Video Alabama Teacher Showed His Class

[titlover]

Go fuck yourself...tard.

Things not going so well, huh?

cheer up, Napoleon. there'll be a new conspiracy to try and sell soon enough.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

His argument's a tough sell because A) it's strictly political and everyone can see right through that -- There's no genuineness to be found, and B) nobody else agrees with him. That always makes things tough.

[Mike the Lab Rat]

Mike,
If you think for one minute that there are not things in a HS science teacher’s job description, like getting the kids out in a fire or telling them to leave the building if he smells gas or breaking up a fight in class, or any number of things that make them safer, then you are a bigger dolt than I had imagined.

Actually, numbnut, those things ARE in a teacher's contract (or at least they're in mine), partly to spell out our contractual obligations and partly for liability reasons in case something goes wrong.

My God, is there ANYTHING you can get right in this debate?

Just because you are a fucking pussy and wouldn’t think of trying to help protect your class from danger (Hitler as POTUS) doesn’t mean it is wrong for this guy to do it.

Ah, I see.....foisting leftist political propaganda on kids who won't be able to vote until the "Great Satan" is out of office for 2 more years. makes sense to you.

Oh, wait, that's right, you busted out the utterly "brilliant" rationalization that "kids talk."

Right, I'm sure moms and dads across the land will be brought to their political senses by kids who are at an age where they either talk a senseless/pointless blue streak (but only to each other) or refuse to communicate in anything other than surly monotones.

I teach kids about this age and am far more aware of their communication preference than you are.

And I still can't believe that you think that the kids would get past the repeated use of a term that they get written up for using. Kids at that age freak out when a teacher accidentally lets a "damn" or "shit" or even "hell" leak out - hearing "asshole" 15 times would inspire nothing more than giggle fits in 13-year-olds.

You are a fucking idiot. The issues ‘is IF HE WAS HITLER would it be okay to call him an asshole.’ Not ‘can he prove he is Hitler.’ That you can’t even argue a point for a few posts without twisting and turning the playing field (A fallacy btw) shows me you are an idiot.

If Bush was Hitler, we'd have a serious biological/temporal issue that would be worthy of discussion from a purely scientific viewpoint.

Whether said organism was an "asshole" is an entirely subjective issue, not to mention that the specific term is inappropriate for an 8th grade class. Period.

Nice application of the Lemon test. Fuck you are stupid.

Then you must share the same opinion about U.S. District Judge John E. Jones (who decided in the Kitzmiller v. Dover) case and Judge kennedy (who ruled in Kunselman v. Western Reserve Local School Board) as well as those whose opinions they cited to support their decisions.

Look, lunkhead, when the "Antichrist" thing came up and you idiotically tried to argue that specifying that the POTUS was that individual would not violate the religious neutrality bit, you showed yourself for the legal charlatan you are.

No resonable person would ever consider the Antichrist a secular topic, nor would identifying and insisting that a particular living individual is in fact the Antichrist be considered a secular issue for discussion. You'd have a tax-payer paid public school teacher advocating a particular religious statement held by particular faiths (and not others).

If you don't see how this would be a HUGE problem, then your partisan stupidity has blinded you.

One of the things that's coming out of this debate is that you may, in fact be a lawyer, but that you know and understand precious little about education law and/or how the church/state thing works in schools. Sure, you may have legal training, but you are so out of your depth in this area that you are pulling completely untenable statements out of myour ass, hoping that I'll cave. The fact is, that thanks to teaching a subject in which religious nuts are constantly trying to inject their Bible-thumping views into my curriculum (creationism/ID), I've attending numerous seminars and kept up on the reading of the legal stuff in this area (including printing out and reading the Dover decision). Additionally, the same "thumpers" had been trying to force out district to relinquish the "Blue Devil" mascot as they argue that it is promoting Satanism - the current junior class in my school (whom I advise) have been fighting this, checking out legal precedents to support our cause of keeping the mascot.

You frigging lose again.

And lastly, your knowledge of anything pertaining to education and teaching is fundamentally, deeply flawed. The fact that you think that any teacher has the right to use their position to pontificate on political or religious issues shows an incredible ignorance on your part.

Political and religious issues can be brought up in class, as long as it is done in the proper context, in a balanced way, and with developmentally and linguistically appropriate resource materials. The 8th grade science teacher did none of the above and knew that what he was doing was wrong, or he'd have told parents beforehand what he was going to do and how.

[Moving Sale]

"Look, lunkhead, when the "Antichrist" thing came up and you idiotically tried to argue that specifying that the POTUS was that individual would not violate the religious neutrality bit, you showed yourself for the legal charlatan you are."
Nice Lie you fucking dolt. That was not the issue and you know it. YOU said IF he was the AC the teacher could not call him an asshole. Frame the issue as it was presented or STFU.

~~~~
J,
Nice sig. And all it cost you was your integrity. Props.

[The Seer]

Well, at least I got a new sig from this thread.

Actually, that's a sig many would be proud of.... :wink:

[Mike the Lab Rat]

YOU said IF he was the AC the teacher could not call him an asshole. Frame the issue as it was presented or STFU.

How's this: an 8th grade teacher cannot use the word asshole in speaking with his students. He cannot call Bush an asshole (even if Bush were the Antichrist), cannot call students an asshole, cannot refer to the rectum as an asshole in a biological context, etc.

The word "asshole" is not supposed to be used by teachers in class.

However, this teacher calling YOU an asshole right now is OK, since I'm not doing so in front of my students.

Asshole.

:P

[War Wagon]

Somebody a few pages back said, and I paraphrase... "Remind me to never get in an argument with MtLR".

Hey, I made that mistake...once. You especially don't want to make that mistake anywhere around spring break.

Dude is probably as fine a teacher as they come, but I believe he missed his calling.

If Mewling Sale had to face the likes of Lab Rat in the courtroom on a regular basis, he'd be run into a different profession quicker than Mace would be forced into calling him a short, stupid cunt.

RACK! you, Mike, for force feeding MS's garbage right back down the esophagus and making her choke on it until the bile spews out the nostrils.

I'm sure there's a JW Red on the rocks or three waiting for you nearby, and consider the next few rounds on me.

[WhatsMyName]

Frankly, I think Mike the Lab Rat gave MultipleSclerosis too much credit by writing back to her so much. Mike won this one before it even started, so all he really did was waste his own time talking to a retard.

[Moving Sale]

Somebody a few pages back said, and I paraphrase... "Remind me to never get in an argument with MtLR".

Because he types stuff like this...
"No resonable (Sic) person would ever consider the Antichrist a secular topic,..."
...when the test is not "is it a secular topic" but "does it have a secular purpose?"

So you think you should not get into an argument with him because he lies? Is that why?

Fucking tards.

[Goober McTuber]

Hey, you’re pretty mouthy for a little feller.

[Mike the Lab Rat]

Because he types stuff like this...
"No resonable (Sic) person would ever consider the Antichrist a secular topic,..."
...when the test is not "is it a secular topic" but "does it have a secular purpose?"

So you think you should not get into an argument with him because he lies? Is that why?

Fucking tards.

The entirety of what I typed:

No resonable person would ever consider the Antichrist a secular topic, nor would identifying and insisting that a particular living individual is in fact the Antichrist be considered a secular issue for discussion. You'd have a tax-payer paid public school teacher advocating a particular religious statement held by particular faiths (and not others).

Rather convenient on your part to edit my statement as you saw fit. The intent of my statement was obvious - discussion of the topic would not have a secular "purpose" either.

The ENTIRE CONCEPT of the Antichrist is a purely religious, and it would be impossible to "prove" that Bush (or any living individual) fulfilled the requirements for that role without resorting to Christian writings and theology. The entire purpose of identifying Bush as the Antichrist would be to prove his "dangerous role"...as described in Scripture, and to thereby get folks to prepare for/fight Bush or face the tribulations described in Scripture.

I'm guessing that identifying Bush as the Antichrist to have folks fired up to prepare for the "End Times" would probably be seen by every frigging judge in the country as having "a religious purpose."

Face it, you lost the debate, did nothing to help your credibility as a poster or professional (you're probably one of the few shysters to have clients wind up with death row for a speeding ticket...), and now you're reduced to your little hobbit games of drive-by attacks.

Well, what can we expect from a gibbering idiot who honestly believes that showing potty-mouthed anti-Bush videos to 13-year-olds is a politically viable way of educating and mobilizing the adult populace against a lame duck president?

BTW - I find it ironic that you feel the need to type "[sic]" after my mistyping considering the numerous misspellings your neurons churn out post after post...

[DMike316]

Where is Big John McCarthy to stop this mauling?

[Goober McTuber]

California law

[Moving Sale]

MS,
You said that being called a name is legal grounds for filing false charges.

If I did I didn't mean to.

Mike,
Spin it anyway you want but "secular topic" and "secular issue for discussion" just aren't part of the test. The first part of the test is 'does the RELIGIOUS talk/rule/law have a secular purpose.' The whole point of needing the test is that there is something non-secular about the speech/rule/law. Of course there is a secular purpose. The secular purpose is to warn the kids. It's pretty simple even for a simpleton like you. You can't get the test right and you can't even frame the question right. As I said before, frame the question correctly or STFU.

[Mike the Lab Rat]

The secular purpose is to warn the kids.

Against a supernaturally-powered and Biblically prophesied entity?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

As I said before, frame the question correctly or STFU.

I have to give you credit - each time I think you've hit a new low in jaw-dropping stupidity, you lower the bar and set a new standard. I mean, usually the kind of synaptic misfiring you've been displaying usually results from blunt force trauma to the head or an extra chromosome or two. For you to crank out, post after post, more and more inane drivel that causes us to either think you are trolling or are in desperate need of in-home shows a real gift for brain-aching stupidity.

Props to you, Corky.

[Moving Sale]

The secular purpose is to warn the kids.

Against a supernaturally-powered and Biblically prophesied entity?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Laugh it up science boy. Public schools and religion mix all the time. It's not my fault you are too stupid to even come close to being able to figure when that is... even when I give you the right test.

'There is no secular purpose in protecting kids.'
I Laughed!

[Mike the Lab Rat]

The secular purpose is to warn the kids.

Against a supernaturally-powered and Biblically prophesied entity?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Laugh it up science boy. Public schools and religion mix all the time.

Oh, you mean like benedictions at graduations...oh no, wait, those have been ruled illegal...

Oh, you mean like public prayers before a big game...oh no, wait, that's illegal too...

How about some silent prayers or 'meditation' time in class? Oh no, that's no good...

How 'bout bringing in creationism in biology class? Oh wait, there's been numerous rulings opposing that one...

Look "He-Who-Grasps-At-Straws (So That He Can Build Straw Man)," you are an absolute, microcephalic clinically-certifiable idiot if you honestly believe for one second that the whole Antichrist discussion would be ruled as legal in a public school, especially in a science class.

I made a specific point of stating that discussions about religion ARE appropriate when done in the proper context - like in a social studies class when relevant (discussing religions of a culture being studied, the Reformation, religious wars in history, reasons for cultures clashing, etc.), or if I discuss pre-Germ Theory beliefs concerning the origin and spread of infectious disease. Trying to pretend that I never brought those up is either a convenient bit of amnesia on your part (considering your other mental defects, however, it is quite possible) or an outright attempts to misrepresent my argument. But no, a fine, upstanding lawyer like you would never do a thing like that...

'There is no secular purpose in protecting kids.'
I Laughed!

It's nice that you crack yourself up, since you're the sole maker of that particular claim.

Protecting kids against legitimate threats is not the problem. Describing the sitting president as a bogeyman from Christian Scripture is not protecting them. Nor is calling the sitting president an asshole 15 times in a video.

How precisely, oh spinner of lies, does showing the video "protect" the kids? Bush is already in office, with about two more to go, and then he's done. The kids will be about 15 when his term ends, leaving them a whole 3 years from being able to vote. What precisely do you think the magic video will do to help "protect" them?

Oh wait, that's right, in your sock puppet playhouse, the kids suddenly mature beyond their years, get past the whole repetition of 'asshole' and stop giggling long enough to have the epiphany that "My God, this man Bush is a threat." Then, suddenly struck with an eloquence never before held by 13-year-olds, they go out and convert their parents and other adults, preaching on streetcorners if need be. Soon, that malefic tyrant Bush is swept out of office by some means as yet not quite worked out in your bizarre fantasies...

Keep a swinging for the fences, Zippy - maybe one of these times you won't hit yourself in the head with the bat and impale yourself on the tee-ball stand...

[velocet]

Valiant effort there, Moving Sale. The whole "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic" gambit was a good move in face of the fact that this situation is untenable.

From different sides of the aisle BSmack and I could agree on the similar Bennish controversy, and from different sides of the aisle we agree on this one. The former, because there was something to defend, the latter, well, there's only so many coats of shine to apply to a turd before you know that you'll win the Shiniest Turd Competition. But in spite of that you went for the challenge and did as well as could be expected in the pursuit (for a message board... I doubt any of the participants in this entertaining thread gave it their utmost all.)






velocet

[Moving Sale]

Valiant effort there, Moving Sale.

When you're riding a losing horse, you have to whip it harder.


And speaking of horses and whips, are we done here Mike?

[Mike the Lab Rat]

And speaking of horses and whips, are we done here Mike?

What? Eight pages is enough? You think?

[Moving Sale]

Last word...

And speaking of horses and whips, are we done here Mike?

What? Eight pages is enough? You think?

[titlover]

Last word...

And speaking of horses and whips, are we done here Mike?

What? Eight pages is enough? You think?

fuck off, shorty.