|
The bans aren't hurting the right people.
Most schools that have decided to ban CRT are actually banning discussion of race relations from the formation of the United States until now. They're banning discussion about how treating a certain group of people as "less than" meant the Bill of Rights didn't apply to them. They're banning discussion about redlining, about localization of the crack epidemic, about environmental factors in poverty- and those weren't heavily delved into to begin with.
Haven't we all seen the effects of politicians' lack of understanding in the automotive world having far-reaching repercussions? Why do we think those same politicians will spend the time coming up with nuanced answers for what CRT is and how it is applied to American teachers and their curricula?
All so that they can keep the votes of the easily manipulated who consume too much knee-jerk media and fundamentally misunderstand what CRT is, who it is typically used by, and doesn't know a single person who teaches K-12?
What is grooming? To most conservatives, being inclusive and providing places to feel accepted seems to be grooming. Being supportive of a person coming out as other than their sex seems to be grooming.
Do limits need to be set with regard to gender-affirming surgery on people whose brains are still developing? Yeah, maybe. I'm not a rocket surgeon, I cannot speak authoritatively on the subject.
Is there proof that exposure to some level of sexualized imagery makes one more or less likely to engage in dangerous behavior when older? Is it any worse than absolute puritanism? Again, this requires actual data rather than bullshit anti-woke facebook memes.
Where is the proof that this subset of people are actually raising children specifically to abuse them?
If you present allegations, support them with legitimate data.
|