What's in the News? 2.0

[TheGlyphstone]

First, a disclaimer that I feel the whole controversy over banning 'critical race theory' in schools is like banning asbestos in baby food - it didn't exist outside of some very narrow ivory-tower academic circles and no one was concerned until a reason to stir people up and get them angry about something was needed.

That said, having read the bill...what the hell does it actually do? The first segment is pretty meaningless puffery, but the meat appears to be simply telling the Board of Education to do a job that it by any reasonable measure should have been doing in the first place - reviewing educational material for curriculums. That's literally what a Board of Education exists to do. Does this actually change anything that wasn't already state policy, or is it just fluffing to make DeSantis look good for his supporters?

I've also noticed what appears to be an amusing bit of accidental double-negative legalese...if you read Section 1, paragraph a, clause 4, it appears to prohibit any employment, licensing, etc. etc. where a condition of such is "Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, sex, or national origin" - so its illegal to forbid your employees to discriminate? They must be allowed to treat others with respect to race, color, sex, or national origin?

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/with-respect-to
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/with-respect-to

[Chulanowa]

The actual bill is a much more interesting and accurate read I find.

Link to the Bill Information: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/

Latest Text as HTML page here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/BillText/Filed/HTML

"Interesting" is indeed a good word to use. The bill is very... interesting. In the sort of way that a two-headed sheep preserved in a jar of formaldehyde is "interesting," in that sort of "wow, fuckin yikes' way.

Cheung's piece isn't so much "inaccurate" as it is... flaccid and half-thought? it seems more worried about Ron DeSantis being inaccurate about something rather than like, the shit that's in the bill, which is, hahahah holy fucking shit level stuff.

That said, having read the bill...what the hell does it actually do? The first segment is pretty meaningless puffery, but the meat appears to be simply telling the Board of Education to do a job that it by any reasonable measure should have been doing in the first place - reviewing educational material for curriculums. That's literally what a Board of Education exists to do. Does this actually change anything that wasn't already state policy, or is it just fluffing to make DeSantis look good for his supporters?

That puffery is there to set out the premises for further content in the bill. Basically it's hte "reasoning" for the bill being written at all.

As for what it does?

it creates a legal obligation for Florida teachers to become propaganda mouthpieces for the governor with their jobs at risk if they deviate from this curriculum even a little.

So first, the Board of Education. Each state has a somewhat different way of composing their Board of education. here in Washington, our BoE has 16 members; the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (public election), seven members appointed by the governor, five members elected by public school directors, one member elected by private school directors, and two non-voting student members selected by the Association of Washington Student Leaders. Most of them are educators, or educator-adjacent (one member does consulting, but with a focus on schooling, whatever that means?)

Now Florida... Well. Florida has eight members on its School board. Six of them are directly appointed by the governor. one is a Commissioner appointed by the six on the board, and the eighth is Vice-chair, who I'm uncertain but would assume is also appointed by the Board itself. Of these eight people currently on the Florida board of education, only one of them has anything even vaguely related to schooling on his resume - and he's not an educator, he's an activist for school antiviolence measures who has political ties to Marco Rubio. The remaining seven are...
• An insurance executive
• a partner for Shutts & Bowne Law in Tallahassee
• The Wal Mart director of public affairs
• The regional vice-president of government affairs for Charter Communications
• a wealthy citrus dude
• An AT&T executive
• And the commissioner, Richard Corcoran, who is a former Florida Speaker of the House who was hand-picked by DeSantis.

So what does the bill so? Well, first, it lays out the sort of school curriculum the board should be approving (like, there is no illusion of the Board of Education having any independence on the subject). it doesn't get super specific, but there are SOME details:

110         (a) The history and content of the Declaration of
  111  Independence, including national sovereignty, natural law, self
  112  evident truth, equality of all persons, limited government,
  113  popular sovereignty, and inalienable rights of life, liberty,
  114  and property, and how they form the philosophical foundation of
  115  our government.
  116         (b) The history, meaning, significance, and effect of the
  117  provisions of the Constitution of the United States and
  118  amendments thereto, with emphasis on each of the 10 amendments
  119  that make up the Bill of Rights and how the constitution
  120  provides the structure of our government.
  121         (c) The arguments in support of adopting our republican
  122  form of government, as they are embodied in the most important
  123  of the Federalist Papers.
  124         (d) Flag education, including proper flag display and flag
  125  salute.
  126         (e) The elements of civil government, including the primary
  127  functions of and interrelationships between the Federal
  128  Government, the state, and its counties, municipalities, school
  129  districts, and special districts.
  130         (f) The history of the United States, including the period
  131  of discovery, early colonies, the War for Independence, the
  132  Civil War, the expansion of the United States to its present
  133  boundaries, the world wars, and the civil rights movement to the
  134  present. American history shall be viewed as factual, not as
  135  constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, and
  136  testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation
  137  based largely on the universal principles stated in the
  138  Declaration of Independence.

"American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed" is... actually pretty alarming. Because, well... all history is "constructed," all history texts have a point of view and generally present some sort of constructed narrative. This is especially (and painfully) true for school-grade history textbooks, which LOVE the 'steady march of progress" narrative that presents American history as the pinnacle of an unbroken procession of human achievements flowing from Greece to Rome to France to England to America.

Also the definition of "American History" as presented in this section is still pretty alarming as it kinda-sorta you know erases everything prior to 1776 and nullifies anything that doesn't mesh neatly with the Declaration of Independence. Whether intentional or not, this has the little side effect of totally removing indigenous people from the picture except as, in the Declaration's words, "merciless Indian savages."

(Also can we just take a moment to take a deep breath and a long laugh at the reverence given to the Declaration, a document which yells about King George III appointing his cronies to power, by a body of people entirely appointed by a governor and demonstrably subservient to his whim? Like...?)

  203         3. The health education curriculum For students in grades 6
  204  through 12,  shall include an awareness of the benefits of sexual
  205  abstinence as the expected standard and the consequences of
  206  teenage pregnancy.

Sadly, this is stock stuff; there will be no useful sex education in Florida schools, just a Nancy Reagan-esque "just don't do it," which I'm sure is going to be real helpful for young people entering puberty and all the fun and wacky things that can do to a body. As usual, a Republican legislature thinks "sex education" is about demonstrating how to deep-throat a banana and not like, giving an honest answer to "why are my breasts different sizes?" or "Why am I sticky when I wake up in the morning?"

  234         (r) The nature and importance of free enterprise to the
  235  United States economy.

(this one warms my communist cockles!)

236         (s) Civic and character education on A character
  237  development program in the elementary schools, similar to
  238  Character First or Character Counts, which is secular in nature.
  239  Beginning in school year 2004-2005, the character development
  240  program shall be required in kindergarten through grade 12. Each
  241  district school board shall develop or adopt a curriculum for
  242  the character development program that shall be submitted to the
  243  department for approval.
  244         1. The character development curriculum shall stress the
  245  qualities and responsibilities of patriotism and;
  246  responsibility; citizenship, including,; kindness; respect for
  247  authority, life, liberty, and personal property; honesty;
  248  charity; self-control; racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance;
  249  and cooperation

As yes, those inherent qualities of character - citizenship and respect for authority (how do we make that latter one jive with the reverence given to "Fuck you, King Geoge!.doc"? Don't think too hard.) One also wonders why "responsibility" and "self-control" were stricken out of the text.

We scroll up a bit though, to Section 2, subsection (2) to find out what's going on:
103         (2) Members of the instructional staff of the public
  104  schools, subject to the rules of the State Board of Education
  105  and the district school board, shall teach efficiently and
  106  faithfully, using the books and materials required that meet the
  107  highest standards for professionalism and historical accuracy,
  108  following the prescribed courses of study, and employing
  109  approved methods of instruction, the following:

"Shall teach efficiently and faithfully, using the books and materials required" is the workhorse of this subsection and, really the whole document. Especially the "faithfully" part, when taken in account with the premises offered in the preamble.

What it amounts to, is a requirement that teachers simply parrot the text. Uncritically, un-analytically, and without discourse. As we see with subsection (2) paragraph f, there is assumed to be nothing to analyze or examine critically, if it's in the text, it's "just the facts," cram them in heads and get the kids out the door. And hte text is, again, decided by a body of non-educators who are entirely beholden to the governor.

[Oniya]

Well, the 'responsibilities of

...

patriotism and;

responsibility' does sound a little awkward.

My latent grammarian is cringing at the punctuation throughout that entire segment.  Comma or semi-colon, not both together!  Who taught these peop- 

Oh.  Never mind.

[greenknight]

They do realize the latter repudiates the former, right?

110         (a) The history and content of the Declaration of
  111  Independence, including national sovereignty, natural law, self
  112  evident truth, equality of all persons, limited government,
  113  popular sovereignty, and inalienable rights of life, liberty,
  114  and property, and how they form the philosophical foundation of
  115  our government.
  116         (b) The history, meaning, significance, and effect of the
  117  provisions of the Constitution of the United States and
  118  amendments thereto, with emphasis on each of the 10 amendments
  119  that make up the Bill of Rights and how the constitution
  120  provides the structure of our government.

[Lustful Bride]

As if it isn't hard enough for orphans to find a loving home, now we have stuff like this. I wish the parents the best in their lawsuit, because this is horseshit!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/adoption-agency-turns-away-jewish-couple-citing-new-controversial-law/ar-AASYCiq?ocid=msedgntp

[Sara Nilsson]

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/jan/20/stranded-dog-saved-from-drowning-after-rescuers-attach-sausage-to-drone

I mean the headline say it all.

Poor pup was stranded in some mudflats, scared, wouldn't move, so they bought some sausages, cooked em up and used them to get the pupper to safety.

Figured we needed a good story to cleanse the palette.

[Mechelle]

In Britain, Boris Johnson remains in power. although his fortunes ebb and flow.

Yesterday, one of my fairly local MPs, Christian Wakeford, defected from the Conservatives to Labour, publically crossing the floor in the House of Commons just before the Prime Minister's Questions. He is not a well-known figure, but this was quite a grand gesture, although the tribal nature of politics meant that a lot of Conservatives who were hostile to Johnson rallied somewhat behind the leader.

At the end of the same session, though David Davis, who is a senior Conservative politician and a former leadership contender did tell Boris Johnson to "in the name of God, go". This is a famous quotation from Leo Amery in 1940  aimed at Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, after which Winston Churchill came to power. Amery was quoting Oliver Cromwell from three centuries earlier; oddly, although Churchill is Johnson's hero, and Johnson has written his biography, he didn't seem to recognise the quote. It was quite a moment to see a senior politician to say this to the leader of his own party in public in the House of Commons.

Today, another of my localish MPs, William Wragg, made some very serious allegations. You would think that Wragg would be a Johnson supporter as he an enthusiastic Brexiteer, against lockdown measures and is  an opponent of "wokeism".  However, he is also principled and independent minded, and at a young age he has got quite high and respected in the Conservative party, while remaining out of government. He has complained about bullying and blackmail by the government whips (party enforcers), who have also threatened to withdraw funding for projects in MPs' constituencies if they don't vote the way the government want. Wakeford also backed up this story, saying that a school in Radcliffe would not be funded if he did not support Johnson.

Michael Fabricant, a dim backbencher and a former whip, defended the government but made things worse by saying that if the police investigated all the times he had been threatened by the whips or that he had threatened them, they would have no time to do anything else. Then he asked what Wragg had to ask in his private life! That might be a subtext as Wragg is openly gay, as I learned to my surprise today, although he is not particularly public about it.

After the  odd boost from the Wakeford defection,  it got worse again for Boris Johnson.

One other story which has come out is that the government suggested to the Queen that Covid regulations could be suspended at the time of Prince Phillip's funeral. She declined and remained alone in the pew at the funeral. Meanwhile, the night before the funeral there was a big party in 10 Downing Street.

[Oniya]

At the end of the same session, though David Davis, who is a senior Conservative politician and a former leadership contender did tell Boris Johnson to "in the name of God, go". This is a famous quotation from Leo Amery in 1940  aimed at Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, after which Winston Churchill came to power. Amery was quoting Oliver Cromwell from three centuries earlier; oddly, although Churchill is Johnson's hero, and Johnson has written his biography, he didn't seem to recognise the quote. It was quite a moment to see a senior politician to say this to the leader of his own party in public in the House of Commons.

I had a history teacher in 9th grade who was absolutely enthralled by Churchill.  The joke was that if you didn't know the answer on an exam, you might pull a B if you wrote an essay about Churchill instead.  Hearing that Davis did that made me laugh way too hard,

[Keelan]

Chulanowa's Post Quotation

"Interesting" is indeed a good word to use. The bill is very... interesting. In the sort of way that a two-headed sheep preserved in a jar of formaldehyde is "interesting," in that sort of "wow, fuckin yikes' way.

Cheung's piece isn't so much "inaccurate" as it is... flaccid and half-thought? it seems more worried about Ron DeSantis being inaccurate about something rather than like, the shit that's in the bill, which is, hahahah holy fucking shit level stuff.

That puffery is there to set out the premises for further content in the bill. Basically it's hte "reasoning" for the bill being written at all.

As for what it does?

it creates a legal obligation for Florida teachers to become propaganda mouthpieces for the governor with their jobs at risk if they deviate from this curriculum even a little.

So first, the Board of Education. Each state has a somewhat different way of composing their Board of education. here in Washington, our BoE has 16 members; the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (public election), seven members appointed by the governor, five members elected by public school directors, one member elected by private school directors, and two non-voting student members selected by the Association of Washington Student Leaders. Most of them are educators, or educator-adjacent (one member does consulting, but with a focus on schooling, whatever that means?)

Now Florida... Well. Florida has eight members on its School board. Six of them are directly appointed by the governor. one is a Commissioner appointed by the six on the board, and the eighth is Vice-chair, who I'm uncertain but would assume is also appointed by the Board itself. Of these eight people currently on the Florida board of education, only one of them has anything even vaguely related to schooling on his resume - and he's not an educator, he's an activist for school antiviolence measures who has political ties to Marco Rubio. The remaining seven are...
• An insurance executive
• a partner for Shutts & Bowne Law in Tallahassee
• The Wal Mart director of public affairs
• The regional vice-president of government affairs for Charter Communications
• a wealthy citrus dude
• An AT&T executive
• And the commissioner, Richard Corcoran, who is a former Florida Speaker of the House who was hand-picked by DeSantis.

So what does the bill so? Well, first, it lays out the sort of school curriculum the board should be approving (like, there is no illusion of the Board of Education having any independence on the subject). it doesn't get super specific, but there are SOME details:

110         (a) The history and content of the Declaration of
  111  Independence, including national sovereignty, natural law, self
  112  evident truth, equality of all persons, limited government,
  113  popular sovereignty, and inalienable rights of life, liberty,
  114  and property, and how they form the philosophical foundation of
  115  our government.
  116         (b) The history, meaning, significance, and effect of the
  117  provisions of the Constitution of the United States and
  118  amendments thereto, with emphasis on each of the 10 amendments
  119  that make up the Bill of Rights and how the constitution
  120  provides the structure of our government.
  121         (c) The arguments in support of adopting our republican
  122  form of government, as they are embodied in the most important
  123  of the Federalist Papers.
  124         (d) Flag education, including proper flag display and flag
  125  salute.
  126         (e) The elements of civil government, including the primary
  127  functions of and interrelationships between the Federal
  128  Government, the state, and its counties, municipalities, school
  129  districts, and special districts.
  130         (f) The history of the United States, including the period
  131  of discovery, early colonies, the War for Independence, the
  132  Civil War, the expansion of the United States to its present
  133  boundaries, the world wars, and the civil rights movement to the
  134  present. American history shall be viewed as factual, not as
  135  constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, and
  136  testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation
  137  based largely on the universal principles stated in the
  138  Declaration of Independence.

"American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed" is... actually pretty alarming. Because, well... all history is "constructed," all history texts have a point of view and generally present some sort of constructed narrative. This is especially (and painfully) true for school-grade history textbooks, which LOVE the 'steady march of progress" narrative that presents American history as the pinnacle of an unbroken procession of human achievements flowing from Greece to Rome to France to England to America.

Also the definition of "American History" as presented in this section is still pretty alarming as it kinda-sorta you know erases everything prior to 1776 and nullifies anything that doesn't mesh neatly with the Declaration of Independence. Whether intentional or not, this has the little side effect of totally removing indigenous people from the picture except as, in the Declaration's words, "merciless Indian savages."

(Also can we just take a moment to take a deep breath and a long laugh at the reverence given to the Declaration, a document which yells about King George III appointing his cronies to power, by a body of people entirely appointed by a governor and demonstrably subservient to his whim? Like...?)

  203         3. The health education curriculum For students in grades 6
  204  through 12,  shall include an awareness of the benefits of sexual
  205  abstinence as the expected standard and the consequences of
  206  teenage pregnancy.

Sadly, this is stock stuff; there will be no useful sex education in Florida schools, just a Nancy Reagan-esque "just don't do it," which I'm sure is going to be real helpful for young people entering puberty and all the fun and wacky things that can do to a body. As usual, a Republican legislature thinks "sex education" is about demonstrating how to deep-throat a banana and not like, giving an honest answer to "why are my breasts different sizes?" or "Why am I sticky when I wake up in the morning?"

  234         (r) The nature and importance of free enterprise to the
  235  United States economy.

(this one warms my communist cockles!)

236         (s) Civic and character education on A character
  237  development program in the elementary schools, similar to
  238  Character First or Character Counts, which is secular in nature.
  239  Beginning in school year 2004-2005, the character development
  240  program shall be required in kindergarten through grade 12. Each
  241  district school board shall develop or adopt a curriculum for
  242  the character development program that shall be submitted to the
  243  department for approval.
  244         1. The character development curriculum shall stress the
  245  qualities and responsibilities of patriotism and;
  246  responsibility; citizenship, including,; kindness; respect for
  247  authority, life, liberty, and personal property; honesty;
  248  charity; self-control; racial, ethnic, and religious tolerance;
  249  and cooperation

As yes, those inherent qualities of character - citizenship and respect for authority (how do we make that latter one jive with the reverence given to "Fuck you, King Geoge!.doc"? Don't think too hard.) One also wonders why "responsibility" and "self-control" were stricken out of the text.

We scroll up a bit though, to Section 2, subsection (2) to find out what's going on:
103         (2) Members of the instructional staff of the public
  104  schools, subject to the rules of the State Board of Education
  105  and the district school board, shall teach efficiently and
  106  faithfully, using the books and materials required that meet the
  107  highest standards for professionalism and historical accuracy,
  108  following the prescribed courses of study, and employing
  109  approved methods of instruction, the following:

"Shall teach efficiently and faithfully, using the books and materials required" is the workhorse of this subsection and, really the whole document. Especially the "faithfully" part, when taken in account with the premises offered in the preamble.

What it amounts to, is a requirement that teachers simply parrot the text. Uncritically, un-analytically, and without discourse. As we see with subsection (2) paragraph f, there is assumed to be nothing to analyze or examine critically, if it's in the text, it's "just the facts," cram them in heads and get the kids out the door. And hte text is, again, decided by a body of non-educators who are entirely beholden to the governor.

...that 'puffery' tells you EXACTLY what is being done in the bill... that is not the 'justification', it LITERALLY tells you what the bill does.

Bolded for Assistance in Finding Sections

    1                        A bill to be entitled                     
    2         An act relating to individual freedom; amending s.
    3         760.10, F.S.; providing that subjecting any
    4         individual, as a condition of employment, membership,
    5         certification, licensing, credentialing, or passing an
    6         examination, to training, instruction, or any other
    7         required activity that espouses, promotes, advances,
    8         inculcates, or compels such individual to believe
    9         specified concepts constitutes discrimination based on
   10         race, color, sex, or national origin; providing
   11         construction; providing severability; amending s.
   12         1003.42, F.S.; revising the requirements for required
   13         instruction on health education; requiring such
   14         instruction to comport with certain principles;
   15         requiring civic and character education instead of a
   16         character development program; providing the
   17         requirements of such education; providing Legislative
   18         findings; requiring instruction to be consistent with
   19         specified principles of individual freedom;
   20         authorizing instructional personnel to facilitate
   21         discussions and use curricula to address, in an age
   22         appropriate manner, specified topics; prohibiting
   23         classroom instruction and curricula from being used to
   24         indoctrinate or persuade students in a manner
   25         inconsistent with certain principles or state academic
   26         standards; amending s. 1006.31, F.S.; prohibiting
   27         instructional materials reviewers from recommending
   28         instructional materials that contain any matter that
   29         contradicts certain principles; amending s. 1012.98,
   30         F.S.; requiring the Department of Education to review
   31         school district professional development systems for
   32         compliance with certain provisions of law; amending
   33         ss. 1002.20 and 1006.40, F.S.; conforming cross
   34         references; providing an effective date.

In other words: this bill amends 6 sections of EXISTING Florida law, linked below:

https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/760.10
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1003.42
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1006.31
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1012.98
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1002.20
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1006.40

You can also find these linked on the Citation Page of the Bill Page:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/?Tab=Citations

If you go to the bottom of each of the individual pages of existing law, it says 'History' and tells you sections and chapters (e.g. s.6, ch.77-341), of which the first part of the chapter is the year, which tells you when it was put into place, and then when it was amended.

760.10 was created in 1977, and unfortunately the electronic stuff doesn't like pre 1997 documents.

The other main section of importance is 1003.42, which was created in 2002, and in fact here's the proof:

Florida Statutes 2001: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?StatuteYear=2001&Tab=statutes&Submenu=1
Florida Statutes 2002: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?StatuteYear=2002&Tab=statutes&Submenu=1

Here's the bill that created it:

WARNING IT IS MASSIVE: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2002E/20E/?Tab=BillHistory (Creation starts on page 352)

Of note, here is the first amendment to 1003.42, done in 2006:

Starts on Page 42: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2006/7087/?Tab=BillHistory

And the resulting 2006 Statute is here:

Florida Statute 2006: https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2006/1003.42

The reason is that the 'efficiently and faithfully' section of law that was mentioned was created in 2002... meaning it was approved by Jeb Bush and likely was influenced by 9/11 with it's wording.

You'll notice the 'factual' section that was also mentioned? That wasn't in the original bill, but it WAS added in 2006 by - you guessed it! - Jeb Bush again!

So yeah, neither of these are actually being introduced in the current bill; the actual 'current bill' is ONLY the green/red (Or for the PDF, underlined/struck-through) which is text added and text removed specifically. In fact, I have discovered that all Florida bills are apparently to be formatted this way.

So, this means that the ACTUAL contents of the bill are mainly 3 sections, with removals of other sections to consolidate into one of the sections, and miscellaneous references updates, updating of language, and renumbering etc through the rest, with the black text being unmodified citation of existing law, and the red text of course also currently being in law (but to be removed). The three sections of THIS bill (Again: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/?Tab=BillHistory ) are as follows:

Amendment to 760.10 - Expansion of Definitions of Unlawful Employment Practices

   44         (8)(a) Subjecting any individual, as a condition of
   45  employment, membership, certification, licensing, credentialing,
   46  or passing an examination, to training, instruction, or any
   47  other required activity that espouses, promotes, advances,
   48  inculcates, or compels such individual to believe any of the
   49  following concepts constitutes discrimination based on race,
   50  color, sex, or national origin under this section:
   51         1. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are
   52  morally superior to members of another race, color, sex, or
   53  national origin.
   54         2. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   55  or national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,
   56  whether consciously or unconsciously.
   57         3. An individual’s moral character or status as either
   58  privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her
   59  race, color, sex, or national origin.
   60         4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin
   61  cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to
   62  race, color, sex, or national origin.
   63         5. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   64  or national origin, bears responsibility for, or should be
   65  discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of,
   66  actions committed in the past by other members of the same race,
   67  color, sex, or national origin.
   68         6. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   69  or national origin, should be discriminated against or receive
   70  adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
   71         7. An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or
   72  any other form of psychological distress on account of his or
   73  her race, color, sex, or national origin.
   74         8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness,
   75  neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or
   76  sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color,
   77  sex, or national origin to oppress members of another race,
   78  color, sex, or national origin.
   79         (b) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to prohibit
   80  discussion of the concepts listed therein as part of a course of
   81  training or instruction, provided such training or instruction
   82  is given in an objective manner without endorsement of the
   83  concepts.
   84         (12) If any provision of this section or its application to
   85  any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does
   86  not affect other provisions or applications of the section which
   87  can be given effect without the invalid provision or
   88  application, and to this end the provisions of this section are
   89  severable.

Amendment to 1003.42 (2) - Consolidating and Expanding Mental Health and Life Skills Sections from Same Subsection

  207         4. Life skills that build confidence, support mental and
  208  emotional health, and enable students to overcome challenges,
  209  including:
  210         a. Self-awareness and self-management.
  211         b. Responsible decisionmaking.
  212         c. Resiliency.
  213         d. Relationship skills and conflict resolution.
  214         e. Understanding and respecting other viewpoints and
  215  backgrounds.
  216         f. For grades 9 through 12, developing leadership skills,
  217  interpersonal skills, organization skills, and research skills;
  218  creating a resume, including a digital resume; exploring career
  219  pathways; using state career planning resources; developing and
  220  practicing the skills necessary for employment interviews;
  221  workplace ethics and workplace law; managing stress and
  222  expectations; and self-motivation.
  223 
  224  Health education and life skills instruction and materials may
  225  not contradict the principles enumerated in subsection (3).

Amendment for New 1003.42 (3) - Addition of Principles to Guide Teaching of Various Topics Associated with Various -isms
(Notably Mirrors the Content of 760.10 Above in Many Ways)

  279         (3) The Legislature acknowledges the fundamental truth that
  280  all individuals are equal before the law and have inalienable
  281  rights. Accordingly, instruction on the topics enumerated in
  282  this section and supporting materials must be consistent with
  283  the following principles of individual freedom:
  284         (a) No individual is inherently racist, sexist, or
  285  oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, solely by
  286  virtue of his or her race or sex.
  287         (b) No race is inherently superior to another race.
  288         (c) No individual should be discriminated against or
  289  receive adverse treatment solely or partly on the basis of race,
  290  color, national origin, religion, disability, or sex.
  291         (d) Meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are not
  292  racist but fundamental to the right to pursue happiness and be
  293  rewarded for industry.
  294         (e) An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex,
  295  does not bear responsibility for actions committed in the past
  296  by other members of the same race or sex.
  297         (f) An individual should not be made to feel discomfort,
  298  guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on
  299  account of his or her race.
  300 
  301  Instructional personnel may facilitate discussions and use
  302  curricula to address, in an age-appropriate manner, the topics
  303  of sexism, slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, and
  304  racial discrimination, including topics relating to the
  305  enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in sexism, racial
  306  oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination.
  307  However, classroom instruction and curriculum may not be used to
  308  indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view
  309  inconsistent with the principles of this subsection or state
  310  academic standards.

Additionally, I looked into it, and 1003.42 does NOT in fact prohibit the teaching of pre-1776 history, native history, OR 'comprehensive' sex education (For the latter: Putnam County teaches comprehensive, but St John County teaches abstinence-only, Citation: https://siecus.org/state_profile/florida-state-profile/ ). 1003.42 covers the topics that MUST be taught, not what can ONLY be taught; if it's NOT otherwise decreed unlawful elsewhere, and is not covered here, it seems to fall upon county/district/Board/curriculum/teacher/etc to determine what gets taught in schools. There obviously still is curriculum and requirements that must be addressed that can vary county to county, but that's largely how bureaucracy functions and is kind of unavoidable.

Sorry it took me so long to do this; work and pulling all the citations etc took a while to figure out and find. I also debated adding more, but felt it best to simply address my key points. I am happy to answer questions though if people want further discussion (though we may end up having to create it's own topic if that were to happen).

[TheGlyphstone]

Can you strip away the legalese and translate the additions into English? I'm happy to hear a good argument for why this isn't an Orwellian situation of a Ministry of TruthBoard of Education determining what 'facts' are permissible to talk about...or if the law was always like that prior to its additions, why that hasnt changed. But to my uneducated layman's view, the language seems to present that image and it does concern me alongside previous examples of "alternative facts".

I'm also curious how I've misread the passage I quoted, or if they did accidentally make discrimination mandatory somehow...

[Oniya]

I'm also curious how I've misread the passage I quoted, or if they did accidentally make discrimination mandatory somehow...

There are two interpretations of 'with respect'.  One is 'giving proper deference' (Acting with respect towards others), and the other is 'in regards to' - which is how anti-discrimination clauses are phrased.  'With respect to clause 234.43, employers may...'  (Number is completely random)

[TheGlyphstone]

I was using the second one in this case from context, which is why it confused me. If you prohibit acting without consideration to sex/race/etc., doesn't that mean you are required to take their sex/race/etc. into consideration?

[Sara Nilsson]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/21/us/new-york-antisemitic-incident-arrest/index.html

The New York City Police Department has arrested a woman accused of spitting on an 8-year-old Jewish boy outside a Brooklyn synagogue last week, authorities said.

oO What the fuck is wrong with people?

The children's father, Aryah Fried, told CNN affiliate WCBS the woman said, "something along the lines of Hitler should have killed you all."

Fried said his son responded to the woman saying he would save his little sister, prompting the suspect to spit on his face and say, "we will kill you all, I know where you live, and we'll make sure to get you all next time."

Ah one of THOSE people.

How fucking twisted do you have to get at age 21 (the suspects age) to be so full of hate you spit on children in public and spew such nazi shit? hate crime has spiked during the pandemic (I mean we have people in congress spewing shit about jewish space lasers so.. perhaps I shouldn't be so surprised (and yes i know she didn't say that but what she said basically amounts to it)), but holy fuck. The raw naked hatred on display is mind boggling, and I am saying that as someone that has been the target of similar hate but just for being trans.

I just cannot wrap my head around hating someone for something so.. petty.. something they have no control over. Hating on people for being born basically. I mean holy fuck... I don't get it, and perhaps I should be happy I don't.

[Oniya]

I was using the second one in this case from context, which is why it confused me. If you prohibit acting without consideration to sex/race/etc., doesn't that mean you are required to take their sex/race/etc. into consideration?

Having re-read the clause in situ - looks like they missed a word or three, and possibly because of the double interpretation.  I think the drafter got so hung up on the anti-discrimination language that as soon as they said 'without respect', the rest just sort of spilled out.

Original:

Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, sex, or national origin

Oni-red-penning:

Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin should attempt to treat others with respect, regardless of race, color, sex, or national origin

Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others disrespectfully, regardless of race, color, sex, or national origin

Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect.

Members of any race, color, sex, or national origin should attempt to treat others with respect.

(I kind of like the last one, but I'm not a Florida legislator.  Eschew obfuscation and all that rot.)
As I said before, my latent grammarian cringes at the text I've read from that bill.

[Keelan]

Oniya why do you always show up and inadvertently help me out here? I'm both appreciated and frustrated as I'm unfortunately long-winded and keep needing to rewrite my post

However joking aside and to tie into it hopefully before I have to revise my post AGAIN (lol ^_^), I would say this to Glyph:

You did not misread the law on it's face; it is weirdly written, and while you could certainly finagle a 'reasonable' interpretation of that section of the law, generally speaking if you have to force an argument as much as we have, it's NOT very well written. I would be in full favor of it being rewritten prior to becoming law (if it is going to become law), or being quickly amended after for clarification so that it reads clearly on it's face.

However to Oniya: Your rewrites actually have a bit of a problem when we look at the context of the chapter and section of law it's nested in, outlined below:

44         (8)(a) Subjecting any individual, as a condition of
   45  employment, membership, certification, licensing, credentialing,
   46  or passing an examination, to training, instruction, or any
   47  other required activity that espouses, promotes, advances,
   48  inculcates, or compels such individual to believe any of the
   49  following concepts constitutes discrimination based on race,
   50  color, sex, or national origin under this section:
   ...
   60         4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin
   61  cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to
   62  race, color, sex, or national origin.

To use your preferred one, translating into layman (up until the rewrite):

"It is unlawful discrimination, for an employer to mandate training as a condition of employment, if the training teaches that Members of any race, color, sex, or national origin should attempt to treat others with respect."

Not quite what I think you were intending there. However, keeping closer to the existing writing of the bill, I would propose:

"It is unlawful discrimination, for an employer to mandate training as a condition of employment, if the training teaches that Members of any race, color, sex, or national origin cannot or should not attempt to treat others respectfully with regards to race, color, sex, or national origin."

That's my crack at it, but like y'all I certainly ain't a Florida legislator.

I'll try and do the layman explanations a bit later; I really should focus on work : P

[Oniya]

However to Oniya: Your rewrites actually have a bit of a problem when we look at the context of the chapter and section of law it's nested in, outlined below:

Looking at the text as written, and breaking it down (forgive me for removing the line numbers - they mess with my ability to get it to flow in my head):

First, removing the excess synonyms (I assume these are included to close loopholes, but they make the thing damn hard to parse.

(8)(a) Subjecting any individual, as a condition of employment, membership, certification, licensing, credentialing, or passing an examination working, to training, instruction, or any other required activity that instructs espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels such individual to believe any of the  following concepts constitutes discrimination based on race, color, sex, or national origin under this section:.
4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, sex, or national origin.

Strikes removed:
(8)(a) Subjecting any individual, as a condition of working, to training that instructs such individual to believe any of the following concepts constitutes discrimination based on race, color, sex, or national origin under this section:.
4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, sex, or national origin.

We still have a 'how' missing between 'others' and 'without respect to', and that in itself makes the entire clause useless.

[Keelan]

Looking at the text as written, and breaking it down (forgive me for removing the line numbers - they mess with my ability to get it to flow in my head):

First, removing the excess synonyms (I assume these are included to close loopholes, but they make the thing damn hard to parse.

Yes, the synonyms are to help cover legal bases, it's why firearms laws often include loan, trade, give, sell, transfer etc in the same passages to cover as many bases as possible. In law, being thorough is more important than being grammatically correct and concise in my experience, sadly.

Also I like how you cleaned up the existing law for comprehension; I will have to keep that in mind for later because it looks WAY better and more effective than my long-winded 'own words' spiel to me.

[Sara Nilsson]

https://www.al.com/news/2022/01/police-in-this-tiny-alabama-town-suck-drivers-into-legal-black-hole.html

This is worth reading as it is FANTASTIC journalism about a small.. and I do mean small town where the police are just out of fucking control. I can't even post small quotes because it all just needs to be read.

Months of research and dozens of interviews by AL.com found that Brookside’s finances are rocket-fueled by tickets and aggressive policing. In a two-year period between 2018 and 2020 Brookside revenues from fines and forfeitures soared more than 640 percent and now make up half the city’s total income.

And the police chief has called for more.

The town of 1,253 just north of Birmingham reported just 55 serious crimes to the state in the entire eight year period between 2011 and 2018 – none of them homicide or rape. But in 2018 it began building a police empire, hiring more and more officers to blanket its six miles of roads and mile-and-a-half jurisdiction on Interstate 22.

By 2020 Brookside made more misdemeanor arrests than it has residents. It went from towing 50 vehicles in 2018 to 789 in 2020 – each carrying fines. That’s a 1,478% increase, with 1.7 tows for every household in town.

But if you have to have something to convince yourself to read this.. fucking insane story.. there you go.

[Chulanowa]

Chulanowa's Post Quotation

...that 'puffery' tells you EXACTLY what is being done in the bill... that is not the 'justification', it LITERALLY tells you what the bill does.

Bolded for Assistance in Finding Sections

    1                        A bill to be entitled                     
    2         An act relating to individual freedom; amending s.
    3         760.10, F.S.; providing that subjecting any
    4         individual, as a condition of employment, membership,
    5         certification, licensing, credentialing, or passing an
    6         examination, to training, instruction, or any other
    7         required activity that espouses, promotes, advances,
    8         inculcates, or compels such individual to believe
    9         specified concepts constitutes discrimination based on
   10         race, color, sex, or national origin; providing
   11         construction; providing severability; amending s.
   12         1003.42, F.S.; revising the requirements for required
   13         instruction on health education; requiring such
   14         instruction to comport with certain principles;
   15         requiring civic and character education instead of a
   16         character development program; providing the
   17         requirements of such education; providing Legislative
   18         findings; requiring instruction to be consistent with
   19         specified principles of individual freedom;
   20         authorizing instructional personnel to facilitate
   21         discussions and use curricula to address, in an age
   22         appropriate manner, specified topics; prohibiting
   23         classroom instruction and curricula from being used to
   24         indoctrinate or persuade students in a manner
   25         inconsistent with certain principles or state academic
   26         standards; amending s. 1006.31, F.S.; prohibiting
   27         instructional materials reviewers from recommending
   28         instructional materials that contain any matter that
   29         contradicts certain principles; amending s. 1012.98,
   30         F.S.; requiring the Department of Education to review
   31         school district professional development systems for
   32         compliance with certain provisions of law; amending
   33         ss. 1002.20 and 1006.40, F.S.; conforming cross
   34         references; providing an effective date.

In other words: this bill amends 6 sections of EXISTING Florida law, linked below:

https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/760.10
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1003.42
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1006.31
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1012.98
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1002.20
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2021/1006.40

You can also find these linked on the Citation Page of the Bill Page:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/?Tab=Citations

If you go to the bottom of each of the individual pages of existing law, it says 'History' and tells you sections and chapters (e.g. s.6, ch.77-341), of which the first part of the chapter is the year, which tells you when it was put into place, and then when it was amended.

760.10 was created in 1977, and unfortunately the electronic stuff doesn't like pre 1997 documents.

The other main section of importance is 1003.42, which was created in 2002, and in fact here's the proof:

Florida Statutes 2001: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?StatuteYear=2001&Tab=statutes&Submenu=1
Florida Statutes 2002: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?StatuteYear=2002&Tab=statutes&Submenu=1

Here's the bill that created it:

WARNING IT IS MASSIVE: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2002E/20E/?Tab=BillHistory (Creation starts on page 352)

Of note, here is the first amendment to 1003.42, done in 2006:

Starts on Page 42: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2006/7087/?Tab=BillHistory

And the resulting 2006 Statute is here:

Florida Statute 2006: https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2006/1003.42

The reason is that the 'efficiently and faithfully' section of law that was mentioned was created in 2002... meaning it was approved by Jeb Bush and likely was influenced by 9/11 with it's wording.

You'll notice the 'factual' section that was also mentioned? That wasn't in the original bill, but it WAS added in 2006 by - you guessed it! - Jeb Bush again!

So yeah, neither of these are actually being introduced in the current bill; the actual 'current bill' is ONLY the green/red (Or for the PDF, underlined/struck-through) which is text added and text removed specifically. In fact, I have discovered that all Florida bills are apparently to be formatted this way.

So, this means that the ACTUAL contents of the bill are mainly 3 sections, with removals of other sections to consolidate into one of the sections, and miscellaneous references updates, updating of language, and renumbering etc through the rest, with the black text being unmodified citation of existing law, and the red text of course also currently being in law (but to be removed). The three sections of THIS bill (Again: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/?Tab=BillHistory ) are as follows:

Amendment to 760.10 - Expansion of Definitions of Unlawful Employment Practices

   44         (8)(a) Subjecting any individual, as a condition of
   45  employment, membership, certification, licensing, credentialing,
   46  or passing an examination, to training, instruction, or any
   47  other required activity that espouses, promotes, advances,
   48  inculcates, or compels such individual to believe any of the
   49  following concepts constitutes discrimination based on race,
   50  color, sex, or national origin under this section:
   51         1. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are
   52  morally superior to members of another race, color, sex, or
   53  national origin.
   54         2. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   55  or national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,
   56  whether consciously or unconsciously.
   57         3. An individual’s moral character or status as either
   58  privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her
   59  race, color, sex, or national origin.
   60         4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin
   61  cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to
   62  race, color, sex, or national origin.
   63         5. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   64  or national origin, bears responsibility for, or should be
   65  discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of,
   66  actions committed in the past by other members of the same race,
   67  color, sex, or national origin.
   68         6. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   69  or national origin, should be discriminated against or receive
   70  adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
   71         7. An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or
   72  any other form of psychological distress on account of his or
   73  her race, color, sex, or national origin.
   74         8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness,
   75  neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or
   76  sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color,
   77  sex, or national origin to oppress members of another race,
   78  color, sex, or national origin.
   79         (b) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to prohibit
   80  discussion of the concepts listed therein as part of a course of
   81  training or instruction, provided such training or instruction
   82  is given in an objective manner without endorsement of the
   83  concepts.
   84         (12) If any provision of this section or its application to
   85  any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does
   86  not affect other provisions or applications of the section which
   87  can be given effect without the invalid provision or
   88  application, and to this end the provisions of this section are
   89  severable.

Amendment to 1003.42 (2) - Consolidating and Expanding Mental Health and Life Skills Sections from Same Subsection

  207         4. Life skills that build confidence, support mental and
  208  emotional health, and enable students to overcome challenges,
  209  including:
  210         a. Self-awareness and self-management.
  211         b. Responsible decisionmaking.
  212         c. Resiliency.
  213         d. Relationship skills and conflict resolution.
  214         e. Understanding and respecting other viewpoints and
  215  backgrounds.
  216         f. For grades 9 through 12, developing leadership skills,
  217  interpersonal skills, organization skills, and research skills;
  218  creating a resume, including a digital resume; exploring career
  219  pathways; using state career planning resources; developing and
  220  practicing the skills necessary for employment interviews;
  221  workplace ethics and workplace law; managing stress and
  222  expectations; and self-motivation.
  223 
  224  Health education and life skills instruction and materials may
  225  not contradict the principles enumerated in subsection (3).

Amendment for New 1003.42 (3) - Addition of Principles to Guide Teaching of Various Topics Associated with Various -isms
(Notably Mirrors the Content of 760.10 Above in Many Ways)

  279         (3) The Legislature acknowledges the fundamental truth that
  280  all individuals are equal before the law and have inalienable
  281  rights. Accordingly, instruction on the topics enumerated in
  282  this section and supporting materials must be consistent with
  283  the following principles of individual freedom:
  284         (a) No individual is inherently racist, sexist, or
  285  oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, solely by
  286  virtue of his or her race or sex.
  287         (b) No race is inherently superior to another race.
  288         (c) No individual should be discriminated against or
  289  receive adverse treatment solely or partly on the basis of race,
  290  color, national origin, religion, disability, or sex.
  291         (d) Meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are not
  292  racist but fundamental to the right to pursue happiness and be
  293  rewarded for industry.
  294         (e) An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex,
  295  does not bear responsibility for actions committed in the past
  296  by other members of the same race or sex.
  297         (f) An individual should not be made to feel discomfort,
  298  guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on
  299  account of his or her race.
  300 
  301  Instructional personnel may facilitate discussions and use
  302  curricula to address, in an age-appropriate manner, the topics
  303  of sexism, slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, and
  304  racial discrimination, including topics relating to the
  305  enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in sexism, racial
  306  oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination.
  307  However, classroom instruction and curriculum may not be used to
  308  indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view
  309  inconsistent with the principles of this subsection or state
  310  academic standards.

Additionally, I looked into it, and 1003.42 does NOT in fact prohibit the teaching of pre-1776 history, native history, OR 'comprehensive' sex education (For the latter: Putnam County teaches comprehensive, but St John County teaches abstinence-only, Citation: https://siecus.org/state_profile/florida-state-profile/ ). 1003.42 covers the topics that MUST be taught, not what can ONLY be taught; if it's NOT otherwise decreed unlawful elsewhere, and is not covered here, it seems to fall upon county/district/Board/curriculum/teacher/etc to determine what gets taught in schools. There obviously still is curriculum and requirements that must be addressed that can vary county to county, but that's largely how bureaucracy functions and is kind of unavoidable.

Sorry it took me so long to do this; work and pulling all the citations etc took a while to figure out and find. I also debated adding more, but felt it best to simply address my key points. I am happy to answer questions though if people want further discussion (though we may end up having to create it's own topic if that were to happen).

Alright, thanks. After i posted, i got the feeling that it was a bunch of addendums to an older bill, but I didn't know and to be honest, kind of lost the vim to check and update. so thanks for the clarification.

Though got to be honest, the clarifications don't do anything to make me have any more faith in the Florida educational system. Well that and being a victim of the Alabama education system myself... 

[Blythe]

https://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/2022/01/21/what-we-know-ascension-thedacare-court-battle-over-employees/6607417001/

TL;DR: An injunction is preventing at-will employed healthcare workers from leaving their old jobs at ThedaCare and starting their new ones at Ascension.

So the workers can't be compelled to work for ThedaCare (the workers opted to stay home rather than go to work, I think), but they are forbidden to start their new jobs right now. So now the seven healthcare professionals aren't working anywhere while this injuction is up.

I am in shock the judge did this; this feels wildly wrong and unethical as hell. The employees got better offers, ThedaCare declined to match those offers, and now ThedaCare wants to force them to continue working for them until "replacements" are found. If ThedaCare wanted to keep them, they should have matched the offers made by Ascension. When the fuck would that even be, given how many healthcare workers are leaving the field? And given this, I can't imagine workers are going to line up at the door to work for a company that does this to employees. :/

Healthcare workers deserve better than this.

[Missy]

And the whole event could be a great plot for a Cronenberg movie or 1960s-inspired comic book. Let's just say the heart received some radiation before the transplant...



On another note...

Oh, f*ck. I thought that Polish Catholic church officials couldn't sink any lower regarding their attitudes toward the sexual child abuse by priests. And then, this happens:

Trigger warning for absolutely disgusting case of allegations against a victim of rape

https://notesfrompoland.com/2022/01/11/church-asks-court-to-determine-abuse-victims-sexuality-and-if-relationship-with-priest-pleased-him/

What's wrong with these people???     

"...sorry, man, but your Church really doesn't understand basic notions of law."

The above is what remained of my comment after editing the cursewords out .

well basically it's just an example how little 'religion' has to do with moral character in reality.

I mean sure, some religious people are moral, but then plenty of areligious folks are equally or moreso, then plenty of both are entirely amoral. Turns out the world isn't just so black and white, how odd.

[Missy]

https://www.businessinsider.com/capitol-rioters-called-pelosis-office-for-lost-and-found-raskin-2022-1

*snicker* I mean.. *snickers more* why.. not? *belly laugh with tears flowing down face* fucking morons. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE that they where morons but holy fuck..

dumb enough to storm the capital, dumb enough to take incriminating photos of oneself storming the capital, dumb enough to call in and openly admit to having trespassed  in a private office of the government of the united states of america. I see no pattern of any kind whatsoever here . . . I'm not dumb.

[Vekseid]

https://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/2022/01/21/what-we-know-ascension-thedacare-court-battle-over-employees/6607417001/

TL;DR: An injunction is preventing at-will employed healthcare workers from leaving their old jobs at ThedaCare and starting their new ones at Ascension.

So the workers can't be compelled to work for ThedaCare (the workers opted to stay home rather than go to work, I think), but they are forbidden to start their new jobs right now. So now the seven healthcare professionals aren't working anywhere while this injuction is up.

I am in shock the judge did this; this feels wildly wrong and unethical as hell. The employees got better offers, ThedaCare declined to match those offers, and now ThedaCare wants to force them to continue working for them until "replacements" are found. If ThedaCare wanted to keep them, they should have matched the offers made by Ascension. When the fuck would that even be, given how many healthcare workers are leaving the field? And given this, I can't imagine workers are going to line up at the door to work for a company that does this to employees. :/

Healthcare workers deserve better than this.

Googling Mark McGinnis reveals he is quite the character.

Hopefully this will spark cause to oppose him in the next election. Though it does seem the injunction is only for a week.

[greenknight]

For a week if the opposing counsels can work something out. Otherwise until the case is decided. Simple obstinance will reward ThedaCare if their goal is punishing employees.

[Sara Nilsson]

MADISON, Wis. (CBS 58) -- Republicans in the state Assembly passed a series of bills to expand gun laws in the badger state, including a proposal to allow some high school students and parents to have firearms on school property.

During the Assembly's return to the floor since the new year, Republicans passed legislation that would lower the concealed carry age from 21 to 18, allow legal gun owners to have their weapon in their vehicle when dropping off or picking up their child from school, and allow anyone with a concealed carry license from any state to be armed in Wisconsin.

https://www.cbs58.com/news/republicans-vote-to-allow-18-year-olds-to-carry-concealed-weapons-on-school-property

What could possibly go wrong....