Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's not the only choice. The obvious choice is to escort him out, not to ARREST him. Talking over a time limit is not an offense where someone should be arrested. The fact you can't see that....seriously?

Did you read the passage in the book? The girl is essentially raped, then tells the guy she loves him after he says it first. Is that the message, you, as an administrator, want to send a 9th grader? This, of course, is in addition to the graphic sexual descriptions. This father had every right to be pissed off about that. And all the board cared about was he went over the two minute rule. Perhaps if the school board showed some concern over the matter, there might have been dialog.

The acting town police chief made the decision to arrest him. I would never second-guess the actions of local government.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/08/father-arrested-protesting-jodi-picoult-high-school

Seems that the school board apologized for their behavior --- OOOPS. Looks like this man had damn good reason to be pissed off:

"The Gilford school board has since apologised in a statement for "the discomfort of those impacted and for the failure of the School District to send home prior notice of assignment of the novel", and said that it will now revise its policies "to include notification that requires parents to accept controversial material rather than opt out"."

They apologized that he had not received proper notice. I think that's fair. That book did require a notice.

I agree the book required a notice. For me, as a parent, I'd want to read further to find out how the rape scene was handled in the rest of the book before I decided how to approach it with my child.

But, I think it's important to note that the father had already complained to the school, who had already addressed the problem before this meeting. Of course they couldn't go back in time, but they sent home the note they should have sent home, and the father received it as evidenced by the fact that it was in his hand. So, while he may have had a good reason to be upset, he also had a good reason to believe that the school and school board would take his position seriously. His behavior was seriously out of line.

I'll also add that I think the police are in a challenging situation here. Once the officer, rightly or wrongly, stepped in and gave the man the direct order to stand up and leave, the guy called their bluff. Part of why the police system works in our country is because there's a general perception that if you disobey a direct order from a police officer you'll regret it. I can understand why the police would be very hesitant to let people walk away from a situation with the idea that listening to a police officer's order is "optional". I think that escorting him from the building and letting him go might have been a solution, but it's also possible that he would have reentered the building since he seemed deadset on getting arrested in order to gain media attention. So, while I don't know that I would have chosen to arrest him, I can understand the officer's thinking.

I'd also like to note here, that I'm the teacher/curriculum specialist who was asked to answer "yes or no" earlier in this thread. Someone else replied to that, who wasn't me, so this is my response. I'll also add that this has absolutely nothing to do with Common Core.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Seems that the school board apologized for their behavior --- OOOPS. Looks like this man had damn good reason to be pissed off:

"The Gilford school board has since apologised in a statement for "the discomfort of those impacted and for the failure of the School District to send home prior notice of assignment of the novel", and said that it will now revise its policies "to include notification that requires parents to accept controversial material rather than opt out"."

Well, of course, if the school board apologized, then the man was obviously completely justified in being disruptive at a public meeting and telling the police to arrest him.

They apologized because they knew they had to, because they'd been called out publicly and it went national.

Anonymous wrote:

Three strikes you're out! Especially when you taunt the ump.

Out or arrested? Good LORD.

Well, if he were a kid, you could give him a time out.

For adults, though, the choices are more limited. You can tell a man his time is up; you can remind him his time is up; you can ask him to respect others and not interrupt, but that only goes so far.

If he then states "You'll have to arrest me..."

Why question the decisions of local officials, though, and the local school board? remember THESE are the people you want to have local control over your child's school curriculum (well they do have control over that) and these are the people you want to be setting local standards for children's education. Right?

If they cannot be trusted to select good books and to run a school board meeting, how can they be trusted to choose appropriate standards?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Go look up the answers to the questions I listed above. Look at the quotes. And if you still don't understand, do it again, and again, until you do.

No, if you had a problem with a specific standard, you could easily link to it, and explain what you felt was inappropriate about it. Since you don't do that, I understand that there are no problems with specific standards, you just oppose the funding.

DING DING DING!! You got it. You've been lied to. This was not a 'state initiative, given the funding, and the goal of common core is control and conform FROM A FEDERAL LEVEL. Which is what states are realizing now and are backing away from it.

My guess is (1) you are a progressive and (2) you are instrumental in foisting this on the American people.

I just like the standards.

Ah, a low information voter. Got it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's the whole video of him by the way, starting with how confrontational and aggressive he was for his full 2 minutes, before he started interrupting people.

Kind of puts it in context, don;t you think?

http://wonkette.com/548478/hero-dad-arrested-for-trying-to-protect-kids-from-filthy-sex-book

I respect the school board members for keeping their cool, and dealing with him in a professional way, and am glad that they had the local control to make that kind of decision about how they wanted to run their schol board meeting (as elected representatives of their local community.)

So you support the arrest of this man and consider that professional?

Yes. The school board member was quite professional and calm, gave him ample notice that he was being disruptive. She spoke courteously to him, called him sir, clearly explained that he needed to show respect to others.

He on the other hand, was a hot head, was speaking disrespectfully, interrupted others and stated he refused to be quiet. He felt this was a lesson in his first amendment rights, and he'd need to be arrested to get him to stop interrupting.

So, he was arrested.

I sincerely hope one of your children are arrested in the future on bogus charges and you have to deal with the system. Without that, you'll never get how sincerely dangerous something like this is to freedom.

And Baer's daughter speaks out:

“I just watched my father get arrested because he broke the two minute rule, at a board of education meeting,” she said. “This just shows that you resort to force at the first turn of conflict and I am appalled. So I don’t trust you.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/09/bold-14-year-old-girl-confronts-school-board-after-watching-her-dad-get-arrested-for-violating-two-minute-rule-i-dont-trust-you/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Go look up the answers to the questions I listed above. Look at the quotes. And if you still don't understand, do it again, and again, until you do.

No, if you had a problem with a specific standard, you could easily link to it, and explain what you felt was inappropriate about it. Since you don't do that, I understand that there are no problems with specific standards, you just oppose the funding.

DING DING DING!! You got it. You've been lied to. This was not a 'state initiative, given the funding, and the goal of common core is control and conform FROM A FEDERAL LEVEL. Which is what states are realizing now and are backing away from it.

My guess is (1) you are a progressive and (2) you are instrumental in foisting this on the American people.

I just like the standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's the whole video of him by the way, starting with how confrontational and aggressive he was for his full 2 minutes, before he started interrupting people.

Kind of puts it in context, don;t you think?

http://wonkette.com/548478/hero-dad-arrested-for-trying-to-protect-kids-from-filthy-sex-book

I respect the school board members for keeping their cool, and dealing with him in a professional way, and am glad that they had the local control to make that kind of decision about how they wanted to run their schol board meeting (as elected representatives of their local community.)

So you support the arrest of this man and consider that professional?

Yes. The school board member was quite professional and calm, gave him ample notice that he was being disruptive. She spoke courteously to him, called him sir, clearly explained that he needed to show respect to others.

He on the other hand, was a hot head, was speaking disrespectfully, interrupted others and stated he refused to be quiet. He felt this was a lesson in his first amendment rights, and he'd need to be arrested to get him to stop interrupting.

So, he was arrested.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's not the only choice. The obvious choice is to escort him out, not to ARREST him. Talking over a time limit is not an offense where someone should be arrested. The fact you can't see that....seriously?

Did you read the passage in the book? The girl is essentially raped, then tells the guy she loves him after he says it first. Is that the message, you, as an administrator, want to send a 9th grader? This, of course, is in addition to the graphic sexual descriptions. This father had every right to be pissed off about that. And all the board cared about was he went over the two minute rule. Perhaps if the school board showed some concern over the matter, there might have been dialog.

The acting town police chief made the decision to arrest him. I would never second-guess the actions of local government.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/08/father-arrested-protesting-jodi-picoult-high-school

Seems that the school board apologized for their behavior --- OOOPS. Looks like this man had damn good reason to be pissed off:

"The Gilford school board has since apologised in a statement for "the discomfort of those impacted and for the failure of the School District to send home prior notice of assignment of the novel", and said that it will now revise its policies "to include notification that requires parents to accept controversial material rather than opt out"."

They apologized that he had not received proper notice. I think that's fair. That book did require a notice.

Another thing I find impressive is that this novel is (apparently) about a bullied high school student shooting up the high school, but the controversial part is p. 313, where the words "erection" and "semen" appear. And the rest of the book, about a high school shooting? Eh. Nothing to get upset about there.

Anonymous wrote:

Seems that the school board apologized for their behavior --- OOOPS. Looks like this man had damn good reason to be pissed off:

"The Gilford school board has since apologised in a statement for "the discomfort of those impacted and for the failure of the School District to send home prior notice of assignment of the novel", and said that it will now revise its policies "to include notification that requires parents to accept controversial material rather than opt out"."

Well, of course, if the school board apologized, then the man was obviously completely justified in being disruptive at a public meeting and telling the police to arrest him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's not the only choice. The obvious choice is to escort him out, not to ARREST him. Talking over a time limit is not an offense where someone should be arrested. The fact you can't see that....seriously?

Did you read the passage in the book? The girl is essentially raped, then tells the guy she loves him after he says it first. Is that the message, you, as an administrator, want to send a 9th grader? This, of course, is in addition to the graphic sexual descriptions. This father had every right to be pissed off about that. And all the board cared about was he went over the two minute rule. Perhaps if the school board showed some concern over the matter, there might have been dialog.

The acting town police chief made the decision to arrest him. I would never second-guess the actions of local government.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/08/father-arrested-protesting-jodi-picoult-high-school

Seems that the school board apologized for their behavior --- OOOPS. Looks like this man had damn good reason to be pissed off:

"The Gilford school board has since apologised in a statement for "the discomfort of those impacted and for the failure of the School District to send home prior notice of assignment of the novel", and said that it will now revise its policies "to include notification that requires parents to accept controversial material rather than opt out"."

Anonymous wrote:There's the whole video of him by the way, starting with how confrontational and aggressive he was for his full 2 minutes, before he started interrupting people.

Kind of puts it in context, don;t you think?

http://wonkette.com/548478/hero-dad-arrested-for-trying-to-protect-kids-from-filthy-sex-book

I respect the school board members for keeping their cool, and dealing with him in a professional way, and am glad that they had the local control to make that kind of decision about how they wanted to run their schol board meeting (as elected representatives of their local community.)

So you support the arrest of this man and consider that professional?

Anonymous wrote:There's the whole video of him by the way, starting with how confrontational and aggressive he was for his full 2 minutes, before he started interrupting people.

Kind of puts it in context, don;t you think?

http://wonkette.com/548478/hero-dad-arrested-for-trying-to-protect-kids-from-filthy-sex-book

I respect the school board members for keeping their cool, and dealing with him in a professional way, and am glad that they had the local control to make that kind of decision about how they wanted to run their schol board meeting (as elected representatives of their local community.)

Also apparently the school district has been using the book since it came out in 2007. Damn that Common Core and its evil time machine!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Go look up the answers to the questions I listed above. Look at the quotes. And if you still don't understand, do it again, and again, until you do.

No, if you had a problem with a specific standard, you could easily link to it, and explain what you felt was inappropriate about it. Since you don't do that, I understand that there are no problems with specific standards, you just oppose the funding.

DING DING DING!! You got it. You've been lied to. This was not a 'state initiative, given the funding, and the goal of common core is control and conform FROM A FEDERAL LEVEL. Which is what states are realizing now and are backing away from it.

My guess is (1) you are a progressive and (2) you are instrumental in foisting this on the American people.