ACHS - conservative leaning students - afraid to speak up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

Which schools are teaching that?

Hopefully all of them are teaching students how to distinguish between a fact and an opinion

Schools aren’t teaching kids about abortion. So…what’s your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many people on this thread seem to think it’s fine to ostracize students with conservative views because those views are WRONG. Thankfully, the difference between fact & opinion is still taught in schools. YOU do not get to decide which points of view or opinions are “wrong.” You get to choose what you believe. That’s it.

And for those saying these topics don’t come up, my middle schooler’s social studies teacher, the first week of school, taught a lesson on the tenets or Black Lives Matter and about the transgender “movement.”

I don't "believe" Biden won the 2020 election. That is a fact.

Conservatives who "believe" the election was stolen are WRONG.

I think is fine to ostracize students who are promoting falsehoods, just as I think it is fine to ostracize students who promote "beliefs" that are bigoted, sexist, homophobic, anti-trans, or support any other type of discrimination, because I do think those points of view and opinions are "wrong." And I will continue to tell conservatives who "believe" women should be forced to give birth, transpeople don't exist, gays shouldn't be allowed to marry that they are wrong and I do not accept their "views."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No. Honey, enough with the persecution complex. No one is saying conservatives “should” remain silent in schools. Again, these are choices teens are making for themselves. They absolutely can speak and are likely encouraged to by their teachers.

And this bizarre lens you see school through is just not supported by the facts. There is no “indoctrination” here unless you find messages of tolerance to be offensive (And don’t start on the whole “why won’t you tolerate my intolerance” bs). You seem to have this fantasy that school days are filled with sermons praising Joe Biden and demonizing Trump or something. That isn’t what happens. Once again, conservatives are so fearful of things they imagine are happening. My guess is this is a side effect of the tribal mindset so many of you retreat into, which also feeds that persecution complex because you sense, rightly, that you are wildly out of step with mainstream values and thinking.

The reality is discussions of any current events are rare. Students spend their days learning math, doing labs in science, reading and writing. It’s like you think there are endless assemblies designed to impart liberal ideologies and talking points into them. This isn’t actually a thing.

Yes. Of course. Some other poster didn’t just admit that ostracizing pro-life students would be a logical consequence of a student articulating a pro-life position. Schools are just institutions of free inquiry and academics; no social conditioning going on at all and all viewpoints are tolerated and respectfully challenged, never shamed.

Based on comments in this thread, I stand by my assessment that the same tools (shaming, threats of being ostracized) used by a church-going community to enforce social conformity within that group are being used by school-going communities to enforce conformity of thought within the school. Folks are openly admitting to it.

You can stand by your assessment all you want, but you're still living in a paranoid alternate reality that doesn't actually reflect how schools actually work. No one said there was no social engineering going on -- of course there is. It's always been that way. If you want indoctrination, let's start with the Pledge of Allegiance, including the insertion of the words "under God." So, we're socially engineering our children from a very young age on how we want to conduct themselves in society. That takes many forms, including teaching things like empathy and tolerance and acceptance for others. Of course, conservatives are perfectly fine with the pledge and the forced expressions of patriotism -- they LOVE that indoctrination. But when schools want to teach that Heather has Two Mommies and that's OK, they lose their ever-loving minds and then pout when expressing contempt for that kind of "social engineering" -- which is necessary for the betterment of a peaceful society as a whole -- is met with pushback.

The reason your church analogy doesn't work here is churches taught (teach) hatred for people based on who they ARE -- gay, trans, immigrants, etc. (Not all churches, mind you -- many are truly dedicated to the teachings of Jesus, but rather the evangelical ones with twisted takes on the gospel that seem to bind bigots together). To the degree you sense rejection/ostracization from people in an academic setting, it's based on things YOU SAY and how you BEHAVE. And those things you say are rooted in trying to demand widespread acceptance of those things your church teaches. In other words, the social engineering in schools is based on fostering an open, tolerant society, whereas church dogma tends to prescribe a very narrow-minded vision for society. If you stopped trying to impose your morality on others, you might find people more tolerant of what you believe.

When you factor teens into this, most will be reluctant to speak out on any thing. Many have strong views, often inherited by the parents, but they don't fully understand WHY they have those views nor do they have the ability to defend them or articulate why they feel the way they do. And as I said before, it's GOOD for students with these strong, poorly developed viewpoints to experience some discomfort, because that cognitive dissonance will hopefully help open their minds -- even if they retain their conservatives biases, gaining a better understanding of world views different than yours is beneficial. And before you say the same is true for the woke crowd -- we absolutely, completely DO understand the way your think and why you think -- we just don't respect it because, again, it's rooted in the imposition of your morality on others. I will fight for your right to practice your faith however you want -- but I will also fight you if you try to tell me I have to live the way your faith demands.

The church analogy is just that schools, like churches, are communities, and within those communities tools are used to achieve social conformity (including conformity of thought, i.e., thought-policing). I take your post as an admission that schools are being used for social-engineering. So we've established that point.

However, the social engineering within schools is not geared solely toward building a tolerant society. If it was, why are the pro-life and pro-gun "conservative" positions cause for ostracization? Neither position is "anti" any immutable characteristic. As such, I can see how conservatives may view schools as being anti-conservative, not tolerant.

It's not an "admission." You haven't "won a point." Of course schools include social engineering -- they always have and that is largely their purpose. I forget who said schools exist not to teach what parents want their children to know but rather what society NEEDS for them to know.

Of course, schools are institutions and communities. But the church analogy fails because the "social conformity" you detect stems from different sources. In the church, it stems from church leaders and their interpretation of religious texts. In schools, it stems from the people in the form of publicly approved and transparent curricula. Much of the "social conformity" you complain about is more organic and tends to be student-led, not dictated by authority. This is true for many things, not just ideas: Fashion, music, the social hierarchy of popularity.

You keep saying students who express "pro-life" or "pro-gun" comments have been ostracized. But you provide no evidence of it. All you seem to have is this insistence that it *would* happen. Which, again, is erecting a straw man and is based on either a paranoid persecution complex or frustration that those views aren't more popular. But I've seen ZERO evidence of any case anywhere where a kid who expresses an anti-abortion view in passing would be ostracized. Where it might happen is if they take more extreme measures like distributing photos of fetuses or slut-shaming a pregnant student or something -- again, that's back to BEHAVIOR. But, this is still all hypothetical. A giant straw man. Show me where a student has been shunned for expressing an anti-abortion or pro-gun viewpoint and we can discuss the particulars of that incident. But you won't, will you? Because it hasn't happened.

This thread is the evidence. In this thread a poster said that the logical consequence of expressing a pro-life position was to be ostracized. Is that not a common view? Where’s the evidence that a pro-life student is welcomed?

That’s evidence that it actually happened? Or evidence that people think it’d be justified if it did happen.

Come back to reality. It’s hard to discuss the twisted scenarios in your head.

I'm done debating hypotheticals.

The premise of the article was conservative students fear they can't speak out.

Boo-hoo for them. They can, no one is stopping them. Either have some courage of your convictions and express yourself anyway, or stop whining about things that haven't happened.

Unless you can provide evidence that this imaginary scenario in which the big bad conservative is shunned for life for being pro-life, this conversation is over.

Thank you for participating. Your posts have helped me clarify the issue, which is neither a freedom of speech issue, nor a freedom from consequences issue; instead, the issue is what are the appropriate consequences for a student articulating a "conservative" position in a predominantly progressive school. I sadly leave this conversation with the understanding that many parents think ostracizing (or potentially ostracizing) that student is acceptable, which to me is eerily similar to how churches police the thoughts of their members. I can understand why conservatives would pull their kids out of public schools and / or why those kids would feel silenced while in school.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that is your takeaway from this.

It isn't a free speech issue at all. But it absolutely is a freedom from consequences issue in the sense that you seem to feel that conservatives should be able to say hateful things that offend others and not experience refutation or pushback. And typically, it's less about what is said than HOW things are said. Really, at the core, the issue for you seems to be frustration at the lack of validation of certain ideas and anger that there isn't a way to articulate them would experiencing repercussions. That isn't how things work.

And no, schools are not like churches at all. This has been explicitly explained to you, yet you remain fixated on a flawed analogy.

I do agree, however that maybe *you* should take your kid out of public schools. It sounds very much like you need a bubble in which to exist. Your fragility is astonishing.

I thought you were done, but here you are deliberately mischaracterizing my comment. I’ve been focused on a conservative student taking a pro-life position in school—how is that a hateful thing that offends others? I agree that the appropriate “consequence” would be for other students “push back”, but only by respectfully engaging with the pro-life student while advancing a pro-choice position. I’m flabbergasted that the general tenor of this thread is that ostracizing the pro-life student would be an “appropriate” consequence. If you’re in favor of ostracizing students, then school communities are acting as church communities to police thought.

Why would anyone want to engage with someone who doesn’t think women have basic human rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No. Honey, enough with the persecution complex. No one is saying conservatives “should” remain silent in schools. Again, these are choices teens are making for themselves. They absolutely can speak and are likely encouraged to by their teachers.

And this bizarre lens you see school through is just not supported by the facts. There is no “indoctrination” here unless you find messages of tolerance to be offensive (And don’t start on the whole “why won’t you tolerate my intolerance” bs). You seem to have this fantasy that school days are filled with sermons praising Joe Biden and demonizing Trump or something. That isn’t what happens. Once again, conservatives are so fearful of things they imagine are happening. My guess is this is a side effect of the tribal mindset so many of you retreat into, which also feeds that persecution complex because you sense, rightly, that you are wildly out of step with mainstream values and thinking.

The reality is discussions of any current events are rare. Students spend their days learning math, doing labs in science, reading and writing. It’s like you think there are endless assemblies designed to impart liberal ideologies and talking points into them. This isn’t actually a thing.

How long has it been since you've been a student in high school?

I have two of the currently. The only thing I have heard of that comes close to this is a homeroom teacher prattling on about how inflation and high gas prices are Biden’s fault. DD just rolls her eyes. We did report him to the tip line though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many people on this thread seem to think it’s fine to ostracize students with conservative views because those views are WRONG. Thankfully, the difference between fact & opinion is still taught in schools. YOU do not get to decide which points of view or opinions are “wrong.” You get to choose what you believe. That’s it.

And for those saying these topics don’t come up, my middle schooler’s social studies teacher, the first week of school, taught a lesson on the tenets or Black Lives Matter and about the transgender “movement.”

I don't "believe" Biden won the 2020 election. That is a fact.

Conservatives who "believe" the election was stolen are WRONG.

I think is fine to ostracize students who are promoting falsehoods, just as I think it is fine to ostracize students who promote "beliefs" that are bigoted, sexist, homophobic, anti-trans, or support any other type of discrimination, because I do think those points of view and opinions are "wrong." And I will continue to tell conservatives who "believe" women should be forced to give birth, transpeople don't exist, gays shouldn't be allowed to marry that they are wrong and I do not accept their "views."

So, what's "wrong" with people who believe "male" and "female" are biological, who "believe" homosexuality or transgender is "wrong" or "abnormal," but who do NOT support discriminatory policies against LGBQT people?
That is another example of a perspective that earns accusations of "bigot." Nothing FACTUALLY "wrong" with the biology statement; viewpoint has nothing to do with facts - disagreeing with it does not make it wrong. Either a person's beliefs are "facts" and therefore not right/wrong, or they aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No. Honey, enough with the persecution complex. No one is saying conservatives “should” remain silent in schools. Again, these are choices teens are making for themselves. They absolutely can speak and are likely encouraged to by their teachers.

And this bizarre lens you see school through is just not supported by the facts. There is no “indoctrination” here unless you find messages of tolerance to be offensive (And don’t start on the whole “why won’t you tolerate my intolerance” bs). You seem to have this fantasy that school days are filled with sermons praising Joe Biden and demonizing Trump or something. That isn’t what happens. Once again, conservatives are so fearful of things they imagine are happening. My guess is this is a side effect of the tribal mindset so many of you retreat into, which also feeds that persecution complex because you sense, rightly, that you are wildly out of step with mainstream values and thinking.

The reality is discussions of any current events are rare. Students spend their days learning math, doing labs in science, reading and writing. It’s like you think there are endless assemblies designed to impart liberal ideologies and talking points into them. This isn’t actually a thing.

How long has it been since you've been a student in high school?

I have two of the currently. The only thing I have heard of that comes close to this is a homeroom teacher prattling on about how inflation and high gas prices are Biden’s fault. DD just rolls her eyes. We did report him to the tip line though.

That wasn't the question.

Regardless, your not hearing of anything from your two kids doesn't mean other conversations aren't happening in other classrooms. I have two high schoolers as well. One would be considered "conservative." The shool is overwhelmingly liberal with no conservative clubs, including a Republican club or even an independents club. My conservative child has commented about several teachers who "clearly agree with everyone else in the class;" who have "political" statements posted in their classroom or on their desk despite a no-political sign policy - same in hallways throughout the building; teachers ranting on about political topics that have absolutely nothing to do with the class subject matter; etc.

Just as your DD rolls her eyes, my child has learned to do the same and stay quiet. The outrageousness of most of the posts in this thread aside, and back directly to OP's post and the article, this isn't out of "fear" or "intimidation." It's out of a sense of futility; a desire to avoid repeating past experiences of their words being misconstrued and getting into pointless debates that aren't even on the point they made (like much of the thread here); and not wanting to again get a lecture from the teacher about them needing to understand others' views (yet not the other way around). I've spoken with the teachers when these situations occurred, and even the teacher confirms that my child was not speaking in a disrespectful manner or saying anything so outlandishly offensive like some keep focusing on in this thread.

These discussions do occur in a variety of classes: government classes, history classes, English classes (literature tends to cover a wide range of themes, especially today when the students have to read assigned novels that cover current social themes and historical discrimination etc.; and writing assignments in various classes are frequently "position" or "persuasive" essays using current social topics), film studies classes, and even in little chit-chat in down moments for whatever reasons - likely because of the reason for the latest student walk-out (I've lost count of how many walk-outs and causes there have been just this year alone; but they are always liberal causes), or just hot topics in current news - of which Roe v Wade and its possible overturn is very much front and center. So yes, these things do come up. And you're likely to hear about them from your kid only when your kid (1) has a different view or (2) is just sick of everything in school being "political" all the time. If you don't think there wasn't a lot of talk and tying-in topics to Black Lives Matter after George Floyd, you definitely are out of touch. Or your child's school is remarkably civically un-engaged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

m

Here you go again. Should a woman be forced to carry an ectopic pregnancy because that cluster of cells that will most likely kill her are a “baby” in your mind?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No. Honey, enough with the persecution complex. No one is saying conservatives “should” remain silent in schools. Again, these are choices teens are making for themselves. They absolutely can speak and are likely encouraged to by their teachers.

And this bizarre lens you see school through is just not supported by the facts. There is no “indoctrination” here unless you find messages of tolerance to be offensive (And don’t start on the whole “why won’t you tolerate my intolerance” bs). You seem to have this fantasy that school days are filled with sermons praising Joe Biden and demonizing Trump or something. That isn’t what happens. Once again, conservatives are so fearful of things they imagine are happening. My guess is this is a side effect of the tribal mindset so many of you retreat into, which also feeds that persecution complex because you sense, rightly, that you are wildly out of step with mainstream values and thinking.

The reality is discussions of any current events are rare. Students spend their days learning math, doing labs in science, reading and writing. It’s like you think there are endless assemblies designed to impart liberal ideologies and talking points into them. This isn’t actually a thing.

Yes. Of course. Some other poster didn’t just admit that ostracizing pro-life students would be a logical consequence of a student articulating a pro-life position. Schools are just institutions of free inquiry and academics; no social conditioning going on at all and all viewpoints are tolerated and respectfully challenged, never shamed.

Based on comments in this thread, I stand by my assessment that the same tools (shaming, threats of being ostracized) used by a church-going community to enforce social conformity within that group are being used by school-going communities to enforce conformity of thought within the school. Folks are openly admitting to it.

You can stand by your assessment all you want, but you're still living in a paranoid alternate reality that doesn't actually reflect how schools actually work. No one said there was no social engineering going on -- of course there is. It's always been that way. If you want indoctrination, let's start with the Pledge of Allegiance, including the insertion of the words "under God." So, we're socially engineering our children from a very young age on how we want to conduct themselves in society. That takes many forms, including teaching things like empathy and tolerance and acceptance for others. Of course, conservatives are perfectly fine with the pledge and the forced expressions of patriotism -- they LOVE that indoctrination. But when schools want to teach that Heather has Two Mommies and that's OK, they lose their ever-loving minds and then pout when expressing contempt for that kind of "social engineering" -- which is necessary for the betterment of a peaceful society as a whole -- is met with pushback.

The reason your church analogy doesn't work here is churches taught (teach) hatred for people based on who they ARE -- gay, trans, immigrants, etc. (Not all churches, mind you -- many are truly dedicated to the teachings of Jesus, but rather the evangelical ones with twisted takes on the gospel that seem to bind bigots together). To the degree you sense rejection/ostracization from people in an academic setting, it's based on things YOU SAY and how you BEHAVE. And those things you say are rooted in trying to demand widespread acceptance of those things your church teaches. In other words, the social engineering in schools is based on fostering an open, tolerant society, whereas church dogma tends to prescribe a very narrow-minded vision for society. If you stopped trying to impose your morality on others, you might find people more tolerant of what you believe.

When you factor teens into this, most will be reluctant to speak out on any thing. Many have strong views, often inherited by the parents, but they don't fully understand WHY they have those views nor do they have the ability to defend them or articulate why they feel the way they do. And as I said before, it's GOOD for students with these strong, poorly developed viewpoints to experience some discomfort, because that cognitive dissonance will hopefully help open their minds -- even if they retain their conservatives biases, gaining a better understanding of world views different than yours is beneficial. And before you say the same is true for the woke crowd -- we absolutely, completely DO understand the way your think and why you think -- we just don't respect it because, again, it's rooted in the imposition of your morality on others. I will fight for your right to practice your faith however you want -- but I will also fight you if you try to tell me I have to live the way your faith demands.

The church analogy is just that schools, like churches, are communities, and within those communities tools are used to achieve social conformity (including conformity of thought, i.e., thought-policing). I take your post as an admission that schools are being used for social-engineering. So we've established that point.

However, the social engineering within schools is not geared solely toward building a tolerant society. If it was, why are the pro-life and pro-gun "conservative" positions cause for ostracization? Neither position is "anti" any immutable characteristic. As such, I can see how conservatives may view schools as being anti-conservative, not tolerant.

It's not an "admission." You haven't "won a point." Of course schools include social engineering -- they always have and that is largely their purpose. I forget who said schools exist not to teach what parents want their children to know but rather what society NEEDS for them to know.

Of course, schools are institutions and communities. But the church analogy fails because the "social conformity" you detect stems from different sources. In the church, it stems from church leaders and their interpretation of religious texts. In schools, it stems from the people in the form of publicly approved and transparent curricula. Much of the "social conformity" you complain about is more organic and tends to be student-led, not dictated by authority. This is true for many things, not just ideas: Fashion, music, the social hierarchy of popularity.

You keep saying students who express "pro-life" or "pro-gun" comments have been ostracized. But you provide no evidence of it. All you seem to have is this insistence that it *would* happen. Which, again, is erecting a straw man and is based on either a paranoid persecution complex or frustration that those views aren't more popular. But I've seen ZERO evidence of any case anywhere where a kid who expresses an anti-abortion view in passing would be ostracized. Where it might happen is if they take more extreme measures like distributing photos of fetuses or slut-shaming a pregnant student or something -- again, that's back to BEHAVIOR. But, this is still all hypothetical. A giant straw man. Show me where a student has been shunned for expressing an anti-abortion or pro-gun viewpoint and we can discuss the particulars of that incident. But you won't, will you? Because it hasn't happened.

This thread is the evidence. In this thread a poster said that the logical consequence of expressing a pro-life position was to be ostracized. Is that not a common view? Where’s the evidence that a pro-life student is welcomed?

That’s evidence that it actually happened? Or evidence that people think it’d be justified if it did happen.

Come back to reality. It’s hard to discuss the twisted scenarios in your head.

I'm done debating hypotheticals.

The premise of the article was conservative students fear they can't speak out.

Boo-hoo for them. They can, no one is stopping them. Either have some courage of your convictions and express yourself anyway, or stop whining about things that haven't happened.

Unless you can provide evidence that this imaginary scenario in which the big bad conservative is shunned for life for being pro-life, this conversation is over.

Thank you for participating. Your posts have helped me clarify the issue, which is neither a freedom of speech issue, nor a freedom from consequences issue; instead, the issue is what are the appropriate consequences for a student articulating a "conservative" position in a predominantly progressive school. I sadly leave this conversation with the understanding that many parents think ostracizing (or potentially ostracizing) that student is acceptable, which to me is eerily similar to how churches police the thoughts of their members. I can understand why conservatives would pull their kids out of public schools and / or why those kids would feel silenced while in school.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that is your takeaway from this.

It isn't a free speech issue at all. But it absolutely is a freedom from consequences issue in the sense that you seem to feel that conservatives should be able to say hateful things that offend others and not experience refutation or pushback. And typically, it's less about what is said than HOW things are said. Really, at the core, the issue for you seems to be frustration at the lack of validation of certain ideas and anger that there isn't a way to articulate them would experiencing repercussions. That isn't how things work.

And no, schools are not like churches at all. This has been explicitly explained to you, yet you remain fixated on a flawed analogy.

I do agree, however that maybe *you* should take your kid out of public schools. It sounds very much like you need a bubble in which to exist. Your fragility is astonishing.

I thought you were done, but here you are deliberately mischaracterizing my comment. I’ve been focused on a conservative student taking a pro-life position in school—how is that a hateful thing that offends others? I agree that the appropriate “consequence” would be for other students “push back”, but only by respectfully engaging with the pro-life student while advancing a pro-choice position. I’m flabbergasted that the general tenor of this thread is that ostracizing the pro-life student would be an “appropriate” consequence. If you’re in favor of ostracizing students, then school communities are acting as church communities to police thought.

Why would anyone want to engage with someone who doesn’t think women have basic human rights?

Because they understand "someone's" perspective that there is at least one other life involved in the specific "right" you are implying and therefore isn't just about the woman - and they are mature and curious enough to engage in a conversation with that "someone" to better understand why they think the way they do and to share why their own opinion is what it is. And maybe one or the other just might learn something or start to see something differently, even if neither changes their position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

m

Here you go again. Should a woman be forced to carry an ectopic pregnancy because that cluster of cells that will most likely kill her are a “baby” in your mind?

The point is moot. Sadly an ectopic pregnancy will not be viable and the baby will die before being able to be born. But, yes, killing any person, baby or not, is murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

m

Here you go again. Should a woman be forced to carry an ectopic pregnancy because that cluster of cells that will most likely kill her are a “baby” in your mind?

DP - And here you go again. You've already tried asking that question. It's already been answered - by me, with an agreement from another. Just who is advancing the banner for forced ectopic pregnancies to their natural end?
Talk about straw man diversions. Next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter goes to ACHS and participated in several non-school related Zoom calls during the 2020 debates. Even among kids with similar political leanings, the student calls during the presidential debates were highly contentious with students sharing a variety of opposing views. My daughter loved the experience. She said that only views that were, universally not tolerated and subjected to getting to kicked from the call were those that were racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, anti-trans or similar views. Expressing more conservative views with respect to economic polices, limited government, foreign policy and tax policy were all well tolerated.

Careful, you're partially describing the GOP platform and those poor folks may get triggered when they have to explain themselves, bless their hearts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

m

Here you go again. Should a woman be forced to carry an ectopic pregnancy because that cluster of cells that will most likely kill her are a “baby” in your mind?

DP - And here you go again. You've already tried asking that question. It's already been answered - by me, with an agreement from another. Just who is advancing the banner for forced ectopic pregnancies to their natural end?
Talk about straw man diversions. Next.

As we speak, states like Oklahoma are passing abortion bans without exceptions for the life of the mother. The consequences of “pro-life” positions is inevitably that women will die due to limited reproductive choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"
Are you kidding me? If you are allowed to speak then they need to be allowed to speak. That's the way it works in a democracy with a constitution like ours that protects freedom of speech."

Sigh. You don't understand freedom of speech.

+1

Everyone can speak. And everyone can face the consequences of their words.

And the consequences for perceived thought crimes are for students (and teachers?) to alienate and ostracize a fellow student? In the context of broader society, I imagine businesses will soon put up signs that they only serve democrats (or republicans).

This fear of alienation and ostracism is largely imaginary. In cases where it might happen, the speech must have been so heinous (expression of racism or bigotry) so as to invite that reaction. No one is alienated by someone advocating for lower taxes or a stronger military. It might be pointed out the two concepts are mutually exclusive goals, but this notion that you can’t articulate those type of traditionally conservative perspectives without being ostracized is ridiculous. No, it’s the weird resentment about feeling like you can’t push back on policies that are inclusive for transgender students or racist policing.

I disagree. From reading this thread, warning someone that “free speech doesn’t mean free of consequences” is a palpable threat to “watch what you say or you’ll be ostracized?” A student articulating even sympathy toward a pro-life position can be expected to be labeled (sorry-publicly “called out”) as an anti-woman bigot (even if they are a woman).

It’s not a threat. It’s a logical consequence.

And, yes, anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman. There are plenty of women who are judging other women and trying to push their religious beliefs on everyone else.

Ok. That clarifies things. I get it. Schools function as churches for Democrats. Conservatives can attend, but they should be silent as to their beliefs, just like a pro-choice individual can attend a traditional church provided they keep that opinion to themselves. Vocally contravening the norm “logically” results in alienation — the heretic simply doesn’t fit in. The threat of being ostracized is a tool of indoctrination. I suspect the indoctrination does more harm than good in both venues and need to go process my own thoughts on this.

No, schools are where kids go to learn facts and how to be a good citizen.

Not to learn outdated myths.

" anyone who is anti-choice is anti-woman" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BS. If you want to dictate a woman's reproductive choices, you are antiwoman.

Baloney. I am a woman who knows that it is immoral and wrong for a woman to have an abortion because an abortion is the murder of an innocent baby. I'm not antiwoman, I'm antimurder of babies.

+1

Then you don't have an abortion. I will do what I want when I want. You have zero right to tell others what to do.

I am worth mte than a clump of cells. You probably aren't though.