“Health Professional” bloviates about guns, paints himself to be a doofus

12 Comments

I apologize – I should have blogged about this earlier, but between my business trips and jetlag, I have dropped the ball. A week ago, a fellow Johns Hopkins alum and public heath professional Vik Khanna penned an essay that gave some doctors and other health professionals a bit of heartburn, because unlike many health professionals, Vik actually understands and appreciates firearms and the right to keep and bear arms.

In his essay, Vik addressed the so-called “gun problem” from a health care perspective, advocating for public education, training, and giving gun owners the benefit of the doubt that they are, for the most part, responsible, peaceable citizens. He was respectful, and he linked to credible studies and statistics to bolster his view.

Interestingly, and perhaps unintentionally, Vik also predicted pretty accurately what the response from the medical community would be to his essay.

Ironically, public health academics happily assert that there is a clear Constitutional right to privacy, even as they vilify a right that is actually expressed in the document, and they merrily condescend to its adherents, whom they regard as pathetic rubes.

Enter this arrogant, fat fuck.

Art-Caplan-2

Meet Art Caplan, MD. Art heads the bioethics program at the University of Pennsylvania, but judging from his snide, sarcastic, arrogant writing, he doesn’t know a whole lot about actual ethics, human interaction, or effective, respectful communication.

Instead of refuting any actual facts in Vik’s essay, Art simply proceeded to sneer out a “you’re a paranoid gun nut” reply, and in the process showed his absolute ignorance not just about firearms, but about current technologies, training opportunities, and laws.

Vik, buddy, no one and especially the roughly 28 folks in public health not completely distracted by their lack of funding and inability to secure tenure is capable of doing anything that will pry your gun from your warm-blooded grip. There is no political movement to take away anyone’s guns. The NRA is the mightiest lobbying outfit in these United States and the best Mike Bloomberg or Bill Gates are going to be able to do is to get the anti-gun lobby a few more op-eds and soundbites.

See that? No one wants to take your guns away. You’re paranoid. And by the way, GIVE US MORE MONEY!

My reply to Art’s patronizing gibberish is below. I also posted it in the comments section. The bolded text is my additional comments added in this blog post. I wonder how long it will last before it’s deleted…

Wow… condescending jerk much?

Someone offers an alternative view to your “kale crunching, fitbit wearing hordes of public health types” who cannot help but hysterically ascribe human traits to an inanimate object, and you have to come back with snide derision?

To be sure, Art, “buddy,” no you are not capable of prying anyone’s guns from their warm blooded grip. But make no mistake – when you “public health types” parade your medical authority as credibility on the gun issue, people who genuflect at the altar of your so-called “eruditeness,” will cite you as authorities on the issue.

So, to refute some of your histrionics…

1) Carnage is not CAUSED by guns. We analysts understand that using the passive voice in this manner serves those with an agenda well to obfuscate the problem. If you can’t determine the culprit, you will focus on the tool. The carnage is caused by criminals, and those who are ignorant and irresponsible on the proper handling of firearms.

2) “There is no political movement to take away anyone’s guns.” – Actually, you’re wrong there. There was a federal assault weapons BAN, which, even by the New York Times’ own admission, served merely to ban cosmetic features that had nothing to do with actual fatality rates. Until very recently guns were BANNED in certain cities such as Washington DC, and in many other locales, you have to ask permission from sometimes unwilling government authorities to exercise your basic right to keep and bear arms.

3) “Do public health folks have anything to offer that might reduce the mayhem while letting you hunt deer or shoot partridge or blast targets or whatever it is you and your son like to do with your guns?” — The Second Amendment is not about hunting, Art, “Buddy.” If you have any doubt about this, you should read the documents written by the men who founded this nation. (I would refer Art to Federalist 28, and this passage in particular: If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.)

4) “How about encouraging doctors, ministers, sporting goods salespeople and other community leaders to learn about and then talk about gun safety?” — The key here is LEARN about gun safety. Most doctors and other public health professionals with whom I have spoken don’t know which way the business end of a rifle points. When you learn the intricacies of using these tools, I might give some credibility to you when you discuss them. Otherwise, it’s much like turning to your plumber for a vasectomy. It might be cheaper, but I don’t recommend it.

5) “How about greater efforts to get gun owners to lock up their guns and ammo properly.” — Do tell me about proper storage for a tool of self defense, Art “Buddy.” Tell me how long it takes to unlock your pistol and load it during a home invasion. Have you ever experienced such an event in your safe, lily-white community? Didn’t think so.

6) “How’s about getting hunters to wear the right high-visibility gear.” — I’m all for it, but much like with seat belts, there are some folks who just don’t wear it, and won’t. You going to fine them? Throw them in jail for violation of safety rules?

7) “Is there any merit to making guns safer including ‘smart’ guns?” — The fact that you even ask that question shows your ignorance on the issue. There has been plenty of discussion on the topic, and there are some serious safety concerns with your “smart guns.” Until you get properly educated and informed on the topic, you have no credibility to speak on the matter, and yet here you are, hiding behind your “medical professional” shield and bloviating about things you obviously know nothing about. (There’s a good article in Forbes magazine on smart gun technology you should probably read, if you haven’t already)

8) “Can we teach people to call the cops when they know there is a gun in the house of someone who is mentally ill or under a restraining order?” Oh, so everyone is now a mental health professional? Everyone knows who is under an RO, or are we relying on ESP to tell us when is a good time to report your neighbor? 

9) “A little training for kids about what to do if they find a gun?” – It’s called Eddie the Eagle. Look it up, “buddy.”

In other words, Art. You obviously have no credibility on this issue, and your little sneering note toward Mr. Khanna shows you to be a supercilious, arrogant wad.

Have a nice day.

Hey, I didn’t even curse. Are you proud of me?

The jokes write themselves

3 Comments

U.S. Naval War College professor pulls Weiner.

A text message conversation with a photo of a penis from May and with the Newport, Rhode Island, college’s professor John Schindler’s name atop it was circulated on Twitter early Monday. It’s unclear who posted it.

A blogger sent a complaint to the War College’s administration. The college’s president has ordered an investigation.

The guy was also a former NSA analyst.

Seriously. Anthony Weiner, a/k/a Carlos Danger, would be proud.

One has to wonder if there’s some freaky compulsion that forces these guys to whip out their puds and wave them around on Twitter for all to see.

I can see Weiner… he’s a politician. Skinny, big nosed, awkward, and narcissistic – an incongruent combination of ego and insecurity that compels him to self destruction. After all, this douchebag was a Congressman. He had this power… this fame… but at the end of the day, he had to stare at his gawky, awkward frame in the mirror every night, probably wondering how a woman as hot as his wife could possibly want him.

But this guy?

John Schindler was ostensibly intelligent, educated, erudite, and most of all… he had to be discreet! He had to know how to keep a low profile! You don’t work at the Fort as an analyst without knowing how to keep secrets and how to use discretion.

And yet…

You have this guy’s wiggleworm wagging all over social media.

What. The. Hell.

Dude! Get help!

 

Zero Tolerance Stupidity, Part…. oh I don’t even know!

8 Comments

In this edition of zero tolerance sense dumbassery, a little boy gets punished for doing what ostensibly is “the right thing.”

A 7-year-old boy western Pennsylvania boy who turned himself in after accidentally bringing a toy gun to school has been suspended for two days but will not be expelled.

The kid apparently forgot his bookbag at a friend’s house, so mom gave him another bag, which contained what was clearly a toy gun.

The little guy knew that he could get in trouble for bringing the toy to school, given the academic asshattery surrounding anything that could be used as a weapon on school property (can’t wait to see what happens the first time some kid stabs another with a pencil! Oh, wait…), so he brought the toy to the teacher and turned it in just like he was indoctrinated into doing.

The result?

A suspension.

At what point do we admit that this idiocy does nothing but land good kids in hot water and ruin lives? At what point do we boot the idiot teachers and administrators who destroy these children for no reason out and not allow them near kids again until they learn some common sense?

This is why we’re raising a bunch of victims

8 Comments

I often have written about school zero tolerance sense policies and obscenely biased, wimpy, cowardly and downright idiotic policies that are churning out panty-soiling ignorami into our society. These are victims who are unable to stand up for themselves, who are too weak and ineffective to defend themselves, too lazy to take personal responsibility for their own safety, and dependent upon others – anyone but themselves – to keep them safe.

Want to see how schools spawn such gutless, torpid, pathetic excuses for actual human beings? They start with this.

dumbassery

This is the advice a school in Nebraska gives to children faced with bullying.

Do not stand up for yourself.

Do not treat bullies like enemies.

Be a good sport, and don’t tell on the person who is abusing you.

Just sit there and take it like a good pathetic victim!

This repulsive set of rules may be the most egregious example of the seeds of cowardice and ineptitude. This is where it all starts – in schools that breed spinelessness and impotence.

Luckily, after being inundated with a plethora of parental outrage, the school apologized and sniveled and finally sent home a flyer that at the very least doesn’t encourage kids to lay down and take it like good little victims.

When the Redhead was just a little guy – all of maybe 2-3 years old – he attended a private daycare near where we used to live. A small kid I’ll call Projectile (you will understand why in a minute) picked the Redhead as a chew toy. To this day I’m not sure what in the world the mother of that kid was doing to him. He bit, scratched and hit. He ate gravel. He refused to stop, no matter how much the staff of the daycare center tried to control him.

Poor little Redhead came home every day with welts all over his body – arms, legs, neck, torso – no part of his little body was immune to Projectile’s teeth! The staff didn’t know what to do other than to lock up Projectile the entire day, but that wasn’t exactly an optimal solution. So the Redhead and I sat down and had a little talk. And by talk, I mean I taught him how to hit – how to hit hard. If you think toddlers can’t learn this effectively, you’re sadly mistaken. We practiced for several hours, and I told him that if Projectile bit him again, he was to defend himself the way I taught him.

Well, wouldn’t you know it, I got a call the very next day. Apparently, Projectile decided that the Redhead tasted better than his lunch, so he sunk his teeth into his leg yet again.

That’s where it ended. The Redhead, I was told, struck out. He struck Projectile with such a forceful punch, that Projectile apparently flew back about three feet (hence earning his nickname), and sat there dazed for a minute.

The daycare director told me that while they do not condone violence, and they had no authorization to use corporal punishment on a child in their care, they could only watch the Redhead’s strike (and applaud internally, I was told).

End result: Projectile never bit the Redhead again. Ever.

He was still an odd child. He was sort of a savage kid, who still insisted on eating gravel and destroying books and toys. But at least he didn’t use the Redhead or any other kid as a chew toy.

Sometimes, you just have to stand up for yourself. In the end, you are your last line of defense, and no one in authority should encourage the idea that your natural state is that of a victim.

That just ain’t true.

Los Angeles Unified School District – redefining stupid

4 Comments

This story is a few days old, but the stupid from it still burns. Apparently, a popular science teacher was removed from teaching classes, because someone shat their pants in fear of his students’ science projects.

Schiller was ordered to report daily to a district administrative office pending an investigation after two students turned in science projects that were designed to shoot small projectiles.

One project used compressed air to propel a small object, but it was not connected to a source of air pressure, so it could not have been fired. (In 2012, President Obama tried out a more powerful air-pressure device at a White House Science Fair that could launch a marshmallow 175 feet.) [emphasis mine]

Another project used the power from an AA battery to charge a tube surrounded by a coil. When the ninth-grader proposed it, Schiller told him to be more scientific, to construct and test different coils and to draw graphs and conduct additional analysis, said the student’s parents, who also are Los Angeles teachers.

A school employee saw the air-pressure project and raised concerns about what looked to her like a weapon, according to the teachers union and supporters. Schiller, who said he never saw either completed project except in photos, was summoned and sent home.

Yeah, I was speechless too. Apparently some sniveling cuntsore soiled herself at the thought of a kid being able to construct something that propels small objects, and decided that it was time to get rid of the teacher. Because keeping kids ignorant – even more ignorant than they already are, given our science and math scores compared to other nations – is preferable to being able to build stuff.

Ferpetessake!

Worse yet, the successful effort to remove the teacher appears to be rather auspicious, since he’s also the teachers’ union representative on campus.

Schiller, 43, also was the teachers union representative on the campus and had been dealing with disagreements with administrators over updating the employment agreement under which the faculty works. His suspension, with pay, removed him from those discussions.

This particular tidbit was buried at the bottom of the article – the second paragraph to the end.  By all reports, this was a very popular teacher, and believe me, those are rare. Additionally, the kids in his classes, which include AP biology and psychology, as well as honors biology and psychology, now have a free period, with their teacher in purgatory and the sub having no psychology experience whatsoever, so instead of learning, they’re sitting around with their thumbs up their asses.

Stupid? No.

This is weapons grade stupid! (pardon my “weapons” reference, lest someone in the Los Angeles Unified School District shit themselves at the thought of someone uttering the word “weapon.”)

But if you thought the burning stupid ended there, you’re sadly mistaken, because what happened to the student (per his father’s report) took a flying leap over stupid and landed squarely into corrupt and egregious!  Rogan Ferguson, the father of one of the students, explains:

I am the father of the child who developed the ‘coil gun’ project. Here are some other aspects of the story that are not yet being reported:

1st: They interrogated my son twice, removing him from the classroom, without my permission or knowledge.

2nd: They refuse to provide any information about who interrogated my son, what questions were asked, and what were his responses.

3rd: One thing my son remembers is that after he had completed a written statement, the Assistant Principal felt that his statement didn’t provide enough evidence against the teacher, and went fishing for more details that could be used against the teacher.

4th: The district refuses to return the project. When we attempted to file a stolen property report with the LAPD, detectives refused to accept the report, saying that it would be pointless, and that the Los Angeles Unified School District had Mafia-like power in the city.

As it stands, the district is claiming the right to remove children from instruction, interrogate them for hours, and provide no information to the parents about what happened in the the closed-off interrogation room. This is unacceptable, and it is sad that it appears that we will need legal representation to find out what happened to our son during the two hours of his interrogation.

It does appear that the school district is claiming all those authorities. It is also beyond egregious that the administrators are using children as tools to remove teachers that apparently don’t toe the line.

Using. Children. As. Tools. In. Administrative. Games.

Using. Kids. As. Weapons.

If this were MY child removed from class, interrogated, his property confiscated and his words twisted, those school administrators would crawl away with their asses missing. And I guarantee you that the Redhead would not tolerate said behavior either, which would probably result in a suspension at the very least for disrespect, and possibly a throat punch. And I can also guarantee you that I would be in that office with my hand around the throat of the first fuck cake administrator who tried to discipline my kid after treating them in such a manner and getting said well-deserved throat punch!

The good news is that the students apparently recognize a quality teacher when they meet him, and they staged a demonstration a few days ago to protest Greg Schiller’s removal.

Meanwhile, the LAUSD put out the following drooling release:

“We will always err on the side of protecting students,” the statement read. “On the other hand, the District does not reassign employees on a whim.  The reassignment of employees is taken very seriously. For this reason, there is a rigorous decision making process associated with the reassignment of employees.”

Rigorous, eh? Bullying students into altering their statements to paint the teacher in a negative light. Removing an educator based on the irrational phobia of an obviously paranoid school employee. Confiscating the science project in question, so no one can actually judge its merit for themselves and refusing to return the property, even though there is no criminal investigation pending, and the project cannot be considered “evidence” in any legal definition of the word. That’s rigorous?

No, that’s the act of an organized criminal, who cannot win by using fair means.

And once in a very rare occasion, I will agree with the teachers’ union. This is nothing but a FAIL – an effort to punish a science teacher” for teaching science.”

But it may be much more than that, because the short, buried paragraph about Schiller being the union’s representative on campus, whose job it was to work to resolve disagreements with the administration over updating the employment agreement under which the faculty works, speaks volumes about the administration’s true goal in removing this teacher.

 

Arrogant, Military-bashing Attention Whore Gets Attention, Doesn’t Like It

92 Comments

So here I am, drinking my first cup of coffee on a Saturday morning, after a long week of dealing with Russia/Ukraine issues, when I run across this, thanks to some of my more sadistic Facebook friends.

Facebook posts by Jodi Rives, a part-time Communication instructor at Butte College’s Chico campus, were brought to the attention of the school’s administration.  In one such post, Rives writes that her military students struggle to be prepared for academic work.  In another post, she writes that staying literate for retiring military students is a full-time job.   

In an interview Rives said she stands by her posts adding that military personnel are being ill-served in preparing for civilian life.
 
[…]

In response to another person’s post, Rives discusses “military guys” having a large pool of people to rape, a comment she defended.

“It’s not just the case of one or two incidents,” Rives said. “How many apples have to be bad before we suspect that the barrel has problems?”

To summarize…

Part-time “communications” instructor claims military folks are illiterate and a bunch of rapists (I’m sure she doesn’t mind it when when people stereotype by race, gender or sexual orientation) on a very public Facebook page.

Some, who happen to read said page get justifiably upset.

News media gets whiff of story (they always do when it involves ignorance, stupidity or prejudice).

Reporter shows up on her doorstep promising a lead story on the news.

Jodi gets “upset” about being “ambushed” and “uncomfortable” about it, but apparently pulls on some make-up and a flowery outfit, does the interview and then advertises it to all her Facebook friends and tells them to watch it at 6:30.

So, it turns out, if you post a MILLION times about social causes–suicide prevention, mental health awareness, LGBT+ issues, rape culture, fiscal meltdowns, local theater–no one in the media could give a shit. But, post about the military–and get a few boys with hurt feewings–and Jerry Olenyn from whatever channel shows up on your doorstep pushing for a response on video for the “lead story at 6:30.” Which you’ve heard nothing about. And when you say you feel uncomfortable having a news reporter “ambush” you at your home–where he is uninvited and is not a public place–when you are in your pajamas on your day off, he gets a little testy about being offended at your attack on him. And then the neighbors call the police. And then he tries to make the police call part of the story. And then you are just sick to damn death with all the bullshit. So, watch it at 6:30, I guess.

So aside from being an attention whore, let’s examine some of Jodi’s other “attributes.”

According to the Part Time Faculty Association page, we learn that Jodi is a mom and a “teacher.”

After being born the same year as Butte College, Jodi Rives grew up and originally attended college in Southern California. Moving north prompted a transfer to Lassen College, where she received a A.A. in Liberal Arts, and Chico State where she received a B.A. in Speech Communication and an M.A. in Human Communication (as opposed to Organizational Communication, not, as some cleverly propose, as opposed to Insect or Animal Communication).

Jodi currently teaches Communication Studies courses at Butte College and is co-advisor to the Butte College Gay/Straight Alliance. She is married to Nick Meier, who is both patient and brave, and is the mother of four whose ages span from 3 to 22, so she pretty much always needs a nap.

So with an M.A. in Human Communication, Jodi, whose biggest accomplishment is teaching apparently illiterate veterans at community college level, is unilaterally condemning those who join the military (and the recruiters who sign them up) as opportunistic (after all, according to Jodi, poor, uneducated, out-of-options dimwits are prime targets for those opportunistic recruiters, who have a quota to fill), illiterate (based on some vets being apparently unable to keep up with her oh-so-challenging communications classes and a couple of messages with words misspelled) and are mostly rapists.

There are reasons recruiters draw heavily from undereducated populations–two of them being they are often desperate and that uninformed folks ask fewer questions. Students with poor academic performance are almost universally encouraged to go into the military and, lord knows, their skills do not improve while in the service.

- Meier, Facebook comment

“It’s not just the case of one or two incidents,” Rives said. “How many apples have to be bad before we suspect that the barrel has problems?”

Let’s start with the military rape claim, which, by the way, has been hysterically flogged by the media as an epidemic, but which also cites likely inflated results of a sexual assault survey by including “unwanted sexual contact” in it, which can be something as stupid as someone slapping another person on the ass, which, while irritating, does not begin to equal the seriousness of actual rape. But even then, the rates of sexual assault for members of the military is quite lower than rates of sexual assault in America overall. Sexual assault is not a military problem, as Jodi would like the world to believe.

Unfortunately, however admirable the recent condemnations of sexual assault in the military, they’re unlikely to have much impact, because sexual assault in the military is not a military problem. It is an American problem. Scholars, retired officers, and others have longed warned of the creeping militarization of American society. However, as the Pentagon yet again renews its sexual assault prevention efforts, it must not discount the socialization of the American military.

The data suggest that one servicemember is sexually assaulted every 20 minutes and that one American citizen is sexually assaulted every two minutes, but it is difficult to directly compare military and civilian sexual assault rates. The WGRA defines “unwanted sexual contact” as “completed or attempted sexual intercourse, sodomy (oral or anal sex), penetration by an object, and the unwanted touching of genitalia and other sexually-related areas of the body.” Survey participants were asked to report incidents occurring in the past 12 months. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice survey used to calculate sexual assaults nationwide asks participants if anyone has “attacked” or “threatened” them by “grabbing, punching, or choking” or by “any rape, attempted rape or other type of sexual act” over the course of the past six months.   [Foreign Policy]

But hey, I guess if it fits her “servicemembers are illiterate rapists narrative,” it’s OK to post in public.

As for her claims that members of the military are apparently dumb and can’t keep up with her work…

I won’t point to my veteran status, B.S. in International Relations from Johns Hopkins and my M.A. in National Security Studies from American Military University and my history of fascinating employment, which included broadcast journalism, professional writing and national security, or my current job, which I love dearly, and compare it to her teaching oral communications part time at community college, because that wouldn’t be fair.

But I will point her to this.

As a whole, the U.S. military is far better educated than the American population it defends. 82.8 percent of U.S. military officers in 2010 had at least a bachelor’s degree, compared to 29.9 percent of the general population. 93.6 percent of enlisted soldiers had at least a high school diploma, compared to 59.5 percent of America.

Now, is it possible that some of her students do come to her class with bad communications skills? Sure.

Are some of them probably in the military or are military veterans? I don’t doubt it.

Is it honest, just or moral to claim that veterans in general are dumb, barely literate rapists, because that is whom recruiters target due to the limited educational opportunities offered to poor folks in bad neighborhoods, based on her limited experience? Absolutely not.

But it’s very typical of the leftist, feminist type of person to make those kinds of generalizations without actually knowing the facts, examining the statistics, or having the life experience to back those claims up. (See what I did there?)

It also baffles me how a supposed communications professional – someone who apparently teaches communications – doesn’t understand a damn thing about social media.

Rives, who calls herself an activist, said her posts are those of a private citizen — not a representative of Butte College. “These are my personal thoughts on my personal page.  This is my personal perspective on things,” Rives said.

However, her own Facebook profile identifies her as an associate faculty at Butte College.

Facebook, unless you shut it down to the public, is a public medium. Your posts – unless you take efforts to keep them private – are in the public domain, and are easily accessible by the public. I easily accessed Jodi’s page and pulled a bunch of information about her, including the name of her husband and children, her location and the fact that she likes the Pittsburgh Steelers (that’s enough to smack her upside the head). I also know where she teaches, the fact that she has a tattoo and is a hoplophobic dipshit, based on the fact that she used to be a Tom Selleck fan until “the NRA got him.” (Obviously the eeeeevvilll NRA got Tom. He doesn’t have a rational mind of his own, and couldn’t possibly have understood that an irrational fear of a tool of self defense is just that.)

Anything you place on the Internet is forever, dummy! So while you may claim that your views are personal and your own, the fact that they’re public domain and you are identified with the place where you teach, makes fair game. I’ve had to explain that to my teenage kids, but I can’t believe a 40-something communications professor doesn’t get it!

Just like embarrassing photos members of the military post on social media reflects poorly on their uniform and the Armed Forces as a whole (see: Cherish Byers, and any number of other dipshitsauruses embarrassed by the Military Social Media Idiots Facebook page), inflammatory, prejudicial and ignorant posts on public social media profiles reflect poorly on Jodi Rives Meier’s employer, no matter how much she claims that they’re just her personal views.

Bottom line: social media is public, and the Internet is forever. Learn it, live it, teach!

And finally…

I have to say I’m a bit appalled at a teacher – an instructor – someone tasked with educating her students and paid for said work – screeching about how illiterate and dumb her students are! Yes, I’m insulted for the veterans in her class, because they don’t deserve to be painted with the broad brush of illiteracy by an ignorant twatmold, whose hatred of the military obviously colors her ability to teach them. Because a teacher, whose task is to teach and perhaps even help the students who she believes are having trouble, instead takes to social media to blame their supposed ignorance on the military as a whole, in my opinion, cannot effectively help them overcome and learn.

And no, I’m not advocating that this dumbass be fired. The question of her employment is between her and the school. If the school feels she reflects badly on the institution, they will do what’s right, and I don’t need to delve into her employment issues here. What I will say is that a teacher, who obviously has disdain for at least a few of her students based on their veteran status, and who doesn’t comprehend the nature of social media, and who gives an interview to a reporter after publicly showing her ass on her Facebook page, claims to be upset and somehow coerced into talking to the reporter, and then advertises the time her Facebook friends should watch said report, has no credibility left.

I’ll leave it at that.

QUICK ADDITION: I need to add this, because this is hilarious! I made the mistake of clicking on the comments of the post that talks about the letter she received with all the spelling errors. One of the first comments is hilarious.

Heather Parker I did not read the first posting- but he should of used the edit button to get his point across…13 March at 10:43 · 1Reply

Now, I don’t want to target poor Heather Parker, but maybe she “should of” taken her own advice.

Isn’t this only slightly unconstitutional?

44 Comments

Hey, Alabama? Requiring teachers to lead kids in Christian prayer in public schools is… um… unconstitutional.

By way of a voice vote, the House Education Policy Committee passed a bill that would require teachers to recite Christian prayers in public schools every day, even though the majority of members did not vote for it.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Steve Hurst, R-Munford, would require teachers to spend no more than 15 minutes in the first class of each day to read, verbatim, opening prayers said before a meeting of the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate.

Rep. Mary Sue McClurkin, R-Indian Springs, chairwoman of the committee, said she heard more votes in favor of the bill.

“It’s what I heard as chairman,” she said.

Yeah, I’m sure that’s what you “heard as chairman,” but it’s still unconstitutional.

Look, I’m a pretty open minded kind of female. I have no problem with kids having their own little prayer groups, or learning about any religion in a public school. Fact is religion is a part of our culture and history, and to pretend it’s not there by not teaching kids about it is quite frankly stupid.

But notice I said, “teaching them ABOUT religion,” and not “teaching them religion.” There’s a difference.

I have no problem learning the history of different faiths, what they worship, how they worship, what they believe, etc. It’s knowledge, frothing atheist zealots. Get over it! It’s part of history. It’s part of geography. It’s part of current events. You can’t pretend religion doesn’t exist, and knowledge about the different faiths out there is important.

That said…

Forcing. Kids. To. Pray. Is. UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Period.

You don’t need a degree in constitutional law to understand that!

The First Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a national religion. It is incorporated, so that states have to abide by it as well. Schools receive local, state and federal money. Ergo, they cannot impose Christian, Jewish, Wiccan, Buddhist, Muslim, Rastafarian, Pastafarian or Scientolog… ical (I hesitate to even use the word “logical” in that particular description of Scientology) prayers on kids.

A teacher is in a position of authority over kids. What do you think is going to happen when a teacher leads a mandated Christian prayer session in the classroom? Think there’s no element of coercion? Please!

When the Redhead was 11 years old, he went to a middle school in rural Virginia. He attended a DARE program taught by a local sheriff’s deputy. The Redhead really enjoyed the class. They played games, discussed the dangers of drugs, etc. One day, the Redhead brought home a pamphlet that this particular deputy handed to all the kids in his class. On its surface, it looked like a bunch of optical illusions and puzzles. However, a closer look revealed that it was a publication by these Living Waters freaks.

The pamphlet used puzzles and games to scare kids into accepting Jesus. It told them they could die at any moment, and if they did anything bad like lie in their lives, they were going to hell, unless… they accepted Jesus right fucking now! It told the kids they were sinners. It told them that hell awaits them all, because they were all inherently bad. It even had an optical illusion that used a reverse afterimage to deceive the kids into “seeing Jesus.”

jesus5zk

The Redhead thought it was interesting, and it didn’t bother him. But I raised him to be a confident individual unfazed by religious scare tactics. But that doesn’t even matter.

There is no justification – NONE – for bringing scary death cult shit into a public school to scare kids into converting. The entire pamphlet was all about how they could die tomorrow, about how they’ll go to hell, about how Jesus will help them get to heaven, but since they could die tomorrow, perhaps they should stare at this picture and then close their eyes and find him!

How the fuck do you justify trying to scare a bunch of 11-year-olds into having faith?

Here’s a hint, frothing fundamentalist zealots: if you have to frighten, mislead, deceive or intimidate people into your beliefs, maybe your beliefs just aren’t strong or convincing enough to stand on their own merit!

I did contact the school and found out that the materials the deputy handed out were not approved by the school, and that the school officials weren’t even made aware that anything was going to be handed out to the kids! They told me this was the first time anyone had complained about the materials the deputy handed out, which makes me believe that either the parents aren’t looking closely enough, or this is the first time he’s brought that crap into the school.

For the record, I have no problem with anyone talking to my kid about religion, encouraging him to explore his spirituality or various faiths. No problem at all. But if you try to bully or deceive my kid into entering your little cult, I promise you will receive a swift kick in the gonads from yours truly!

But back to Alabama…

Forcing children to say Christian prayers in class with the teacher at the helm is coercive, especially if a child’s family practices something other than Christianity. Yes, believe it or not, there are families – even in friggin’ Alabama – that are not Christian! And guess what, you arrogant, supercilious shitbags! They pay taxes too, including your salaries and the salaries of those teachers whom you want to become accomplices in your little game of religious compulsion. And I’m fairly sure these families would be pretty unhappy if their tax dollars were paying for a coercive religious conversion.

But hey… it’s your state, so you do what you want.

Bring on the lawsuits!

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: