> > > > abuse. You think
"evolution" is science, but to a quarter
> > > > of a billion Christians in this country
it's pure science
> > > > fiction.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Not one shred of data supports this contention. All surveys show that
> > > the vast majority of people think that evolution should be taught in
> > > school. Evolution can and should be taught without getting directly into
> > > its implications for a creator God. Most people recognize this and think
> > > that is how it should be taught. Nearly all christians accept evolution,
> > > they just tack on their own assumptions about God's role in the process.
> > > Adding these assumptions may not be scientific, but it in no way
> > > directly contradicts the theory of evolution. It is a very
small (but
> > > powerful) minority of Americans who are so blindly committed to their
> > > wishful thinking Fundamentalist world view that they refuse to be in any
> > > way rational about the issue of evolution
> >
> > How many times has this Gallup Poll got to be posted before you finally
> > gander over to that web site and verify the STUPIDITY and INACCURACY of that
> > paragraph? Do you have a reference which refutes Gallup? No?
Then what is
> > your "authority" for that intentionally misleading and intentionally
> > inflammatory statement? None?
> >
> > Is this the classic example of how you "evolutionists" get together in
a
> > smokey room, and fill each other with feel-good BS, and then go home and
> > brag to everybody about how enlightened you are?
> > http://www.gallup.com/poll/indicators/indreligion3.asp
> >
> > As of right now:
> >
> > 45% believe that "God created human beings in present form".
> > 37% believe that "Humans developed, with God guiding".
> > 12% believe that "Humans developed, but God had no part in process".
> >
> > In 1982, 44% believed that "God created human beings in present form".
> >
> > In other words, almost HALF of Americans flat out reject "the speculation
of
> > evolution".
> >
> > Altogether, 82% believe that GOD created human life.
> >
> > And only 12% are hardcore "evolutionists" who: don't have a clue what
> > they're talking about; also believe in flying squirrels, flying saucers, and
> > dolphins with hooves; have utterly no explanation for how human live would
> > have "evolved" by chance out of inanimate objects; ignore a colossal
amount
> > of scientific evidence to the contrary; ignore the improbability of their
> > "speculation" and the fact that they are LYING when they refer to this
> > speculation as a "theory".
> >
> > Let's be frank. You accuse the majority of Americans of
"refus[ing] to be
> > in any way rational about the issue of evolution".
> >
> > I accuse you of being a total freaking IDIOT.
> >
> > Where does that leave us? It leaves us with maybe 12% of the population
> > "thinking" that that a quarter of a billion Christians in this country
are
> > "irrational", and it leaves a quarter of a billion Christians in this
> > country thinking that you are an IDIOT.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What makes you think you have a right to
force your minority
> > > > opinion down their children's throats
using *their* tax
> > > > dollars?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Again, yours is not only a minority opinion, but an entirely irrational
> > > one without any evidence or argument to support it.
> > > Evolution is the majority opinion precisely b/c there is so much
> > > evidence behind it that it is able to overcome many Christians emotional
> > > resistance to it. Besides, the constitution is specifically designed to
> > > protect people from the tyranny of the majority, and the founding
> > > father's recognized that there is no more likely source of majority
> > > tyranny than religious belief.
> >
> > WRONG. It was designed to protect people from the tyranny of the MINORITY.
> > Why do "liberals" NEVER get this right? Why do
"liberals" think they have a
> > right to force their idiotic views on the majority, and deny that "majority
> > rules"?
> >
> > Can you answer that one question candidly? No other "liberal"
would or has
> > even DARED to explain it.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Other countries which aren't hamstrung by
the feminized
> > > > > education process
> > > > > that our public schools are have the
options that Catholic
> > > > > schools have
> > > > > here--which includes school prayer,
teaching creation,
> > > > > teaching math,
> > > > > teaching morals and ethics and
spirituality, etc, and
> > > > > almost all of those
> > > > > countries scored more than 100 TIMSS math
points higher
> > > > > than us at the 12th
> > > > > grade level.
> > > >
> > > > Are you referring to Anti-democratic
societies, such as
> > > > middle-eastern countries, and China?
> > > > True, they are not feminists (they
murder their women) and
> > > > they force non-scientific dogma down the
throats of every
> > > > child.
> > > > These counties do generally score higher
in math, and if
> > > > math scores are more important to you
than equality and
> > > > freedom, you should get on the next
plane. The US has one of
> > > > the highest murder rates in the world.
We murder more women
> > > > per capita than almost anyone.
> > > > We have the undisputed highest
incarceration rate, with a
> > > > third of the people in the world who are
behind bars. We
> > > > have the undisputed highest divorce rate
in the
> > > > industrialized world, and an
illegitimacy rate which few
> > > > countries can reach. We scored
dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS
> > > > subjects, a feat accomplished by no
other country. Amnesty
> > > > International has us as the #1 nation on
their hit list in
> > > > three categories: 1) more citizens
than anybody on death
> > > > row, 2) world's highest incarceration
rate, 3) more than
> > > > half of the youth executed around the
world were executed in
> > > > the US. If you want to see a
totalitarian country, look in
> > > > the mirror. Not even Russia nor
China imprison as many of
> > > > their citizens as we do, so it's not
clear what you mean by
> > > > "Anti-democratic societies".
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Many wrong statements here. First, in many of these countries
numerous
> > > forms of killing (killing your wife, gov killing of political
> > > dissidents) are not considered murder and are not counted in your stats.
> > > Also, people kill their female infants left and right and the
> > > authorities never even find out about it b/c of the rural nature of life
> > > in these countries.
> > > The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate entirely b/c we put people
> > > in jail based on religiously motivated laws (FYI: drug laws, and sex
> > > laws are religiously based).
> > >
> > > As for divorce rates, that great! It means that women in the U.S. are
> > > not forced by law to stay married to abusive husbands.
> >
> > "Abusive husbands"? What about "abusive wives"?
You're not a "liberal",
> > you're a "feminist". Do you know that mothers are 78% of the
defendants in
> > child murder?
> > http://fathersmanifesto.com/nis3.htm
> >
> > Do you know that there are almost as many husbands killed by
> > wives as there are wives killed by husbands? Do you know that the
SAFEST
> > place in the world for American women is in a family, and not in a
> > "single-mother household", where divorced or never-married women are:
> >
> > Twice as likely to die of circulatory diseases.
> > Twice as likely to die of cancer.
> > Three times as likely to die of diabetes.
> > Four times as likely to be killed in an accident.
> > Four times as likely to be murdered.
> > Five times as likely to die of respiratory diseases.
> > Five times as likely to commit suicide.
> > Five times as likely to die of cirrhosis.
> > http://fathersmanifesto.com/mortdiv.htm
> >
> > Our children just shouldn't have to put up with such feminist blather in
> > public "schools".
> >
> > >
> > > As for those we execute, religious conservatives (those most likely to
> > > believe in creationism) are by far the biggest supporters of the
death
> > > penalty. Religious conservatives tend to have a very immature
> > > black/white kind of moral viewpoint that leaves little room for the kind
> > > of doubt and uncertainty that causes most to become uncomfortable with
> > > passing a death judgment on another person.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > You certainly are NOT referring to most
European countries
> > > > who would find your misogyny and
fundamentalism both
> > > > laughable and disturbing.
> > > >
> > > > Feminism made the American woman the
laughing stock of
> > > > nations, not just in Europe, but in the
most remote spots in
> > > > the world that you could ever imagine.
> > > >
> > >
> > > When American feminism becomes extreme and goes "overboard" it is
due to
> > > the fact that it is reacting to the medieval mindset of many Americans
> > > inspired by a fundamentalist Christian attitude towards gender.
> > > It is Christian evangelical thinking that is the laughing stock of most
> > > countries in Europe.
> >
> > It's American feminism which made the American woman the laughing stock of
> > nations, not Christianity. It was just 40 years ago, before feminism took
> > off, that the American woman was the most revered and awesome woman in the
> > world. Our translator in Russia asked "who is the most popular person
in
> > Russia". We answered "Finnish men", because there are so
many Finnish men
> > who go to Russia and throw their money around, but she answered "American
> > men".
> >
> > Then she asked "who is the least popular person in Russia", and again
we
> > thought "Finnish men".
> >
> > She answered "American women".
> >
> > The irony is that this is true all over the world now, not just in Russia,
> > where you would think that the American feminist's evil reputation would
> > have been spared.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If
teaching creation and religion and morals and
> > > > saying a
spoken Christian
> > > > prayer in
class and are all so bad for children,
> > > > then
where's your evidence?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is bad on principal. It violates
children's rights. Where
> > > > is your evidence that these things do
anything whatsoever to
> > > > improve moral behavior or learning?
Before you answer,
> > > > remember that everything your about to
write is chock full
> > > > of confounds and NONE of it counts as
scientific evidence.
> > > >
> > > > There isn't one single country which has
spoken school
> > > > prayer that scored lower than the US in
TIMSS. The 12th
> > > > graders in the most religious countries
scored as much as
> > > > 160 points higher than our 12th graders
in a number of
> > > > subjects. Before we banned
school prayer in the US, SAT
> > > > scores were 98 points higher. How
many examples do you
> > > > need?
> > > >
> > > > ****I need at least 1 example that in
any way shows a causal
> > > > relationship between school prayer and
any of the test
> > > > scores or behavioral problems you
mention. At the very least
> > > > you need to show that immediately
following the elimination
> > > > of prayer in schoold there was a
signifant and reliable drop
> > > > in test scores.
> > > > Many, many cultural and educational
changes have occurred in
> > > > this time period, none of which are
related to school prayer
> > > > and many of which can explain the drop
in test scores.
> > > >
> > > > Racism among school students was much
higher when prayer was
> > > > allowed. Should we conclude that school
prayer was
> > > > responsible for greater racism. At least
I can make an that
> > > > Christian fundamentalism promotes values
of racism and is
> > > > consistently correlated with racism, but
still I would not
> > > > claim on this is evidence that school
prayer has any causal
> > > > relation to racism.
> > > > You, however, have provided no argument
as to exactly how
> > > > school prayer would have a causal effect
on test scores.
> > > >
> > > > Besides, school is about giving students
knowledge and
> > > > intellectual skills to think. Religion
(and fundamentalism
> > > > especially) is anti-thetical to critical
thought, prayer is
> > > > superstition, and morals have nothing to
do with religion.
> > > > Those so-called "morals" that
are specifically religious
> > > > regarding homosexuality and sexuality in
general teach
> > > > nothing but intolerance towards others
and unhealthy
> > > > self-hatred.
> > > > Fortunately, the vast majority of
the citizens of the
> > > > civilized world disagree with you, as do
80-90% of
> > > > Americans, which includes the vast
majority of the quarter
> > > > of a billion Christians in this country.
> > > >
> > > > It does not matter that they disagree.
It is a matter of
> > > > empirical fact and truth by definition.
> > > > If religion is based on faith (as most
would say it is) then
> > > > by definition it is anti-thetical to
critical thought,
> > > > because faith is unquestioned-belief and
critical thought is
> > > > the very process of fundamentally
questioning any assertion
> > > > or belief.
> > > > Prayer involves the belief in a
supernatural force that
> > > > responds to your wishes or praise. There
is no more evidence
> > > > for this force than for the the bad luch
associated with
> > > > number 13, thus prayer is superstition
by definition.
> > > > As for morals, both historical analysis
as well as modern
> > > > random studies of people's religious and
moral beliefs show
> > > > that there is no relationship between
how religious you are
> > > > and how moral you are.
> > > > (there is a relation when it comes to
attitudes towards
> > > > homosexuals and women's rights, but
these are not "morals",
> > > > they are codes of hatred and
intolerance).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Short of Africa, you probably couldn't
find public schools
> > > > > which have done a
> > > > > better job of destroying children's lives
than American
> > > > > public schools have.
> > > >
> > > > Short of Christianity you couldn't find
another ideology
> > > > that does more to destroy children's
minds.
> > > > Had White Europeans managed to
spread Christianity to
> > > > Africa, rather than earning an average
of $50 per month,
> > > > they might be earning $1,000 per month,
and rather than
> > > > having a life expectancy of 33 years,
they might have a life
> > > > expectancy similar to American blacks
who have a life
> > > > expectancy more than twice as long. You
don't understand the
> > > > benefits of Christianity because you've
never seen how
> > > > people live without it. You're
surrounded by Christians so
> > > > you think that things like laws are
normal. This is not the
> > > > case in more than half of the world.
Korea had been a
> > > > Buddhist country for thousands of years
and just 40 years
> > > > ago they didn't earn much more than
Africans. It is now
> > > > 75% Christian and their standard of
living rivals or exceeds
> > > > our own.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > * What does earnings
and life expectancy have to do
> > > > with free
thought and intellectual integrity?
> > > > * Besides, the
earnings of Americans and their
> > > > longer
life have to do directly with the
> > > >
science-based knowledge and
technologies that
> > > > result
from the same scientific standards as those
> > > > that find
strong support for evolution and no
> > > > support
for Creationism.
> > > > * Christianity existed
for nearly two thousand years
> > > > and had no
effect on life expectancy and earnings
> > > > (except
when it was used as justification to rape
> > > > and pilage
the resources of other cultures).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > And if you
think this isn't related to
> > > >
religion--you need to go way
back to
> > > > square one
and start all over again.
> > > >
> > > > You never left square zero with your
argument. You provided
> > > > meaningless statistics with no causal
relation to the issue
> > > > your speaking about. The only thing you
accomplished was to
> > > > demonstrate that you are so hell-bent
(pun intended) on
> > > > finding a justification to forcibly
indoctrinate every child
> > > > with your fantasy-based world view and
your personal
> > > > intolerant moral code that you are
incapable of grasping the
> > > > complexity of issues involved.
> > > >
> > > > Thomas
> > > > Guess what, Thomas?
Christians could not care less how you
> > > > educate your children. What
Christians mostly object to is
> > > > your wanting to force your
"scientific theories" on their
> > > > children, using their own tax dollars.
Not a single
> > > > Christian wants to stop you and your
children from
> > > > grovelling in "evolution" and
"feminism" and "equal rights",
> > > > but none of them want immoral people
like you telling them
> > > > how to live their lives and educate
their children.
> > > > If you love sodomites so
much that you want them going to
> > > > school with your children, go to South
Africa where they
> > > > just legalized it, in contradiction to 3
centuries of
> > > > Christian progress. But don't tell moral
Christians that
> > > > their children have to accept sodomites
into their Boy Scout
> > > > troops and classrooms because it's just
not going to
> > > > happen. John Knight
> > > >
> > > \
> > >
> > > School prayer has no motivation other than to force religion on other
> > > people's children. Children can be taught by their parents to pray and
> > > taught by them to say private prayers even when they are in school.
> > > Public prayer in school serves only to force children to pray who
> > > otherwise would not.
> > >
> > > I don't love all sodomites. I simply do not have an irrational hatred or
> > > fear of them indoctrinated into me by an intolerant, ignorant, and
> > > superstitious world view. A world view that does not promote morality or
> > > kindness towards others, but rather is specifically designed to find
> > > excuses to act immorally towards certain kinds of people.
> >
> > CHRISTIANS DO NOT WANT THEIR CHILDREN TO BE AROUND PEOPLE LIKE YOU.
> > http://fathersmanifesto.com/sodomy.htm
> >
> > Do you understand that?
> >
> > Per the Holy Bible, you are "immoral", and we do not want to be around
such
> > people, ever, no matter what you "think" about sodomites.
> >
> > Who is "we". 86% of Americans are members of Christian churches,
and
> > another 7% are Christians who are not members of churches, for a total of
> > 93%. There is a problem here, which is that The Statistical Handbook of
the
> > American Family reports that an average of 80% of the American population
> > believes that sodomy is "always wrong". Another 6% believe it is
"almost
> > always wrong". 10% believes that it is "not wrong at all",
1% profess to be
> > "gay", and 3% of those who have committed sodomy report that it was
"against
> > their will".
> >
> > The PROBLEM is that some 13% of Americans who profess to be Christians ALSO
> > condone sodomy.
> >
> > The FACT is that the 86% who believe that sodomy is wrong will FOREVER
> > maintain sodomy as a CRIME in this country, no matter how
"compassionate"
> > sodomites think we need to be.
> >
> > >
> > > If you want to force your immoral and ignorant world view on your
> > > children you can do so, however if the means you use to do so make
use
> > > of any gov money, facilities, or services, then you may not violate
> > > others constitutional rights.
> > >
> > > Thomas
> > >
> >
> > Go to South Africa, Thomas. After 3 centuries of White rule, the blacks
now
> > running the country just legalized sodomy.
> >
> > Enjoy yourself. Knock yourself out. But don't tell Christians that
they
> > need to have their children hang around sodomites--in public school, in Boy
> > Scouts Troops, on TV, in the movies, or ANYWHERE else.
> >
> > Sodomites will always be punished for their crimes, which is what
"teachers"
> > who don't teach the facts are denying to the sodomites who otherwise
> > wouldn't be so open about in and DIE in prisons.
> >
> > John Knight
>
| |
|
