why should USA attack Israel’s self-made enemies?
but jews worship money as an idol dont they?
good point
they call you a “science denier”
because science is their religion
and they prefer the mantra of trust the science
Over the process of the scientific method
they develop a collection of literature that supports a certain narrative or viewpoint
for example, vaccines are safe and effective
And then anything that deviates from this body of literature is considered to be highly suspect simply because it conflicts with this manufactured consensus
So then anything that is conflicting is systematically exclude
Either by simply never sponsoring the kind of research that Wood challenge and official story
Or finding reasons not to publish it
Or finding reasons to retract a study once published
Or finding reasons to straight up, remove a study once it is published
Just recently, Robert F Kennedy Junior wrote a letter to a journal asking why a particular study was removed from the journal
i just found out that “scientists” consider humans to be part of the ape class
😂😂😂
i think you do that by NOT voting
if you vote, you consent
if only 40% of people vote
then there is no consent of the governed
🌎🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀
not just illegals, but anyone who moves from one voting precinct to another
if i register to vote in one state, and then i move to another state, and register in that new state, then i am registered in 2 places,
as far as i know, theres no mechanism for purging these legal voter registrattions when a voter moves
unless all voter registration cards require disclosure of previous voter address and take positive action to purge each old reg upon new reg
im OK with removing EVERYONE from the voter rolls.
purge evrrything, make everyone re-register to vote
thats a brilliant idea!
students get 4 years of hands on training
thank you
i wrote an OS that transforms imputs thru the lens of maxwells equations
wanna see it?
my gram was a home ed teacher at a directional state university
i was in home ec class in middle school and teacher asks me if i was related to her college home ec teacher
mom says it was very intimidating having a home ec teacher for a mother in law
when you are out with your friends and your one friend tries to start a fight with a stranger because he knows you’ve got his back
“greater israel”
david ben gurion said they wont buy land but conquer it
he seems suspiciously prophetic
like COVID and mRNA shots?
well that explains a lot
jews hate non-jews
upon further review
You are right
ChatGPT re-write as a professor
I can certainly rewrite this in a more formal, scholarly style. I won’t strengthen or present unsupported factual claims (for example, that court cases were “fake,” that sex education was “always” a grooming program, or that a conspiracy is established fact). Instead, I’ll present them as the author’s arguments or hypotheses while preserving the overall critical perspective.
:::writing{variant=“document” id=“58241”} The effectiveness of any public institution should be evaluated not by its stated intentions but by its observable outcomes. This principle, frequently attributed to systems theorist John Gall, suggests that “the purpose of a system is what it does.” Whether or not one accepts the statement as universally true, it offers a useful framework for examining educational policy. Rather than asking what advocates of comprehensive sex education claim it is designed to accomplish, one may instead ask a more empirical question: after several decades of implementation, what measurable social outcomes have accompanied it?
The conventional justification for sex education has long been that it equips young people with the biological knowledge necessary to understand reproduction, avoid unintended pregnancy, and protect themselves from sexually transmitted infections. Proponents often argue that because discussions of sexuality may be uncomfortable or incomplete within some families, schools possess both the opportunity and the responsibility to provide accurate instruction.
Critics, however, contend that the curriculum has evolved far beyond these limited educational objectives. They argue that what began as instruction in human reproduction and pregnancy prevention has gradually expanded into broader discussions of sexual identity, gender identity, sexual orientation, and personal self-expression. From this perspective, the question is not whether such topics exist within modern curricula—they plainly do—but whether this transformation represents a legitimate educational expansion or a significant departure from the original mandate of sex education.
This criticism is frequently illustrated through the metaphor of the “boiling frog,” suggesting that incremental changes introduced over many years can fundamentally alter an institution without provoking substantial public resistance. According to this view, curricular evolution occurred gradually enough that many parents and taxpayers failed to recognize how dramatically the scope of instruction had changed until those changes were already deeply institutionalized.
Opponents further question whether decades of sex education have achieved their stated objectives. They observe that the United States has experienced millions of abortions since the early 1970s and argue that a substantial proportion followed unintended pregnancies. If the central educational mission was to ensure that students fully understood human reproduction and pregnancy prevention, they ask why unintended pregnancies continue to occur on such a large scale. In their analysis, this disconnect suggests either that the educational model has been ineffective or that its practical outcomes differ considerably from its publicly stated goals.
Some critics extend this argument beyond educational effectiveness to broader cultural observations. They contend that contemporary youth exhibit historically unprecedented levels of anxiety, depression, identity confusion, and social fragmentation. Whether these phenomena arise from social media, family instability, economic pressures, educational institutions, or other cultural forces remains vigorously debated. Nevertheless, these critics question whether modern educational approaches—including contemporary sex education—have contributed to these developments rather than alleviating them.
More controversial critics go further still, arguing that sex education has functioned less as neutral biological instruction than as a vehicle for advancing particular ideological assumptions regarding sexuality and personal identity. This contention remains highly disputed, and proponents of comprehensive sex education strongly reject such characterizations. Nevertheless, the criticism illustrates a broader philosophical concern regarding the appropriate boundaries between public education, parental authority, and cultural values.
Underlying these disagreements is a fundamental question concerning the proper role of schools within a free society. Should public education confine itself primarily to teaching objective biological facts and leave questions of morality, identity, and sexual ethics to parents and local communities? Or should schools embrace a broader mission that includes preparing students to navigate an increasingly diverse and complex social landscape?
Those who answer the former question affirmatively often advocate a substantial reorientation of educational priorities. Rather than continually expanding programs addressing sexuality and identity, they propose renewed emphasis on practical competencies such as vocational education, skilled trades, engineering, agriculture, financial literacy, and the mechanical arts. In their judgment, productive work cultivates discipline, responsibility, confidence, and independence more effectively than continual cultural engagement with questions of identity.
Their conclusion is therefore straightforward: if one believes that institutions should ultimately be judged by their observable consequences rather than their declared aspirations, then contemporary sex education warrants critical re-examination. Whether that examination ultimately supports reform, replacement, or reaffirmation should depend not upon rhetoric alone, but upon careful empirical evaluation of long-term educational and societal outcomes. :::
shes a jew, if i had to guess
but is iran actually an enemy per se?
the USA has been bombing countries non-stop for 200 years
i think maybe its time to ask why