Yep, also they write bills poorly. This one is full of holes that could lead to it being overturned in court, but in the meantime… maybe we can play around with elements of the bill through malicious compliance.
The anti lobbying portion where they forbid allowing extra credit for participating in civics is laughable but the law doesn’t prohibit students from filing a lawsuit against the state government, which is also civics, so cool.
What amuses means just how politicly correct they have made the language of their text and I am already thinking of ways to use their “weasel words” and “lawyerly language” against them.
4: a teacher, administrator, or other employee of a state agency, school district, or open-enrollment charter school may not: (B) require or make part of a course the concept that:
(i) one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
I personally think this is great as it allows the teacher to argue that they should be teaching radical equality and that all races and sexes are inherently equal.
(ii) an individual, by virtue of the individual ’s race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;
This is great because as we all know racism and sexism isn’t isolated to one race or sex but instead is a form of tribalist disease that is common among all races and all sexes.
By admitting that all races have forms of racism, we can then address specifics without making it about an individual’s race.
Same with sexism. If anything, this should help to make teaching equality of LGBT people much easier.
(iii) an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of the individual ’s race or sex;
I’ll be honest with you, I was expecting this with regards to race, but this means that we can actually talk about the mistreatments that women have faced for generations and say it as equals. I never thought the Texas legislature would be so progressive.
(iv) members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
But we are allowed to teach the opposite
members of any and every race or sex can and should attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex;
and to use examples from history to demonstrate injustices that we are still working on.
(v) an individual ’s moral character is necessarily determined by the individual ’s race or sex;
This would be the perfect opportunity to bring up Martin Luther King, Jr., his dream for America, his socialist poor people’s party, his imperfections and the way that the CIA tried to intimidate him, And how many civil rights that we enjoy today only occurred due to rioting that happened after his assassination.
(vi) an individual, by virtue of the individual ’s race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;
That would be ridiculous. People should be taught that they are responsible for their individual actions and that their individual actions have consequences that impact others as the actions of others have impacted them. The best thing we can do as a society is to build rather bridges rather than burn them.
(vii) an individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of the individual ’s race or sex; or
I don’t think that people should be taught to feel “psychological distress” if history and civics are taught in the appropriate way, but this seems focused on keeping people from openly discussing supremacist imperialism and it’s impact on this continent over the last 500 years in any way that might upset people who share supremacist imperialist values … but we already affirmed in section one that all races are equal and that racism and sexism are anti-American but the tribalism is existent in all and as such all racism and sexism should be approached as moral failings inherent to the human condition that the American experiment aimed (and still should aim) to temper through the struggle for a more perfect union.
(viii) meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist or were created by members of a particular race to oppress members of another race. So I guess that means we can’t teach about the many ways that Western colonizers have used “spreading culture” as a way of wiping out preexisting cultures.
Guess we shouldn’t talk about how Native American children were separated from their parents to be westernized in “separation camps”.
Probably wouldn’t be appropriate to talk about Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings, the slave that he owned as an infant, who was also the half-sister of his wife (being the daughter of slave trader John Wayles and his own servant Betty Hemings). If one does touch on that, it is probably best to pay careful attention to avoid making anybody feel uncomfortable about race, sex, ownership, and power dynamics in our debate: “Was it rape?”
Guess we couldn’t talk about how African American children were kept from learning because it made them more likely to turn against their masters.
Guess we shouldn’t talk about how they are doing the exact same thing to this generation of children with their white washing brainwash.
Just kidding. If they’re going to try this sort of attack on education let’s push the envelope through civil disobedience and malicious compliance.
If any teachers in texas want to work on a “malicious compliance” curriculum, I think it might be fun to approach it as a group project.