Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why not just hold them in private or something?
Um, because the boards conduct public business subject to public open meetings laws.
yes, they'd have to change the rules about meetings, but I don't blame the thought. Some folks can't seem to control themselves. I wouldn't want to be a BOE member with all the threats and low pay.
While there have been some over the top responses, can you really blame the parents? Some B's of E are making terrible decisions and harming kids. It's only natural for parents to want to protect their kids.
Can you give an example? Thanks
DP.
Why should we allow this at SB meetings?
Huh? I don’t agree with the public speaker, but it was entirely inappropriate for the school board to interrupt her while reading the excerpt from the book.
I don't know that it was... it seems like if this topic needs to be addressed and discussed, it should be done in a forum restricted to 18+, e.g. a separate public comment period. If you want to argue 13+ because technically HS kids have access to this book in the library, then you are conflating "some kids have access to these materials if they explicitly seek them out" with "let's read this out loud to everyone".
I'm curious what the library checkout records are on these materials... what percentage of students are _actually_ going and checking out the books in question? Technically they could read without checking out, I'm majorly skeptical that any kids are sneaking around the library just to read a few text passages when they could was more easily obtain illicit imagery or videos elsewhere (if they're so inclined).
The bolded is a lie.
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1037570.page
But PP knew it was a lie when she posted her lie.
Moreover, the book is appropriate for children or it’s not.
It was deliberately placed in a library for children.
The idea that the same adults responsible for putting the book there somehow cannot handle hearing a passage read aloud is an obvious indication there may be something extreme or inappropriate.
The school board members have been radicalized.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why not just hold them in private or something?
Um, because the boards conduct public business subject to public open meetings laws.
yes, they'd have to change the rules about meetings, but I don't blame the thought. Some folks can't seem to control themselves. I wouldn't want to be a BOE member with all the threats and low pay.
While there have been some over the top responses, can you really blame the parents? Some B's of E are making terrible decisions and harming kids. It's only natural for parents to want to protect their kids.
Can you give an example? Thanks
DP.
Why should we allow this at SB meetings?
Huh? I don’t agree with the public speaker, but it was entirely inappropriate for the school board to interrupt her while reading the excerpt from the book.
I don't know that it was... it seems like if this topic needs to be addressed and discussed, it should be done in a forum restricted to 18+, e.g. a separate public comment period. If you want to argue 13+ because technically HS kids have access to this book in the library, then you are conflating "some kids have access to these materials if they explicitly seek them out" with "let's read this out loud to everyone".
I'm curious what the library checkout records are on these materials... what percentage of students are _actually_ going and checking out the books in question? Technically they could read without checking out, I'm majorly skeptical that any kids are sneaking around the library just to read a few text passages when they could was more easily obtain illicit imagery or videos elsewhere (if they're so inclined).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why not just hold them in private or something?
Um, because the boards conduct public business subject to public open meetings laws.
yes, they'd have to change the rules about meetings, but I don't blame the thought. Some folks can't seem to control themselves. I wouldn't want to be a BOE member with all the threats and low pay.
While there have been some over the top responses, can you really blame the parents? Some B's of E are making terrible decisions and harming kids. It's only natural for parents to want to protect their kids.
Can you give an example? Thanks
DP.
Why should we allow this at SB meetings?
Huh? I don’t agree with the public speaker, but it was entirely inappropriate for the school board to interrupt her while reading the excerpt from the book.
I don't know that it was... it seems like if this topic needs to be addressed and discussed, it should be done in a forum restricted to 18+, e.g. a separate public comment period. If you want to argue 13+ because technically HS kids have access to this book in the library, then you are conflating "some kids have access to these materials if they explicitly seek them out" with "let's read this out loud to everyone".
I'm curious what the library checkout records are on these materials... what percentage of students are _actually_ going and checking out the books in question? Technically they could read without checking out, I'm majorly skeptical that any kids are sneaking around the library just to read a few text passages when they could was more easily obtain illicit imagery or videos elsewhere (if they're so inclined).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't you want accountability from elected officials?
Death threats and harassment isn't "accountability".
That's part and parcel of politics. Politics isn't nice.
Death threats and harassment are not "part and parcel" of politics. In a democracy, politics should be about persuasion, not intimidation.
Can you name any time in American politics where that has been true?
Are you arguing that intimidation is a legitimate political tactic?
Anonymous wrote:No you can't have school board meetings outside of the public eye. Here in Fairfax County our school board actually added religious holidays to the public school calendar which took away 15 days of learning. Who knows what other extreme policies they would implement with zero accountability.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't you want accountability from elected officials?
Death threats and harassment isn't "accountability".
That's part and parcel of politics. Politics isn't nice.
Death threats and harassment are not "part and parcel" of politics. In a democracy, politics should be about persuasion, not intimidation.
Can you name any time in American politics where that has been true?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why not just hold them in private or something?
Sure. Let's allow congress and state and local legislatures to do the same. We'll be North Korea in a decade.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't you want accountability from elected officials?
Death threats and harassment isn't "accountability".
That's part and parcel of politics. Politics isn't nice.
Bullsh1t. That’s illegal POS behavior.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why not just hold them in private or something?
Um, because the boards conduct public business subject to public open meetings laws.
yes, they'd have to change the rules about meetings, but I don't blame the thought. Some folks can't seem to control themselves. I wouldn't want to be a BOE member with all the threats and low pay.
While there have been some over the top responses, can you really blame the parents? Some B's of E are making terrible decisions and harming kids. It's only natural for parents to want to protect their kids.
yes.. what the BOE are doing does not threaten lives.
Some of the parents have threatened the BOE, egged their homes, slashed tires, etc.. That's insane. Great role models they are to their kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't you want accountability from elected officials?
Death threats and harassment isn't "accountability".
That's part and parcel of politics. Politics isn't nice.
Death threats and harassment are not "part and parcel" of politics. In a democracy, politics should be about persuasion, not intimidation.
Can you name any time in American politics where that has been true?
Are you arguing that intimidation is a legitimate political tactic?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Radicalized school boards are the problem.
Even San Francisco has finally admitted it.
The FFX and Loudoun boards are hopelessly radicalized. It is ridiculous how out of touch they really are.
The only solution is to vote out every last one of them.
"I don't like the FFX and Loudon school boards" would have been just as informative and required you to type fewer words.
There are people I disagree with; some I may dislike. The SB in Loudoun and FFX are next-level crazy (as in: insanely radical).
Far to the left of The Squad. They need to do the honorable thing and resign.
How on earth are they radically left? They've done nothing except make the divide between wealthy and poor school districts as big as ever, which is the usual conservative approach. And conservatives can't deny that, because I'm certain that no conservative is going to be voting for a candidate that supports real blending of poor and wealthy school districts.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't you want accountability from elected officials?
Death threats and harassment isn't "accountability".
That's part and parcel of politics. Politics isn't nice.
Death threats and harassment are not "part and parcel" of politics. In a democracy, politics should be about persuasion, not intimidation.
Can you name any time in American politics where that has been true?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn't you want accountability from elected officials?
Death threats and harassment isn't "accountability".
That's part and parcel of politics. Politics isn't nice.
Death threats and harassment are not "part and parcel" of politics. In a democracy, politics should be about persuasion, not intimidation.