Monday, January 31, 2005

Recall Blog Oops

The recall group's blog has retracted their comment about the BOE hiding the report.

They say:
Update: Oops. Our mistake. The document is still available at (Recall group blog)

Well, yes it is, isn't it?

Look, we're not here to make fun every time somebody makes a mistake. But here ya got a gang of conspiracy theorists who are trying to convince the world that the "gay agenda" is out to recruit public school students into its nefarious sodomistic nightmare by teaching them some simple, obvious facts about sexual orientation, and they go out on the Internet implying that the Board of Education is part of the scandalous plot to undermine all that is virtuous by concealing the One Document that contains the True Plan ...

... well, yeah, we make fun of that.

People, follow the link, read the document, make up your own mind.


Blogger War Diaries said...

Well, honestly, they should have taken the accusatory posting out, and probably they could have even avoid the apology, if they so wish...But leaving it up with the questioning and the rest...looks suspect to me.

January 31, 2005 5:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You two are new bloggers, aren't you?

Whenever I make a mistake on my blog, I leave it up with the correction in case people read the original item come back to it.

Not that there's really anything wrong with deleting it, as obviously someone decided later.

Yeesh. Mountains out of molehills around here.


February 01, 2005 2:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Look, we're not here to make fun every time somebody makes a mistake."

You people are kidding, right? Because that is ALL you do... if you are not making fun you are making sweeping generalizations or spewing personal attacks.

But the fact is that it IS currently very hard to locate that report on the BOE website -- if you search by name of the report you end up coming up with that darn gopher again. Seems to me it is buried right now deep in some 'meeting agenda' report, from the looks of the URL you came up with. So go fish Jim --


February 01, 2005 5:36 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

We have a link right here, and so do the recall folks... it's not hard to find.

February 01, 2005 6:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So you don't refute my original assertion, do you Jim dear?


February 01, 2005 7:37 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Not sure what "original assertion" you mean, MB. I'll take a guess it's the "you people are kidding" part?

I don't mean we don't make make fun, I mean I understand if somebody simply screws up. When they screw up though while trying to accuse somebody of something based on paranoid fantasies, especially when they screw up while trying to undermine my kid's education, well, sure, I'll make fun of them, no problem.

You may be able to back up the "sweeping generalizations" assertion, but well this is a blog, and we ain't got all day, youknowhatImean? Gotta cut to the bone quickly. If you want the details, look in the newspaper. But the "personal attack" business, mmm, naw, I don't think you get those points. There's lots and lots of nasty things we could say about people, but this really isn't personal. They seem like nice enough folks, they just need to keep their religious beliefs in the home and in their churches and out of the public schools.

See, I don't like being not-nice about this. But they have chosen to attack our school district, threatening to recall the school board, whining on the radio and in the newspapers about how it's going "too far" to tell students that some people are gay, bitching among themselves about the "sodomites" and the sinners and the "gay agenda." They can feel that way, and I am perfectly happy to ignore them, and in fact I have for my whole life. I'm fifty-something-million years old, and I've never had any fight with the puritan hypocrites of the world, as long as they mind their own business. But they want to force the rest of us to go along with them, and that's where I start getting not-so-nice.

February 01, 2005 9:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My, a little defensive I'd say Jim. How in the world do you know what they are 'bitching among themselves" about? Seems to me they have publicly advocated for teaching tolerance and acceptance (see their webite at and about teaching about homosexuality in a repsonsible way. Who are YOU to say that this is the most perfect form of a sex-ed curriculum that the BOE could come up with? Why can't parents who don't agree with you advocate for change? This is America, after all.

What makes you such an expert on homosexual behavior and transgenderism? Huh Jim?


February 02, 2005 7:48 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

How in the world do you know what they are "bitching among themselves" about?I went to their meeting. I heard them. I read their message board. "Bitching" is a nice word, "raving" is more accurate.

Why can't parents who don't agree with you advocate for change?There was a change. A citizen's advisory committee met for years, discussing this. The "ex-gay" crowd brought their materials and showed them to everybody. The religious right was there, the Catholics, the Mormons, the evangelists. The freakin' Daughters of the American Revolution had somebody there! Parents Against Ex-Rated Books had somebody on the committee, and not only them, but Parents Against Pornography. They all had their say, and when it came down to a vote a moderate curriculum was proposed.

There is a process, a nice, fair process. People talk, people present literature and ideas, people decide. They follow Robert's Rules of Order. The Board asks for clarification or changes, and there is more discussion. Finally, the Board votes -- in this case the vote was unanimous. But now those who participated in the process but didn't get their way want to insist that it was unfair. Bull-oney.

What makes you such an expert on homosexual behavior and transgenderism?None of this has to do with being an expert on anything. People are people, and it's none of my business, or yours, who they are attracted to. I know, as well as you do, that some people prefer individuals of their own sex. That's not too much to tell our kids, if they're learning about sexuality in the public school. Some weirdos think that if kids learn that some people are gay, it will make them gay themselves -- look at yesterday's "risky" post on the recall group's blog. That's crazy. Kids should be taught the facts. If their parents want them to hate some group of people, then they can teach them that at home.


February 02, 2005 10:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its amusing arguing with you Jim. You get more and more outrageous! Hate indeed. No sir, it is you who are showing your intolerance and hatred.

February 02, 2005 4:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've looked at this site, the MPCS (or whatever) Curriculum site, and the school board's site.

This is the only one that seems to resort to name-calling and slander.


February 02, 2005 5:23 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Nice toss. I am not tolerant of intolerance, no, I don't think that works. Before, when there were bigots who just talked among themselves, it was not my problem, and I didn't get involved in trying to change it. Really, why would I care?

But you know full well, the whole point of this "recall the school board" business is that these people think being gay is satanic and evil, and they want to do anything they can to stomp it out. They talk about families -- well, they should be concerned with divorce,then, or how about adultery? No, they don't care about "the family," they just hate gay people. Well, OK, maybe they've always been that way, and it wasn't any of my business, but now, they want to take their twisted beliefs and force the school district to go along with them.

So now, yes, I have to act. I am not tolerant of their intolerance. I am a mellow fellow, but I will not let these ignorant people impact my life in any way.

February 02, 2005 5:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, Jim -

Do you believe that we should establish unisex bathrooms in highschools to accomodate trans-sexual 13-17 year olds ?

Do you believe that it is okay to cite religous views supporting homosexuality and leave out the ones that don't ? I mean, if we are talking fair and balanced here, you either don't cite religon at all, or if you do you cite both sides.

Do you think it is okay to state that sexual orientation cannot be changed - when there are whole groups (EX-GAYS) to refute that claim ?

What part of the universe are you from that you can possibly try to justify this as a fair and balanced discussion of homosexuality ? The above statements all come from the "fair and balanced" teacher resources....

February 11, 2005 6:02 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home