# Libs destroying the education system: California mandates gay history be taught



## novasteve

As California mandate looms, some LGBT curriculum already in place &#8211; In America - CNN.com Blogs

Our schools are pathetic. Kids in china learn math and science, our schools already have horrific performance, and now another mandate for more pc nonsense that will not help kids be productive, educated citizens.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The history of gays in America has been taught for almost twenty years in American higher education.

OP is fail.


----------



## WillowTree

novasteve said:


> As California mandate looms, some LGBT curriculum already in place  In America - CNN.com Blogs
> 
> Our schools are pathetic. Kids in china learn math and science, our schools already have horrific performance, and now another mandate for more pc nonsense that will not help kids be productive, educated citizens.



fuck! what are you talking bout? they destroyed California.


----------



## Jackson

Social engineering of the schools is one of the reason so much money is dumped into education without the promise of getting students mastering the basic curricum scxhools are intended to teach.


----------



## Katzndogz

Not only will gay "history" be taught, but they will lie about it.

Will they teach that Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay or because he was a corrupt poliltician?


----------



## JakeStarkey

katz, you prove the point.  You want your agenda taught, not the truth.


----------



## Jackson

The problem is, that education was meant to represent the fundamentals of reading, writing, math science, etc.  It was not meant to solve the ills of the population or cultures. 

Stop usurping the resources that education needs for the basics. Tolerance of minorities of any kind cannot be taught in schools but by society in general.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Of course toleration of minorities can be taught in public school.


----------



## Jackson

JakeStarkey said:


> Of course toleration of minorities can be taught in public school.



But what is happening is the cost.  New reading books and fad strategies keep coming up for the social engineering in schools.  Instead of holding on to reading books 4-6 years, new reading series are bought every 2 years!  That's an astronomical expense.  

The same things for all new strategies in schools.  Some work and many don't, but they replace them like they are napkins regardless of the effectiveness.  Let our citzens take responsibility for their culture, the schools should be in academia.

Of course, that is just my impression, being an educator rather than a theorist on society.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Textbook publication strategies are not dependent on minorities, only on making profit.

You could have the "white generally" history books of the fifties mode today, and the companies would still be coming out with a new edition every 18 to 24 months.

That is why so many history teachers are writing their own materials for the students.


----------



## rdean

novasteve said:


> As California mandate looms, some LGBT curriculum already in place &#8211; In America - CNN.com Blogs
> 
> Our schools are pathetic. Kids in china learn math and science, our schools already have horrific performance, and now another mandate for more pc nonsense that will not help kids be productive, educated citizens.



Why do you care?

Right wingers think science is a faith, evolution a lie and climate change a conspiracy.  They've slashed funding for education everywhere they've been voted into power.  They even rewrite text books trying to fill the minds of their children with wild, Soviet style propaganda.  

Besides, gays have done a hundred times more for this country than the conservative right wing.  

In fact, the conservatives are so pathetic, they had to hire gays to build their churches:












Go look up "Chrystal Cathedral" and "Chapel of St. Basil".  Jesus, these right wingers.  Don't they know anything?


----------



## California Girl

I see rdweeb is still preaching hate. How sad.


----------



## Douger

First class: Back in 1332 the Viking sailed the high seas in search of free real estate. Vargas looked over at Linus and says. Damn we shoulda brought some pussy with us.
Vargs said: I'll suck yours if you return the favor
And so it began.
Did the Vikings land in Kalifornication ?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

The American public education system has already been destroyed and gay people have nothing to do with it.


----------



## bodecea

Katzndogz said:


> Not only will gay "history" be taught, but they will lie about it.
> 
> Will they teach that Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay or because he was a corrupt poliltician?



Ah, is that the story you are going with now?


----------



## Haplo

JakeStarkey said:


> Of course toleration of minorities can be taught in public school.



Yes.  Mostly by simply having kids of different colors next to each other in class and correcting them when racism pops up.

There's no need to spend valuable class time on it.


----------



## Katzndogz

bodecea said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not only will gay "history" be taught, but they will lie about it.
> 
> Will they teach that Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay or because he was a corrupt poliltician?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, is that the story you are going with now?
Click to expand...


One vote for Milk was killed because he was gay.

He was gay, but he was killed because he was a corrupt politician.


----------



## bodecea

Katzndogz said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not only will gay "history" be taught, but they will lie about it.
> 
> Will they teach that Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay or because he was a corrupt poliltician?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, is that the story you are going with now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One vote for Milk was killed because he was gay.
> 
> He was gay, but he was killed because he was a corrupt politician.
Click to expand...


You go with that....if it's an excuse that works for you.....Dan White, the Corruption Killer.


----------



## Katzndogz

Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations

After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.

Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."

Nothing about Milk being gay is there?


----------



## bodecea

Katzndogz said:


> Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations
> 
> After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.
> 
> Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."
> 
> Nothing about Milk being gay is there?


If White thought things were corrupt, why did he want his job back?   That's right, he did...after he resigned.   The man was a loony....remember, the twinkies made him do it.


----------



## Katzndogz

bodecea said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations
> 
> After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.
> 
> Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."
> 
> Nothing about Milk being gay is there?
> 
> 
> 
> If White thought things were corrupt, why did he want his job back?   That's right, he did...after he resigned.   The man was a loony....remember, the twinkies made him do it.
Click to expand...


It doesn't change the cold hard fact that Harvey Milk's being gay had nothing to do with his assassination but that will not be taught in the schools.  What will be taught in an outright lie.


----------



## Jackson

Haplo said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course toleration of minorities can be taught in public school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  Mostly by simply having kids of different colors next to each other in class and correcting them when racism pops up.
> 
> There's no need to spend valuable class time on it.
Click to expand...


That is called the hidden curriculum.  Of course discussion happens when racism is brought up.  When it continues in the classroom, lessons are appropriate.. 

When teachers taught the classes merged with white middle class and innercity kids (many who were minorities - bussing), the stress was appreciation of everyone in the class.  In my class it worked very well.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Katzndogz said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations
> 
> After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.
> 
> Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."
> 
> Nothing about Milk being gay is there?
> 
> 
> 
> If White thought things were corrupt, why did he want his job back?   That's right, he did...after he resigned.   The man was a loony....remember, the twinkies made him do it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It doesn't change the cold hard fact that Harvey Milk's being gay had nothing to do with his assassination but that will not be taught in the schools.  What will be taught in an outright lie.
Click to expand...


Your slant won't be taught because it is not true.


----------



## Katzndogz

JakeStarkey said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> If White thought things were corrupt, why did he want his job back?   That's right, he did...after he resigned.   The man was a loony....remember, the twinkies made him do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't change the cold hard fact that Harvey Milk's being gay had nothing to do with his assassination but that will not be taught in the schools.  What will be taught in an outright lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your slant won't be taught because it is not true.
Click to expand...


Of course it's true.   Your position is pretty much WHY truth isn't taught any more, nor will it ever.


----------



## bodecea

Katzndogz said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations
> 
> After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.
> 
> Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."
> 
> Nothing about Milk being gay is there?
> 
> 
> 
> If White thought things were corrupt, why did he want his job back?   That's right, he did...after he resigned.   The man was a loony....remember, the twinkies made him do it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It doesn't change the cold hard fact that Harvey Milk's being gay had nothing to do with his assassination but that will not be taught in the schools.  What will be taught in an outright lie.
Click to expand...



So why was Milk killed and not the other City Reps?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Your position is why critical thinking skills keeps being taught to help folks like you.


----------



## rdean

Katzndogz said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations
> 
> After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.
> 
> Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."
> 
> Nothing about Milk being gay is there?
> 
> 
> 
> If White thought things were corrupt, why did he want his job back?   That's right, he did...after he resigned.   The man was a loony....remember, the twinkies made him do it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It doesn't change the cold hard fact that Harvey Milk's being gay had nothing to do with his assassination but that will not be taught in the schools.  What will be taught in an outright lie.
Click to expand...


Can you describe the corruption for us? 

Right wingers made White a "hero".  Even his name was "right".  Until he got out of prison.  Seems no one wants to live next to a murderer.  Especially one who killed a family man with 5 children.  Dan ended his pitiful existence by committing suicide.  Too bad he didn't do that about 6 years earlier.


----------



## Katzndogz

Can you please describe the facts upon which you base a belief that Milk was killed for no other reason than he was gay?


----------



## JakeStarkey

Katzndogz said:


> Can you please describe the facts upon which you base a belief that Milk was killed for no other reason than he was gay?



You made a claim and have offered no solid, substantive facts for it.

Your claim summarily fails until you do so.


----------



## Katzndogz

Typical lib.

I gave you the facts of the case.  There is no basis on which it could be claimed that Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay.  Since Mayor Moscone was also shot, the concept of Milk being killed solely because he was gay is sort of moot.

It does make for a good agenda supporting legend.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Now you are moving to _solely _and you are ignoring collateral damage that often happens in assassinations.

You have to show us that absolutely no evidence can support that the assassination was not about Milk's orientation.


----------



## rightwinger

OMG

Teaching gay history will turn kids gay!


----------



## BluePhantom

Interesting that Milk has been brought up.  I actually taught sections about Milk in my history class.  The information I conveyed to my students was his background as a gay activist and his rise to office due to the backing of the gay community.  However, I pointed out that his murder was probably *not *motivated by his homosexuality since White targeted both Milk and Moscone.  Moscone was *not *just "residual damage."  He was specifically targeted by White and in fact upon entering the City Hall building he went directly to Moscone's office before even looking for Milk.  Additionally, White was a harsh political opponent of Milk after Milk switched his vote on an issue regarding a mental health clinic.  White and Milk had previously been allies on that issue and Milk withdrew his support at the final vote.  It was a huge issue for White's district and after that they became political enemies.

White's decision to murder Moscone and Milk stemmed from Moscone refusing to reinstate White and Milk's political opposition.  Homosexuality had nothing to do with it and in fact had Milk not changed his vote on the mental health clinic issue White probably would have further regarded him as a political ally.

And yes we discussed the Twinkie Defense.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Great analysis, BP.  You convince me.


----------



## Katzndogz

BluePhantom said:


> Interesting that Milk has been brought up.  I actually taught sections about Milk in my history class.  The information I conveyed to my students was his background as a gay activist and his rise to office due to the backing of the gay community.  However, I pointed out that his murder was probably *not *motivated by his homosexuality since White targeted both Milk and Moscone.  Moscone was *not *just "residual damage."  He was specifically targeted by White and in fact upon entering the City Hall building he went directly to Moscone's office before even looking for Milk.  Additionally, White was a harsh political opponent of Milk after Milk switched his vote on an issue regarding a mental health clinic.  White and Milk had previously been allies on that issue and Milk withdrew his support at the final vote.  It was a huge issue for White's district and after that they became political enemies.
> 
> White's decision to murder Moscone and Milk stemmed from Moscone refusing to reinstate White and Milk's political opposition.  Homosexuality had nothing to do with it and in fact had Milk not changed his vote on the mental health clinic issue White probably would have further regarded him as a political ally.
> 
> And yes we discussed the Twinkie Defense.



As truthful and factual as your explanation is, it is unlikely that many minds will be changed.  Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay.  That is a political truth, even if a factual lie.


----------



## BluePhantom

Katzndogz said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that Milk has been brought up.  I actually taught sections about Milk in my history class.  The information I conveyed to my students was his background as a gay activist and his rise to office due to the backing of the gay community.  However, I pointed out that his murder was probably *not *motivated by his homosexuality since White targeted both Milk and Moscone.  Moscone was *not *just "residual damage."  He was specifically targeted by White and in fact upon entering the City Hall building he went directly to Moscone's office before even looking for Milk.  Additionally, White was a harsh political opponent of Milk after Milk switched his vote on an issue regarding a mental health clinic.  White and Milk had previously been allies on that issue and Milk withdrew his support at the final vote.  It was a huge issue for White's district and after that they became political enemies.
> 
> White's decision to murder Moscone and Milk stemmed from Moscone refusing to reinstate White and Milk's political opposition.  Homosexuality had nothing to do with it and in fact had Milk not changed his vote on the mental health clinic issue White probably would have further regarded him as a political ally.
> 
> And yes we discussed the Twinkie Defense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As truthful and factual as your explanation is, it is unlikely that many minds will be changed.  Harvey Milk was killed because he was gay.  That is a political truth, even if a factual lie.
Click to expand...


Point taken and conceded.


----------



## BluePhantom

As an educator I don't have an issue discussing the history of homosexuality so long as it is presented accurately and responsibly.  In regards to Milk I don't see an issue with discussing how homosexuality was perceived in San Francisco in the 1970's, discussing the fact that homosexuals were often the subjects of random acts of violence and received very little protection from law enforcement, that Milk was a major force in uniting the gay community to demand rights and protections, and that he was eventually killed *giving an accurate depiction of why* he was killed.

All of that is accurate, it's part of our history, and that's fine.  However, if it's portrayed as "this poor, gentle soul, Harvey Milk, who wanted nothing more than to help his community in the face of oppression and was ruthlessly murdered by a maniac, who said the twinkies made him do it, in order to exact revenge on the gay community."  Ok well that's total bullshit and any instructor who would present the lesson that way has no damn business in a classroom.


----------



## PredFan

In addition, I'm sure that what will be taught is the fabricated PC version of gay history.

Anyone who sends their children to public school should be prosecuted for child neglect.


----------



## bodecea

PredFan said:


> In addition, I'm sure that what will be taught is the fabricated PC version of gay history.
> 
> *Anyone who sends their children to public school should be prosecuted for child neglect*.



Riiiiight.


----------



## Tank

This will give the kids more material for new faggot jokes


----------



## bodecea

Tank said:


> This will give the kids more material for new faggot jokes



The bullies, of course.


----------



## rightwinger

BluePhantom said:


> Interesting that Milk has been brought up.  I actually taught sections about Milk in my history class.  The information I conveyed to my students was his background as a gay activist and his rise to office due to the backing of the gay community.  However, I pointed out that his murder was probably *not *motivated by his homosexuality since White targeted both Milk and Moscone.  Moscone was *not *just "residual damage."  He was specifically targeted by White and in fact upon entering the City Hall building he went directly to Moscone's office before even looking for Milk.  Additionally, White was a harsh political opponent of Milk after Milk switched his vote on an issue regarding a mental health clinic.  White and Milk had previously been allies on that issue and Milk withdrew his support at the final vote.  It was a huge issue for White's district and after that they became political enemies.
> 
> White's decision to murder Moscone and Milk stemmed from Moscone refusing to reinstate White and Milk's political opposition.  Homosexuality had nothing to do with it and in fact had Milk not changed his vote on the mental health clinic issue White probably would have further regarded him as a political ally.
> 
> And yes we discussed the Twinkie Defense.



I lived in San Fransisco at the time. Your description is pretty accurate. 

The Twinkie Defense is overrated


----------



## nitroz

Honestly, I don't think this is appropriate.

Gay Rights or anything related to Gays should be in a politics/constitution class.
Because our constitution is made to let anyone be themselves regardless of religion, race, sex, orientation, etc. 


We don't need a class to encourage people to be gay if they aren't gay.
You don't just choose your sexual orientation, you are born that way and/or more happier that way.

Of course it could be an _optional_ class, but the wrong approach is being taken.
Schools should teach everyone to accept people for who they are, not have classes designated for groups. That will teach people to be biased.


----------



## Katzndogz

Schools should teach facts not opinions and not the opinions of the teachers.


----------



## BluePhantom

Katzndogz said:


> Schools should teach facts not opinions and not the opinions of the teachers.



For the most part I would agree with you, but to some degree it depends on the subject.  There are a few circumstances where opinion is actually vital.  My general strategy in those situations is to present all sides of an argument and all available information and then encourage discussion / debate on the merits of each.  In that way students are encouraged to reach their own opinions based upon available and reliable evidence.  Unfortunately, in my experience, most teachers don't do that, especially in college where I teach.  Most of them pound their angle and woe be to any student who dares challenge it.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Any who can't agree with "My general strategy in those situations is to present all sides of an argument and all available information and then encourage discussion / debate on the merits of each" should put their children in private school.

You are exactly right, BP.


----------



## Katzndogz

A young friend of mine went to University of Santa Barbara.  She learned that all children are genderless until they become adults.   Boys and girls are a matter of nurture, not nature.  There is no inherent "boy" or "girl" behavior.

She is now having a terrible time letting her female bulldog puppy know  that it's okay for her to lift her leg to pee.


----------



## FurthurBB

Katzndogz said:


> Main article: MosconeMilk assassinations
> 
> After his disagreement with Milk over the proposed rehab center, White frequently clashed with Milk as well as other members of the board. On November 10, 1978, White resigned his seat as supervisor.[5] The reasons he cited were his dissatisfaction with what he saw as the corrupt inner-workings of San Francisco city politics, as well as the difficulty in making a living without a police officer's or firefighter's salary, jobs he could not hold legally while serving as supervisor. White had opened a baked-potato stand at Pier 39, which failed to become profitable.[6] He reversed his resignation on November 14, 1978 after his supporters lobbied him to seek appointment from George Moscone.
> 
> Moscone initially agreed to White's request, but later refused the appointment at the urging of Milk and others. On November 27, 1978, White visited San Francisco City Hall with the later-declared intention of killing Moscone, Milk, and two other San Francisco politicians whom he also blamed for lobbying Moscone not to re-appointment him. He arrived that day by climbing through a first-floor window on the side of City Hall carrying a loaded gun and 10 rounds of ammunition. By entering the building through the window, White was able to circumvent the recently installed metal detectors. After entering Moscone's office, White pleaded to be re-instated as supervisor, but Moscone said no. White then killed Moscone by shooting him in the shoulder, chest, and twice in the head. He then walked to the other side of City Hall to Milk's office, reloaded his gun, and fatally shot Milk five times, the final two shots fired with the gun's barrel touching Milk's skull, according to the medical examiner. White then fled City Hall, turning himself in at the San Francisco's Northern Police Station where he had been a police officer. While being interviewed by investigators, White recorded a tearful confession, stating, "I just shot him."
> 
> Nothing about Milk being gay is there?



It also makes it seem like corruption was also not the issue either.


----------



## FurthurBB

nitroz said:


> Honestly, I don't think this is appropriate.
> 
> Gay Rights or anything related to Gays should be in a politics/constitution class.
> Because our constitution is made to let anyone be themselves regardless of religion, race, sex, orientation, etc.
> 
> 
> We don't need a class to encourage people to be gay if they aren't gay.
> You don't just choose your sexual orientation, you are born that way and/or more happier that way.
> 
> Of course it could be an _optional_ class, but the wrong approach is being taken.
> Schools should teach everyone to accept people for who they are, not have classes designated for groups. That will teach people to be biased.



I think it will probably be included in a general US history class.  My children already learn/learned about gay history.  They have been teaching it for years at their school.  It is a short snippet that takes less than 2 weeks in their general American history class.  It does not turn anyone gay, does not lie about events, and is not rewritten watered down PC crap as some paranoid person assumed.  Also, in their civics class they talk a little bit about the plight of gay rights, just like women's rights, and minority rights.  I don't know how California is going to handle things, but I am no way opposed to the way it is taught in my children's school.


----------



## FurthurBB

BluePhantom said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Schools should teach facts not opinions and not the opinions of the teachers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the most part I would agree with you, but to some degree it depends on the subject.  There are a few circumstances where opinion is actually vital.  My general strategy in those situations is to present all sides of an argument and all available information and then encourage discussion / debate on the merits of each.  In that way students are encouraged to reach their own opinions based upon available and reliable evidence.  Unfortunately, in my experience, most teachers don't do that, especially in college where I teach.  Most of them pound their angle and woe be to any student who dares challenge it.
Click to expand...


I also teach at the university level and have actually very rarely seen a professor that will even tell you their opinion on an issue of debate, let alone pound that opinion home.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Good professors do not indoctrinate, and simply follow, instead, critical thinking skills and present the material.


----------



## FurthurBB

JakeStarkey said:


> Good professors do not indoctrinate, and simply follow, instead, critical thinking skills and present the material.



Exactly!  I will not even tell the students I advise which classes I think they should take.  I only tell them what they can or have to take for their degree and give them the pros and cons of the rest so they can decide for themselves.


----------



## BluePhantom

FurthurBB said:


> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Schools should teach facts not opinions and not the opinions of the teachers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the most part I would agree with you, but to some degree it depends on the subject.  There are a few circumstances where opinion is actually vital.  My general strategy in those situations is to present all sides of an argument and all available information and then encourage discussion / debate on the merits of each.  In that way students are encouraged to reach their own opinions based upon available and reliable evidence.  Unfortunately, in my experience, most teachers don't do that, especially in college where I teach.  Most of them pound their angle and woe be to any student who dares challenge it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I also teach at the university level and have actually very rarely seen a professor that will even tell you their opinion on an issue of debate, let alone pound that opinion home.
Click to expand...


Well your experience and mine have been dramatically different. Hell I know one who tells his class right up front that arguing a conservative position will result in failure of the assignment.  His point of view is that the students know his reputation and what his class is about and if they don't want to deal with it they shouldn't take his class.  I will grant you that he is an extreme example but I know far more professors who bias their grading according to the degree to which the student's opinion matches their own than those who don't.


----------



## BluePhantom

JakeStarkey said:


> Good professors do not indoctrinate, and simply follow, instead, critical thinking skills and present the material.



That's pretty much what I did, but as the dean told me "We don't want them to think for themselves, we want them to think what we tell them to think."  That's a direct quote...word for word


----------



## Zander

Gay History 101.

Q- How did homosexuality get it's start?
A- Someone was sucked into it. 

Q - How do you know if you are gay?
A - If your roommate's cock tastes like shit. 

Q - How do lesbians have sex?
A - they buy an organ and ply hymns

Q- Why do so many gays have mustaches?
A - To hide the stretch marks

Q- What did one lesbian say to the other lesbian?
A- "you da man!"...no.."YOU da man!". 

Q - What do you call 50 lesbians and 50 government employees in one room?
A- 100 people that don''t do dick!

Q -What''s the difference between a gay rodeo and a straight rodeo?
A- At a straight rodeo everyone yells, "Ride that sucker"


----------



## BluePhantom

here's what I mean about teaching opinions.  It's easy enough to teach the "what" of a given historical event for example.  It gets much harder to avoid opinion when you start examining the "why" and "how"s of it.  Let's take the Great Depression.  Now you can say it was triggered by the stock market tanking in late 1929 and that would be accurate.  But the question then becomes "why did it tank?"  Well shit....ask 100 different economists and historians and you will get 100 different answers and the answers the historians give will usually be dramatically different than those the economists give.  By the same token we can talk about the New Deal.  Well did it help or hurt?  Again, it depends on what source of information you use.  What ended the depression?  Once again, it depends on what "expert" you ask.

So as an instructor you have two choices:  A) you can look at all the theories on those things and encourage the students to make up their own mind and grade upon their grasp of those various theories, or B) you can focus on a couple or even one theory and profess that as "the one we are choosing to focus upon" and grade based upon the student's grasp of that smaller set. 

Well teaching B is a hell of a lot easier than teaching A because when you teach A it takes more time and requires more flexibility from the instructor as well as more knowledge and more tolerance of views that contradict their own.  You have to structure the entire section as well as evaluations completely differently.  When you teach B the class becomes far more black and white and since the instructor is the one choosing "which theory we are going to focus on" they are obviously going to choose one that supports their own personal views.  

Now I always taught A, but (again in my experience) most instructors choose to teach B.


----------



## FurthurBB

BluePhantom said:


> FurthurBB said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BluePhantom said:
> 
> 
> 
> For the most part I would agree with you, but to some degree it depends on the subject.  There are a few circumstances where opinion is actually vital.  My general strategy in those situations is to present all sides of an argument and all available information and then encourage discussion / debate on the merits of each.  In that way students are encouraged to reach their own opinions based upon available and reliable evidence.  Unfortunately, in my experience, most teachers don't do that, especially in college where I teach.  Most of them pound their angle and woe be to any student who dares challenge it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also teach at the university level and have actually very rarely seen a professor that will even tell you their opinion on an issue of debate, let alone pound that opinion home.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well your experience and mine have been dramatically different. Hell I know one who tells his class right up front that arguing a conservative position will result in failure of the assignment.  His point of view is that the students know his reputation and what his class is about and if they don't want to deal with it they shouldn't take his class.  I will grant you that he is an extreme example but I know far more professors who bias their grading according to the degree to which the student's opinion matches their own than those who don't.
Click to expand...


Wow!  Well, I guess that in biology  you really do not see a need to inject any of these kinds of opinions.  Though, I have been a guest lecturer in a lot of criminology courses because I do freelance work for the FBI and police departments in forensic microbiology and some of those professors are like that.  I had one tell me that I should move out of the city I live in because they are prejudice and I was supporting it by living there.  I tried to tell him it wasn't prejudice against a type of person, just people that don't live there.  So, he went and got a job as the chief of police there and ended up suing the city.  I testified for the city about what he had said to me and so did several of his students.  I guess no one ever knew his political leanings, but he had a real hang up about this city and talked about it all the time.  There was another criminology teacher who was very conservative and would fail his students if he thought they were liberal leaning, he was fired for it.  That one was a straight crazy person who was a detective and is now in jail for stalking and brutally attacking one of his female students.  Those are the only two experiences I can remember having in all the years I attended and have taught university.


----------



## JakeStarkey

BluePhantom said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good professors do not indoctrinate, and simply follow, instead, critical thinking skills and present the material.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty much what I did, but as the dean told me "We don't want them to think for themselves, we want them to think what we tell them to think."  That's a direct quote...word for word
Click to expand...


I have no doubt that deans at universities and directors of think tanks and executive vice-presidents at banks and so forth and so on, do indeed do that very thing.

The duty remains for us who are not ignorant to circumvent the would be masters and teach the would be subjects how to critically think, how to master Crap 101 so people can understand why communism, libertarianism, corporatism are to be avoided and classical liberalism to be embraced.


----------



## rdean

PredFan said:


> In addition, I'm sure that what will be taught is the fabricated PC version of gay history.
> 
> Anyone who sends their children to public school should be prosecuted for child neglect.



Yea because those Christian right wing schools are so good.  They teach "alternate reality history" and "magical creation".  They want 50 to a 100 kids to a class.  They love their pregnant teens.  And their drop out rate is so high for a reason.  They tell their kids "education is just a piece of paper".  Besides, who wants to be "elite".  Right wingers have better ways to spend their money.  Give it to rich people because they are creating jobs - in China.


----------



## BluePhantom

JakeStarkey said:


> I have no doubt that deans at universities and directors of think tanks and executive vice-presidents at banks and so forth and so on, do indeed do that very thing.
> 
> The duty remains for us who are not ignorant to circumvent the would be masters and teach the would be subjects how to critically think....



You are absolutely correct right there and I really view my classroom far differently than other instructors.  I have noticed most of them really are very narrowly focused on simply the subject matter they teach and usually only from a very narrow perspective.  I view my classes as "preparing the students for life" and the subject matter is simply the medium I am using at the time to accomplish that.

When I discuss that point of view with my colleagues they look at me like I am speaking a completely different language, but then again it's also worth noting that teaching was something I started doing later in life after I had established a successful history in private business and industry.  So my perspective is far different than those instructors who teach without having that real world experience to look at.

RDean states below:



> They tell their kids "education is just a piece of paper".



Boy do I have news for *her *as a professor.  Without *actual experience* in the subject matter education *IS * just a piece of paper _and a worthless one at that_. 

It's a disturbing trend I have noticed where teachers without actual experience have to rely solely upon academic theory to provide information to their students.  The problem is that academic theory is rarely very applicable to a real world situation (at least in the manner it's presented).  So in essence they are teaching their students a lot of useless bullshit and because they lack real experience the teachers often don't realize it themselves.

I have concluded that teaching should mostly be a retirement profession where qualifications for the teacher are based upon their experience and history in business and industry.


----------



## rdean

BluePhantom said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no doubt that deans at universities and directors of think tanks and executive vice-presidents at banks and so forth and so on, do indeed do that very thing.
> 
> The duty remains for us who are not ignorant to circumvent the would be masters and teach the would be subjects how to critically think....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are absolutely correct right there and I really view my classroom far differently than other instructors.  I have noticed most of them really are very narrowly focused on simply the subject matter they teach and usually only from a very narrow perspective.  I view my classes as "preparing the students for life" and the subject matter is simply the medium I am using at the time to accomplish that.
> 
> When I discuss that point of view with my colleagues they look at me like I am speaking a completely different language, but then again it's also worth noting that teaching was something I started doing later in life after I had established a successful history in private business and industry.  So my perspective is far different than those instructors who teach without having that real world experience to look at.
> 
> RDean states below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They tell their kids "education is just a piece of paper".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boy do I have news for *her *as a professor.  Without *actual experience* in the subject matter education *IS * just a piece of paper _and a worthless one at that_.
> 
> It's a disturbing trend I have noticed where teachers without actual experience have to rely solely upon academic theory to provide information to their students.  The problem is that academic theory is rarely very applicable to a real world situation (at least in the manner it's presented).  So in essence they are teaching their students a lot of useless bullshit and because they lack real experience the teachers often don't realize it themselves.
> 
> I have concluded that teaching should mostly be a retirement profession where qualifications for the teacher are based upon their experience and history in business and industry.
Click to expand...


Yea, because all of academics is "just a theory".  So stay away from schools.  Let those derned liberals go.  Right wingers can get so much more from "Trick my ride".


----------



## FurthurBB

BluePhantom said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no doubt that deans at universities and directors of think tanks and executive vice-presidents at banks and so forth and so on, do indeed do that very thing.
> 
> The duty remains for us who are not ignorant to circumvent the would be masters and teach the would be subjects how to critically think....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are absolutely correct right there and I really view my classroom far differently than other instructors.  I have noticed most of them really are very narrowly focused on simply the subject matter they teach and usually only from a very narrow perspective.  I view my classes as "preparing the students for life" and the subject matter is simply the medium I am using at the time to accomplish that.
> 
> When I discuss that point of view with my colleagues they look at me like I am speaking a completely different language, but then again it's also worth noting that teaching was something I started doing later in life after I had established a successful history in private business and industry.  So my perspective is far different than those instructors who teach without having that real world experience to look at.
> 
> RDean states below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They tell their kids "education is just a piece of paper".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boy do I have news for *her *as a professor.  Without *actual experience* in the subject matter education *IS * just a piece of paper _and a worthless one at that_.
> 
> It's a disturbing trend I have noticed where teachers without actual experience have to rely solely upon academic theory to provide information to their students.  The problem is that academic theory is rarely very applicable to a real world situation (at least in the manner it's presented).  So in essence they are teaching their students a lot of useless bullshit and because they lack real experience the teachers often don't realize it themselves.
> 
> I have concluded that teaching should mostly be a retirement profession where qualifications for the teacher are based upon their experience and history in business and industry.
Click to expand...


Hmmm ... I think we must work at different kinds of universities.  All the ones I teach at, the teachers are working.  Most of the criminology teachers are lawyers and police officers either currently or retired.  All the science teachers have at least 3 jobs as well as labs at the university.  I do not think I have ever met a professor that has not had a real job at least in the past.


----------

