Texas Gov. Abbott wants to get rid of mandatory public education

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Warp12

The whole "taxpayer" thing is a different debate. Lets just say that if Juan buys a Snickers bar and pays 5% in taxes from his under-the-table job, it is not the same as me paying 35% out of my paycheck, plus that 5%.

Remember, technically these kids should not even be here in the first place. Their illegal parents made that decision. It isn't about who's "sins" they are paying for. All of that falls on the parents, imo. And nobody should have to provide any resources for these people, educational or otherwise.

You are then indeed saying the child is to be punished for the sins of their fathers. I suppose good old fashion Christianity.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by psionl0

I don't see the value either. Indoctrination - whether it be religious instruction or teaching that only the official theory of evolution is true - is the antithesis of critical thinking.

Would you advocate a similar approach to geography with equal weight being given to flat-Earthism ?

How about teaching maths where equal weight being given to a variety of values of pi ?

How about medical institutions "teaching the controversy" of the humours ?

How much time should be allocated by science teachers to explore religious rubbish in their classes especially when fundamentalists are well known for their disruptive tactics. Ensure that every biology lesson is hijacked by a lengthy diversion into new-Earth creationism ? Sure, explore evolution vs. ID vs. creationism in critical thinking or philosophy classes but to allow, encourage even, science classes to be ruined by people who aren't interested in critical thinking but just pushing their fables is unwise IMO.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by psionl0

I don't see the value either. Indoctrination - whether it be religious instruction or teaching that only the official theory of evolution is true - is the antithesis of critical thinking.

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

There, let's watch you lie and pretend you can't understand that "wordsalad."

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by Random

Well, if you are arguing that children have no right to an education, then why have a public education system at all?

Of course, this is probably just a few years away from becoming mainstream GOP policy...

First off, I am not saying that no children have a right to an education here. I think you know this.

I am saying that children of illegals should not have that right. I don't think they should be granted citizenship just because they were born here, either. As far as their burden to the US while growing up uneducated, there shouldn't be one. They should not be allowed to stay here.

[Random]

Originally Posted by Warp12

First off, I am not saying that no children have a right to an education here. I think you know this.

I am saying that children of illegals should not have that right. I don't think they should be granted citizenship just because they were born here, either. As far as their burden to the US while growing up uneducated, there shouldn't be one. They should not be allowed to stay here.

Again, they are children. They have significantly little say in whether or not they stay in the country, legally or otherwise.

[Crossbow]

Originally Posted by Warp12

First off, I am not saying that no children have a right to an education here. I think you know this.

I am saying that children of illegals should not have that right. I don't think they should be granted citizenship just because they were born here, either. As far as their burden to the US while growing up uneducated, there shouldn't be one. They should not be allowed to stay here.

Well I just have to ask something about this remarkable posting ...

Just how do you propose to locate and apprehend these children who you find so objectionable?

Area you planning on setting up a network of Child Catchers like the one shown in the film Chitty Chitty Bang Bang?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Catcher

[sackett]

Originally Posted by psionl0

I don't see the value either. Indoctrination - whether it be religious instruction or teaching that only the official theory of evolution is true - is the antithesis of critical thinking.

wish that people would abandon that word. They never, but never, use it right.*

There is no official theory of evolution. There is no official theory of tectonics, or stellar origins, or market forces. There is no official theory of any ******* thing. There are only theories that best explain facts as they are currently understood.

And if new evidence emerges that requires modification of ANY theory, you'll see scientists shoving and elbowing to publish it. Eventually, it will appear in textbooks. And in the mad denunciations of the religion industry.

* Come to that, does "official" ever mean much of anything? Which officials? How do they make something official? Must they all concur? Are there degrees of officiality? Suppose somebody (not me!) decides that something isn't official enough for him. What do we do then? psion, tell us what to do!

[JoeMorgue]

He knows. Calling evolution a theory is just bait at this point.

[sackett]

@Warp12.Yo bro! You sure use SHOULD and SHOULDN'T a lot. You should all over yourself, seems like.

Heck, anybody can should. Me, I think all kids of the right age should go to public school. If there's a grownup living in the district to bring them in and enroll them, that should be sufficient.

Anybody born on US soil is an American. That's the law, and it should be. Any American who wants it otherwise should be ashamed of himself.

Or am I just full of should? You're the expert, shouldn't you give us a ruling on that?

Make it official while you're at it.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Crossbow

Well I just have to ask something about this remarkable posting ...

Just how do you propose to locate and apprehend these children who you find so objectionable?

Area you planning on setting up a network of Child Catchers like the one shown in the film Chitty Chitty Bang Bang?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Catcher

I suggest a two pronged approach. If they are found by ICE then deport them back to their parents' homeland regardless of whether they've got the parents as well.

Similarly, if they request education and cannot prove their parents' citizenship/residency then deport them. Again with or without parents.

I think that's what is being advocated.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Not if I'm writing the law, they aren't.

Thanks a lot for that. My three children's mother, though a legal alien, was not a citizen, and therefore by your broadly swinging axe, not entitled to the rights of American born children, at least not automatically without some additional legal procedure for which no bureaucracy or budget exists. But hey, what does this country need, but another layer of bureaucracy?

I'm sure you can backpedal your statement and say, as so often happens, "Oh, I didn't mean that,"because you meant illegals without saying it, and without thinking about how the distinction might be made, nor how it might be possible to enact unconstitutional laws that nullify the rights that children already born had when they were born, but we are so often now being governed by people who do not think and do not count the exceptions swept up in their bloviating rhetoric that I think it's time, just this once, to stop and actually THINK about what you're saying, and not have to unsay it later. I wish I could express my true opinion of that position here, but I don't like yellow cards, so I'll just have to say....excuse me for disagreeing!

You're all in favor of denying rights to those whose parents are illegal, arguing that this is not penalizing the children, but you're apparently also in favor of retroactively removing the rights of those already born, whose citizenship was guaranteed from that moment by the law.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by psionl0

What sort of rubbish is this?

In a maths/science class students should be encouraged to demand proof that a given teaching is true (or at least better than any other explanation) and why alternative theories fail.

Nobody advocates teaching "flat earthism" / "multiple values of pi" / "the humours" along with regular teachings.

Worst strawman ever.

Again with pretending schools are one long "debate class" that lets you teach gibberish.

Pathetic.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Critical support for teaching the one true biblical creationism in schools:

Quote:

n the beliefs of the Nation of Islam (NOI), Yakub (sometimes spelled Yacub or Yaqub) was a black scientist who lived 6,600 years ago and began the creation of the white race/whites. He is said to have done this through a form of selective breeding which is referred to as "grafting", while he was living on the island of Patmos. The Nation of Islam's theology states that Yakub is the biblical Jacob.

The story has caused disputes within the NOI during its history. Under its current leader Louis Farrakhan, the NOI continues to assert that the story of Yakub is true,[1] claiming that modern science is consistent with it.[2] Despite the NOI's self-proclamations of consistency with modern science, there are no reputable, peer-reviewed scientific studies that support this assertion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakub_(Nation_of_Islam)

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

The story of Yakub seems more scientifically plausible than Young Earth Creationism.

"Sounds good" has nothing to do with science or critical thinking.

[shemp]

Originally Posted by The Don

I think that Republicans would like to do away with citizenship by dint of being born in the US and would like to modify it to citizenship being granted to those born to people Republicans legally resident in, or even citizens of, the Unite States.

FTFY

[JoeMorgue]

Don't let them drag us down the hole of explaining basics facts of how logic and reality work. We'll never come back if they do.

Stop letting the wrong people put more and more layers of wrongness that we are then expected to explain to them.

They are wrong about education. We'll deal with them being wrong about literally everything else later, that's not the topic now.

I'm so sick of them shutting down conversation by going saying one wrong then and then needing a simpler wrong thing explained to them just to get back to the original wrong thing.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser

And science and critical thinking thus far suggest that the theory of evolution is on par with the current atomic model, the current model for physics etc.

Not perfect, but by far the best and thus the one that should be taught in science classes in high school.
It's hard enough to teach without having to pay lip-service to every unproven and untestable theory out there.

But why do we have to teach it by rote? Why are students not supposed to ask why a particular explanation is the best one for the available data? Why can they not explore why alternative scientific theories (ie not YEC or any other form of untestable religious dogma) do not fit the known data as well?

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by bruto

Thanks a lot for that. My three children's mother, though a legal alien, was not a citizen, and therefore by your broadly swinging axe, not entitled to the rights of American born children, at least not automatically without some additional legal procedure for which no bureaucracy or budget exists. But hey, what does this country need, but another layer of bureaucracy?

I'm sure you can backpedal your statement and say, as so often happens, "Oh, I didn't mean that,"because you meant illegals without saying it

I said "illegals" a lot. I mean a whole lot. Like, in almost every post.

[sackett]

Originally Posted by plague311

Who said that? I haven't read that anywhere in this thread.

Well heck, we can use this thread to conduct a little poll.

Everybody who thinks there's one unchanging theory of evolution, raise your ✋️.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by JesseCuster

General consensus among who?

The religious.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Darat

Which alternate scientific theory for evolution?

God did it with magic.

[pgwenthold]

Originally Posted by Crossbow

Well I just have to ask something about this remarkable posting ...

Just how do you propose to locate and apprehend these children who you find so objectionable?

Area you planning on setting up a network of Child Catchers like the one shown in the film Chitty Chitty Bang Bang?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Catcher

That guy always freaks me out.

[JoeMorgue]

So now we're being forced, yet again, to have a "civil debate" where we have to "prove" that schools should teach facts and not go "Here's a fact and here's some nonsense, it's not on us to tell you which is which."

[Donal]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

So now we're being forced, yet again, to have a "civil debate" where we have to "prove" that schools should teach facts and not go "Here's a fact and here's some nonsense, it's not on us to tell you which is which."

Except you're not. You can move on without ever addressing what is plainly a disingenuous attempt to derail the discussion.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Donal

Except you're not. You can move on without ever addressing what is plainly a disingenuous attempt to derail the discussion.

Yeah and then we'll see the same arguments being mad on the floor of Congress in a few weeks.

"Just ignore the people trying to find new ways to be wrong" is how we got here. If you wish to complicit in that fine, I will not.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by kookbreaker

This would be like saying kids should jump off tall buildings and lick outlets because gravity and electrical theory are also theory and denying letting kids do this is “close-minded”.

No he's now going to tell us that is totally different for reasons that he will literally never provide to us.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by kookbreaker

While the basic structure of evolution as proposed by Darwin is in place evolution has undergone multiple, multiple changes to its aspects over the years.

I wish people would regularly make the distinction between evolution and the theory of natural selection. Darwin is responsible for the latter, NOT the former. The concept of evolution predates him, and was an inferred phenomenon distinct from any theory of its cause. Other explanations have been proposed, but so far only natural selection has survived scrutiny.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Yeah and then we'll see the same arguments being mad on the floor of Congress in a few weeks.

"Just ignore the people trying to find new ways to be wrong" is how we got here. If you wish to complicit in that fine, I will not.

Not ignore them, but there's no need to engage them directly. Do you think that maybe *this* time they'll see the error of their ways? Precisely what laws are being passed by people here?

You should pay attention to the rhetoric and how they are trying to frame and change the discussion, but it's an asymmetric game. They aren't trying to accomplish anything specific. They have no coherent goals, principles, or beliefs. They are just there to stop any sort of progress. Why would you even want to deal with them head-on?

Coming here and pointing out some right-wingers fallacies might make you feel smart, but you're even less effective than complacency. You're letting them bog down the conversation and drive away people who maybe want to understand these things.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Donal

Not ignore them, but there's no need to engage them directly.

I've made it very clear I'm talking AT them, not TO them.

[newyorkguy]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

I'm trying to discover, is Abbott proposing to bar the children of undocumented persons from Texas schools or is he trying to shift the costs? Shift the burden from local taxpayers to...the federal government? That actually sounds fairly reasonable...

As it turns out Governor Greg Abbot isn't proposing the children of the undocumented be barred from schools -in Texas or anywhere else. That would be barbaric. Below is a news story from the Texas Tribune.

Quote:

Gov. Greg Abbott wants the federal government to pay for the public education of undocumented students in Texas schools, arguing that President Joe Biden’s administration’s decision to lift the Title 42 policy later this month will bring an influx of immigrants across the border that is “unsustainable and unavoidable.”

Last month, a Texas Education Agency lawyer testified before the House Public Education Committee that federal guidance indicates that denying enrollment or attendance based on citizenship status would violate Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Texas does not track the citizenship status of students. Therefore, it is unclear how many undocumented students are enrolled or what the financial impact on Texas public schools is. Texas spends a minimum of $6,160 per student, which lags behind the national average of $12,600 in 2018. Texas Tribune link

The 1964 Civil Rights Act established that the only requirement a school district can use for enrollment is residency. That can be established by a parent producing a utility bill. School districts are not allowed to ask for citizenship or immigration status. If the kids live in the district they can go to school there.

With a big rise in undocumented people arriving in Texas Abbot is concerned with the effect on local taxes. (Schools are normally funded by property taxes, not income tax.) Abbot is also basing this request on the fact the state cannot take control of the parts of the international border that are within their state, only the federal government has that power.

In this case I find Abbot's request to be fairly reasonable.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

With a big rise in undocumented people arriving in Texas Abbot is concerned with the effect on local taxes. (Schools are normally funded by property taxes, not income tax.) Abbot is also basing this request on the fact the state cannot take control of the parts of the international border that are within their state, only the federal government has that power.

I'm not sure I see your point. Illegal immigrants have to live somewhere too, and whatever place they're living is certainly kicking up property taxes.

From a tax perspective, there's no difference between illegal aliens living in slums and a poor American citizen doing the same.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

I said "illegals" a lot. I mean a whole lot. Like, in almost every post.

Yes, and we can presume that you would like to deny American citizenship to those born of illegal parents. But you have not really addressed the problem here, that until such a law is passed, the law explicitly states that all children born within the jurisdiction of the United States are citizens by birth. That means, among other things, that all the children who attend public schools for the five or six years AFTER such a law is passed, if it is passed, will STILL be citizens. There is a strict constitutional bar against ex post facto laws.

And though it is a subsidiary issue, you have not suggested a way that such a rule could be enforced without a citizenship test for children and parents, and a bureaucracy that can handle not only that but the inevitable mistakes and oversights and appeals that will result from it.

And of course we can hope you mean the same thing every time you state it, but if you don't you don't, and since I suspect you sometimes will accept collateral damage for ideas you support, precision is important whether you think so or not.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I've made it very clear I'm talking AT them, not TO them.

That's great for hurting the feelings of someone you're speaking to face to face who actually believes what they are saying. That is not what we're dealing with.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Donal

That's great for hurting the feelings of someone you're speaking to face to face who actually believes what they are saying.

Oh ******* spare me.

[newyorkguy]

In most places property owners are assessed for a special school district tax. It's often a separate payment on your tax account and in many places the tax is considered an irritant.

What Abbot is saying is, an influx of the kids into a school district, especially a smaller district, will create an identifiable increase in the school assessment for individual property owners. That will generate a lot of complaints. So he would like the federal government to pay the added costs.

I'm sure this is for when someone gets up at a school board meeting and complains their tax increased because of "all these illegal kids!" If Abbot can get the feds to shoulder the cost local politicians can assure property tax owners -- and it's usually people who own private homes, not the guy who owns a factory -- that the costs have been transferred to the federal government.

It's come up now because the Biden Administration is going to discontinue trump's Title 42 initiative that effectively blocked asylum seekers from being allowed into the United States while their request (often a lengthy process) gets considered. Under Title 42, asylum seekers had to remain in Mexico while their request was processed. This was begun during the Covid-19 pandemic and Biden doesn't feel continuing it is warranted. It places a considerable burden on both the asylum seekers and Mexico.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

As it turns out Governor Greg Abbot isn't proposing the children of the undocumented be barred from schools -in Texas or anywhere else. That would be barbaric. Below is a news story from the Texas Tribune.



The 1964 Civil Rights Act established that the only requirement a school district can use for enrollment is residency. That can be established by a parent producing a utility bill. School districts are not allowed to ask for citizenship or immigration status. If the kids live in the district they can go to school there.

With a big rise in undocumented people arriving in Texas Abbot is concerned with the effect on local taxes. (Schools are normally funded by property taxes, not income tax.) Abbot is also basing this request on the fact the state cannot take control of the parts of the international border that are within their state, only the federal government has that power.

In this case I find Abbot's request to be fairly reasonable.

I think by itself it probably is. The question that follows is how it is implemented and what is required, and how slippery the slope here might be. The suggestion seems to be that if one cannot "prove" one's legal immigration status, public education will be denied. While this might be possible, I question how it would be done, what will be adequate, and what degree of profiling and error will result. Although it is obvious to some, it has, in some cases not been obvious to all, that a person born in this country cannot, under any circumstance, prove legal immigration. With that said, I can see a reason behind it. This is quite different from Warp12's desire to see birthright citizenship denied, and other issues not yet addressed.

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Critical support for teaching the one true biblical creationism in schools:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakub_(Nation_of_Islam)

Teach the Controversy!

[newyorkguy]

Originally Posted by bruto

...The question that follows is how it is implemented and what is required, and how slippery the slope here might be. The suggestion seems to be that if one cannot "prove" one's legal immigration status, public education will be denied...

I hope that this can be worked out. That a way can be found to provide some support for Texas schools which are, undoubtedly, being strained by the large influx of undocumented students. To do it in a way that supports both. Public school education for children regardless of their immigration status, and providing financial support for public schools in Texas. But in the current atmosphere of hyper-partisanship, along with the current vindictiveness of conservatives, you wonder how this will turn out.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Critical support for teaching the one true biblical creationism in schools:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakub_(Nation_of_Islam)

The Yakub story is a load of utter hogwash

* * * * * * * * *


....but interesting nonetheless!

There is evidence of white humans going back to almost 30,000 years ago (that predates the Yakub claim by over 23,000 years. Further, it has recently (and seriously) been proposed that early humans probably had pale skin like our closest living relatives, chimpanzees, that are white under their fur. Then, as a response increasing temperatures and exposure to the sun, around 1.2 million to 1.8 million years ago, early Homo sapiens evolved dark skin as a defence against skin cancer.

https://www.livescience.com/43674-ca...evolution.html

[sackett]

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

I hope that this can be worked out. That a way can be found to provide some support for Texas schools which are, undoubtedly, being strained by the large influx of undocumented students. To do it in a way that supports both. Public school education for children regardless of their immigration status, and providing financial support for public schools in Texas. But in the current atmosphere of hyper-partisanship, along with the current vindictiveness of conservatives, you wonder how this will turn out.

Just hand Master Abbot a big bale of federal cash. He can disburse it appropriately. He's a governor, isn't he?