Community Message Concerning Access to the Carver Educational Services Center on Thursday, July 20

[Anonymous]

How many books do kids in each grade read? Are the books in controversy one percent, 10 percent, 25 percent, or more than 50 % of all the books read to students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

If the same material about gender identity is taught in the Family Life unit, people can opt out. But when it's taught in the English Language Arts unit, people cannot. This does not make any sense.

I predict this case will go to the Supreme Court and MCPS will lose there. It will take a few years, after MCPS spends millions of dollars defending it.

This...all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

MCPS and the board don't even respond to the opt-out testimonies at this point. They just ignore them.

You're inferring MCPS is ignoring them. That's on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

What concessions did MCPS and the BOE make after they had their say?

They have no obligations to make concessions after someone has had their say.

[Anonymous]

Based on what I gleaned from the meeting, it looks like the plaintiffs have filed for a motion for permanent injunction, which would require that mcps reinstate the opt out during the period that the lawsuit is in progress (would be possibly years). And they are asking it to be done before August 28. Hoping the judge grants their request.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

What concessions did MCPS and the BOE make after they had their say?

They have no obligations to make concessions after someone has had their say.

+1 There were BoE candidates who would have presented the opt out and they were roundly defeated. That's democracy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

Today there were 17 people who testified for the opt-out to be reinstated. Only 2 testified to keep it. There were over 300 protesters for the opt out. There were only 7 counter protesters. I think we can say that the opt out is a popular demand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

Today there were 17 people who testified for the opt-out to be reinstated. Only 2 testified to keep it. There were over 300 protesters for the opt out. There were only 7 counter protesters. I think we can say that the opt out is a popular demand.

That's no how statistics work. Nice try, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

Today there were 17 people who testified for the opt-out to be reinstated. Only 2 testified to keep it. There were over 300 protesters for the opt out. There were only 7 counter protesters. I think we can say that the opt out is a popular demand.

You can say the moon is made of green cheese, if you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

Today there were 17 people who testified for the opt-out to be reinstated. Only 2 testified to keep it. There were over 300 protesters for the opt out. There were only 7 counter protesters. I think we can say that the opt out is a popular demand.

That's no how statistics work. Nice try, though.

Where are all the rainbow supporters? I guess they aren't that passionate afterall. These families WILL get their opt out if they have to go to the supreme court. And they will definitely get it there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

MCPS and the board don't even respond to the opt-out testimonies at this point. They just ignore them.

You're inferring MCPS is ignoring them. That's on you.

I'm not inferring anything. I watch the BOE proceedings and the members remark on all the public comments except for the ones that are related to the opt-out. They engaged the first time, but they've stopped engaging after Lynne Harris and Arvin Kim doubled down and said the protesters were fueled by hate and ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

MCPS and the board don't even respond to the opt-out testimonies at this point. They just ignore them.

You're inferring MCPS is ignoring them. That's on you.

I'm not inferring anything. I watch the BOE proceedings and the members remark on all the public comments except for the ones that are related to the opt-out. They engaged the first time, but they've stopped engaging after Lynne Harris and Arvin Kim doubled down and said the protesters were fueled by hate and ignorance.

Very prudent and appropriate. There is no reason to engage, and nobody has any right to expect engagement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

MCPS and the board don't even respond to the opt-out testimonies at this point. They just ignore them.

You're inferring MCPS is ignoring them. That's on you.

I'm not inferring anything. I watch the BOE proceedings and the members remark on all the public comments except for the ones that are related to the opt-out. They engaged the first time, but they've stopped engaging after Lynne Harris and Arvin Kim doubled down and said the protesters were fueled by hate and ignorance.

I watched the meeting today. They had a very in depth discussion. I suspect Rivera-Oven is on the side of the protesters because she brought it up and then they had a discussion. Lynn Harris, as usual, was totally off base, disparaging people in the process. McKnight ended the discussion by tying a bow around it and saying the community needed to come together no matter what the outcome. Bottom line it is not settled yet, and the protesters are being heard.

[Anonymous]

Of all the testimonies, this one was the most on point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A new piece from Em Espey in MoCo360, this morning:

https://moco360.media/2023/07/20/volume-of-lgbtq-opt-out-requests-caused-significant-disruptions-mcps-says-in-legal-filing/

Clearly there are quite a few people who agree with the protestors. MCPS and the BOE might want to at least hear them out.

MCPS and the BoE has heard them out. They have had a lot of opportunity to have their say, and they are continuing to have that opportunity. You need to distinguish between "having your say" and "getting your way."

+1. No one is being blocked from submitting testimony or putting themselves on the schedule for public comment. Nor are they being prevented from reaching out to their district representative on the BoE or Central Office itself. If anything MCPS is making sure this is done in an orderly and safe way.

Let's be careful not to hyperbolize, here. Speaking slots are capped at 20 & at a premium, leaving many out in the cold (many speaking on one subject, saying the same/similar things, keep other subjects entirely off the table -- for months, if not entirely). Further, slots were reduced to 2 minutes from 3 minutes -- already far to little to make meaningful/detailed enough arguments to counter anything MCPS presents with no effective time limitation of their own (and with no opportunity for timely rebuttal by the community). Those providing testimony have to speed-read their way through, rarely able to properly puctuate/emphasize/elicit audience empathy, a few talented orators excepted, let alone present counter-arguments to anticipated MCPS responses.

Today there were 17 people who testified for the opt-out to be reinstated. Only 2 testified to keep it. There were over 300 protesters for the opt out. There were only 7 counter protesters. I think we can say that the opt out is a popular demand.

That's no how statistics work. Nice try, though.

Where are all the rainbow supporters? I guess they aren't that passionate afterall. These families WILL get their opt out if they have to go to the supreme court. And they will definitely get it there.

They're content with the status quo.