Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He had 2 minutes. Period. After he made his point, he could have used his rights via other venues. FB and Twitter seem to be the way to go now to get viewpoints picked up by media, then to the public.
And this "two minute rule"? Geesh, the First Amendment didn't say that you were guaranteed two minutes to speak your mind and sit down. It says you are guaranteed a right to protest, to address your grievances with government, to speak your mind. Honestly, where do people come up with this stuff?
The girl wasn't being sexualised, for fucks sake. Its a god damned book. What about the numerous sex scenes in the Bible?
And this "two minute rule"? Geesh, the First Amendment didn't say that you were guaranteed two minutes to speak your mind and sit down. It says you are guaranteed a right to protest, to address your grievances with government, to speak your mind. Honestly, where do people come up with this stuff?
The first amendment does not give you a right to disrupt a meeting.
All speakers were allotted two minutes. Crazy Dad decided that, heck, that wasn't good enough for him, and even though two minutes was more than enough time to make a point (He really didn't have one).
And this "two minute rule"? Geesh, the First Amendment didn't say that you were guaranteed two minutes to speak your mind and sit down. It says you are guaranteed a right to protest, to address your grievances with government, to speak your mind. Honestly, where do people come up with this stuff?
The first amendment does not give you a right to disrupt a meeting.
All speakers were allotted two minutes. Crazy Dad decided that, heck, that wasn't good enough for him, and even though two minutes was more than enough time to make a point (He really didn't have one).
I would have pissed on the book at the meeting and given them another charge of misconduct.
Amazing isn't it.
The girl wasn't being sexualised, for fucks sake. Its a god damned book. What about the numerous sex scenes in the Bible?
It's inappropriate material. So why sponsor trash in the books...............This shouldn't even be an issue at all.
But alas, to HELL WITH THE PARENTS.........The School Board Rules............
America has gone to hell and a handbag.
The first amendment does not give you a right to disrupt a meeting.
All speakers were allotted two minutes. Crazy Dad decided that, heck, that wasn't good enough for him, and even though two minutes was more than enough time to make a point (He really didn't have one).
I would have pissed on the book at the meeting and given them another charge of misconduct.
Amazing isn't it.
i'm sure you would have, but we've already established you have mental problems.
I would have pissed on the book at the meeting and given them another charge of misconduct.
Amazing isn't it.
i'm sure you would have, but we've already established you have mental problems.
You are a mental midget if you defend this book and it's contents in the class room.
i'm sure you would have, but we've already established you have mental problems.
You are a mental midget if you defend this book and it's contents in the class room.
I bet the father was only opposed to it because he felt it promoted pre marital sex.
Am I right?
Idiotic fucking conservatives.
[
As a parent, we don't need to walk lock and step with the system on this one. If it's inappropriate then it shouldn't be used. He has the right to protest to the School Board over his concerns..................
And if he goes past the allotted protest time, he gets arrested.............You don't see the problem with that..................Their response was basically shut the hell up about it and go to jail.............Same as the Liberal bone heads on this thread.
You are a mental midget if you defend this book and it's contents in the class room.
I bet the father was only opposed to it because he felt it promoted pre marital sex.
Am I right?
Idiotic fucking conservatives.
As a parent, we don't need to walk lock and step with the system on this one. If it's inappropriate then it shouldn't be used. He has the right to protest to the School Board over his concerns..................
And if he goes past the allotted protest time, he gets arrested.............You don't see the problem with that..................Their response was basically shut the hell up about it and go to jail.............Same as the Liberal bone heads on this thread.
I read the article and the page he quoted yesterday Noomi...........
And again, they were standing by to arrest him for addressing his concern over the book.
and again, he has a whole 2 minutes to say it, on which most of the time was taken to read the page of concern.
I read the article and the page he quoted yesterday Noomi...........
And again, they were standing by to arrest him for addressing his concern over the book.
and again, he has a whole 2 minutes to say it, on which most of the time was taken to read the page of concern.
I read the article and the page he quoted yesterday Noomi...........
And again, they were standing by to arrest him for addressing his concern over the book.
and again, he has a whole 2 minutes to say it, on which most of the time was taken to read the page of concern.
It takes him two minutes to read a page?
Did someone need to help him with the big words?
Stifling dissent through police-state tactics
Secondly, Mr. Baer asked the principal present to read page 313 of the book to give those in attendance the reasons for which he was voicing his objections. After all, not everyone there was aware of the contents of the book. The principal refused as did every other board member, calling it “inappropriate.” Mr. Baer attempted to compel the board members to answer legitimate questions about the class assignment and methods, but they refused, asserting they would only allow the attendees two minutes worth of comments to be put on record. As the video shows, it was an exasperating exercise in futility for Mr. Baer to seek redress in this venue to which he was directed.
Mr. Baer ultimately exceeded his two minutes by 18 seconds, an obviously egregious offense to the royalty of the Gilford School District. After sternly warning Mr. Baer that his time was up and they would have no part in addressing his concerns, he dutifully sat down.
At this point, a man positioned behind Mr. Baer spoke up and glowingly described how the book actually prompted a frank family discussion about the subject matter of the book, taking a tone that seemed to paint Mr. Baer as an advocate of censorship and book banning, which is far from the truth or Mr. Baer’s intent. In response to this false accusation and mischaracterization, Mr. Baer verbally dissented. He calmly defended himself against these public accusations, attempting to set the public record straight.
It was as a result of this egregious offense, one that caused Mr. Baer to add another 30 seconds or so onto his unauthorized 18 seconds beyond the allotted 2 minutes that caused the school board to react - and react with prejudice.
I read the article and the page he quoted yesterday Noomi...........
And again, they were standing by to arrest him for addressing his concern over the book.
and again, he has a whole 2 minutes to say it, on which most of the time was taken to read the page of concern.
It takes him two minutes to read a page?
Did someone need to help him with the big words?
I bet he blushed and stuttered over the rude words.
Stifling dissent through police-state tactics
Secondly, Mr. Baer asked the principal present to read page 313 of the book to give those in attendance the reasons for which he was voicing his objections. After all, not everyone there was aware of the contents of the book. The principal refused as did every other board member, calling it inappropriate. Mr. Baer attempted to compel the board members to answer legitimate questions about the class assignment and methods, but they refused, asserting they would only allow the attendees two minutes worth of comments to be put on record. As the video shows, it was an exasperating exercise in futility for Mr. Baer to seek redress in this venue to which he was directed.
Mr. Baer ultimately exceeded his two minutes by 18 seconds, an obviously egregious offense to the royalty of the Gilford School District. After sternly warning Mr. Baer that his time was up and they would have no part in addressing his concerns, he dutifully sat down.
At this point, a man positioned behind Mr. Baer spoke up and glowingly described how the book actually prompted a frank family discussion about the subject matter of the book, taking a tone that seemed to paint Mr. Baer as an advocate of censorship and book banning, which is far from the truth or Mr. Baers intent. In response to this false accusation and mischaracterization, Mr. Baer verbally dissented. He calmly defended himself against these public accusations, attempting to set the public record straight.
It was as a result of this egregious offense, one that caused Mr. Baer to add another 30 seconds or so onto his unauthorized 18 seconds beyond the allotted 2 minutes that caused the school board to react - and react with prejudice.
Page 313 is on the site posted at the bottom of the article for all to see. Again, I read about it yesterday but didn't post it up.
You may read the page in question to determine if it's appropriate or not. But please only comment for 2 minutes..........Do not go over by a whole 18 seconds, or say anything if someone else calls you out in the meeting and speak another 30 seconds.
This is Fing Ridiculous.
Stifling dissent through police-state tactics
Secondly, Mr. Baer asked the principal present to read page 313 of the book to give those in attendance the reasons for which he was voicing his objections. After all, not everyone there was aware of the contents of the book. The principal refused as did every other board member, calling it inappropriate. Mr. Baer attempted to compel the board members to answer legitimate questions about the class assignment and methods, but they refused, asserting they would only allow the attendees two minutes worth of comments to be put on record. As the video shows, it was an exasperating exercise in futility for Mr. Baer to seek redress in this venue to which he was directed.
Mr. Baer ultimately exceeded his two minutes by 18 seconds, an obviously egregious offense to the royalty of the Gilford School District. After sternly warning Mr. Baer that his time was up and they would have no part in addressing his concerns, he dutifully sat down.
At this point, a man positioned behind Mr. Baer spoke up and glowingly described how the book actually prompted a frank family discussion about the subject matter of the book, taking a tone that seemed to paint Mr. Baer as an advocate of censorship and book banning, which is far from the truth or Mr. Baers intent. In response to this false accusation and mischaracterization, Mr. Baer verbally dissented. He calmly defended himself against these public accusations, attempting to set the public record straight.
It was as a result of this egregious offense, one that caused Mr. Baer to add another 30 seconds or so onto his unauthorized 18 seconds beyond the allotted 2 minutes that caused the school board to react - and react with prejudice.
Page 313 is on the site posted at the bottom of the article for all to see. Again, I read about it yesterday but didn't post it up.
You may read the page in question to determine if it's appropriate or not. But please only comment for 2 minutes..........Do not go over by a whole 18 seconds, or say anything if someone else calls you out in the meeting and speak another 30 seconds.
This is Fing Ridiculous.
I have read the entire book and I can say that the passage is relevant to the story, whether you believe it or not. The father IS an advocate for censorship. He says he isn't but wants the book banned?
He's a dickhead.
