3 ms·
Lol, it obviously isn’t. And you use language in the same silly way as the bureaucrats and administrators cited in this article. That words don’t have meanings
by jimbokun 4y ago
Lol, it obviously isn’t. And you use language in the same silly way as the bureaucrats and administrators cited in this article.
That words don’t have meanings to be used to engage ideas, but are simply signifiers of which political tribe you belong to.
- mcdonje 4y agoIt absolutely is a conservative think-tank. Look at their "about" page, or their Wikipedia page. I looked those up before I made a claim about them. Your claims about me and my language are also not correct. I am not engaging in tribalism. I am pointing it out.
- jimbokun 4y agoYou are saying the article is bad not for what it says, but who it is affiliated with. That’s the very essence of tribalism.
- mcdonje 4y agoBut my comment did address the article's content...
- jimbokun 4y agoIt did not. The things you say the article says, is clearly nowhere in the text.
- mcdonje 4y agoWhat I said was accurate about their intentions. If they said the same thing I did, they'd be saying the quiet part out loud. They're accusing everyone left of them as teaching "a doctrine", and they're accusing administration of unilaterally making mandates, but then clarifying that affinity groups were consulted. This is the type of article where they pretend to care about free speech. They tend to keep those separate from when they try to influence legislation on what can and can't be taught.