I'm rewording to make sure I haven't misunderstood you. Your argument seems to be that, (1) since embryonic stem cell research is wrong, the bus driver was justified in discussing it with small children, (2) complaints about said discussion are based on immorality, and (3), since the bus driver was not warned about having political discussions with the children, she should not be fired.
Have I summarized/reworded correctly?
1) since embryonic stem cell research is wrong, the bus driver was justified in discussing it with small children,
It would be silly to use such a premise, as most on your side probably assumed I have done. Reasonable people can disagree on such an issue. Again thank you for giving me the chance to emphasis that my arguments don't use such a flawed premise.
(2) complaints about said discussion are based on immorality
This doesn't make any kind of sense to me. What does a discussion based on immorality mean (other then trying to seduce a married person or the like). I doubt whatever you meant by this is part of my argument...but since I'm not entirely sure...
(3) Since the bus driver was not warned about having political discussions with the children, she should not be fired.
My conclusion is even stronger then that. I maintain that the bus driver did nothing wrong. I think this fairly summarizes MEGoody's position, who I'm still debating.
I've summarized my argument before on this thread, but since neither of us wants to dig through 500+ posts, I will do so once more (only the high points now):
The schools should serve to educate rather then indoctrinate our children. A minority of parents, lawyers, and teachers would prefer to indoctrinate rather then teach. This latter group scares the bleep out of schoool boards. Thus the schools are evolving into a place of indoctrination, to such an extent, that neutral educational facts are now being suppressed.
The bus driver was fired for being too educational by those who either wish to indoctrinate or are fearful of litigation by those that wish to indoctrinate the children.
Now I'm sure you may suspect some flaws (this is only a summary). Particularly my assertion that the bus drivers comments were neutral educational facts. I have supported this assertion quite well in this thread, and would like the opportunity to reiterate.
Another possible flaw was recently raised by MEGoody, but I think I dealt with it well in my last post.
By the way, I have yet to see a coherent argument supporting the bus driver being fired. I've been ripping them apart for breakfast.