Jump to content

School Members & Parents Clash Over First Amendment Issues & Face Mask Mandates


Chevdove

Recommended Posts

 

School Members & Parents Clash Over First Amendment Issues & Face Mask Mandates

 

A few days ago, government officials became involved due to some violent and potentially violent conflicts that have occurred amongst certain school board members and parents in America over the recent issues of whether or not to impose face mask mandates in the classroom and also what legally can be taught in the classroom on the subject of ‘racism’. This morning I came across this article about two mothers in the state of Wisconsin who are now bringing a lawsuit against the public schools because face masks were not required yet, their children and several other students in these classrooms tested positive for COVID. Not only that but the contact tracing was obscure, therefore these mothers and many others are angry with Wisconsin for not following the guidelines of CDC:

 

 

Parents sue Wisconsin schools after their children catch covid-19

 

Gina Harkins, (c) 2021, The Washington Post

Tue, October 12, 2021, 7:40 AM

 

Just weeks into the new school year, both boys tested positive for the coronavirus. Lawsuits filed this month in two Wisconsin federal courts blame the schools' lax policies on masks, quarantining and contact tracing.

 

Both the boards of education for the School District of Waukesha and the School District of Fall Creek had voted to end many of the covid-19 mitigation policies that had been in place last year, according to the two lawsuits. That included getting rid of universal mask requirements.

Parents sue Wisconsin schools after their children catch covid-19 (yahoo.com)

 

So even though officials decided it was best to return the students to the classroom, there are pressing issues today due to the COVID pandemic and also recent issues about the educational curriculum that involves whether or not to teach about racism from a specific perspective. It seems that a theory on racism has been constructed, and instead of just teaching on the historical events about subjects such as ‘Chattel Slavery’, ‘Jim Crow Laws’ and the CRM [the Civil Rights Movement], the coined phrase of the day, C.R.T. [Critical Race Theory] seems to be the new approach that has been a topic of discussion on whether or not to implement it in the educational curriculum. Until last week, I had never heard of the term! What does it mean?  Any comments? So far nothing has come up against the major subject of ‘the HAULOCAUST Movement’ that occurred against the European Jews which has been a major subject taught as its own separate unit and curriculum for about six weeks even since I was a young student.

 

It seems that some Americans do not want their children to be taught about this subject CRT in the classrooms and it has become a hot debate in even in politics. After the recent and horrible death of George Floyd by a White racist police, it appears that this subject became an issue about teaching it in the classroom, however, former President Trump issued a statement on the basis that it would become too divisive:

 

Critical Race Theory: A Brief History

By Jacey Fortin

July 27, 2021

 

… Last year, after protests over the police killing of George Floyd prompted new conversations about structural racism in the United States, President Donald J. Trump issued a memo to federal agencies that warned against critical race theory, labeling it as “divisive,” followed by an executive order barring any training that suggested the United States was fundamentally racist.

What is Critical Race Theory? A Brief History Explained - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

 

My first thoughts would be ‘Is this really a theory that cannot be proven, if not on what basis? Why has it not been proven by now? And, if this theory cannot be proven then why should it not be taught on a higher level such as in college at least?’ Is our American government in denial that they constructed ‘RACIAL CATEGORIES’ based on skin color as a description of its’ slaves at one time in order to benefit for their racial category of White? Is our government in denial of racism as a result of these modern new age constructs of hierarchy based on skin color? Is this a question of ‘Has the American government benefacted from racist laws’? Many Americans may not be educated on the reality of this subject however, this government has an obligation to acknowledge the truth. Should the issue of ‘racism’ be categorized a theory, an opinion, or a fact. Perhaps one of the problems of not understanding the origins of racism could stem from a governmental denial of ancient history about this subject and only in consideration of the definition of ‘Race’ based upon the new modern times. Whatever the case may be, I do not completely understand the conflict over CRT nor it being defined as a theory.

 

 

… Use of the term skyrocketed from there, though it is often used to describe a range of activities that don’t really fit the academic definition, like acknowledging historical racism in school lessons or attending diversity trainings at work.

What is Critical Race Theory? A Brief History Explained - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a sports fan (boxing and football), I get to sit back and watch white folks mix it up over their constitutional rights (1st & 2nd amendment), pandemic fallout (masks & vax), insurrection and racism (CRT). 

 

Not since the Civil War has white America been so clearly divided over issue(s).  The media does a great job of stirring the pot.  They have dispatched cameras everywhere to document it.  

 

I don't know what the outcome will be but I think we'll soon find out what's really most important to white folks.  Of course, I have some ideas. 😎

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I HOPE the fighting and division continues to escalate.

I hope the nation ends up shutting down again.

As far as it being a 1st Amendment issue.....
Since WHEN was the 1sth Amendment respected???

The people never were free to say what they want or express themselves how they wished since the founding of this country.
That's mere cheap talk.

They are PRIVILEDGES...not rights.
And anytime the government or law wants to take them away from most people, they just DO so.

You don't have a "right" not to wear as mask any more than do you have a right NOT to wear clothes when you walk out the house.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

I HOPE the fighting and division continues to escalate.

I hope the nation ends up shutting down again.

As far as it being a 1st Amendment issue.....
Since WHEN was the 1sth Amendment respected???

When folks were under the illusion that they had rights and privilege, ignorance was bliss. This was their country to do as they d8mn well pleased. 

 

Now that they're being told what to do, wear a mask and get a jab, it feels like a violation of freedoms. They don't like it one bit. Tastes funny. 

 

Now, lines have been drawn in the sand between the left and  right. The fighting will continue into the 2022 midterms and beyond.

 

IMO, America will not shut down again. Except Jeff Bezos d8mn near doubling his fortune, too  much money was lost during that exercise. They're going to do everything possible to return to normalcy.😎

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A house divided cannot stand.
However is this house really divided...or is it ROLE PLAYING that's really taking place?

There is something that great and wonderful Elder Mr. Neely Fuller Jr. said that actually I had been seeing since my teens.

I would watch White boys PRETEND to fight around Black boys.
I wasn't sure if they were doing it to be cool or what but it was obviously fake and would rarely escalate to getting physical.  And if it did, it would be a few slaps and shoves.
I knew White dudes could do more than that to eachother and often did when they were TRULY angry.

I saw this more and more on jobs and other places where White men would do almost like a "role play" where they would pretend to hate eachother or fight with eachother specifically around us, but didn't QUITE understand why they were doing it other than they wanted us to see it.

I wonder if the same thing might be going on here.

I wonder how serious the leaders of BOTH sides of the debate really are in their positions and how much of it is just role playing to pretend they're really fighting with eachother to give the illusion that they are divided.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

A house divided cannot stand.
However is this house really divided...or is it ROLE PLAYING that's really taking place?

 

I wonder how serious the leaders of BOTH sides of the debate really are in their positions and how much of it is just role playing to pretend they're really fighting with eachother to give the illusion that they are divided.

Civil War.  A total of about 500,000 dead from the North and South.  White folks fighting for real over a  principle...slavery.  Illusion of division.

 

Afterwards, one of the primary successes of Reconstruction was restoration of the Federal Union and limited reprisals against the South directly after the war.  Former slaveowners were given reparations.

 

White folks will kill each other like it's nothing and when the dust settles, they're back to drinking and playing cards like nothing ever happened.  Every World War is indicative of it.  The one thing they are united in is maintaining racism. 😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites


ProfD

 

Quick aside......

 

As I study back in history, I'm beginning to wonder if the Civil War really WAS fought over slavery.

After studying it a little closer I'm beginning to believe the war was really fought to keep the southern states from seceding and forming their own little nations.
They were making so much money from slavery that they wanted to branch off and do their own thing instead of seeing so much of their revenue go to Northern states.

 

I have been convinced that the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 was a last ditch effort of Lincoln to turn the tide of a war he was losing and gamble on "freed" Black folks to pick up arms and join the losing North against their Southern masters.

 

And the gamble paid off.

Once Black folks were allowed to fight...the North started winning.

 

But I say all of that to say......and think about it...if the Civil War was fought to liberate the Slaves, then why wasn't the Emancipation Proclamation made BEFORE the war go started instead of in the middle of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

As I study back in history, I'm beginning to wonder if the Civil War really WAS fought over slavery.

After studying it a little closer I'm beginning to believe the war was really fought to keep the southern states from seceding and forming their own little nations.
They were making so much money from slavery that they wanted to branch off and do their own thing instead of seeing so much of their revenue go to Northern states.

 

I have been convinced that the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 was a last ditch effort of Lincoln to turn the tide of a war he was losing and gamble on "freed" Black folks to pick up arms and join the losing North against their Southern masters.

 

But I say all of that to say......and think about it...if the Civil War was fought to liberate the Slaves, then why wasn't the Emancipation Proclamation made BEFORE the war go started instead of in the middle of it?

You're on the right track.  Lincoln did not want the institution of slavery to spread from the South upward into the North and West.  The South threatened to secede from the Union.

 

It was like keeping a drug dealer from expanding into new territories.  The South wanted to go big and felt like the North should mind their business especially since they were benefitting from the goods and services the free labor of slavery produced.

 

Lincoln stuck to his principles of keeping the institution of slavery as a Southern thing and not letting it expand.  The Southerners bucked.  War was declared.  Black folks benefitted indirectly.  😎

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 4:27 PM, ProfD said:

 

Lincoln stuck to his principles of keeping the institution of slavery as a Southern thing and not letting it expand.  The Southerners bucked.  War was declared.  Black folks benefitted indirectly.  😎

@ProfD  The Civil War was also instrumental in the formation of the electoral college  which was conjured up to placate the defeated Confederacy States by giving them them equal voting power with the large Federal states. Just another reason for the electoral college to be abolished along with supreme court justices being appointed for life!  Like Lincoln, everybody reveres Ruth Bader Ginsberg but she neutralized her legacy and endangered freedom by refusing to retire during Obama's administration when she was in her 80s, so he could've appointed a liberal to the court to maintain so much of the legislation that protects individual rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cynique said:

@ProfD  The Civil War was also instrumental in the formation of the electoral college  which was conjured up to placate the defeated Confederacy States by giving them them equal voting power with the large Federal states. Just another reason for the electoral college to be abolished along with supreme court justices being appointed for life!  Like Lincoln, everybody reveres Ruth Bader Ginsberg but she neutralized her legacy and endangered freedom by refusing to retire during Obama's administration when she was in her 80s, so he could've appointed a liberal to the court to maintain so much of the legislation that protects individual rights.


????

The Electoral College existed BEFORE the Civil War.
It existed back in the 1700 close to the original Constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  What i wrote was based on one of of the many arguments i have heard from those  condemning  the electoral college,        "Electoral College in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. However, the term “electoral college” does not appear in the Constitution....The stain of slavery is on the Electoral College as it is on all US history." 

This is excerpted from what i looked up. There is an implied connection between the electoral college and the after math of the civil war because there were many amendments. There's a wealth of information about this on Google and Wikipedia. So you can look it up and  post your rebuttal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cynique said:

Just another reason for the electoral college to be abolished along with supreme court justices being appointed for life! 

Unfortunately, the government won't blow up the electoral college in favor of the popular vote.

 

I think SCOTUS justices should definitely have a term limit of no more than 10 years on the bench.😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...