I think I've found the right question to distill where I disagree with @realchrisrufo but let's see:
Show this thread
-
You’re getting rolled by Rufo here. It’s already unconstitutional to compel speech. Most of these bills, including Idaho’s, target many other kinds of heretofore permissible speech as well, like “endorse”, “promote”, “teach as true”, or even “include”.pic.twitter.com/CEbUeTOaZE
You're working really hard to make sure that public schools can indoctrinate kindergarteners into believing in race essentialism, collective guilt, and neo-segregation.
-
-
Which of the state bills do you two most disagree on?
-
Speaking for myself, I'm not comfortable with the bills either. But it's not like there's any conversation coming from the other direction on how to prevent people, especially kids, from internalizing their status as either an oppressor or oppressed.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Jeffrey is a free speech absolutist to the point where teachers are free to *systematically* indoctrinate kids, and any defense against that is an abrogation of rights. It may be nuts, but it has a weird internal consistency.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
So I can teach CRT as long as all of my statements are preceded by "What CRT advocates would say, is..."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
if you don't believe in "race essentialism," then what's your explanation for the disparate socio-economic standing of different racial groups? this is the central contradiction of your whole schtick.
-
if you believe that different racial groups occupy different socio-economic niches because "that's just the way the world works," then I have news for you: you're a "race essentialist."
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.