Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif)
Posts: 36,753
![](./avatars/Democratic/INT_D_UA.gif)
|
![](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/post/xx.gif) |
« on: February 07, 2021, 04:41:24 PM » |
|
The simplest explanation that isn't naive about this topic is that the school was trying to make an "anti-anti racist" safe space. You can't normally opt out of a subject in school unless you have a compelling reason to do so. For example, your family is unable resolve comprehensive sex education with its theology or church membership. The question then becomes whether there are any compelling reasons to not learn Black History. The only compelling reason most us understand is that there is some sort of racist sentiment amongst students and families that leads students and families to find Black History to be inappropriate. On the other hand, there is this question as to why Black History is its own discrete subject. Would integrating Black History into a general History curriculum make it harder to "opt out" of make it harder to teach?
Am I caught up?
|