This seems like an analogue of what some of the right-wing private universities have learned. If you're going to take government funding, you have to uphold the government's rules.
This is why I've come around to being opposed to education vouchers for home school / private schools. Its a government back door to regulate.
I do think those that do not use public education shouldn't be paying for it, but you could just have a tax refund on your return. That would be a better option.
I respect that position, but I'm still in favor of vouchers as a first step towards ending government schooling. Plus, many of the states rolling out vouchers seem likely to continue moving in the direction of parental autonomy.
Going the refund route wouldn't guarantee freedom from state interference but I do not like the idea of not pushing for a more hard core approach.
I mean, I think it would great if the federal department of education was disbanded. This is something many people trying to freak people out are saying Trump is gonna do. I have no idea if he's even said that, but even if he did its seems very unlikely to me.
If it happens though, it might be one of the most bullish things I've seen in a long time. I don't think people really understand how critical government education is to continuing the status quo of programming the population.
I hope so. I think a lot of people just haven't thought about it. I used to be for vouchers until I heard this argument.
It reminds me of how California "legalized" pot. What it did was create a regulatory framework for spying on people. The amount of regulation on that industry is absolutely Orwellian. Its absolutely absurd. And people celebrate it like it was some massive win.
Its why there is still a massive black market for pot. Anyone what wants privacy has to continue to be a criminal.
On pot legalization, the most interesting state was Alaska, because it was already fully decriminalized there. When the state legalized it, there were a bunch of new taxes and regulations, but not much expansion of freedom.
Its a good thing to think about in the context of Bitcoin and "regulatory clarity".
Government approval is a double edged sword.
I always loved the way Ron Paul would put it. What business is it of the government what I put into my own body? A very conservative Christian man that probably never used pot in his life.
Wouldn’t vouchers negate refunds? You can have one or the other but not both. Politically both are difficult but refunds seem like a nonstarter. The state legislature giving money back?
However... Government has to use logical language to communicate and there is the rub. Man means Human first and gender second. A woman is still a man and in fact is a man with a womb. These are embedded into language so the government that breaks the code will no longer be able to steer (Kubern ~ Gubern) the people's minds. It's like Snow Crash... The code we speak is a dharma code and that code is already built and it was naturally built by those who later built on top government. It will fail in court because the foundation of the court is built on the law (word).
A woman's bathroom, thus, is reserved for those who have a womb. Anyone can use the men's restroom. Men don't give a shit. But men who respect women have reserved a space for women to be free from masculine bullshit while being protected by it.
I'll further qualify. Man doesn't mean penis. If that was the case then a Bull would be a man. Anything with a penis would be a man which is exactly the intention behind removing man from the language. But man means hand and a hand is a very amazing instrument that allows people to manipulate, manufacture and manage the world. It our ability to manifest. Like the Communist Manifesto. Yes the big Commie book has the man term, too.
There must be some room for the evolution of language, else those without hands through deformity or maiming risk losing human rights, the same as the unborn risk not having rights until their hands are formed and perhaps functional…further, are our rights at stake when we lose function of our hands through injury or if we do not have function of our hands through disability? I thought the documentary Tell Them You Love Me was fascinating and it fits neatly into this discussion…ultimately those who can exercise serious reasoning must protect those without hands as we are discussing them and uphold protection.
There is an evolution of language. It is built on the very basic root words of the past. These are words from 50,000 to 15,000 years ago. A man born without hands is just that. This hyperbolic statement above is ignoring the very language that we have but if we censure that language or change the meaning then we devolve into grunting angry idiots. In mythology there are plenty of traditional stories where Gods and Men took many different forms.
This is exactly the type of think that removes the finer hemispheres of the cerebral cortex and moves back through the mammalian brain to the reptilian brain. People operating on those levels will be full of fear and will need the protection (an illusion) of the sorcerer scoundrels who pray on fear and feed the non-human entities who thrive on this carnal fear.
Below is an image of the Hindu Vaishnava Krishna in various avatars: A turtle, a lion, a boar, a fish .... man evolving over time has developed extensive myths, stories, scriptures, knowledge and gnosis that spiritually lifts man beyond his "dick beaters". So a man that has a deformity or an illness is recognized as suffering just as much as a man who has everything and looses it to greed, theft or death. No man made authority will prevent suffering. We all must undergo our spiritual development and we all must speak what we need to say.
In modern terms censuring the very language strips us of 50,000 years of wisdom. This is why astronomy and astrology are very important because even before we had modern language we had painted our hands (man) and we celestially tracked the great year 26,000 year cycle of the sun through astrological houses. So in closing, Universities are places where ignorant monkeys with swords find a little wisdom and proceed to dismantle education, wisdom and learning by usurping truth with the monopoly of violence.
Man may not be able to prevent suffering, but if those who are able do not take upon themselves to protect, shelter, and comfort those who are suffering from further exploitation and violence, they fail both Krishna and Jesus Christ.
In many of Ovid's stories of transformation in the Metamorphoses, those who transform do so for protection. Is it a hopeless dream to believe that man can invent tools and even "authorities" (organizations of people) which protect people from exploitation and suffering? Is it wrong to believe that man can transform nothing into something which protects those who are less fortunate? To deny that possibility is, to me, an intolerable regression of the definition of the potential of the human spirit.
This is why we are here to serve and by service we find happiness. Service under the duress of regulation and or censorship is just the monopoly of violence. The power hungry will use any sweat language to sway the ignorant who are rules by external senses. But we must have a clear language to delegate, delineate, manufacture, manage, and help. Finally the free market makes us wealthy by providing the opportunities and means to help others.
If we circle back to helpless men, women or babies we can determine with clarity that more men and women and babies are harmed in our age of quarrel now!
If I see trash I pick it up. I don't wait for someone else to do it and complain about it.
I think we've gone so far of the peg here. I wish you free speech and peace!
I'm also teaching in a university here in in india but have never ever listened such disputes. We also don't have such administrative circles like DEA.
I don't believe that USA needs such a debate on Free speech censorship!!! Why is so that Dems hate their own country to preserve those values for which America was created??
I think universities these days only teach about biases, racism, sexuality, inequality, and all misleading theories to create a divide among human race.
The administration seems bent on this and they are the same class of people who are deep state people. Full of agenda but lacking the skill to create so they destroy by fiat while getting paid off of the labor of productive people.
Conversely those who administrate knowing they are servants of the people will default to common law and natural law. They will encourage nature to fix itself or they will be conservative toward the organization they work for in order to maintain the institution.
Men are not equal, but they are CREATED equal. What men do from the beginning to the end of life determines who they will be known as. At the point of death there will be a cashing in of all work and this will determine whether one led a good life or one led a wasted life. A declaration of inequality is like taking a snapshot of people in the Gym at various stages of life, effort and fitness level. A snapshot is just a snapshot of the past.
We previously discussed the free speech lawsuit of Portland State University Professor Bruce Gilley who was blocked from the Twitter account of the University of Oregon’s Division of Equity and Inclusion after tweeting “All men are created equal.” The court just granted a preliminary injunction holding that there was a substantial likelihood that he would prevail on the merits against the University of Oregon.
"However, the people of Oregon should consider the use of their tax dollars to seek to limit the “indispensable right” of free speech and to give figures like stabin such discretion over what speech to allow on campus."
I feel this is very crooked.
Allowing the campuses to decide what is free speech.
First by the medieval priest John Ball who at the outbreak of the 1381 Peasants Revolt in his famous sermon posited the question "When Adam delved and Eve span, Who was then the gentleman?" and proclaimed "From the beginning all men by nature were created alike"
In his 1690 work Second Treatise of Government the philosopher John Locke argues that in the "state of nature" that existed before the formation of governments all men were created equal.
And finally in 1776 when the great Declaration of Independence was asked by Franklin, Jefferson and others. As a proof read Jefferson suggested some minor suggestions to Franklin alongwith the phrase 'all men are created equal.' The second para of the Declaration of Independence of USA reads:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.-- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the 6 of the governed."
We are all equal but currently we do not all have the same benefits and opportunities. There are people who have advanced thanks to corruption, leaving death and destruction in their wake.
I hope you don't believe that nonsense. You are absolutely responsible for your life and your rights are not given by anyone other than GOD or the Universe (Dharma). Everything that we have is the result of cause and effect but because we are still alive we have the ability to grow. This material world is not easy but it is a free world.
The term Man (Singular) and Men (Plural) means very specifically those with "hands". As in this is what separates us from the other living beings.
A woman is a man with a womb.
Reducing the language to nihilistic babble is the agenda of university and government activists who are, regardless of intention, ignorant, stupid or collectivist (communists) and more relativists.
The first use of this Phrase: