If they’re hiding necessary information about my kid from me, that’s not serving the tax payers. That’s government employees determining decisions for kids that aren’t their own, without taking any risk for how these decisions turn out.
So you’d rather have children being thrown out to the streets or even killed by their parents just for talking to another person about their gender identity?
They’re not “determining decisions,” they’re protecting children. There’s a reason that kids don’t tell their parents that they’re queer.
So you’d rather have children being thrown out to the streets
Why is this automatically what’s going to happen to kids whose teachers tell their parents if they’re socially transitioning?
Why is it always ‘OH MY GOD, THE PARENTS WILL KNOW THEY WILL KILL THESE KIDS’
Unless you can prove that that is the most likely scenario in these cases, that’s a shit argument.
killed by their parents
How often does this happen? Can you provide any statistics that can convince a reasonable person this is a widespread issue?
They’re not “determining decisions,” they’re protecting children.
Exactly the difference between you and I. I think the people should be protected from the government, so we can live our lives. You think the government should protect the people by everyone doing what the government thinks.
There’s a reason that kids don’t tell their parents that they’re queer.
Exactly the difference between you and I. I think the people should be protected from the government, so we can live our lives. You think the government should protect the people by everyone doing what the government thinks.
I don’t believe that government is necessarily a bad thing; I highly disagree with many of the policies of governments today, but I think that when government is used for the people, by the people, it can be a very useful and productive tool. Your entire argument boils down to, “Parents are always right and government should just fuck off,” which is not just completely incorrect, but extremely disrespectful to those who have experienced abuse by their parents and relatives.
While I’ll probably never be able to convince you, when you’re in a nursing home wondering why your kids never visit you, I hope you realize what I mean.
You’re acting like this is the default situation if the teachers tell their parents that the kids are socially transitioning at school.
I’m not saying it happens to every queer kid, it’s to prevent “…28% of LGBTQ youth [reporting] experiencing homelessness or housing instability…” and 52% of queer youth [reporting] to have experienced three or more ACEs (adverse childhood experiences,) which includes emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and physical abuse.
And if you look at the survey that it’s based on, it’s clear why the numbers are staggering.
nearly 40% of the surveors is made up of the minority of people that identify as LGBTQIAS2+. Transgenders make up 8% of the LGBTQIA2S+ community, and they clearly have these issues much worse than the others in the community. So they’re weighted more than 4x as much in these statistics.
Do you think these %'s would change vastly if they used a proportionate sample size as the LGBTQIA2S+?
I agree, especially trans youth, have issues at home, that’s why I’m for a huge investment in programs helping these kids, not just for the + community, but for all youths experiencing homelessness, but that’s outside the scope of schools.
but I think that when government is used for the people, by the people, it can be a very useful and productive tool.
What cases would you say the government is used for the people by the people? What’s that mean in schools today?
The schools say we don’t give them enough money, that’s why we’re falling behind. But instead, we give them much much more, while receiving a worse and worse education, and they want to teach our kids stuff we don’t want them to. I imagine the reaction would be different if the education system was doing well, if we felt our kids were being taught correctly. Instead it’s crappy, expensive and not what we want, that’s a bad sell to most parents.
While I’ll probably never be able to convince you, when you’re in a nursing home wondering why your kids never visit you, I hope you realize what I mean.
I’m not worried about it. I treat people with love, and patience. Just because you and I have different views on how to tackle social issues, doesn’t mean I’m gonna die alone and my kids will hate me. It actually makes me feel really bad for you that you think if someone disagrees with you, that their lives should be miserable.
Estimates of child abuse range from 10-20% of all school age children in the UK. Any person who is working in a classroom (including TAs and volunteers) has had some amount of safeguarding training to help mitigate the risk of harm to children.
It is literally our/their job to help prevent or mitigate harm that might come to children in their home lives, and teachers, admins, and safeguarding leads make decisions every day based on a clear and well-monitored framework to do so. This decision, made by people with little or no experience in the field, spits in the face of all of that.
Estimates of child abuse range from 10-20% of all school age children in the UK. Any person who is working in a classroom (including TAs and volunteers) has had some amount of safeguarding training to help mitigate the risk of harm to children.
Exactly. “ALL SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN.” We already have all these ways that teachers are obligated to report abuse if they suspect it. Why do we need to carve out special treatment of the LGBTQIA2S+ communities? They’re just humans. If teachers suspect abuse, they should report it, whether it’s for LGBTQIA2S+ or straight cis kids.
It is literally our/their job to help prevent or mitigate harm
No your job is to be a public servant and educate kids. It’s the parents responsibility to ensure their kids are safe.
This decision, made by people with little or no experience in the field, spits in the face of all of that.
Because it comes to parental rights, and limiting the influence government employees push on our youth.
My entire argument is I think parents should be given the information and ability to raise their kids how they see fit (obviously within limits, like abuse)
The alternative of government employees determining that they know what’s best for other peoples children, without assuming the risk for their actions is insanity.
If your child is too afraid of telling you something important about themselves or their lives, that is a YOU problem. Public servants exist to protect children from risks to their health and safety, including risks at home. Nobody has a right to abuse their children. If you want to know about their lives and challenges, you need to make yourself a safe person for them to confide in. If you are not, that's on you and you alone.
If your child is too afraid of telling you something important about themselves or their lives, that is a YOU problem
Did you tell your parents everything in high school?
I smoked weed for the first time when I was 13, I didn’t tell my parents. Is that because my parents are bad? I didn’t tell them I had sex with my first girlfriend, does that make my parents bad? I didn’t tell them I was with my homies and he was speeding down gardener road, going 100.
Are my parents bad?
Public servants exist to protect children from risks to their health and safety, including risks at home.
And we have standards for that, if parents suspect abuse, they have to report it. Whether it’s for the + community, or if it’s for the straight cis community.
Nobody has a right to abuse their children.
I agree.
If you want to know about their lives and challenges, you need to make yourself a safe person for them to confide in.
All your examples of things you hid from your parents are dangerous, illegal, and ‘wrong’. You trying to lump personal identity in with things that can lead to jail or teenage pregnancy is very telling.
Should teachers also report when your child makes friends with a student of a different race or religion? Why or why not and if not, how is that any different from this? You keep referring to teachers ‘making decisions about the child’ but nothing is being ‘decided’ by teachers here. It’s the children who are deciding this for themselves because they’re also people with autonomy.
You trying to lump personal identity in with things that can lead to jail or teenage pregnancy is very telling.
Yes, it’s called ‘behavior.’
The government forces parents to send our kids to government institutions for ‘education’ and if we want to know what’s going on they tell us to shut up? Nah, family, I don’t buy into that philosophy.
Should teachers also report when your child makes friends with a student of a different race or religion?
Did you not parent teacher meetings where they talk about how you’re doing in school and who you’re hanging out with?
You keep referring to teachers ‘making decisions about the child’ but nothing is being ‘decided’ by teachers here.
The teachers are deciding to withhold information about how my kid behaves in a government forced institution. The teachers should be working with parents, not fighting against them.
It’s the children who are deciding this for themselves because they’re also people with autonomy.
How much autonomy? If they can decide for themselves, why shouldn’t we remove the drinking age? Smoking age? military age? They’re people with autonomy, right? If a kid gets caught drinking, their parents deal with it, not the kid.
What a nonsense, meaningless reply. This sounds like a response from someone who lacks critical thinking skills and doesn’t understand the difference between behavior and identity.
The government forces parents to send our kids to government institutions for ‘education’ and if we want to know what’s going on they tell us to shut up?
This makes you sound unhinged. Who is ‘they’ and when did ‘they’ tell you to shut up?
Did you not parent teacher meetings where they talk about how you’re doing in school and who you’re hanging out with?
Yes, and that’s completely irrelevant to the discussion. Parent teacher conferences don’t consist of the teacher listing the race, religion or ethnicity of the students I/my child hang out with, nor is there a specific mandate for them to do so.
Since you avoided my question, I’ll ask you again: Should teachers also report when your child makes friends with a student of a different race or religion? Why or why not and if not, how is that any different from this? Are you capable of responding to this question or do you find it too challenging?
The teachers are deciding to withhold information about how my kid behaves in a government forced institution.
Are they? Or maybe they’re just minding their own business when it comes to matters that don’t involve education or risky/harmful behavior. If you want to know about your kid’s behavior, why are you asking their teacher instead of them? You complain about ‘forced government institutions’ yet in the next breath demand they be the sole conduit into your child’s life.
The teachers should be working with parents, not fighting against them.
Why would anyone in their right mind want to work with someone who refers to them as a “servant” of theirs and claims they work for a “forced government institution” that’s indoctrinating children? How are they “fighting against you” here?
How much autonomy? If they can decide for themselves, why shouldn’t we remove the drinking age? Smoking age? military age? They’re people with autonomy, right? If a kid gets caught drinking, their parents deal with it, not the kid.
What do any of these things have to do with a person determining their own identity just as every other autonomous human has done for millennia?
What a nonsense, meaningless reply. This sounds like a response from someone who lacks critical thinking skills and doesn’t understand the difference between behavior and identity.
Parents are forced to send their kids to government agents at the threat of taking the kids away. The least they can do is being transparent with my kids behavior, if little jimmy wants everyone to call him Laquisha, that falls under behavior.
This makes you sound unhinged. Who is ‘they’ and when did ‘they’ tell you to shut up?
What’s unhinged about it? My local school boards.
Yes, and that’s completely irrelevant to the discussion.
No it’s not, teachers have been expected to let parents know what their kids are up to and how they’re doing socially, emotionally and with their studies. The fact you are trying to have teachers keep these things from parents is more telling about you.
Parent teacher conferences don’t consist of the teacher listing the race, religion or ethnicity of the students I/my child hang out with, nor is there a specific mandate for them to do so.
You made up this scenario and are arguing against it. That’s weird.
Are they? Or maybe they’re just minding their own business when it comes to matters that don’t involve education or risky/harmful behavior.
If a kid has cancer should the nurses not tell the parents? Is transitioning not a very hard emotionally and mentally situation to be in? pre-transition, the suicide rate attempt is over 40%, how would you feel if your kid attempted suicide and you couldn’t help because the teacher kept it a secret?
Why would anyone in their right mind want to work with someone who refers to them as a “servant”
LOL, I say public servant, and the fact you try to pervert my argument and equate it with ‘servant’ is dishonest and disgusting. Every individual employed by the government is supposed to serve the tax payers.
You complain about ‘forced government institutions’ yet in the next breath demand they be the sole conduit into your child’s life.
I didn’t complain it’s a forced government institution, I said what it was. I don’t demand I be the sole conduit, I demand that the teachers tell me what my kids are up to during their forced institutionalization. I know it may be odd that someone paying for the school, paying for the new gym, property taxes teachers salaries and their supplies might want to know how my kids are doing, but I think the governments job should always include transparency to those that they are serving.
What do any of these things have to do with a person determining their own identity just as every other autonomous human has done for millennia?
You said that kids have autonomy. 13 year olds should be able to buy cigarettes, booze, get tattoos, right? Is there a reason we don’t allow them to?
You sound like exactly the kind of parent teachers should avoid sharing any information with. You claim to be against abuse but you want to force teachers to share information that is well known to result in kids being abused by their parents.
You think the government employees should be the ones making decisions on behalf of the kids.
There is so much wrong with that statement.
First, teachers make decisions on behalf of kids all the time. It’s literally their job.
Noting that they’re government employees just sounds like an anti-government dog whistle.
Saying they’re making a decision “on behalf of kids” is wrong because the law only matters when teachers see a conflict of interest between the parents and kids. They’re being forced to act AGAINST the kids on behalf of unsupportive parents.
Finally, this isn’t just a matter of judgment. We know for a fact that some alarmingly large percentage of parents will disown our otherwise abuse their kids after finding out they’re LBGT+. This law is specifically designed to endanger those kids, and no amount of bloviating about the property role of government will change that fact.
If teachers suspect abuse, they are legally obligated to report it.
They can only report it after it’s too late to prevent it, and they’re being forced to create the conditions that precipitate it. Are you really gonna argue that dealing with abuse after the fact is even remotely as good as preventing it in the first place?
Also, in a lot of cases you’re asking teachers to permanently damage the kids’ relationship with their parents. They’re not gonna get their families back when they become adults
First, teachers make decisions on behalf of kids all the time. It’s literally their job.
No, their job is to teach the basics that we as a local society would like. They are funded by local tax payers to serve tax payers.
Noting that they’re government employees just sounds like an anti-government dog whistle.
Noting that they’re government employees puts into perspective that these are people that should be serving the people, not establishing a government culture in our youth. In principle, there’s little difference between the government using elementary schools to shape the youth as the indian boarding schools. They’ve moved from teaching objective studies like math, english and science, with teaching about subjective topics like sexuality and gender.
Meanwhile our kids test scores are getting worse compared to our peer countries, despite spending a shit ton more money. Then they tell us the reason is because we aren’t giving them enough money.
Saying they’re making a decision “on behalf of kids” is wrong because the law only matters when teachers see a conflict of interest between the parents and kids. They’re being forced to act AGAINST the kids on behalf of unsupportive parents.
You assume giving parents information about their kids school behavior is working against the kids, and also assuming the parents are unsupportive. What you’re asking is for governmeny employees to determine on behalf of the kids what’s better for them than their parents, and judging the morality of their parents based on incomplete information.
You’re asking the teachers to raise the kids. That’s not their jobs.
We know for a fact that some alarmingly large percentage of parents will disown our otherwise abuse their kids after finding out they’re LBGT+.
And we should invest in programs to help the homeless youth.
This law is specifically designed to endanger those kids
We can’t protect everyone from everything their parents do. And shouldn’t leave it up to government employees to make the determination of withholding information about a kids behavior at a place that the government forces parents to send their kids to at the threat of taking the kids away.
Have teachers teach and invest in programs that help the youth whose parents aren’t caring for them. Just like we say that cops have too many issues that they aren’t experts on that we call them for, teachers are being given too much responsibility for issues they aren’t experts in.
They have qualifications to do their job. The only qualifications you have is you fucked one night and nine months later popped out a baby. But that suddenly makes you the expert.
You sound like a devil trying to control your children like that.
Exactly. I need you for one purpose: Teach my child <subject>. If my child sets fire to a car, it’s my ass on the line. If my child gets hurt, it’s me at the hospital. If my child has an issue, hiding it from me is less than useful, it’s negligent.
Until a kid is 18, they’re -legally- 100% my responsibility and how they’re raised is my call.
If your kid is trans or gay and they don’t feel safe coming out to you then that’s your fault. There are no decisions being made. Kids are going to be queer weather you like it or not.
If you think you can “do something” about your kids being queer then that’s probably why they don’t want to tell you.
Even CBS does clickbait now. First sentence in article:
<pre style="background-color:#ffffff;">
<span style="color:#323232;">AAA will not renew the auto and home insurance policies for some customers in Florida, joining a growing list of insurers dialing back their presence in the Sunshine State amid a growing risk of natural disasters.
</span>
Some customers. Will that be dozens, thousands, millions?
I bet even they don’t know the specific number. But certain conditions like being in a hurricane-prone area or zones not performing the maintenance on structures that help deal with natural disasters would probably cause those people to no longer be insurable as it predictable that they would pay out more money to more people when things go sideways. This is information for their stockholders, so they don’t get sued for not maximizing profit.
Your title might not match the article you linked (detected similairity: 40.41450777202073% . Could you review it, and change it if it does indeed not match.
bleep bloop, this action was performed semi-automatically by a bot (:
The court’s decision today holds – as my office has consistently advocated – that the General Assembly had the authority to eliminate cash bail and replace it with a system in which people are detained pending trial only if they pose a threat to the public or are a flight risk.
I’m not too knowledgeable about how the system works, but isn’t this kind of what we did, just now without any requirement for bail?
This seems to remove the only encouragement to return to court without an appropriate replacement.
To my knowledge, I thought bail was basically a ‘loan’ that you get back when you return to court.
No, if you skip hearings for a criminal charge they can issue a warrant for your arrest, throw your ass in jail more or less anywhere they find you in the States, fine you, hit you with another set of criminal charges, and refuse to release you because by that point you’re by definition a flight risk.
Please try to understand something about the American criminal justice system before you comment on it.
Edit - while apparently you can often get bail back under the right circumstances, bail is generally so expensive that even with a bond most people can’t afford it. If bail is only affordable to rich people, it’s in practice a special privilege of the rich.
Had to look it up to double check and edited my comment quite a while before you posted yours, so all I can say is, sure, I agree with you, not that I understand why you chose to respond to an earlier version of my comment. Or did you really spend fifteen minutes drafting a two sentence comment?
Although having seen court clerks play all kinds of nasty games with delivering court notices to defendants and the challenges many indigent defendants face, "you get your bail back if you never miss a single hearing is pretty slim comfort in the real world…
You know I can see the timestamps, right? You posted the comment at 17:09:18, I replied at 17:20:56, you edited at 17:24:00.
Even if you edited multiple times and that’s only the most recent one, yes, in whatever time it was between me opening this post and submitting the comment, I did spend some time reading about bail, first just to make sure I wasn’t crazy, and then just out of curiosity.
Lol I like that you talked shit about their lack of understanding of the criminal justice system, yet you clearly didn’t understand how bail works. Please try to do better in the future
Forgetting a single thing about a system I haven’t studied or interacted with in over fifteen years doesn’t mean I don’t understand it. You never forget or incorrectly remember anything?
Was I wrong in other parts of my comment? In what other ways did I betray a lack of understanding of the criminal justice system? Was my understanding overall better or worse than the person I was replying to? Did I really show a lower overall level of understanding than the right wing concern troll I was responding to?
Was my bit about bail even the main point of my comment?
In what ways should I do better in future? Never make mistakes? Not correct myself when I catch them? Not complain when other people pile on to correct me long after I’ve corrected myself? Not get annoyed when people who are clearly an order of magnitude slower than me take it on themselves to correct mistakes I’ve already fixed? Please help me be “better,” whatever that’s supposed to mean in this situation.
Please try to understand something about the American criminal justice system before you comment on it.
I wrote a comment starting that I’m not knowledgeable and asking for more opinions.
You told me I don’t understand it, need to read up more and that you have the answers. Then you have people correcting you and you need to edit and correct your comment.
Seems like I have the right amount of confidence in my response, and you are way too over confident.
You were repeating common right-wing talking points about this in exactly the same concern trolling style that many right wing trolls use and have used on this exact topic of discussion. I just didn’t give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren’t exactly what you appeared to be and replied as though you were concern trolling. I still responded to your points.
Also, how much does it really change anything if you get bail back or not? Does it? How so, if so?
Additionally, I caught my mistake quickly and corrected it on my own. The people who are correcting me spent twenty minutes lovingly researching and crafting two sentence responses to an issue I caught on my own and fixed within a couple of minutes. I don’t know why you shouldn’t trust me based on needing to make a single correction. Based on this, you shouldn’t trust any human, living or dead, including the reporter who wrote the above article.
Cash bail drastically over affects poor people. If you dont have money to put up or assests to leverage, you hsve to take a loan that costs 10% of the loan total, i.e if you need 50k, you still need 5k to give up.
If you cant do the above like many poor people, you are stuck in jail while not being convincted of a crime. This almost always costs you your job, your home, all your belongings, your car, custody of your children, on and on. There are countless horror stories of people spending years in jail awaiting trial to be aquiteed and released, having lost everything they have in the world while being found not guilty of the crime.
This system ends that. If youre a flight risk or violent, you stay in jail. If not, you can carry on your life until youre convicted, which is both just and reasonable. It puts the poor and the rich in the same justice system, and thats a good thing.
These people are not “political prisoners”. They were part of an attempted coup, and should absolutely be prosecuted to the maximum extent that the law prescribes.
Good. They’re all traitors who violated our Constitution and attempted to subvert democracy for their cult leader. Throw the book at every single one of them.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.