₦airaland Forum

saxywale2:
With this your level of confidence, one would think you live in America LMAO.

If you don't know how guns are viewed in rural America, then maybe you shouldn't be weighing on this topic.

saxywale2:
And this is happening less than a month after news of a Virginia six-year-old shooting their teacher and a viral surveillance video from Indiana that captured a diaper-wearing toddler carrying a handgun and firing it. Lol.

How would this law have stopped the child from shooting their teacher?

benalvino3:
Trust me, if democrats were pushing for minors to carry gun, he will be here supporting it. Dems are pushing to castrate minors, groom them and folks here are in support. Some are going as far as to say it is parents that are planting the books in the library. As long as they hear Republicans or GOP, automatically they are pushing back.

It's just tribal mentality. Teens in rural Missouri use their guns to hunt and to protect their farmlands from pests and predators but city-centre people can't seem to understand that their culture and lifestyle make guns a useful tool for them. It's how they've always been and these leftists suddenly want to get up in arms about it.

Raskimonojendor:
It would be against the Missouri department of conservation rules for a 4 year old or a 14 year to go hunting in Missouri without supervision. I understand that we are Nigerians so we like to support illegality. You are not an exception dude.

I'm not supporting illegality since it's legal for them to carry without supervision, cope harder.

Raskimonojendor:
This really defines logic and some people are defending this bullshit. Defending the Republicans whether good or bad is exactly like being in a mafia or cult. Some are even talking about hunting when hunting has rules on supervision.

Missouri has always been like this, so where are the newborns shooting their way out of the womb?

saxywale2:
Percent of residents with paid hunting licenses: 7.9%.

Missouri. Ages 6 years through 15 will hunt while SUPERVISED by an adult or 18 years of age or older who is hunter-education certified.

Older teenagers go hunting in rural America all the time without adult supervision. It was another stupid, overstepping, virtue-signaling gun control law that won't have done anything to stop real world harm.

saxywale2:
Get a 5 year old a gun for hunting in urban jungle of Kansas city or St. Louise. Clap for yourself.

Even in rural Missouri, you would let a 5 year old go hunting without supervision.

But then again, your post was out of ignorance since you have assumed that everyone hunts in Missouri in rural Missouri let alone the cities.

There's a strong hunting culture in Missouri, which is a fact, I don't know what you're arguing here.

The bill was going to stop teenagers from going hunting. That's probably why it didn't get enough support.

Almiron:
Just dey play.

This is why I hate affirmative action.

adamusuleiman3:
Missouri votes against banning children from carrying guns in public.

Republican-led legislature rejects measure to prevent minors from carrying firearms in public without adult supervision. The Republican-led Missouri state house on Wednesday voted against banning minors from openly carrying firearms on public land without adult supervision.

The proposal to ban children from carrying guns without adult supervision in public failed by a 104-39 vote. Only one Republican voted in support.

A Democrat, Donna Baringer, said police in her district asked for the change to stop “14-year-olds walking down the middle of the street in the city of St Louis carrying AR-15s”.

“Now they have been emboldened, and they are walking around with them,” Baringer said. “Until they actually brandish them, and brandish them with intent, our police officers’ hands are handcuffed.”

Based.

Missouri has a strong hunting culture. Another stupid law trying to stop kids from touching grass and having fun in a traditionally masculine way.

budaatum:
You really don't get it do you. What race would we be critiquing if not in old books and history and how it has effected the society and the culture of the people? Those books are how racism and other discriminations are revealed, so I definitely want them.

Here is a list of some books banned for racism. It would be interesting to see where they are banned and who rules in those states,

LOL most of the banned books were either banned in blue states or democrat-controlled areas of red states, except maybe Wisconsin. It's in your own link.

budaatum:
Hypocrisy knows no bounds. They'll support those banning books with sex in it in schools but will object when some call for books with racism to be banned in schools.

You guys want CRT but you don't want old books with racism in them?

wirinet:
Jesus Christ! You guys know how to make a mountain out of a molehill, rather a mountain out of a pimple.

So, this one page is what the whole outrage is about? One page out of one book out of one library (or a few libraries) and boom republicans want to vet and ban books in all school libraries in the United States.

It seems republicans main political strategy is "outrage". They take a few isolated cases of errors or misjudgement and the blow it out of proportion and then elevate it to a democrat/leftist policy or agenda, then outrage.

So because this page of this book is in this school library, democrats/leftist are grooming children or teens for sex? In that case we were over groomed for sex, because in my own school library in the 80's, there was james hardly chase, Mills and boom, and lots of romantic novels in my school library. In fact I learnt to be a fast reader on these novels, because when you borrow them, you have less than 3 days to return them, as the next person is waiting.

In this era of Internet and smartphones, republicans think banning books (like in medieval europe) would stop kids from accessing information.
It not that I oppose removing books that parents are uncomfortable with from school libraries, but making it a national or state policy is just stupid. These decisions should be taken at PTA levels. Parents cannot outsource the moral upbringing of their children to schools and teachers, they need to be actively involved.

You had Mills and Boon in your school library and you grew up into a guy who doesn't see anything wrong with a book like Lawn Boy in school library. Thanks for proving the point.

Baddestguyp:
Say anything in the AOT fandom during discussions and they'll call you "rascist, genocide supporter, fascist, etc

Fighting each other everyday and they call themselves a fandom 🤦

Reddit moment

budaatum:
I don't known, so I'm borrowing a response from IMAliyu2.

Can you define CRT in your own words?

The previous person asked couldn't.

Idpol grievance studies

NoonMasamune:
A bit off topic but since this is an anime thread i might have more chance. Any who has any of the Xenoblade games or who knows someone who has them and is willing to sell, hook me up. I'm interested. Seems like no one in the gaming threads play JRPGs

I don't think discussion of JRPGs or gachas would be off-topic on this thread.

That said, you may be out of luck trying to find this game though because nobody uses a switch in Nigeria.

However, if you have a high-end PC available, emulation might be your best bet here.

IMAliyu2:
The subject material of the book in the last vid is indeed bad, though I don't know the whole context, however it was in the library of a high school.
High schoolers aren't people I consider to be innocent, immature or need protection from vulgar books.

God knows l knew more about sex and brutal nature of reality than I ever let my parents know when I was younger.

I disagree. I'm strongly against censorship for adults but parents should absolutely have a say in what their kids will be exposed to by the school. As a teenager, for example, not all the kids were exposed to the same stuff.

Furthermore, there's a difference between things like sex education and biological illustration of sex and things like the normalization of sexual encounters between 4th graders.

IMAliyu2:
Can you define CRT in your own words?

I watched the video.
It's a parent complaining about a woman that got fired for using racial slurs, a few charts and a book "Not my ideas" that teaches the reality and history of racial discrimination in America, and a republican congressman agreeing with her.
The specific paragraph she talks about is literally part of a passage condemning White supremacy in America. The specific image is Satan holding up a contract promising whiteness (white supremacy) in exchange for your soul.
How's that CRT?
It's always odd when this people feel attacked by stating history and the reality of things, and it's telling when the person identifies with those that did the oppression rather than the people that fought to make things better.

This is a feint. Intellectual sleight-of-hand. Whiteness ≠ White Supremacy. Whiteness is whiteness and white supremacy is something else.

Bro, the book is insinuating that white people have no soul.

budaatum:
This is disingenuous, or you understand wrong.

If CRT taught that what you claim above, is it your understanding too that it teaches blacks are inherently superior and whites should be adversely treated?

Because that's the only reason blacks would support CRT if what you claim above is true.

OK, so no CRT ban, then.

IMAliyu2:
CRT was never being taught to kids, it's a graduate level theory, in law and sociology that looks at political, social structures, laws and the justice system as it intersects with race and ethnicity.

[quote author=IMAliyu2 post=120815480]What people label as "CRT" is literally just teaching anti-racism and black history, sure some teachers might be weird about it, and should be criticized, but why is there a push to legislate a ban on an entire field of study?

People complain about the ban on critical race theory, but to quote the Idaho Bill that 'bans' it.

All it prevents is teaching 3 things:
(i) That any sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin is inherently superior or inferior;
(ii) That individuals should be adversely treated on the basis of their sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin;
(iii) That individuals, by virtue of sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin, are inherently responsible for actions committed in the past by other members of the same sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin.

Why exactly is this bill considered controversial if CRT only teaches about the existence of racism and black history?

IMAliyu2:
What were the inappropriate books being shown to elementary school kids by teachers?
If a teacher was showing a book that contained pornography to kids they'd lose their job and be arrested.

The ban wasn't just an elementary school ban and while it rightfully targeted some books with inappropriate sexual content (eg: Genderqueer). I don't understand why some others were removed (eg: Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, which I read myself in secondary school). Desantis always does the most.

IMAliyu2:
This Florida law made it a felony to have a non state approved book in school libraries, hence why some schools have been clearing out their libraries in fear, and so far the books targeted are ones containing minorities. "Sexually inappropriate" in this context just seems to mean, books that teaches the existence and acceptance of gay people, rather than having actual sexually charged content.

Nah, Genderqueer clearly has what could be considered pornographic content. I've actually posted screenshots here before.

IMAliyu2:
The trans issue thing is an iffy subject, but as it's a medical and psychological thing, so I defer to the experts and research in the field.
So far for a kid to even get on puberty blockers they'd have to have shown visible signs of gender dysphoria and have been diagnosed by a child psychologist over an extended period of time (months), and are prescribed puberty blockers with the consent of the parents.
This gives enough time and opportunity for a change of mind.
Before proceeding with transition on HRT when they reach the medical age of consent, so far the overwhelming majority continue into adulthood, and only a 2% regret rate.
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-study-suggesting-discontinuation-of-gender-affirming-hormones-in-those-who-start-treatment-as-adolescents-is-rare/

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2018/04/analysis-finds-strong-consensus-effectiveness-gender-transition-treatment

So why is this being made a political platform republicans are willing to die on?

The evidence showing puberty blockers helped improve the mental well-being of children with gender dysphoria is dubious at best. The published results showed a statistically significant improvement after 12 months. However, this improvement disappears after 18 months. This particular fact happens to locked behind a paywall, though. This seems to follow the conclusions of the Nordic Institute of Psychiatry

Link:
tandfonline[dot]com
/doi/full/10.1080/08039488.2019.1691260

This is also one of the reasons why Finland stopped using WPATH's guidelines. Finland will sometimes give hormone blockers to minors, so no, they aren't being transphobic. They mostly just disagree with the gender-affirming psychology that we see in America.

If we really wanted to follow the science, we would exercise caution before allowing children to potentially irreversibly damage their bodies. That's the definition of conservatism.

IMAliyu2:
What I seem to be seeing from the republicans are all culture war stuff.
Ban Woke, ban CRT, Drag shows this, Trans people that..

And we have the Florida, canceling of AP black history class, and elementary school book ban, where a teacher can face a falony for having non state approved books.
Push for a total Abortion ban.

So, I stand by my assertion.

Rand Paul has been fighting for reduced government spending but nobody gives a shxt, including his fellow Republicans.

To be fair though, this 'culture war stuff' still has its effects on society. CRT is needlessly divisive, why do you have to teach kids how their fellow classmates unknowingly perpetuate racism against them? A culture can only thrive on shared common ground, it's better to focus on what brings different together in my opinion. Better still, just leave it out of the classroom.

Certain books were banned from schools but this is something that happens all time. To Kill a Mockingbird was banned for having the 'n-word' in it. So why is banning books deemed sexually inappropriate for kids from libraries such a terrible thing?

The trans issue is a nuanced one. Most conservatives just don't want minors to be given life-altering hormones and puberty blockers. Why is that considered transphobic? A lot of older trans people also share this belief.

budaatum:
Next election you will vote in someone who will add to your suffer, then perhaps you will wake up and elect those who might make things easier for you, but going by all you post on here I am certain your suffer never end. In fact, I think it's only just begun, but we shall discuss that when you wail in pain in a year or two.

Literally all the three major candidates will do this.

IjeBos:
Huh? You're regressing. The argument with Floyd is that he did _______ and therefore it somehow excuses the officers actions. But that is the point of our law system. Even murderers get to stand trial. And a lot of white murderers seem to make it to trial alive.

The argument was that she doesn't like when people bring up the criminal history of guys like George Floyd but she couldn't help but bring up Eunice Dwumfour's former political stances.

IjeBos:
This is a rather weak argument on your part. There is a huge difference when you are arguing against extra-judicial killings

And this was a legal execution??

1stGenAmerican:
Her husband is in Nigeria, not in the home.
She was anti-immigration, not anti-illegal immigration. Check out her speeches.
Where’s your evidence to support your statement that she was killed because she was a Republican? Even her father has said that he doubts her killing was politically motivated. The shooting of the other politician wasn’t politically motivated either but remember—Republicans are in favor of everyone having guns with little to no stipulations. They’re now pushing for 14 year olds to open carry in some states.

I didn't say she was killed because she was a republican, I'm saying that you're suddenly OK with bringing up her past because she was a republican.

benalvino3:
this so-called lawyer who cannot even argue or provide sensible material to support her stance on Single households is here smearing a dead Ghanaian-American because she is a republican and not a criminal like George Floyd. No Black people are in the Republican party, but you sickos celebrate when they are murdered.

We will not hear a pip from Al-Sharpton or all those fools who always come like a fly looking for poop when a criminal is killed by the police.

She didn't have a long enough rap sheet or enough fentanyl in her system for her black life to matter.

1stGenAmerican:
She didn’t deserve to die regardless of what she did. I hope her killer is arrested soon.
What’s crazy is how Eunice, an immigrant single mother (who only recently got married) was an anti-immigration Republican, was against benefits for single parents, was living in a subsidized unit in an apartment complex, and was fighting hard against affordable housing being built in her area. To her, some things are good for me but not thee. Hypocritical to say the least.
It’s sad but Eunice was like many of our Nigerian people here in America.

Being against illegal immigration is not anti-immigration. I don't know about the circumstances of her single motherhood but good on her for getting married and giving her child/children a stable home environment.

Funny how you bring these things up when an upstanding black woman gets violently murdered because she's a republican.

SlyFoxxEternity:
First of all let’s talk about what kind of weak, pathetic man allows another man kiss his wife on the lips in front of the whole world like this?

All the evidence you need that Joe Biden is no longer a sentient human being. No woman should have this kind of guts to do this to her husband so openly and blatantly. If they can kiss like this in public then bet your last dollar they are screwing in the White House residence every afternoon while their spouses fool themselves in the Oval Office. Complete disgrace.


1stGenAmerican and IjeBos come and defend your weakling president on this one too please. Can you imagine another man kissing Melania Trump in front of King Donald himself?? Impossible.

I'll chalk that up to cultural differences (i.e., white people shxt).

Kaycee7:
Just as planned by Yams. It was even foreshadowed many times in the story.

Baddestguyp:
the story has to end in 13 years...
Just like the curse of Ymir

Hahaha...

We're trolling at this point, right guys?...right guys?

Explain this, AoT fanboys.

Hmm...

Cope

nani667:
°°

I—is there a punchline here that I'm missing?