acsguitar wrote:Of course what this meant was "Lift weights in the winter or you aren't playing baseball." It's the same idea here. Like someone before said when you are 16 whatever the coach says goes. It's inappropriate 100% And it's typical of people who push their religion to ignore every bit of law and common sense to promote their religion. Welcome to America I guess. The whole "I don't care what the LAW says as long as god is happy" is a big problem in this country
You're getting more and more ridiculous as this thread goes on. This forum needs a facepalm icon.
acsguitar wrote:Of course what this meant was "Lift weights in the winter or you aren't playing baseball." It's the same idea here. Like someone before said when you are 16 whatever the coach says goes. It's inappropriate 100% And it's typical of people who push their religion to ignore every bit of law and common sense to promote their religion. Welcome to America I guess. The whole "I don't care what the LAW says as long as god is happy" is a big problem in this country
You're getting more and more ridiculous as this thread goes on. This forum needs a facepalm icon.
knapplc wrote:Circles. We're just running in circles now.
I could be a huge jerk right now but I won't. So I'll just disagree right now
Whatever makes you happy. You're asking the same questions and making the same unsubstantiated accusations and the same misunderstandings of the law as you were when this thread started. You've had the law explained to you, you've had the situation explained to you, and all of your questions have been answered, but you're still saying the same things as you were on the first couple of pages.
If you want to be a jerk, go ahead. Nobody's going to stop you.
knapplc wrote:Circles. We're just running in circles now.
I could be a huge jerk right now but I won't. So I'll just disagree right now
Whatever makes you happy. You're asking the same questions and making the same unsubstantiated accusations and the same misunderstandings of the law as you were when this thread started. You've had the law explained to you, you've had the situation explained to you, and all of your questions have been answered, but you're still saying the same things as you were on the first couple of pages.
If you want to be a jerk, go ahead. Nobody's going to stop you.
Madison wrote: As a teacher you know that schools don't have an unlimited money supply. The money and time need to be invested into eliminating the most dangerous things, rather than wasting both on something far less damaging/important. Once #1 is gone (drugs), move to #2 (guns). Once #2 is gone, move to #3 (gangs). A discussion about religion certainly doesn't rank very highly on the list.
It does happen to be the only one that's free, though.
Dunno if I'm just tired or what, but I'm confused. What do you mean?
I asked why can't we have both, and you replied citing limited funding and budgeting issues, saying we should invest time and money into removing drugs, guns, and gangs from our schools, and then look at religious discrepancy. What I'm saying is, the three former require time and money while simply not discussing religion outside of the context of curriculum doesn't. It's free.