• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Arizona Republican Proposes Trio of Laws That Would Allow Schools to Discriminate Against Transgende

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
That works too.

Unless of course "Harry" demands to be called "Harriette." Or vice versa.

I just think that the situation with transgendered children shouldn't be something TEACHERS should have to address and handle. If the guardians haven't done what they need to do in order to fix the records, then it's way too much to demand that the schools, especially the teachers, do it.
Then no nicknames can be used.
No calling Charles Chuck, or Robert Bob...
Otherwise it would be sexual discrimination,
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Then no nicknames can be used.
No calling Charles Chuck, or Robert Bob...
Otherwise it would be sexual discrimination,

Students should be called by the name that appears on their paperwork. I had a student who demanded that he be called 'Butch.' I called him "Charles" anyway.

His friends knew the difference. I wasn't his friend. I was his teacher, and the only job I had was to teach him how to read, and how to enjoy reading.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
A Republican Arizona state representative has introduced three laws that propose mandating binary sex identification on state documents and legally allowing public school employees to discriminate against transgender students by referring to them with incorrect pronouns......
Rep. John Fillmore proposed House Bill 2082 for the upcoming legislative session, according to a Tuesday report in the Arizona Mirror. The bill would prevent public schools from penalizing employees who use incorrect pronouns for transgender students. It would also prohibit schools from requiring that employees use correct pronouns for students, unless the pronoun "corresponds to the sex listed on that student's birth certificate."

A recent incident that would likely have had a different outcome under the proposed law involved an Arizona teacher who was fired in September 2019. The teacher allegedly insisted on using incorrect pronouns for transgender students, and failed one student for a school project that referred to gender identity. The teacher was also said to have lowered the grade of a student that admitted to being an atheist while proselytizing Christianity and attempting to distribute Bibles to students in class.

Although the law would seemingly help teachers legally discriminate against transgender students, Fillmore insisted the proposal was aimed at helping schools focus on issues like simple math instead of "sexual stuff."

Arizona Republican Proposes Trio of Laws That Would Allow Schools to Discriminate Against Transgender Students

Does this mean that a majority of voters on Arizona are prejudiced bigots?

Or is this just one politician proposing stuff for attention?

Either way...... What a pathetic creep, eh?
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Students should be called by the name that appears on their paperwork. I had a student who demanded that he be called 'Butch.' I called him "Charles" anyway.

His friends knew the difference. I wasn't his friend. I was his teacher, and the only job I had was to teach him how to read, and how to enjoy reading.
I have a legal name that nobody has ever called me. That name is on all my records.
Then I have the name that people have been calling me since birth. If you call me by my legal name, I might answer you, but I might not, because I'm not used to responding to it.
If you call me by the name I prefer and have been called my entire life, I will answer you every time.
So if I ask to be called say, "Mandy" instead of "Amanda" because I prefer to be called that, what skin is it off some teacher's nose to call me by the name I prefer?
Honestly, I think it's rude to call somebody by a name that they do not identify with.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
Best not to play the game at all, because if you don't play it according to society's "rules" you not going to win.

That's true. But what determines that me suddenly deciding to identify as a different race/gender is wrong, but for others, it's perfectly acceptable? I have no problem with transgender people. But I don't think they deserve special treatment, nor do I think everyone should be forced to recognize that their gender is objectively different than their birth gender. Heck, people have even invented new, fictional genders. I have no problem with people who want to call themselves "Xi" or identify with some other fictional identity. But if they insist I recognize that their fictional identity is objectively real, I certainly DO have a problem. In this case, the left is as irrational and scientifically incorrect as young-earth creationists.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
I have a legal name that nobody has ever called me. That name is on all my records.
Then I have the name that people have been calling me since birth. If you call me by my legal name, I might answer you, but I might not, because I'm not used to responding to it.
If you call me by the name I prefer and have been called my entire life, I will answer you every time.
So if I ask to be called say, "Mandy" instead of "Amanda" because I prefer to be called that, what skin is it off some teacher's nose to call me by the name I prefer?
Honestly, I think it's rude to call somebody by a name that they do not identify with.

Then make that preference known on the school records. It's done all the time.

It's rude for your FRIENDS to insist upon using a name you don't answer to.
It's rude for your business associates to do so.
It's even rude for strangers to do so, if you introduce yourself as "Mandy," and they somehow figure out that it's short for 'Amanda.'
But not for a teacher, who should have a more formal arrangement with the student anyway. Or perhaps that should be 'more respectful."

I'm aware of this. My sister has never used her first name, EVER. She uses her middle name, and a shortened version of that, as well. She is 'Katey."

And every year my parents had to go to school and insist that the records reflect that, because when they didn't, she was assigned to boy's gym. ;) Classic example of what I'm arguing here, come to think of it! Mom and Dad named the kid; if something changes, it's THEIR job to go to the school to fix it.

It is not the job of the school or the teacher, especially when the student is a child. It is not the teacher's job to adjust cultural and personal attitudes towards gender. His/her job is to teach the student what that student needs to know.

Perhaps if the teacher is actually a nanny, that might be different, but a teacher who has the kid for an hour...or three or four...a day?

No. The parents need to deal with it, officially. Then the teacher can do her job, and call Harry 'Harriet" or "Twinkletoes," according to the records.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Maybe kids ought to learn early that the world is not necessarily going to cater to their personal identity.
There are concessions made for other health conditions. The world won't necessarily accommodate and cater to such a small population as the handicapped. Until it did.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
They are afraid because white Christianity is now a minority.
I don't think that bothers them, as it just reaffirms to them the final days are coming. It's that they are losing control and have to tolerate existing among such sin that bothers them. They want the end rewards, but not the effort and work to get there.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
There are concessions made for other health conditions. The world won't necessarily accommodate and cater to such a small population as the handicapped. Until it did.

Not saying we shouldn't strive for accomodations. My son is mentally handicapped. I am very happy for the accommodations which allow him to live a independent, productive life. At the same time not every situation is going to be accommodated for.

He is aware that he is seen differently. However he does not allow this to affect who he is. His goals, his relationships, his happiness, his life. Doesn't care how other people see him. This still creates obstacles for him others don't face. He deals with them with no animosity towards the world for being in a situation he had no choice in. He adapts to the world instead of waiting/hoping for the world to adapt to him. Sure, maybe he shouldn't have to but in the end, I feel this is a healthier way to go about life.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Not saying we shouldn't strive for accomodations. My son is mentally handicapped. I am very happy for the accommodations which allow him to live a independent, productive life. At the same time not every situation is going to be accommodated for.

He is aware that he is seen differently. However he does not allow this to affect who he is. His goals, his relationships, his happiness, his life. Doesn't care how other people see him. This still creates obstacles for him others don't face. He deals with them with no animosity towards the world for being in a situation he had no choice in. He adapts to the world instead of waiting/hoping for the world to adapt to him. Sure, maybe he shouldn't have to but in the end, I feel this is a healthier way to go about life.
I dont necessarily disagree, however, with things such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, which provides for reasonable accommodations. Or privacy laws that, in certain situations, prohibit asking a woman if she's pregnant or plans regarding pregnancy.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Except she hasn't been nominated and it's unlikely she will.

You are quite right. I hope. But you NEVER know what those nutty Democrats will do.

On the other hand, on "Realclearpolitics,' one of the comments read thusly:

  1. She may have a boat load of degrees but she has no common sense. No one with the smarts to come out of the rain would have published that damning DNA report or promised to take away the private health care of 138 million. Americans for an undefined Medicare for all plan.
  2. She is one of the most wooden and inherently unlikable politicians since Hillary Clinton, scratch that she is in Nixon territory.
  3. She is a tireless scold, a busybody that would drive the American people nuts.
  4. She is humorless and boring. Jimmy Carter is a raconteur by comparison.
I have to agree...except that Nixon was pretty popular before he was, er, unpopular.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Of course you do. Such criticisms (2,3 and 4) and obsessions over someone who just isn't going to get it at this point are signs of "WDS."

Hey. Those were quotes from someone else. I didn't take credit for them.

I think, personally, that Warren is entertaining, in a 'slapstick' sort of way. Right up there with Pelosi.

I never did like slapstick much, though.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You are quite right. I hope. But you NEVER know what those nutty Democrats will do.

On the other hand, on "Realclearpolitics,' one of the comments read thusly:

  1. She may have a boat load of degrees but she has no common sense. No one with the smarts to come out of the rain would have published that damning DNA report or promised to take away the private health care of 138 million. Americans for an undefined Medicare for all plan.
  2. She is one of the most wooden and inherently unlikable politicians since Hillary Clinton, scratch that she is in Nixon territory.
  3. She is a tireless scold, a busybody that would drive the American people nuts.
  4. She is humorless and boring. Jimmy Carter is a raconteur by comparison.
I have to agree...except that Nixon was pretty popular before he was, er, unpopular.
Part of the Democrats problem last time was that they thought it was a woman's turn to win. Trust me, there will be a female President some day. But it won't be Clinton and it won't be Warren.
 
Top