Skip to comments.Arrested father had point to make Disputed school's lesson on "diversity"
Posted on 04/29/2005 1:16:06 AM PDT by ninonitti
click here to read article
YES, we need to protect all the children, not just our own!!
Would you take me through that step by step? I don't get it. To me it seems that you are saying something like,"If you're not happy with the way the election turned out, take it out on the people who work for the government you elected. Don't spend your time working the political system, just punish those on the winning side." And, as I say, I don't see the difference between that and an activist judge who "discovers" womething in our constitution which, mirabile dictu, looks just like himself, because he is using the constitution as a mirror.
I make an audio recording of EVERY interaction with any government employee. That alone has saved me a couple speeding tickets. (I "accidentally" left my digital dictation machine running.) I look forward to the day when people can make video recordings just as conveniently.
I can't say enough what a GREAT practice this is! Keep records. Real time recordings are wonderful assets. Keep on doing it, and tell your friends!
In an ideal world, you would be right.
In a world where I don't have the clout of a PPU or other public sector employees union, and I can't buy some laws, a person has to improvise.
Practical politics are difficult, expensive, and time-consuming. (And just to be clear. I do not belong to any law enforcement union. They mostly make me wanna puke.)
If we do things your way (IF I understand you, and I maybe I don't) we will be working AWAY from police professionalism and toward a spoils system. Individual LEOs will only work as LEO when the legislature, executive, and (especially)judiciary are dominated by people with whom they agree. Every change of administration will mean that a bunch of LEO's will quit since they are in your view, rightly held hostage to the public's reaction to their lawful execution of lawful orders lawfully given blah blah blah... If I have to pay for something with which you disagree by putting my family's safety and financial security on the table (more than it already is)I'm going to make damn sure it's something I agree with.
When a judge makes a conviction sometimes it is my duty to book, cuff, search, and lock up the convict. Are you REALLY saying that when I disagree with the judge I should refuse to do that? And that when YOU disagree with the judge, if I do my duty I should have my name and address published so that people who disagree with the judge can call me up at Zero dark thirty to make their feelings known and to offer hypotheses as to the canine portion of my genetic heritage and possibly inappropriate relations between me and my sainted mother?
Yesterday I was at a trial where a pissy little snot of a 19 year old was tried for underage possession of alcohol, possession of marijuana, driving a vehicle with expired registration and defective equipment, driving under the affluence of inkahol, and resisting arrest. Judging by the evidence and his demeanor, I think the little twerp should have spent the weekend in the pokey -- a little wakey wakey call for him.
If I am NOT to enforce the laws or judgements with which I disagree when they are too harsh, do I at least get to lock this little snot-head up because I think the judge was too lenient?
Woah! I could get to like this! (No, not really. Jail is nasty.)
You are too optimistic about professionalism and about whether we do not have a bought government. If we really had clean representative government and professional law enforcement, you would be entirely in the right.
Can you specify the actual statute he was arrested for before commenting on whether the LEOs handled it correctly or not. The MA statutes I've read don't indicate a crime on his part.
Do I take it correctly that you think the only recourse is little bitty acts of resistance here and there? The government(s) is/are too far gone for political change, and revolution is too bloody, so "it is our right, it is our duty" to break our oaths and the law, both for citizens and for LEO's?
THAT is one tough call! It seems you are talking about revolution by attrition or merely a kind of crypto rebellious state, but in either ase we are beyond civil dialogue and you are pretty much stuck with viewing me as a soldier for the bad guys.
It's interesting. I became an LEO pretty much to get as close as I could to defending my community against terrorism. All the other stuff is the tarrif I pay on getting asmuch training and info as I can on that matter.
We live outside of Tulsa, Oklahoma. We have one son homeschooled, and three kids in public school. A majority of the teachers are pretty conservative culturally, and maybe up to half are Christians. I have done substitute teaching in a variety of schools, and have seen a range of high schools that goes--I'm not really exaggerating--from a college-level, well-behaved Calculus class, down to a gangster-rap, I-don't-know-nothin', lewd-talking, girls-never-blush-cuz-they've-been-hearing-all-that-obscene-stuff-all-their-lives inner-city school.
Thanks. I think the deciding factor from what I've gleaned so far is that the closer to cities you get, the worse the schools (culturally and academically). I'll be looking for something a bit more rural.
Basically yes. You may live in a small town with a government that is close to the people, and a truly professional, non-union PD with excellent leadership, but most people don't.
"A kind of crypto rebellious state" was pretty much the state of the Soviet Empire until its fall. Everyone except for a small number of true believers resisted by monkeywrenching a hopelessly corrupt system, or, at least, not giving a damn. That isn't exactly how I see things happening here, but analogous.
Basically what I am saying is that both ends of the spectrum are wrong: The pollyannas want us to shut up and vote for politicians that are bought by interests not our own. The yahoos want to go straight for the ammo box.
The middle ground is, unfortunately, messy. But destroying the morale of corrupt officials is a lot less messy than a shooting war, and a lot more likely to work.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think laws against trespass are fairly straightforward just about everywhere. When you are asked repeatedly to leave, and you don't, you're trespassing. Just because he was invited doesn't mean he can stay as long as he likes.
However, nor does the principal's convenience define "trespassing." Was there a set time limit? A written policy? Did he attempt to stay beyond the time the building is available for use?
Police should ask a few questions before whipping out the cuffs.
eno, I'm fairly well running out of gas on this subject. But I think if you are asked to leave a property and you are still there after two hours of negotiating with the police, they have every right to cart you off for trespass.
There are places a person can remain by right. Or does every police command have the force of law?
It is quote possible the principal and police were in the wrong here. If so, the police should have told the principal it does not rise to a police matter.
> Manditory gay training for kids
Did you even read the article? This book is about family structure, not
homosexual sex or heterosexual sex or any sex. I am a parent of a kindergartener at Estabrook School, and there are several kids from two gay-parent headed families there. This book isn't about indoctrination; it's a helpful way for parents to discuss these issues with their kids AT HOME.
Parker's kid is going to see gay married families just waiting for the bus, or
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.