Is Texas really as conservative/narrow-minded as people say it is? (Houston: public school, live)

[Muhnay]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

So? It was some kind of misdemenor, and nobody really gave a damn to begin with. Some kind of law which really ranked up there with not being able to spit on the sidewalks on Sunday mornings. Every state in the Union has something of the same. No one in Texas really gives a damn what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. It is totally idiotic to present this old law on Texas books as in that anyone ever wanted to enforce it.

With that said though, the Supreme Court ruling which overturned it was flawed...but that is a seperate issue...

Ya know what ********* guys, Im washing my mule in the bathtub if you like it or not. So there. Another fantastic law we have here in Texas.

[Houston3]

Originally Posted by Angel713

Those are the liberal cities in Texas, while other areas are conservative. He forgot to mention that every single major city (not metro area, but city) in Texas pretty much votes Democratic. You can always count on the Rio Grande Valley cities to vote Democratic, for example.

BUT they are nowhere near 100% liberal.

[padcrasher]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

Tell us? Tell WHO? You? Who is "us"? LMAO

Ok..I am a public school teacher. And unless I missed something, then there is no law which mandates the teaching of the Bible in public schools. So be a bit more specific. Or else quit outright lying.



Do you mean an affirmation that marriage is an institution recognized by the State of Texas to be a union between a man and woman. There was nothing banned at all, since anything contrary was never legal to begin with.



So? It was some kind of misdemenor, and nobody really gave a damn to begin with. Some kind of law which really ranked up there with not being able to spit on the sidewalks on Sunday mornings. Every state in the Union has something of the same. No one in Texas really gives a damn what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. It is totally idiotic to present this old law on Texas books as in that anyone ever wanted to enforce it.

With that said though, the Supreme Court ruling which overturned it was flawed...but that is a seperate issue...

Mandates? Who said anything about mandates? You'll need to google for your answer. Bible - Texas- Public Schools. to catch a clue ......teacher...LOL

As far as man dates....Texans don't care for man dates. They passed a change to their Constitution just in case any people on man dates want to take their relationship to the next level....LOL

And how do you think the case got to the US Surpreme Court if Texas authorities didnt press their case against the two men in the midst of their man date??? LOL....

Tell me your not a government/civics teacher?

[Houston3]

It is illegal for one to shoot a buffalo from the second story of a hotel.

It is illegal to take more than three sips of beer at a time while standing.

It is illegal to dust any public building with a feather duster.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Mandates? Who said anything about mandates? You'll need to google for your answer. Bible - Texas- Public Schools. to catch a clue ......teacher...LOL

I don't need to get a clue. I KNOW what the law is. Here is what you said: "So tell us again why you passed a law to teach the Bible in public schools?"

Back it up by quoting the law/statute which mandates such. Yep, mandates.

As far as man dates....Texans don't care for man dates. They passed a change to their Constitution just in case any people on man dates want to take their relationship to the next level....LOL

??? There was no change passed at all in the Texas Constitution. Only that a minor statute (which nobody really cared about anyway) was eliminated in the Penal Code.

And how do you think the case got to the US Surpreme Court if Texas authorities didnt press their case against the two men in the midst of their man date??? LOL

You have GOT to be kidding. Do you really think the State of Texas went all out to make a case before the Supreme Court simply to prevent two men from doing what they wanted to do?

Nobody gave a damn what those two did. Or does. The parties involved were insignificant, as they should be. Far as I am concerned, I hope they are carrying on and happy to this day...

The case being made before the Supreme Court by the State of Texas was that there was nothing unconstitutional about said laws forbidding homosexual conduct. Not that they weren't silly, stupid, outdated or whatever..just that there was nothing uncontitutional about state laws forbidding such. There is a HUGE distinction.

[padcrasher]

Got it.

1) It's not a law that the Bible now can be taught in Texas Public Schools because the conservatives who had the law drawn up were so kind as to not mandate the class for everyone.

2) When Texas changed their Constitution in 2005 to outlaw gay marriage that wasnt a "ban" because gay marriage wasnt allowed in the first place.

3) When two men were arrested in Houston on Sodomy law charges and Texas fought it all the way to the Supreme Court...it wasnt about those two girly boys...it was for Texas's right to outlaw homosexuality. ( This must make the gays feel so much better)


They don't call this the Texans are narrowminded thread for nothing....LOL

[TexasHorseLady]

From the website of the Texas Association of School Administrators (http://www.tasanet.org/government/capitolwatcharchivelist.cfm?DisplayDate=8-22-2008&snItemNumber=630&tnItemNumber=633 - broken link):
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued an opinion yesterday relating to whether school districts are required to offer elective courses on religious literature.
“In furtherance of the enrichment curriculum requirement concerning ‘religious literature, including the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and New Testament, and its impact on history and literature,’ section 28.011 of the Education Code authorizes but does not require school districts and charter schools to offer elective courses on the Hebrew Scriptures and its impact or on the New Testament and its impact,” General Abbott concluded. “Such discretion does not, however, mean that school districts or charter schools are not required to comply with the curriculum requirements in subsection 28.002(a)(2).”


Texas Education Code
Chapter 74. Curriculum Requirements
Subchapter C. Other Provisions
74.36. Requirements for Elective Courses on the Bible's Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and New Testament and Their Impact on the History and Literature of Western Civilization.
(a) Pursuant to this rule, a school district may offer to students in Grade 9 or above:
(1) an elective course on the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and its impact and an elective course on the New Testament and its impact; or
(2) an elective course that combines the courses on the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and its impact and on the New Testament and its impact.
(b) The purpose of a course under this section is to:
(1) teach students knowledge of biblical content, characters, poetry, and narratives that are prerequisites to understanding contemporary society and culture, including literature, art, music, mores, oratory, and public policy; and
(2) familiarize students with, as applicable:
(A) the contents of the Hebrew Scriptures or New Testament;
(B) the history of the Hebrew Scriptures or New Testament;
(C) the literary style and structure of the Hebrew Scriptures or New Testament; and
(D) the influence of the Hebrew Scriptures or New Testament on law, history, government, literature, art, music, customs, morals, values, and culture.
(c) A course offered under this section shall follow applicable law and all federal and state guidelines in maintaining religious neutrality and accommodating the diverse religious views, traditions, and perspectives of students in their school district. A course under this section shall not endorse, favor, or promote, or disfavor or show hostility toward, any particular religion or nonreligious faith or religious perspective.

[blkgiraffe]

[quote=Houston3;7059171]BUT they are nowhere near 100% liberal.[/quote]

and that is a bad thing??? I'd honestly rather be known as a conservative state than a liberal state (We see how those so called "progressive" states are doing now).

[padcrasher]

[quote=jluke65780;7060811]

Originally Posted by Houston3

BUT they are nowhere near 100% liberal.[/quote]

and that is a bad thing??? I'd honestly rather be known as a conservative state than a liberal state (We see how those so called "progressive" states are doing now).

Yes those liberal States...ha! Look who's laughing now...Red States got it going on!

Go Mississippi! Go Oklahoma! Alabama's kickin it!

States of the United States of America by income - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Got it.

*yawns* No, I dont think you do.

1) It's not a law that the Bible now can be taught in Texas Public Schools because the conservatives who had the law drawn up were so kind as to not mandate the class for everyone.

Here is what you wrote. Try and hedge it as you may:

[I]So tell us again why you passed a law to teach the Bible in public schools?"[/i]

It is an elective course in SOME schools. What is your problem with that? Not withstanding your original presentation is nothing more than a false presentation. A carefuly worded lie, really.

When Texas changed their Constitution in 2005 to outlaw gay marriage that wasnt a "ban" because gay marriage wasnt allowed in the first place.

Exactly. How can something be "outlawed" which was never recognized as legal to begin with? This particular passage simply re-enforced what has always been recognized. That the institution of marriage is between a man and woman.

3) When two men were arrested in Houston on Sodomy law charges and Texas fought it all the way to the Supreme Court...it wasnt about those two girly boys...it was for Texas's right to outlaw homosexuality. ( This must make the gays feel so much better)

LMAO Do you really think the State of Texas would have made such an effort to go all the way to the Supreme Court to object to what two men whose names not one in a thousand can come up with, did in their bedroom. Who gives a damn? It amounted, really, to about a traffic ticket.

The case by the state was that the law itself -- however stupid it might be -- was not uncontitutional. Have you even read the decision? The majority and minority decison?

They don't call this the Texans are narrowminded thread for nothing....LOL

??? Who calls it that? You? If by your standards Texans are narrow minded, then count me as one of them. Are we now back to square one? LOL