[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

So it should be a school board meeting or a county law, and that's the objection?



I think I'm more convinced the law is a good idea, as no real argument against the law as it is actually written is ever put forth. I can't get you to make any actual statement of what the objection is, or to address the actual law, or to address how it is logically consistent to hold this in violation of the first but not every other such law, or answer really any question lol. No one wants to explain how it's okay to teach white people are bad for X but to teach back people are bad for Y should still be banned. I have 1st amendment concerns on pretty much every education bill, but I fail to see why we would want to teach racism against any race in school, or which of the 8 very direct and specific points is bad policy, nor can anyone state an argument against any of them, apparently.

So you disagree with the court's analysis of how the text of the law could be construed to prevent various teaching activities described by the plaintiffs? Or are you saying none of those are worthwhile so it's a good thing to ban them?