Nov 21, 2022·edited Nov 21, 2022Liked by Chris J. Karr, David Thornton
As JVL noted: the current "not Trump" message from the GOP is based solely on electoral results and not the moral issues of his rhetoric and actions. A few votes going the other way in the midterms and I imagine none of this talk of "no more Trump" would be happening.
Nov 22, 2022·edited Nov 22, 2022Liked by Chris J. Karr
There is no reality to the statement that "employees attend classes that instruct them that one skin color is responsible for all the ills of society": that is quite literally not in any employers training curriculums. It's a performative piece of junk legislation that they knew would be struck down, especially Mr. DeSantis - he went to both Yale and Harvard Law.
The real target of the legislation is to prevent teaching history as it actually existed regarding slavery and Jim Crow.
And, to address your "it makes sense" statement: it only makes sense if you do not believe that both individuals and corporations have a right to free speech, and are protected in their speech via the First Amendment.
The problem with Disney is that it was blatant retaliation for speech: any issue regarding RCID should be addressed solely as being its own issue. Those issues may have merit, but that's not why it all happened.
Nov 23, 2022·edited Nov 23, 2022Liked by Chris J. Karr
I've worked corporate for almost 17 years, and not once has there been an anti-racism training. Workplace harassment, absolutely. Anti-racism, no.
"The Florida law deems it discrimination if a student was exposed to anything that compelled them to believe “he or she must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress for actions, in which he or she played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.”
Is simply teaching people reality of the history enough to violate the above? Seems like it could be...
As I said: the issues with Disney may be real, and retaliation for protected speech is not OK. Take those issues up in regular discussion - that's not what happened. Instead we have a government retaliating over being criticized - which is an important aspect of the 1sr Amendment.
Or are you saying that government retaliation for criticism of said government is OK?
On the contrary: what we have is a statute that says "teach these things", and another that says "if it makes you feel bad it's illegal". To state that the Stop Woke Act will not alter instruction is delusional.
And to confirm: you're OK with the government determining what business may or may not say.
As JVL noted: the current "not Trump" message from the GOP is based solely on electoral results and not the moral issues of his rhetoric and actions. A few votes going the other way in the midterms and I imagine none of this talk of "no more Trump" would be happening.
There is no reality to the statement that "employees attend classes that instruct them that one skin color is responsible for all the ills of society": that is quite literally not in any employers training curriculums. It's a performative piece of junk legislation that they knew would be struck down, especially Mr. DeSantis - he went to both Yale and Harvard Law.
The real target of the legislation is to prevent teaching history as it actually existed regarding slavery and Jim Crow.
And, to address your "it makes sense" statement: it only makes sense if you do not believe that both individuals and corporations have a right to free speech, and are protected in their speech via the First Amendment.
The problem with Disney is that it was blatant retaliation for speech: any issue regarding RCID should be addressed solely as being its own issue. Those issues may have merit, but that's not why it all happened.
I've worked corporate for almost 17 years, and not once has there been an anti-racism training. Workplace harassment, absolutely. Anti-racism, no.
"The Florida law deems it discrimination if a student was exposed to anything that compelled them to believe “he or she must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress for actions, in which he or she played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.”
Is simply teaching people reality of the history enough to violate the above? Seems like it could be...
As I said: the issues with Disney may be real, and retaliation for protected speech is not OK. Take those issues up in regular discussion - that's not what happened. Instead we have a government retaliating over being criticized - which is an important aspect of the 1sr Amendment.
Or are you saying that government retaliation for criticism of said government is OK?
On the contrary: what we have is a statute that says "teach these things", and another that says "if it makes you feel bad it's illegal". To state that the Stop Woke Act will not alter instruction is delusional.
And to confirm: you're OK with the government determining what business may or may not say.
Glad we cleared that up.