This off topic of nit picking words on who could or isn't a terrorist, moral values or 100 year old understanding of law is what I wanted to avoid. Remember the point on hand about this teaching yelling her personal views onto children trying to have their own voice.
I’m sorry to have helped drive this off topic, and terrorism is off topic here. However on a forum dedicated to protecting our Constitutionally protected rights a statement that someone has none of those rights
before they have been proven to have violated any law is fair game to me, leading to my first post.
ArmySoldier22’s statement that someone should be “tortured for information, and put down afterwords” without a trial (or even w is not what I swore to protect, and is a statement I can never let stand unchallenged. If we are willing to accept that it can be “ proven that someone is guilty” without a trial, we have lost.
You are correct, the focus should be on a poor teacher who quashes students trying to learn to think for themselves. I feel lucky that I had more teachers who challenged me to think than I had punishing me for thinking (but I am old "and things were different then"
). I'll try to stay on topic in the future.