Recently at a South Carolina high school a history teacher placed and American flag on the floor of his classroom and stomped on it. There was an attempt to defend this as a lesson in critical thinking.

In a class at FAU a professor ORDERED students to write Jesus on a piece of paper then place it on the floor and stomp on it. One student did not comply and was told to leave the class. Thus my statement it was an Order not a request by the professor. Again the professor and school administration tried to defend this as a lesson in "critical" thinking. Interesting, why Jesus? Why not Muhammad? Why not Obama?

These are two examples of LIBERALS trying to devalue beliefs that a majority of Americans still hold as sacred. What is the REAL purpose of these demonstrations? I contend it is to take away things that are held in high esteem so the only thing we would be left with is Government. Liberals see Government as a thing to worship and serve, which is not at all what government should be. However when a majority of Americans depend on government to support them it becomes something that must be worshipped and served because if it ceases to exist in that Nanny State structure these people would have to support themselves.

Critical thinking is *not* about pushing the boundaries of your comfort zone... It's about well thinking. This crap is desensitization.

Want to teach kids to think, make them debate for positions things they disagree with.

Critical thinking requires TWO sides to the issue. Indoctrination requires ONE side. How many sides are being presented in these situations?

A Snip on Marx and Engels concerning education:

Furthermore, Marx and Engels provided some hints in The Communist Manifesto concerning the social relations that would supersede the family. First they discussed the status of children, whose exploitation they wanted to end. They proposed the replacement of home education by social education (Erziehung), which included, but encompassed far more than, sending children to public schools. The German term Erziehung entails not only formal education, but any training of children, including that normally given by parents. Marx and Engels reinforced their point further by assaulting the 'bourgeois claptrap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parent and child'.50 Furthermore, Engels in his draft for The Communist Manifesto articulated more clearly his vision for children in communist society: 'The raising (Erziehung) of children together in national institutions and at national expense, from that moment on, in which they can dispense with the first motherly care'.51
The child-rearing principles that Marx and Engels espoused were not original. Fourier and especially Owen had already vigorously touted the superiority of the communal education of children and the removal of children from parental control and influence. However, these views were by no means universally adopted in leftist circles in the nineteenth century. Proudhon was an advocate and polemicist on behalf of the traditional family, which he considered the only social institution worth salvaging. Even the anarchist Bakunin proposed the maintenance of parent-child relationships, except in cases where society perceived deleterious effects on a child's development.52
One of Marx's and Engels' suggestions in The Communist Manifesto for facilitating the transformation to communist society tended to weaken parent-child ties still more—the abolition of inheritance.53 This would be the first step in stripping the family of its role as an economic unit. With no private property and with economic opportunities for all in communist society, there would be no need for the financial support commonly provided by the family unit.

I'll start to consider it critical thinking when liberals start wanting us to disrespect their idols, i.e., obama, Allah, MLK, Hillary, and others. If we stomped on a Mexican flag we'd be racists. If we even draw a picture of Mohammad we'd be labeled as being insensitive. How do you debate people who think the words "golf" and "Chicago" are conservative code words for racism?

That they only want to disrespect conservatives and/or their values proves to me that this is indoctrination.

(03-30-2013 09:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Critical thinking requires TWO sides to the issue. Indoctrination requires ONE side. How many sides are being presented in these situations?

Well, the guy that refused was suspended, if that tells you anything.

Some more on Marx:

Thus in Marx’s utopian vision of communism, education would help fully develop socialized individuals, create a cooperative and harmonious society, and unleash creativity in all of its forms.

...And later generations of neo-Marxian theorists would develop more sophisticated theories of consciousness, communication, and education, whereby political subjectivities could be formed which would strive for socialist and/or democratic social change.

(03-30-2013 09:40 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 09:32 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Critical thinking requires TWO sides to the issue. Indoctrination requires ONE side. How many sides are being presented in these situations?

Well, the guy that refused was suspended, if that tells you anything.

I would argue that he was the only one in the whole lot of them who was doing any critical thinking.

(03-30-2013 07:49 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Recently at a South Carolina high school a history teacher placed and American flag on the floor of his classroom and stomped on it. There was an attempt to defend this as a lesson in critical thinking.

In a class at FAU a professor ORDERED students to write Jesus on a piece of paper then place it on the floor and stomp on it. One student did not comply and was told to leave the class. Thus my statement it was an Order not a request by the professor. Again the professor and school administration tried to defend this as a lesson in "critical" thinking. Interesting, why Jesus? Why not Muhammad? Why not Obama?

These are two examples of LIBERALS trying to devalue beliefs that a majority of Americans still hold as sacred. What is the REAL purpose of these demonstrations? I contend it is to take away things that are held in high esteem so the only thing we would be left with is Government. Liberals see Government as a thing to worship and serve, which is not at all what government should be. However when a majority of Americans depend on government to support them it becomes something that must be worshipped and served because if it ceases to exist in that Nanny State structure these people would have to support themselves.

I am all for them teaching critical thinking to the Faux drones down in SC. THey should have used one of these instead of an American flag though:



or this one



just imagine how pissed they would be!

(03-30-2013 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 07:49 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Recently at a South Carolina high school a history teacher placed and American flag on the floor of his classroom and stomped on it. There was an attempt to defend this as a lesson in critical thinking.

In a class at FAU a professor ORDERED students to write Jesus on a piece of paper then place it on the floor and stomp on it. One student did not comply and was told to leave the class. Thus my statement it was an Order not a request by the professor. Again the professor and school administration tried to defend this as a lesson in "critical" thinking. Interesting, why Jesus? Why not Muhammad? Why not Obama?

These are two examples of LIBERALS trying to devalue beliefs that a majority of Americans still hold as sacred. What is the REAL purpose of these demonstrations? I contend it is to take away things that are held in high esteem so the only thing we would be left with is Government. Liberals see Government as a thing to worship and serve, which is not at all what government should be. However when a majority of Americans depend on government to support them it becomes something that must be worshipped and served because if it ceases to exist in that Nanny State structure these people would have to support themselves.

I am all for them teaching critical thinking to the Faux drones down in SC. THey should have used one of these instead of an American flag though:



or this one



just imagine how pissed they would be!

What would your thoughts be on this one?

(03-30-2013 12:20 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  What would your thoughts be on this one?

NO ONE would stomp on THIS one.

(03-30-2013 12:24 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  NO ONE would stomp on THIS one.

What is that, bacon?

(03-30-2013 12:24 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 12:20 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  What would your thoughts be on this one?

NO ONE would stomp on THIS one.

Muslims would. Hence why we should never take that religion seriously. 1) they don't eat bacon. 2) they don't like dogs. 3) they believe women should be covered.

I'm a Ferengi. I think women should be nude...

I'm an American, and I agree. More nude beaches!

Oh, but we have to put a weight limitation. This is the one time I'm fine with violating the Constitution.

(03-30-2013 04:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I'm a Ferengi. I think women should be nude...

Even Janet Reno and Rosie Odonnell? SOME women should be nude and others covered completely.

Or exiled to a desert island so as to not pollute the gene pool. Katherine had all beautiful women exiled to the Ukraine because she, the ugly, horse-f'ing beeyatch she was, wanted no competition. Hence why the Ukraine is slap full of extremely beautiful women. It's almost like Oxford, Ms, for a similar reason. Well, not really similar, but women, from all over the country, sent their beautiful daughters to Ole Miss because we redshirted pageant queens in the 50's and 60's. genes matter. Lol

(03-30-2013 12:20 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 07:49 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Recently at a South Carolina high school a history teacher placed and American flag on the floor of his classroom and stomped on it. There was an attempt to defend this as a lesson in critical thinking.

In a class at FAU a professor ORDERED students to write Jesus on a piece of paper then place it on the floor and stomp on it. One student did not comply and was told to leave the class. Thus my statement it was an Order not a request by the professor. Again the professor and school administration tried to defend this as a lesson in "critical" thinking. Interesting, why Jesus? Why not Muhammad? Why not Obama?

These are two examples of LIBERALS trying to devalue beliefs that a majority of Americans still hold as sacred. What is the REAL purpose of these demonstrations? I contend it is to take away things that are held in high esteem so the only thing we would be left with is Government. Liberals see Government as a thing to worship and serve, which is not at all what government should be. However when a majority of Americans depend on government to support them it becomes something that must be worshipped and served because if it ceases to exist in that Nanny State structure these people would have to support themselves.

I am all for them teaching critical thinking to the Faux drones down in SC. THey should have used one of these instead of an American flag though:



or this one



just imagine how pissed they would be!

What would your thoughts be on this one?

Don't know what that is.

(03-30-2013 04:43 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 04:37 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I'm a Ferengi. I think women should be nude...

Even Janet Reno and Rosie Odonnell? SOME women should be nude and others covered completely.

Just think of all the fat guys that need women. Should they be left out in the cold?