1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trans athletes and NCAA

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by HanSenSE, Oct 3, 2024.

  1. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    What he said.
    What he said again.

    And, to give another example: Trump says he’s going to “put God back in school.” How’s the federal government going to do that when there’s no DOE to enforce it? See the contradiction?
     
  2. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    He also said he was going to force schools to get rid of all DEI and pay reparations to anyone who was harmed by them. Putting aside the ridiculousness of his idea, he would be limited his ability to do that, too.

    Also, is SoloFlyer a guy? I'm not sure about that.
     
  3. SoloFlyer

    SoloFlyer Well-Known Member

    I'm a dude.

    As far as other Trump decrees, that's another way Title IX will suffer. You don't even have to completely gut departments to create problems -- you force the staff to shift their focus to other issues. For example, he and the GOP want bibles in schools. They could choose to spend money and time on that instead of enforcing Title IX, which again creates a trickle down effect that causes an overload for the states.
     
    Webster and Baron Scicluna like this.
  4. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    My bad. Thank you for clarifying.

    Don't forget the extra cost of getting the leather-bound "G-d Bless the USA" Bibles. Yeah, I know I put a Jewish spin on that, which would certainly make those Trump-loving white nationalists cringe.
     
  5. Webster

    Webster Well-Known Member

    I have a good friend who works for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Under the first Trump administration, the orders from the top were that banks and big businesses were “consumers” too and their focus completely changed from helping the individual.
     
  6. justgladtobehere

    justgladtobehere Well-Known Member

    If the DOJ is gutted to the extent people imagine it will be and unable to enforce laws, why wouldn't the Department of Education be gutted to a similar extent leaving it unable to enforce laws?

    The simple existence of the Department of Education does not determine whether certain laws are enforced. I don't know why that is difficult to understand.
     
  7. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Sigh.

    The God Emperor Has Not Promised to "Gut" the Department of Education, He Has Promised To Eliminate It.

    The main reason MAGA wants to do this is the DOE attempts to enforce annoying oppressive rules and regulations -- curriculum requirements, program availability and funding, equality of opportunity for all students, that MAGA considers "woke."

    If the god emperor succeeds in his stated intention of eliminating the department, who will be tasked with enforcing these regulations?


    Fucking Nobody, that's who! Trump is not going to tell any other federal agency to enforce those regulations, he is going to order all of them NOT to enforce them.

    That's the whole fucking point. They don't want to obey no rules and regulations at all, because Nobudduh Tellz Them Whut Ta Dew, especially anything "woke."

    Can citizens/taxpayers/parents go to court to get the rules enforced? Well yeah sure they can, until they run into a MAGA puppet judge, who will tell their woke asses to fuck off.
     
    WriteThinking likes this.
  8. Twirling Time

    Twirling Time Well-Known Member

    That cuts both ways. Without a DOE, the feds can't say boo about a state that wants to say "woke." That'll be a perfect pretzel.
     
    Baron Scicluna likes this.
  9. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    This whole circular argument is based upon a fundamental misconception.

    When MOST PEOPLE try to reduce bureaucracy, cut departments, they think about issues like, "To which other agencies should we transfer vital functions of the agency we're shutting down?"

    This bunch doesn't give a fiery flying fuck about any of that. They don't think any governmental functions are vital or beneficial. They think anybody who previously had been benefiting from any of them are government moochers.

    They want to smash it all as completely as possible so in the far fetched possibility another political party takes power in the future, it will be difficult or preferably impossible to ever rebuild it.

    The Commander in Chief can declare a national emergency and send in military forces to ensure "woke" policies are not being forced upon patriotic citizens.
     
  10. justgladtobehere

    justgladtobehere Well-Known Member

    There is no qualification that the Department of Education exist at a Cabinet level for Title IX to be enforced.

    If the Department of Education is ended, an unlikely proposition in itself, the duties for which it was responsible for don't go away and people's rights as private citizens aren't cut off.
     
  11. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Repeating this point over and over doesn't make it any less ignorant. It ignores that it isn't just about the right to sue if some institution violates the law. It is about monitoring and pushing schools to remain in compliance. I don't know why you insist on sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring that and many other reasons threatening the DOE is dangerous, but it is just stubborn foolishness on your part.
     
  12. SoloFlyer

    SoloFlyer Well-Known Member

    Let's make this a simple analogy.

    If a city police department takes its task force devoted to busting drug dealers and tells them to start focusing on traffic citations instead, no qualifications have changed. No new departments have been created. It's a change in priorities. And it means that suddenly there is little to zero enforcement of drug laws.

    That's what will happen here.
     
    Baron Scicluna and sgreenwell like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page