Why are book banners showing up at FCPS SB meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This, my friends, is faux outrage, a common tactic of the left to silence conservatives. The likelihood of any children attending a school board meeting is infinitesimally small. And if the content isn't appropriate for a school board meeting, it's not appropriate for the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

Then you have no trouble with the woman reading from those books and showing the pictures.

Time, place and manner. There is a difference between what someone chooses to read for themselves and someone deciding to broadcast the content the way she did. I don’t not think the content is offensive but also understand why someone might not want to be blasted with it without warning.

None of us here are saying people should be forced to read these books against their will, which is essentially what this woman did to listeners. We simply think a high school library should be allowed to circulate these books for those who *want* to read them.

Let me see if I've got this correct:

1. A concerned parent reads from a book at a school board meeting, to demonstrate that the book contents are not appropriate for the school library.
2. Outrage ensues from other parents who agree that the content is inappropriate.
3. Outrage also ensues from other folks who, though they believe that the content is acceptable for high school, believe that the content is inappropriate for a broadcast internet stream to a likely extremely small audience, claiming that children could be exposed to said content.

I presume that the argument is that the content is okay for a 9th grader, but not for an 8th grader. My...that's a fine line.

And then to attack the parent for supposed broadcast of inappropriate content is mindboggling hutzpah.. And I think that such assertions are made with a straight face. Amazing.

FWIW, my high school freshman is 13 (birthday soon), and it'd be nice to preserve her innocence for a while longer.

FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

And you wonder why some of the threads have become toxic. A poster expresses concern about inappropriate school library content and notes the blatant hypocrisy of those pushing it. And then the poster is attacked. Nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This isn't a left-right issue. It's the First Amendment! (And at the risk of covering well-trodden ground in this thread, the FCC cannot fine someone for their speech at an open government hearing, irrespective of whether it is televised; the First Amendment is no less powerful during prime time.)

It's perfectly reasonable to say that none of this should be discussed at a school board hearing or that speakers should choose their words more carefully. But none of that goes to the rights of the speaker to make the speech.

You may a tough time with this, but sometimes even your precious FREEDOMS have restrictions.

Fortunately the federal courts have spoken clearly on this one. . .

Citation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This, my friends, is faux outrage, a common tactic of the left to silence conservatives. The likelihood of any children attending a school board meeting is infinitesimally small. And if the content isn't appropriate for a school board meeting, it's not appropriate for the school.

They are on TV. In Primetime. In an enormous District. And most ES parents with unvaxxed kids wanted the update on test and quarantine protocols discussed at the meeting. Why is this hard to understand?

[Anonymous]

Kids absolutely are exposed to SB meetings. They are broadcast on tv and streamed live. Many of us watch the meetings with kids around. It’s super strange that you think the chance of kids being exposed to meetings is infinitesimally small. And makes me wonder whether you are even a fairfax parent.

Materials appropriate for a high school student absolutely differ from materials for younger kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This, my friends, is faux outrage, a common tactic of the left to silence conservatives. The likelihood of any children attending a school board meeting is infinitesimally small. And if the content isn't appropriate for a school board meeting, it's not appropriate for the school.

Do you actually have kids in FCPS? If you did, you’d realize that many, many families - especially those with young kids - will watch the SB meeting on TV at home.

And context is important. Obviously. Faux obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids absolutely are exposed to SB meetings. They are broadcast on tv and streamed live. Many of us watch the meetings with kids around. It’s super strange that you think the chance of kids being exposed to meetings is infinitesimally small. And makes me wonder whether you are even a fairfax parent.

Materials appropriate for a high school student absolutely differ from materials for younger kids.

Yes. It doesn’t sound like someone familiar the FCPS.

Republican troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. If your high schooler is interested in seeing sexual images, they can find far worse thing elsewhere very easily. This book has the image in the context of a positive message about sexual respect and staying within your comfort zone rather than feeling pressured to do something you don’t want to do. That is a good thing for teens to be exposed to.

Then you have no trouble with the woman reading from those books and showing the pictures.

Time, place and manner. There is a difference between what someone chooses to read for themselves and someone deciding to broadcast the content the way she did. I don’t not think the content is offensive but also understand why someone might not want to be blasted with it without warning.

None of us here are saying people should be forced to read these books against their will, which is essentially what this woman did to listeners. We simply think a high school library should be allowed to circulate these books for those who *want* to read them.

Let me see if I've got this correct:

1. A concerned parent reads from a book at a school board meeting, to demonstrate that the book contents are not appropriate for the school library.
2. Outrage ensues from other parents who agree that the content is inappropriate.
3. Outrage also ensues from other folks who, though they believe that the content is acceptable for high school, believe that the content is inappropriate for a broadcast internet stream to a likely extremely small audience, claiming that children could be exposed to said content.

I presume that the argument is that the content is okay for a 9th grader, but not for an 8th grader. My...that's a fine line.

And then to attack the parent for supposed broadcast of inappropriate content is mindboggling hutzpah.. And I think that such assertions are made with a straight face. Amazing.

FWIW, my high school freshman is 13 (birthday soon), and it'd be nice to preserve her innocence for a while longer.

FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

And you wonder why some of the threads have become toxic. A poster expresses concern about inappropriate school library content and notes the blatant hypocrisy of those pushing it. And then the poster is attacked. Nice.

DP. That wasn’t an attack, it was expressing disagreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids absolutely are exposed to SB meetings. They are broadcast on tv and streamed live. Many of us watch the meetings with kids around. It’s super strange that you think the chance of kids being exposed to meetings is infinitesimally small. And makes me wonder whether you are even a fairfax parent.

Materials appropriate for a high school student absolutely differ from materials for younger kids.

+1. Yeah. This “no kids would hear a SB meeting” seems very astroturfed. Anyone who has lived in Fairfax for the last 18 months understands how huge the system is, and how many parents are following the SB very closely right now. Especially now with confusion over testing and quarantines for unvaxxed ES kids. Parents have kids being “paused” and quarantined too often for too long and want the SB to change polices, like MoCo did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids absolutely are exposed to SB meetings. They are broadcast on tv and streamed live. Many of us watch the meetings with kids around. It’s super strange that you think the chance of kids being exposed to meetings is infinitesimally small. And makes me wonder whether you are even a fairfax parent.

Materials appropriate for a high school student absolutely differ from materials for younger kids.

Yes. It doesn’t sound like someone familiar the FCPS.

Republican troll.

+1. DP. No one with a kid in FCPS would say this in September 2021.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This, my friends, is faux outrage, a common tactic of the left to silence conservatives. The likelihood of any children attending a school board meeting is infinitesimally small. And if the content isn't appropriate for a school board meeting, it's not appropriate for the school.

Do you actually have kids in FCPS? If you did, you’d realize that many, many families - especially those with young kids - will watch the SB meeting on TV at home.

And context is important. Obviously. Faux obtuse.

Just to be clear then. You're okay with the content in school library, but not in the school board meeting. Got it. 'Nuf said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This, my friends, is faux outrage, a common tactic of the left to silence conservatives. The likelihood of any children attending a school board meeting is infinitesimally small. And if the content isn't appropriate for a school board meeting, it's not appropriate for the school.

Do you actually have kids in FCPS? If you did, you’d realize that many, many families - especially those with young kids - will watch the SB meeting on TV at home.

And context is important. Obviously. Faux obtuse.

Just to be clear then. You're okay with the content in school library, but not in the school board meeting. Got it. 'Nuf said.

So....do you have a kid in FCPS or not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ I’ve seen it. It’s a drawing that shows people participating in oral sex. I don’t think that image is appropriate in a school. I’m honestly disturbed that some people are okay with this.”

+1
And I am a pro gay rights Democrat. Truly baffled as to how people can look at those pics and say yes this is fine to have in school.

You have seen ONE page from an entire book. One page. One page that shows people engaging in play with a sex toy. There is not even an actual penis pictured. It is cartoonish and awkward and involves the MC realizing that e doesn’t want to do what e fantasized about, so the two people agree to try something else. It’s about open communication, consent, and respect.

Apparently you just see the penis. That’s sad. But people who have actually read the book (see reviews on Goodreads) have a different view.

I’m not okay with kids seeing penises in books at school, except perhaps in a science book. I’m not okay with kids seeing images that depict sex acts. I don’t think that attitude makes me an outlier.

YES! And I don’t care if it’s about consent or what!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
FCPS Back to School and COVID updates are broadcast into thousands of households. There is very large engagement in these meetings. Everyone is angry. Everyone wants answers. Everyone i upset about pauses and wants info on testing and quarantines. And there 180,000 kids and 35,000 staff involved. The audience was huge. It was on TV. And parents watching on their TV set in early evening had their elementary school aged kids in the room. You want to protect your 13 year old? My 7 year old saw this. Too late for her to stay innocent.

I’m sorry you aren’t engaged in the school system. Some of us haven’t been ble to zone out on our kids education this year.

It's a basic tenet of 1st Amendment law that (with few exceptions), the rights of the speaker are not limited by the effect of the speech on a listener. The best way to protect your 7 year-old is to not have her watch a school board meeting.

First, one of the exceptions you mention is broadcast TV between 6am and 10pm, when it must be appropriate for the reasonably intended audience. Which for an early evening SB meeting is… parents with young kids around.

Second, do you even hear yourself? My kid now has to protected from *FCPS SB meetings* because God forbid we expect adults to act like adults. There is something seriously off kilter when the right says with a straight face that it’s okay if SB meetings on a return to school agenda (as opposed to FLE) are inappropriate for children to hear. Seriously?

This, my friends, is faux outrage, a common tactic of the left to silence conservatives. The likelihood of any children attending a school board meeting is infinitesimally small. And if the content isn't appropriate for a school board meeting, it's not appropriate for the school.

Do you actually have kids in FCPS? If you did, you’d realize that many, many families - especially those with young kids - will watch the SB meeting on TV at home.

And context is important. Obviously. Faux obtuse.

Just to be clear then. You're okay with the content in school library, but not in the school board meeting. Got it. 'Nuf said.

So....do you have a kid in FCPS or not?

Yes. I wouldn't be posting otherwise. I appreciate you trying to attach motives though. Another tactic of the left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fortunately the federal courts have spoken clearly on this one. . .

Not in the ways you say. Speech on broadcast TV is limited during prime time. Freedom of expression isn’t absolute in government meetings. Etc.

I don't want to belabor this, but a government entity cannot restrict the scope of permissible speech at a hearing simply by broadcasting the hearing on TV. The speaker's First Amendment rights do not change simply because the hearing is broadcast. (The other examples cited above re FCC fines are not relevant because none involved political speech or a public forum.)

You are correct that freedom of expression is not absolute at a government meeting. But any restriction is subject to strict scrutiny. A restriction against quoting from the text of a book that is apparently in FCPS school libraries would never survive strict scrutiny. (Nor would an across-the-board ban on the use of certain language. A ban on profanity may survive a facial challenge -- it's viewpoint neutral and there is arguably a compelling government interest, though that's far from certain -- but it would never survive an as-applied challenge in the circumstances being discussed.)

Here is the short of it -- the content of books in school libraries is unquestionably a relevant topic for discussion at a school board meeting (irrespective of whether one has a problem with the content or does not). Quoting that content is also relevant to any discussion about the content. A government entity cannot shut down that speech simply because it may offend other listeners, absent truly extraordinary circumstances (this is essentially the heckler's veto doctrine).