Pennsylvania school district votes to defy law that would prohibit teaching any race is superior to another

[reason10]

Folks, I don't even know where to begin. But the thread title is cut and pasted from the exact article. (Liberals, try not to drool all over your keyboard while reading this. And it is NOT about slavery.)

https://www.foxnews.com/media/pennsylvania-school-district-votes-defy-bill-prohibits-teaching-race-superior-another

Pennsylvania school district votes to defy law that would prohibit teaching any race is superior to another

 

Quote

 

A Pennsylvania school district unanimously voted on Tuesday to defy a bill if it were passed into law that prohibits teaching "racist" concepts, such as that any race is superior to another. 

The Pittsburgh School District passed a resolution which said it would defy "harmful legislation," such as the Republican-backed bill called HB 1532. "

HB 1532, if it were passed into law, would prohibit teaching "racist and sexist concepts" in school districts, and is "aimed at curtailing the divisive nature of concepts more commonly known as 'critical race theory.'"

"Critical race theory further divides us by making the immutable traits of race and gender a prime factor in how we view others – exactly the opposite of Dr. [Martin Luther] King’s dream," according to a description of the legislation. 

"Our legislation makes it clear that no Pennsylvania school district, public postsecondary institution, or state or local government entity shall teach that any race or sex is superior to another, that any individual based on their race or sex is inherently racist or sexist, or that any individual should receive favorable treatment or be discriminated against based on their race or sex," the bill states. 

 

Confusing? Kinda like the liberal staring at an orange juice carton for hours because it had the word "concentrate" on it.

Here's the bill text.

https://legiscan.com/PA/text/HB1532/id/2412593

For the blue state third grade dropouts here, a LEGISLATION FOR DUMMIES guide.

1. The Legislature of Pennsylvania has passed HB 1532, which prohibits schools from teaching that one group is superior to the other. (Men are superior to women. Blacks are superior to whites. That sort of thing.)

2. Liberals are constantly whining about equality, (even though the Sixties legislation was about equal opportunity). So you'd think they would be on board with a bill that prevents schools from teaching RACIST or SEXIST concepts.

3. Leave it to the Pittsburgh RACISTS, (the CRT bunch)

1619 Project' creator claims Gov. Youngkin blocking CRT in schools to 'protect feelings of White children'

to OPPOSE ANY bill which prohibits schools from teaching superiority of one race/sex over another.

4. Conclusion: Leftists are RACISTS.

(We already knew that.)

[reason10]

From the bill text:

Quote

of the act of March 10, 1949 (P.L.30, No.14), known as the
Public School Code of 1949.
"Public postsecondary institution." A postsecondary
institution that receives funding, in any amount, from the
Commonwealth.
"Racist or sexist concept." Any of the following concepts:
(1) One race or sex is inherently superior to another
race or sex.
(2) An individual, by virtue of race or sex, is
inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether consciously
or unconsciously.
(3) An individual should be discriminated against or
receive adverse treatment due to the individual's race or
sex.
(4) An individual should receive favorable treatment due
to the individual's race or sex.
(5) An individual or institution cannot or should not
treat individuals without regard to race or sex.
(6) An individual's moral character is determined by the
individual's race or sex.
(7) An individual, by virtue of the individual's race or
sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past
by members of the individual's race or sex.
(8) Meritocracy or merit-based systems are either racist
or sexist.
(9) The United States of America or the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania is fundamentally racist or sexist.
"School district." As defined under section 102 of the
Public School Code of 1949

a) General rule.--No communication by a Commonwealth,
county or municipal agency, school district or public
postsecondary institution, or an official representative, shall
adopt, express or promote any racist or sexist concept.
(b) Penalty prohibited.--No employee, contractor, staff
member or student in a Commonwealth, county or municipal agency,
school district or public postsecondary institution shall face a
penalty or adverse treatment due to a refusal to support,
believe, endorse, embrace, confess, act upon or otherwise assent
to an racist or sexist concept.
(c) Use of funds prohibited.--No Commonwealth, county or
municipal agency, school district or public postsecondary
institution shall use any funds to express, publish, advertise
or promote any racist or sexist concept

Now we see just how STUPID the liberals are here.

Let's hear it. What's wrong with this bill?

 

[Rebound]

On 11/24/2022 at 8:30 AM, reason10 said:

Folks, I don't even know where to begin. But the thread title is cut and pasted from the exact article. (Liberals, try not to drool all over your keyboard while reading this. And it is NOT about slavery.)

https://www.foxnews.com/media/pennsylvania-school-district-votes-defy-bill-prohibits-teaching-race-superior-another

Pennsylvania school district votes to defy law that would prohibit teaching any race is superior to another

 

Confusing? Kinda like the liberal staring at an orange juice carton for hours because it had the word "concentrate" on it.

Here's the bill text.

https://legiscan.com/PA/text/HB1532/id/2412593

For the blue state third grade dropouts here, a LEGISLATION FOR DUMMIES guide.

1. The Legislature of Pennsylvania has passed HB 1532, which prohibits schools from teaching that one group is superior to the other. (Men are superior to women. Blacks are superior to whites. That sort of thing.)

2. Liberals are constantly whining about equality, (even though the Sixties legislation was about equal opportunity). So you'd think they would be on board with a bill that prevents schools from teaching RACIST or SEXIST concepts.

3. Leave it to the Pittsburgh RACISTS, (the CRT bunch)

1619 Project' creator claims Gov. Youngkin blocking CRT in schools to 'protect feelings of White children'

to OPPOSE ANY bill which prohibits schools from teaching superiority of one race/sex over another.

4. Conclusion: Leftists are RACISTS.

(We already knew that.)

You’re a liar, that’s all. 
The bill defines nine things which cannot be taught in schools, and you listed only the first. 

Edited November 26, 2022 by Rebound

[reason10]

2 minutes ago, Rebound said:

You’re a liar, that’s all. 
The bill defines seven things which cannot be taught in schools, and you listed only the first. 

Get an adult in your life to read the bill. You have frozen yogurt for brains.

I cited the ENTIRE bill. Are you REALLY that stupid?

 

[Rebound]

15 minutes ago, reason10 said:

Get an adult in your life to read the bill. You have frozen yogurt for brains.

I cited the ENTIRE bill. Are you REALLY that stupid?

 

Gosh, dipsh!t, how do you suppose I knew there were nine things that the bill bans and not just the one you listed? 
 

Maybe if you believed in learning instead of banning teaching and books, you could keep up.  

[reason10]

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Gosh, dipsh!t, how do you suppose I knew there were nine things that the bill bans and not just the one you listed? 
 

Maybe if you believed in learning instead of banning teaching and books, you could keep up.  

Nobody is against teaching and banning books, except you goose steppers.

Florida has decided Kindergarten through third grade teachers will not be indoctrinating children on homosexuality, lesbianism and transgenderism. (Some would call that a ban on pedophelia.)

If you knew the bill banned more than seven items, why did you accuse me of citing only seven? Or did you think the Woke goose steppers here would be too stupid to READ THE LINK?

And when it comes to banning books, ADOLF, your side of the aisle leads the charge.

https://redstate.com/diary/razor/2012/12/08/it-takes-a-liberal-to-ban-a-book-n202807

Quote

 

Fast forward to today. Catcher in the Rye, a book considered one of the top 100 novels written in the 20th century, is to be banned. Now, here’s the twist: the ban this time is from left-wing groups.

Books such as JD Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye and Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird will be replaced by “informational texts” approved by the Common Core State Standards.

Suggested non-fiction texts include Recommended Levels of Insulation by the the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Invasive Plant Inventory, by California’s Invasive Plant Council.

The new educational standards have the backing of the influential National Governors’ Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, and are being part-funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

 

 

[Rebound]

On 11/26/2022 at 8:51 AM, reason10 said:

Nobody is against teaching and banning books, except you goose steppers.

Florida has decided Kindergarten through third grade teachers will not be indoctrinating children on homosexuality, lesbianism and transgenderism. (Some would call that a ban on pedophelia.)

If you knew the bill banned more than seven items, why did you accuse me of citing only seven? Or did you think the Woke goose steppers here would be too stupid to READ THE LINK?

And when it comes to banning books, ADOLF, your side of the aisle leads the charge.

https://redstate.com/diary/razor/2012/12/08/it-takes-a-liberal-to-ban-a-book-n202807

 

Replacing one book in a curriculum with a different book is not “banning” a book. 

Edited November 28, 2022 by Rebound

[WestCanMan]

On 11/26/2022 at 5:18 AM, Rebound said:

You’re a liar, that’s all. 
The bill defines nine things which cannot be taught in schools, and you listed only the first. 

Huh? 

Coming from a supporter of the party that says "Don't Say Gay bill" that's ripe. 

[WestCanMan]

On 11/26/2022 at 5:39 AM, Rebound said:

Maybe if you believed in learning instead of banning teaching and books, you could keep up.  

Thanks for blabbing I guess, but the party of banning the truth from the internet doesn't get a seat at this table. 

[reason10]

7 hours ago, Rebound said:

Replacing one book in a curriculum with a different book is not “banning” a book. 

Those books were BANNED, schit for brains.

[Hodad]

On 11/26/2022 at 8:51 AM, reason10 said:

Nobody is against teaching and banning books, except you goose steppers.

Florida has decided Kindergarten through third grade teachers will not be indoctrinating children on homosexuality, lesbianism and transgenderism. (Some would call that a ban on pedophelia.)

If you knew the bill banned more than seven items, why did you accuse me of citing only seven? Or did you think the Woke goose steppers here would be too stupid to READ THE LINK?

And when it comes to banning books, ADOLF, your side of the aisle leads the charge.

https://redstate.com/diary/razor/2012/12/08/it-takes-a-liberal-to-ban-a-book-n202807

 

You are not playing with a full deck to begin with, but when you ingest nothing but garbage media you compound the problem.=. You cited a disreputable source and, of course, they lied to you and you don't have the capacity to critically evaluate information. 

A. This is an article from 2012, nearly a decade old. 

B. Your garbage source is basically re-blogging an article from an actual newspaper--and adding lies to rile up the gullible and easily manipulated. They completely made up the notion that these books are "banned" -- and you swallowed it down without question. Ugh.

C. If you were to actually click the link in your citation and view the original source - they link to it there - you'd get to The Telegraph. Or, you could read the excerpts on the page of your linked article. 

Quote

A new school curriculum which will affect 46 out of 50 states will make it compulsory for at least 70 per cent of books studied to be non-fiction, in an effort to ready pupils for the workplace.

 

Books such as JD Salinger's Catcher in the Rye and Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird will be replaced by "informational texts" approved by the Common Core State Standards.

D. As any literate person can see, those books WERE NOT BANNED. Nor was banning proposed in that curricular shift. They were listed in the article as examples of what might be lost in the curriculum in a shift to 70% nonfiction. Those books are still available in libraries and are still being taught in classrooms across the country--even in backwaters like Florida. 

E. Should go without saying that books that are not included in a curriculum are not "banned." 

F. The push for nonfiction books comes from in pursuit of STEM education and workplace readiness. Personally, I'm not a fan of the idea, as I would prefer well-rounded humans as a priority, but there's no need to lie about it. 

Edited November 29, 2022 by Hodad

[reason10]

10 hours ago, Hodad said:

You are not playing with a full deck to begin with, but when you ingest nothing but garbage media you compound the problem.=. You cited a disreputable source and, of course, they lied to you and you don't have the capacity to critically evaluate information. 

A. This is an article from 2012, nearly a decade old. 

B. Your garbage source is basically re-blogging an article from an actual newspaper--and adding lies to rile up the gullible and easily manipulated. They completely made up the notion that these books are "banned" -- and you swallowed it down without question. Ugh.

C. If you were to actually click the link in your citation and view the original source - they link to it there - you'd get to The Telegraph. Or, you could read the excerpts on the page of your linked article. 

D. As any literate person can see, those books WERE NOT BANNED. Nor was banning proposed in that curricular shift. They were listed in the article as examples of what might be lost in the curriculum in a shift to 70% nonfiction. Those books are still available in libraries and are still being taught in classrooms across the country--even in backwaters like Florida. 

E. Should go without saying that books that are not included in a curriculum are not "banned." 

F. The push for nonfiction books comes from in pursuit of STEM education and workplace readiness. Personally, I'm not a fan of the idea, as I would prefer well-rounded humans as a priority, but there's no need to lie about it. 

They were banned from blue state public schools. I ONLY cite reliable sources, numb nuts.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, reason10 said:

They were banned from blue state public schools. I ONLY cite reliable sources, numb nuts.

No, you are a shameless liar. Literally anyone can see that they were not banned, yet you persist.

And, you've told us all about your reliable sources, like Pinterest posts, and Red State- the latter of which is actively lying to you. 

Click your own link. Then click through to the actual article that Red State is blogging about. Not banned. Not proposed to be banned by that curriculum change. You are absolutely full of "it." 

[Rebound]

4 hours ago, reason10 said:

They were banned from blue state public schools. I ONLY cite reliable sources, numb nuts.

CAN YOU READ?

The blue state article you linked to said that Catcher in the Rye was BANNED, but their “proof” was a hyperlink to an article titled, “Catcher in the Rye dropped from US school curriculum.”

If you replace one book in a curriculum with another, are you “banning” a book? Does this prohibit students from reading the book? No. Was it removed from libraries? No. 
 

I don’t know if the new curriculum is better than the old one, but I don’t think curriculum should be static, and if you add new books, you need to remove something. 

[reason10]

On 11/29/2022 at 9:34 AM, Hodad said:

No, you are a shameless liar. Literally anyone can see that they were not banned, yet you persist.

And, you've told us all about your reliable sources, like Pinterest posts, and Red State- the latter of which is actively lying to you. 

Click your own link. Then click through to the actual article that Red State is blogging about. Not banned. Not proposed to be banned by that curriculum change. You are absolutely full of "it." 

I don't have to lie. I'm right and you're wrong. I don't cite fake sources like MSNBC, CNN, THE VIEW, or whatever left wing Nazi rags where you get ALL your information.

And as usual, you and the other goose steppers here have tried to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. (I swear, Florida third graders are smarter than you hacks.)

The thread is about A PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT PASSES A LAW OUTLAWING THE TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER.

Do you need to read it again?

A PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL DISTRICT PASSES A LAW OUTLAWING THE TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER.

The link is FoxNews. I also included the text of the actual law.

If your blue state reeducation camp socially promoted you to the fourth grade, they are guilty of educational malpractice.

Edited December 2, 2022 by reason10

[Rebound]

23 minutes ago, reason10 said:

I don't have to lie. I'm right and you're wrong. I don't cite fake sources like MSNBC, CNN, THE VIEW, or whatever left wing Nazi rags where you get ALL your information.

And as usual, you and the other goose steppers here have tried to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. (I swear, Florida third graders are smarter than you hacks.)

The thread is about A PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT PASSES A LAW OUTLAWING THE TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER.

Do you need to read it again?

A PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL DISTRICT PASSES A LAW OUTLAWING THE TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER.

The link is FoxNews. I also included the text of the actual law.

If your blue state reeducation camp socially promoted you to the fourth grade, they are guilty of educational malpractice.

You

Are

Lying

Troll

Edited December 2, 2022 by Rebound

[reason10]

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

You

Are

Lying

Troll

So you are having a tantrum and somehow you think you'll convince me by arranging the words to read downward, rather than across?

I have provided FACTS in the first post. The fact that you have been monumentally STUPID and have chosen to change the subject and engage in insults would make YOU the troll, if there were such a thing.

You're just an uneducated goose stepping cretin.  Oh, and

 

[Hodad]

5 hours ago, reason10 said:

I don't have to lie. I'm right and you're wrong. I don't cite fake sources like MSNBC, CNN, THE VIEW, or whatever left wing Nazi rags where you get ALL your information.

And as usual, you and the other goose steppers here have tried to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. (I swear, Florida third graders are smarter than you hacks.)

The thread is about A PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT PASSES A LAW OUTLAWING THE TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER.

Do you need to read it again?

A PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL DISTRICT PASSES A LAW OUTLAWING THE TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER.

The link is FoxNews. I also included the text of the actual law.

If your blue state reeducation camp socially promoted you to the fourth grade, they are guilty of educational malpractice.

As before, nobody HAS to lie. You just seem to get off on it.

I didn't change the subject. I quoted and replied to your post. I clicked through to your garbage citation. I then clicked through again to actual news article that Red State was blogging about to discover, of course, that Red State was lying. Those books were not banned, and it was not proposed that they be banned. They would be perfectly eligible to be featured in the 30% fiction mix.

You're dumb enough to fall for the lies of garbage media, and dishonest enough to stick with it when it's pointed out that you've been duped. Top notch trolling, dude.

[Rebound]

5 hours ago, reason10 said:

So you are having a tantrum and somehow you think you'll convince me by arranging the words to read downward, rather than across?

I have provided FACTS in the first post. The fact that you have been monumentally STUPID and have chosen to change the subject and engage in insults would make YOU the troll, if there were such a thing.

You're just an uneducated goose stepping cretin.  

 

There is a proposed law. 
The law bans teaching NINE things. 
The article your quoted mentions only the first of the nine banned things:  Teaching that any race is superior to another. (I’m happy you agree that people should not teach that. Big thumbs up for you!)
 

So of course your panties are all in a twist over liberals who refuse to accept this. Except it’s some of the other eight things in the same proposed law which, whoops, you “conveniently” left out. THAT is the dishonesty. 
 

So here’s where we can go: Either STFU, or, discuss why the other eight things should also be banned.  Since it’s an all or nothing deal. 

[reason10]

20 hours ago, Hodad said:

As before, nobody HAS to lie. You just seem to get off on it.

I didn't change the subject. I quoted and replied to your post. I clicked through to your garbage citation. I then clicked through again to actual news article that Red State was blogging about to discover, of course, that Red State was lying. Those books were not banned, and it was not proposed that they be banned. They would be perfectly eligible to be featured in the 30% fiction mix.

You're dumb enough to fall for the lies of garbage media, and dishonest enough to stick with it when it's pointed out that you've been duped. Top notch trolling, dude.

Again, from the RELIABLE source I cited:

https://redstate.com/diary/razor/2012/12/08/it-takes-a-liberal-to-ban-a-book-n202807

Quote

 

Fast forward to today. Catcher in the Rye, a book considered one of the top 100 novels written in the 20th century, is to be banned. Now, here’s the twist: the ban this time is from left-wing groups.

Books such as JD Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye and Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird will be replaced by “informational texts” approved by the Common Core State Standards.

Suggested non-fiction texts include Recommended Levels of Insulation by the the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Invasive Plant Inventory, by California’s Invasive Plant Council.

The new educational standards have the backing of the influential National Governors’ Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, and are being part-funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

 

Quote

 

Now, there are all kinds of things wrong with this.

First Warren Buffett, and now Bill Gates. Why can’t these super-rich liberals stay out of our business?

“Catcher in the Rye” and “To Kill a Mockingbird.” Sure, “Rye’s” Holden Caulfield was a rebel, and who needs rebellious teenagers? They’re always spoiling society, leading protests, freeing jailed rock stars. Just ask Dr Righteous! (oops, spoiler alert).

But “To Kill a Mockingbird?” Atticus Finch is a cultural hero, and he is to be removed from classrooms? This is disturbing. He was no Holden Caulfield; he was virtuous. What is going on here?

This is all being done in the name of helping education. Did you see what the banned books are to be replaced with? Non-fiction. Manuals. Sorry, high schoolers, you can no longer read about Atticus Finch who stood up to powerful forces based on what he felt was right. Instead, here’s a text on Recommended Levels of Insulation. You’ll be tested on Monday. Best grade gets his name on a plaque on the wall at the EPA.

 

Of course, the SUPERIOR red state of Florida doesn't seem to have a problem with "To Kill A Mockingbird." During a Freshman writing/reading class in a local high school, the book came up in discussion. I was subbing for the class, (the teacher out with an extended illness.) All the horrific items in the book were explored in great detail. All the violence, the racism, etc. (Not surprising since the racists were all Democrats.)

Personally I never cared for Harper Lee's books. I thought "Mockingbird" was poorly written and just seemed to ramble on. And "Go Set A Watchman" (the sequel to Mockingbird, where Atticus Finch wound up in the KKK) would have been a perfect substitute for Ambien, it was so boring.

Then again, my historic author favorites were a much more eclectic class:

Ayn Rand, Frank Yerby, Ludwig Von Mises, Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, etc.

But somehow Harper Lee was able to parlay her friendship with that fag Truman Capote to get an inferior manuscript published.

 

Oh, and those are OPINIONS. The fact that they might disagree with your bullshit does not automatically brand me a troll. The thread title was about a Pennsylvania school board deciding to violate state law and teach that one race is superior to another. But since you do not have the education to actually discuss the thread title because you think changing the subject will make you look clever, we're at this point in the discussion where I hurt a lot of retarded liberal feelings with my dislike of Harper Lee.

When you are ready to grow a brain and discuss the actual subject of the thread, I'll be surprised, (as will the third grade teacher who flunked you out.)

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

Again, from the RELIABLE source I cited:

https://redstate.com/diary/razor/2012/12/08/it-takes-a-liberal-to-ban-a-book-n202807

 

Of course, the SUPERIOR red state of Florida doesn't seem to have a problem with "To Kill A Mockingbird." During a Freshman writing/reading class in a local high school, the book came up in discussion. I was subbing for the class, (the teacher out with an extended illness.) All the horrific items in the book were explored in great detail. All the violence, the racism, etc. (Not surprising since the racists were all Democrats.)

Personally I never cared for Harper Lee's books. I thought "Mockingbird" was poorly written and just seemed to ramble on. And "Go Set A Watchman" (the sequel to Mockingbird, where Atticus Finch wound up in the KKK) would have been a perfect substitute for Ambien, it was so boring.

Then again, my historic author favorites were a much more eclectic class:

Ayn Rand, Frank Yerby, Ludwig Von Mises, Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, etc.

But somehow Harper Lee was able to parlay her friendship with that fag Truman Capote to get an inferior manuscript published.

 

Oh, and those are OPINIONS. The fact that they might disagree with your bullshit does not automatically brand me a troll. The thread title was about a Pennsylvania school board deciding to violate state law and teach that one race is superior to another. But since you do not have the education to actually discuss the thread title because you think changing the subject will make you look clever, we're at this point in the discussion where I hurt a lot of retarded liberal feelings with my dislike of Harper Lee.

When you are ready to grow a brain and discuss the actual subject of the thread, I'll be surprised, (as will the third grade teacher who flunked you out.)

Your lies have already been pointed out, so we all know you’re just a troll.  
 

Too bad, because we could have an interesting discussion about whether any of the other eight prohibitions are warranted or not.  

Edited December 3, 2022 by Rebound

[reason10]

22 hours ago, Hodad said:

As before, nobody HAS to lie. You just seem to get off on it.

I didn't change the subject. I quoted and replied to your post. I clicked through to your garbage citation. I then clicked through again to actual news article that Red State was blogging about to discover, of course, that Red State was lying. Those books were not banned, and it was not proposed that they be banned. They would be perfectly eligible to be featured in the 30% fiction mix.

You're dumb enough to fall for the lies of garbage media, and dishonest enough to stick with it when it's pointed out that you've been duped. Top notch trolling, dude.

You changed the subject. In fact you didn't even MENTION the subject. You're the only troll here.

[reason10]

21 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Your lies have already been pointed out, so we all know you’re just a troll.  
 

Too bad, because we could have an interesting discussion about whether any of the other eight prohibitions are warranted or not.  

The source says it all.  You are wrong and you know it.

I don't lie. I don't have to. I'm right and you're wrong.

You're also stupid.

[Rebound]

2 minutes ago, reason10 said:

The source says it all.  You are wrong and you know it.

I don't lie. I don't have to. I'm right and you're wrong.

You're also stupid.

What are the other prohibitions listed in the proposed law, Adulterer?

Edited December 3, 2022 by Rebound

[reason10]

13 minutes ago, Rebound said:

What are the other prohibitions listed in the proposed law, Adulterer?

You have the link, same as the intelligent people here.

As far as being an adulterer, accusing me of that makes you a troll. A stupid one at that.

Adultery has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. This thread is about some retarded PA county who wants to break the law and have its schools teach that some races are inferior to others.