School Board Candidate Schaerr Has Gaps in Her Resume
Tuesday we'll be having primary elections in Montgomery County, including for school board, and I thought I should point out one of the candidates in District 5 whose anti-LGBT beliefs, actions, and associations are not exactly clear from her campaign documentation.
Here's what Martha Schaerr says on her campaign website:
She sounds like a nice lady, a mom, been in the county for a long time. She has an "Issues" page on her site with the heading "Empowering students, parents, teachers and taxpayers" and some paragraphs about how she would do that. And who could be against empowering people?
Since the Board of Education is nonpartisan, she is not obligated to mention that, as the Family Leader Network site says, "She is currently the Magruder High School PTSA president and president of Citizens for Traditional Families. She served as a legislative district chair for the 2004 Bush Re-election Campaign and is currently a leader in the Montgomery County GOP."
You might wonder why is she mentioned on the Family Leader Network site. She is mentioned there because she is on the Board of Directors of that organization.
Martha Schaerr does not mention in her campaign information that she is on the Board of an organization that, along with the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum and PFOX, sued the Montgomery County Public School District in 2007 to stop the new sex-ed curriculum, which was going to introduce the topic of sexual orientation for the first time in our county. The group also went to the state school board to block the curriculum -- they have cost MoCo taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars is legal fees.
How do you run for school board and not tell people you're on the Board of Directors (and your husband is Chairman of the Board) of a group that sued the school district?
Ms. Schaerr was the point person for the Family Leader Network's campaign to train "board monitors" to watch school boards across the country for any signs of LGBT-affirming behaviors. An online newsletter says:
She is the President of Citizens for Traditional Families, a group that exists to oppose same-sex marriages. In one court brief they define themselves in this way:
Martha Schaerr's name may sound vaguely familiar to Vigilance readers. In 2007 she tried to pull a fast one and we caught her at it. As president of the Magruder PTSA, she placed this notice in a newsletter to parents:
In fact, Ms. Schaerr only invited committee member Ruth Jacobs, who was the representative of the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum and opposed everything sensible about the curriculum. Dr. Jacobs is now president of the anti-transgender group known as the shower-nuts, the Citizens for Responsible Government, she's the one who sent out the spurious press release about Duchy Trachtenberg this week. Other members of the citizens advisory committee found out about it and almost all of them ended up attending the meeting; Dr. Jacobs gave one of her trademarked speeches equating gay people with anal sex and AIDS and a couple of other committee members spoke as well. I blogged about it HERE.
I am mentioning this because Ms. Schaerr has left important gaps in her resume. It may be that you are one of those who believes that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people deserve less than the rest of us, maybe you support policies that make life harder for them. In that case, you want to be sure to put an X next to her name for District 5 Board of Education when you vote in the Montgomery County primaries next Tuesday.
As far as I know, none of her campaign materials reflect her anti-gay activism, her role in the Republican Party, her leadership positions in the Family Leader Network and Citizens for Traditional Families, there is no mention of the several lawsuits her group filed to stop the MCPS sex-ed curriculum, or the briefs her other group filed to oppose marriage equality. If you don't like gay people, I recommend you vote for Martha Schaerr Tuesday. I understand there are four candidates in the race, the top two winners will face each other in the general election in November.
Here's what Martha Schaerr says on her campaign website:
My name is Martha Schaerr and I am running to empower students, parents, teachers and taxpayers as the District 5 representative on the Montgomery County Public Schools Board of Education.
I have lived in Montgomery County for 25 years and raised my seven children here, five of whom graduated from Montgomery County Public Schools and two of whom are still students at MCPS. I am grateful to MCPS and the caring, hardworking teachers and other staff members who gave my children a good education. I believe there is more we can do to improve our schools.
I’ve been involved in PTAs at every level for 20 years, serving in nearly every capacity including two years as the president of Magruder High School PTSA. I’ve sat on multiple school improvement planning committees, helping to formulate goals for future progress. I also serve on the Citizen’s Advisory Board of the Regional Institute for Children and Adolescents, which serves students with serious emotional challenges.
She sounds like a nice lady, a mom, been in the county for a long time. She has an "Issues" page on her site with the heading "Empowering students, parents, teachers and taxpayers" and some paragraphs about how she would do that. And who could be against empowering people?
Since the Board of Education is nonpartisan, she is not obligated to mention that, as the Family Leader Network site says, "She is currently the Magruder High School PTSA president and president of Citizens for Traditional Families. She served as a legislative district chair for the 2004 Bush Re-election Campaign and is currently a leader in the Montgomery County GOP."
You might wonder why is she mentioned on the Family Leader Network site. She is mentioned there because she is on the Board of Directors of that organization.
Martha Schaerr does not mention in her campaign information that she is on the Board of an organization that, along with the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum and PFOX, sued the Montgomery County Public School District in 2007 to stop the new sex-ed curriculum, which was going to introduce the topic of sexual orientation for the first time in our county. The group also went to the state school board to block the curriculum -- they have cost MoCo taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars is legal fees.
How do you run for school board and not tell people you're on the Board of Directors (and your husband is Chairman of the Board) of a group that sued the school district?
Ms. Schaerr was the point person for the Family Leader Network's campaign to train "board monitors" to watch school boards across the country for any signs of LGBT-affirming behaviors. An online newsletter says:
...One of the goals of Family Leader California is to have a school board monitor in each of the 1,011 school districts in California. As stated in the school board monitor document from Family Leader, "Several organizations like GLSEN, PFLAG, GSA HRC and SIECUS, who promote the normalcy of homosexuality and "comprehensive" sex education, are aggressively pushing their agenda into schools under the banners of tolerance, equality and safety. More and more schools are caving into pressure from these and other organizations who strive to indoctrinate children and youth into lifestyles and acts that are dangerous to their physical, mental and emotional health"...
... Take Action!! Many of you are already active and involved in your child's school. Would you consider dedicating one year to being a school monitor in place of another volunteer position that is worthy, but perhaps not as critical to children's needs as school monitoring is at this time? If you are interested, please contact Martha Schaerr at mschaerr@yahoo.com . Martha is helping to train Family Leader school board monitors nationwide.
She is the President of Citizens for Traditional Families, a group that exists to oppose same-sex marriages. In one court brief they define themselves in this way:
Citizens for Traditional Marriage (CTF) filed an amicus brief with the Circuit Court in this case. CTF is a Maryland-based citizens’ organization that promotes the welfare of families and children. It does this by working to preserve and strengthen the vital social institution of man/woman marriage. CTF believes that a decision redefining marriage in Maryland will change the social institution of marriage in ways that will prevent the institution from performing its vital functions, with consequent harm to society and, particularly, children.
Martha Schaerr's name may sound vaguely familiar to Vigilance readers. In 2007 she tried to pull a fast one and we caught her at it. As president of the Magruder PTSA, she placed this notice in a newsletter to parents:
Our February 20 PTSA meeting will be a forum on the Family Life Curriculum. I have invited our health teachers and members of the Citizens Advisory Committee to present their thoughts on the curriculum.
In fact, Ms. Schaerr only invited committee member Ruth Jacobs, who was the representative of the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum and opposed everything sensible about the curriculum. Dr. Jacobs is now president of the anti-transgender group known as the shower-nuts, the Citizens for Responsible Government, she's the one who sent out the spurious press release about Duchy Trachtenberg this week. Other members of the citizens advisory committee found out about it and almost all of them ended up attending the meeting; Dr. Jacobs gave one of her trademarked speeches equating gay people with anal sex and AIDS and a couple of other committee members spoke as well. I blogged about it HERE.
I am mentioning this because Ms. Schaerr has left important gaps in her resume. It may be that you are one of those who believes that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people deserve less than the rest of us, maybe you support policies that make life harder for them. In that case, you want to be sure to put an X next to her name for District 5 Board of Education when you vote in the Montgomery County primaries next Tuesday.
As far as I know, none of her campaign materials reflect her anti-gay activism, her role in the Republican Party, her leadership positions in the Family Leader Network and Citizens for Traditional Families, there is no mention of the several lawsuits her group filed to stop the MCPS sex-ed curriculum, or the briefs her other group filed to oppose marriage equality. If you don't like gay people, I recommend you vote for Martha Schaerr Tuesday. I understand there are four candidates in the race, the top two winners will face each other in the general election in November.
posted by JimK at 6:32 AM
30 Comments:
she's got my vote
thanks for bringing her to our attention
Thanks, Jim.
Of course she's got your vote. Now everybody can see how much you CRG types like candidates who do the Nixonian cover up!
Thanks for exposing the secrets on "the tapes," Jim!
"Of course she's got your vote. Now everybody can see how much you CRG types like candidates who do the Nixonian cover up!"
not emphasizing her Republican activities in the most liberal county in America?
despicable
you'd never see Democrats do something like that
you'd never see them disassociate themselves from Obama and Pelosi and Reid and taxing the rich just to get elected
oh, wait a minute
never mind
"With a bruising election likely ahead of them and the economy proving resistant to any quick fixes, nearly two dozen moderate Democrats are pushing for a proposal on the expiring Bush tax cuts that was all-but-unthinkable to liberals a year ago -- extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
The number of Democrats proposing the idea is more than enough to scuttle President Obama's campaign promise to allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire for individuals making more than $200,000 and for families making more than $250,000.
At least a dozen House Democrats, several Democratic candidates and four Democratic senators -- Evan Bayh of Indiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Kent Conrad of North Dakota -- have said they won't go along with the president's plan to allow the cuts to expire for the wealthiest Americans."
NOT ONLY ARE DEMS TRYING TO AVOID ANY ASSOCIATION WITH OBAMA, PELOSI, REID OR TAX HIKES.
THERE ARE ALSO AVOIDING ANY DISCUSSION OF THEIR VOTE APPROVING OBAMACARE.
THAT'S RIGHT. THE HEALTHCARE "REFORMS" THAT TTF LIKES SO MUCH IS BEING SHUNNED BY MOST OF THOSE WHO VOTED TO APPROVE IT.
SOME OF THEM ARE EVEN PUSHING THEIR PLANS TO REPEAL PARTS OF IT.
TALK ABOUT GAPS IN THE RESUME...
that's pretty funny considering that Obama considers health care his crowning achievement
the liberal dream of a century finally fulfilled
Obama has a gap in his abilities:
"WASHINGTON (Sept. 10) -- President Barack Obama conceded Friday that progress in the U.S. economy "has been painfully slow" and many voters in November's elections may blame him.
Facing a rising jobless rate, Obama told a White House news conference: "We're not there yet. And that means people are frustrated and why people are angry."
"Because I am president, and the Democrats have control of the House and Senate, it's understandable that people are saying, 'What have you done?'"
The president, who also is the leader of the Democratic Party, spent much of his appearance before cameras on the defensive, underscoring his frustration in dealing with the economy."
"she's the one who sent out the spurious press release about Duchy Trachtenberg this week"
really not "spurious" considering Duchy won't answer any question
she needs to overcome her inner Nixon
Duchy was apparently accused of using contributions for her own personal expenses
the taxpayers need to know how the allegation was resolved
LOLOL You all really ought to get your heads out of those dark places you keep them in so you can keep up with the changes occurring every day.
"Stocks rose on Thursday as stronger-than-expected jobs and trade data helped lift optimism about the economic recovery.
Financials, hit hard in the August downturn, were among top gainers as new U.S. claims for unemployment benefits fell to a two-month low, while the trade deficit narrowed sharply in July. JP Morgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) rose 2.5 percent to $40.10.
"The recovery is not falling apart and continued growth is the most likely outcome," said Zach Pandl, economist at Nomura Securities International in New York. "This is generally a bond negative and positive for stock prices."
However, defensive sectors such as healthcare, utilities and telecommunications services were also among top gainers in a sign investors remain cautious. The S&P healthcare index .GSPA rose 1.2 percent, with Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) up 1.3 percent to $16.77.
It's intriguing that as early as two weeks ago the economic calendar was working in the wrong direction. All we could talk about was a double dip. That has gone the way of the dodo bird now."
What will you GOTP naysayers do with all this good news!?!
sounds promising but I doubt it's in time to help Dems
they're in deep trouble as long as millions are out of work and with the free time to go vote about it in November
"You all really ought to get your heads out of those dark places"
you mean like teachthefacts.org?
Aha...just as was to be expected - the revival of the so-called "stealth candidates" tactic, utilized by several candidates for the B.O.E. about 15 years ago. The tactic failed then, as it will now, because the public will reject the hidden agenda of these candidates.
One has to wonder about the ethics and morals of a small group of grouches and nay-sayers who insist, over and over and over, on foisting their rejected ideas on the citizens of Montgomery County.
the Apple Ballot is like the politic machine of Mayor Daley in 1968
candidates don't even bother with the voters but instead put more energy into appeasing the teachers' union
the day of the Apple Ballot are drawing to an end
Look at those sour grapes!
Obviously Ms. Steathcandidate did not get herself on the Apple Ballot!
2010 MCEA Apple Ballot
http://mcea.nea.org/action/election2010.php
"Anonymous:
I would suggest that you not embarrass yourself further by exhibiting your ignorance of the process involved with developing the Apple Ballot.
It's easy to make wild accusations and inaccurate assumptions, especially when you so often express your distaste of teachers in M.C.P.S. and lack evidence of your allegations. Wild rants such as" "the Apple Ballot is like the politic (sic.) machine of Mayor Daley in 1968
and "candidates...appeasing the teachers union" only reinforce readers' opinions about your ignorance.
Unless you know what you are talking about and can give some specific examples of this "appeasement" I think you owe an apology to the unusually fine candidates in Montgomery County who are running for election in November.
Have you ever considered offering yourself as a candidate for public scrutiny and evaluation of your positions and experience? I doubt it...you wouldn't pass the test.
Washinton Post, February 5, 2010:
"MOST CANDIDATES for local office in Montgomery County covet the endorsement of the county teachers union more than any other, and all of them know the drill: Appear at union events, fill out the union questionnaire, submit to the union interview. The union, representing 11,000 teachers, helpfully provides a road map to candidates seeking its blessing, including 11 criteria spelled out in painstaking detail online. Just one thing is missing from this handy guide: Candidates who receive the union's stamp of approval are also then expected to pay.
As far as we know, this arrangement is unique; in elections elsewhere, unions and other special interests contribute to candidates, not vice versa. But such is the overweening power of the teachers union in Montgomery that the usual rules are turned upside down. And it's no coincidence that the union's toxic influence in local elections is matched by its success in squeezing unaffordable concessions from the county in contract negotiations -- at taxpayers' expense.
In the latest elections for the Montgomery County Council, in 2006, most candidates on the union-approved (and trademarked) "Apple Ballot" coughed up the maximum contribution allowed by state law, $6,000, to a PAC run by the Montgomery County Education Association, as the teachers union is known. Union-backed candidates for the Board of Education also paid handsomely. Supposedly, these funds covered the cost of the union's mailings to constituents and other activities on behalf of its anointed candidates -- although there is no real accounting on a campaign-by-campaign basis. In theory, these contributions are voluntary. In fact, several sources told us that the MCEA's chief political strategist, Jon Gerson, made it clear that he expected candidates, once endorsed, to pay what they "owed" for the union's campaign on their behalf. One candidate, asked to explain the decision to pay, answered concisely: "Fear."
This distorts and perverts the political process. A case in point is Nancy Floreen, the current County Council president, who suggested, during a budget crunch in 2003, that the union make some concessions on compensation. That probably cost her the MCEA endorsement in the 2006 primaries, in which she barely managed to retain her council seat. This year, facing reelection and even more dire budgetary circumstances, Ms. Floreen has been quiet as a mouse on the subject of union concessions, even though negotiations on a new contract for teachers are underway.
And no wonder. In addition to its multiple and targeted mailings in the last elections, the MCEA planted yard signs, bought advertising on the radio and at Metro stations and deployed teachers to every key county polling station, where they handed voters sample "Apple Ballots" of endorsed candidates bearing the words "Teacher Recommended." Of the 47 "Apple Ballot" candidates in 2006, 42 won their races for county and state legislative offices."
"Some MCEA-backed candidates, and the union, portray this as a win-win arrangement whereby teachers and the candidates who support them help one another out. As Mr. Gerson put it to us: "Everybody would like to do this, and others have said they'd like to try, but what you have to have is a product that someone says they'd like to invest in."
Teachers are a bedrock of any community, and they deserve good salaries and benefits for doing a tough and important job. The problem in Montgomery is not its teachers. Rather, it is that the MCEA, the largest union in the county, is in effect hiring its own bosses -- members of the school board, who vote on the teachers' contract, and County Council members, who approve the overall county budget -- and is getting paid for it in the bargain. This twisted system has fueled skyrocketing payroll costs -- including a 23 percent pay raise for a typical teacher over the past three years, plus extraordinary health and retirement benefits -- even as private-sector wages have stagnated.
Most elected officials, too fearful of the union to object, rubber-stamp the teachers' contract and the county budget, thereby repaying the union for its backing. Other big public employees unions in the county, jealous at the terms extracted by the MCEA, use the teachers' contract as a benchmark for their own negotiations, creating a self-perpetuating spiral of unaffordable concessions by the county. Little wonder that the county is facing staggering deficits -- $600 million on a budget of $4.3 billion in the fiscal year starting this summer. And it's no surprise either that despite the county's severe budget problems, the MCEA is still demanding raises in the current contract negotiations. As the teachers union gears up to make endorsements in this fall's elections, county taxpayers should clutch their wallets tightly."
Washington Post, February 12, 2010
"MONTGOMERY COUNTY schools are among the best in the nation, a point of pride for the community and a springboard for their students. The system's teachers -- well qualified, professional and highly committed -- are its driving engine. That's why the heavy-handed tactics and political thuggery of the union that represents them do a disservice not only to the county and its much-admired school system but to the teachers themselves.
As we noted on this page last week, the union, known as the Montgomery County Education Association, which represents 11,000 teachers, has increasingly played the part of kingmaker in races for local state legislative seats. Starting in 2006, it embarked on a policy of soliciting "contributions" from the candidates it endorsed on its influential "Apple Ballot." These contributions, often up to the state limit of $6,000, are said to be voluntary, and are meant to defray the cost of the union's mailings and other campaign materials.
Some candidates told us the mailings were worth it. Others said they felt compelled to pay, for fear of incurring the union's wrath, and a few who ran, or thought about running, said the union sought to intimidate them in various ways. A number of officials, including some who paid the union and some who did not, told us they saw the "contributions" as shakedowns, pure and simple. "I felt it was creepy then, and I still feel that way now," said one person subjected to the union's aggressive bid for funds.
Something is seriously amiss when a union acts in this way even as it represents a group of public employees as highly regarded as Montgomery's teachers. And when elected officials, who in principle are responsible for overseeing county and school finances, including employee pay and benefits, feel intimidated by the tactics of the union representing teachers, that's a sign that democratic processes have been turned upside down. In no other county in Maryland -- including others with top-flight schools, every bit the equal of Montgomery's -- does the teachers union exercise such lopsided power, let alone compel candidates, once endorsed, to pay for its political support. This is an instance of a single special-interest group running amok.
The Maryland State Education Association, of which the MCEA is a local affiliate, confirmed that no other local chapters follow a similar practice.
Unsurprisingly, the MCEA, backed by its anointed candidates on the Montgomery County Council, the county school board and the local delegation to the state legislature, has been able to squeeze enormous concessions from the school system in past contract negotiations. Over the past three years, the salary of a typical teacher with 10 years of experience has risen by 23 percent. Had it not been for the county's budget crunch last year, which persuaded the union to forgo part of the scheduled 2009 raise, that increase would have been closer to 30 percent. It is a measure of how twisted things have become in the county that the union depicts this as a great sacrifice.
In negotiations underway for a new contract, the MCEA is pressing for further pay hikes for most teachers, which would cost Montgomery taxpayers another $18 million. This is taking place as the county grapples with a projected budget deficit of $600 million, and as wages in the private sector are stagnant. Privately, nearly every member of the County Council and the school board says the union's demands are blatantly unrealistic. Publicly, almost all of them are too cowed by the union to say a word."
Apple ballot apologist:
"I would suggest that you not embarrass yourself further by exhibiting your ignorance of the process involved with developing the Apple Ballot.
It's easy to make wild accusations and inaccurate assumptions,....lack evidence of your allegations. Wild rants only reinforce readers' opinions about your ignorance.
Unless you know what you are talking about"
a few highlights from Washington Post in February who were, no doubt, probably threatened by being told "not to embarass themselves further":
"such is the overweening power of the teachers union in Montgomery that the usual rules are turned upside down"
"the union's toxic influence in local elections"
"at taxpayers' expense"MCEA's chief political strategist, Jon Gerson, made it clear that he expected candidates, once endorsed, to pay what they "owed" for the union's campaign on their behalf. One candidate, asked to explain the decision to pay, answered concisely: "Fear.""
"distorts and perverts the political process"
"MCEA, the largest union in the county, is in effect hiring its own bosses and is getting paid for it in the bargain. This twisted system has fueled skyrocketing payroll costs"
"Most elected officials, too fearful of the union to object,"
"the heavy-handed tactics and political thuggery of the union"
"the union, known as the Montgomery County Education Association, has increasingly played the part of kingmaker in races for local state legislative seats"
"for fear of incurring the union's wrath,"
"a few who ran, or thought about running, said the union sought to intimidate them in various ways"
""I felt it was creepy then, and I still feel that way now," said one person subjected to the union's aggressive bid"
"Something is seriously amiss when a union acts in this way"
"when elected officials, feel intimidated by the tactics of the union representing teachers, that's a sign that democratic processes have been turned upside down. In no other county in Maryland -- including others with top-flight schools, every bit the equal of Montgomery's -- does the teachers union exercise such lopsided power, let alone compel candidates, once endorsed, to pay for its political support. This is an instance of a single special-interest group running amok."
"In the two terms that at-large incumbents Leventhal and Council President Nancy Floreen have been in office, they voted to increase spending by more than $1.3 billion, or about 45 percent.
In the four years since Berliner, Marc Elrich, and Duchy Trachtenberg joined them on the council, spending is up 10 percent. Their four budgets varied sharply, from a large increase in 2007 to more constrained efforts in recent years.
Over the past year, with the after effects of recession savaging county revenues, the council voted to cut total spending for the first time in more than 40 years."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/11/AR2010091104525_pf.html
"MONTGOMERY COUNTY schools are among the best in the nation, a point of pride for the community and a springboard for their students."
What are you doing quoting this statement, Anon? You don't believe a blessed word of it!
You think MSPC schools are indoctrination labs for the gay agenda!
Since when do you take pride in MCPS?
If you did take pride in MCPS, you would not support liars like Martha Schaerr, who fails to inform voters she sits on the Board of an organization that was too eager to join the lawsuit of MCPS over its revision of the sex education curriculum, a lawsuit that forced MCPS to use taxpayer funds to defend the suers' frivolous lawsuit rather than to educate MCPS students!
The manure is getting thick in here.
"What are you doing quoting this statement, Anon? You don't believe a blessed word of it!"
it was part of a story demonstrating that a party that thinks like TTF also has big problems with the Aple ballot
facts are facts and people from every side know the truth about the teacher union activity in MC
"You think MSPC schools are indoctrination labs for the gay agenda!"
you could say that but, obviously, there are other aspects to the schools here
"If you did take pride in MCPS, you would not support liars like Martha Schaerr, who fails to inform voters she sits on the Board of an organization that was too eager to join the lawsuit of MCPS over its revision of the sex education curriculum, a lawsuit that forced MCPS to use taxpayer funds to defend the suers' frivolous lawsuit rather than to educate MCPS students!"
the lawsuit was fine
it's part of the process
the money spent by the county is trivial and trace compared to the hundereds of millions lavished on union demands which are rubber-stamped by our "representatives" on the school board
not only that but the county had to paid in the lawsuit because their first version, the Fishback revisions, violated the U.S. Constitution, and they were forced to come to a settlement
"toxic" "creepy" "political thuggery"
just a sample of the terms used by the Washington Post to describe the MC teacher's union and its Apple ballot
and, yet, TTF likes the Apple ballot
tells you something right there
and, yet, TTF likes the Apple ballot
Anon, please link to any statement anywhere on the Internet or tell us anything you have heard that supports this statement.
This assertion may be consistent with your simplified view of the world, but it has no basis in reality. This is an example of why somebody has to advocate for "teaching the facts."
JimK
"the lawsuit was fine
it's part of the process"
Oh yes it was, part of the FAILED PROCESS the CRC attempted to use to find an activist judge to do their bidding.
Instead they suers won a **10-day temporary restraining order.** But you can go ahead and lie here on VIgilance that some judge found that any of the curricular revisions "violated the US Constitution." No, he did not. What Judge Williams actually said is:
"This case pits **a potential loss** of Plaintiffs’ First Amendment freedoms against what amounts to mere inconvenience to Defendants. It is in the public interest for the Court to guard against any chipping away at Plaintiffs’ First Amendment freedoms, particularly where Plaintiffs have shown a strong **likelihood** of success on the merits. As such, for the aforementioned reasons, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order."
Judge Williams did not say there was a violation of the US Constitution, he said there was a potential violation of it, he issued a 10 TRO, and the CRG was free to continued with their lawsuit. Had there been any actual violations of the US Constitution, does any Vigilance reader think that Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel would have advised the CRG to NOT proceed with their lawsuit?
No one but a moron might believe it.
Had there been what Anon claims, an actual **violation** of the US Constitution in any way, shape, or form, Liberty Counsel would have continued to represent the CRC instead of dropping the CRC's lawsuit like it a hot potato. Stavers' didn't want to waste anymore resources on that losing cause and they were right. Every subsequent judge that heard legal arguments from the CRC ruled against them, every single time.
"part of the FAILED PROCESS the CRC"
failed?
the county discarded the Fishback revisions and the county started from scratch, being careful to protect the constitutional rights of the kids this time and delaying the other stuff for a couple of years
they accomplished much more than anyone imagined possible in this Washington beltway liberal bastion
"you can go ahead and lie here on VIgilance that some judge found that any of the curricular revisions "violated the US Constitution." No, he did not."
no, he found that it was likely that he would if the case proceeded
you quoted it yourself:
"It is in the public interest for the Court to guard against any chipping away at Plaintiffs’ First Amendment freedoms, particularly where Plaintiffs have shown a strong **likelihood** of success on the merits. As such, for the aforementioned reasons, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order."
"Had there been any actual violations of the US Constitution, does any Vigilance reader think that Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel would have advised the CRG to NOT proceed with their lawsuit?
No one but a moron might believe it."
yeah, well us morons got what we were seeking: cancellation of the curriculum
so why continue the suit?
monetary damages were never the point, you imbecile
"part of the FAILED PROCESS the CRC"
failed?
the county discarded the Fishback revisions and the county started from scratch, being careful to protect the constitutional rights of the kids this time and delaying the other stuff for a couple of years
they accomplished much more than anyone imagined possible in this Washington beltway liberal bastion
"you can go ahead and lie here on VIgilance that some judge found that any of the curricular revisions "violated the US Constitution." No, he did not."
no, he found that it was likely that he would if the case proceeded
you quoted it yourself:
"It is in the public interest for the Court to guard against any chipping away at Plaintiffs’ First Amendment freedoms, particularly where Plaintiffs have shown a strong **likelihood** of success on the merits. As such, for the aforementioned reasons, the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order."
"Had there been any actual violations of the US Constitution, does any Vigilance reader think that Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel would have advised the CRG to NOT proceed with their lawsuit?
No one but a moron might believe it."
yeah, well us morons got what we were seeking: cancellation of the curriculum
so why continue the suit?
monetary damages were never the point, you imbecile
"yeah, well us morons got what we were seeking: cancellation of the curriculum
so why continue the suit?
monetary damages were never the point, you imbecile"
Oh brother! Let's check some facts, shall we?
The CRC's number one mission was to stop any revision of the sex education curriculum and to keep status quo. The CRC wanted to keep the sex ed curriculum that was being used in 2004 in place. The only thing the CRC managed to do was derail revision of the MCPS sex ed curriculum for a while. Currently, a new revised sex education curriculum -- with it's vignettes about Portia and the rest that drive the CRC crazy -- has been approved, implemented, and taught for a few years already.
At Dr. Weast's insistence, if a student asks "Am I sick because I'm gay?" the answer provided in the revised curriculum is "No, you are not." Parts of the curriculum do discuss illnesses, however, such as homophobia.
Good luck revising history to say the CRC got MCPS to keep the status quo and to only teach what the CRC wanted taught -- abstinence until holy opposite sex marriage! That's not what the lawyers at the Thomas Moore Law Center, who represented the CRC in court, said:
"“In oral arguments last week, the Thomas More Law Center asked Maryland state circuit court judge William Rowan III to overturn a Maryland Board of Education ruling that approves of public schools in Montgomery County, Maryland, teaching 8th and 10th graders that homosexuality is innate—meaning they are born that way. The schools also show how to use condoms in anal and oral sex. [What liars, nothing about "anal and oral sex" is shown in the MCPS Condom video, but that lie does make for sensational copy, doesn't it? The truth is that even Dr. Ruth Jacobs herself complimented the MCPS condom video in a Public Comment before the MC BOE on October 23, 2006. Dr. Jacobs said: "I currently believe the condom use lesson has undergone dramatic improvements and I commplement [sic] MCPS staff on the condom use video."]
The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, represents Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, the Family Leader Network [where Martha Schaer sits on the Board of Directors and now she wants to join the BOE she has sued], and the Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays. John Garza, of Garza, Regan & Associates of Rockville, Maryland, is acting as local counsel.
Montgomery educators were forced to defend their new sex curriculum that promotes anal sex, homosexuality, bisexuality and transvestitism despite strong opposition from several pro-family groups. The controversial new curriculum was adopted as a result of pressure by homosexual advocacy groups.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “This is another example of our public school system being used as an indoctrination arm of homosexual advocacy groups. Promoting the use of condoms in anal and oral sex not only violates Maryland law and court decisions, but endangers the health of any student who tries it. Moreover, teaching students that homosexuals are ‘born that way’ is contrary to the rulings of the Maryland’s highest court and court decisions of other states as well. ”
“The bottom line — this school system is guilty of educational malpractice,” said Thompson.
**This challenge to the new sex education curriculum has been in litigation for six years, meandering through the Federal District Courts, Maryland Administrative Panels and finally winding up in front of Judge Rowan III.** Initially, a Federal District Court enjoined the county schools from implementing the curriculum in 2005 because the lesson plan criticized religious “fundamentalism. [Yeah, that 10 day TRO was the CRC's only bit of "good news" in the entire 6 years of litigation they pursued.]”
However, following the federal court ruling and injunction, the county board merely omitted the anti-religious references, and began teaching the controversial health curriculum to all 8th and 10th grade classes. [And gave PFOX and CRC each a seat on a 15 member (reduced from 27 member) Citizen Advisory Committee.] The current case involves a judicial appeal of the final State Board decision under a Maryland law that allows final administrative denials to be challenged in the state circuit court..."
Post a Comment
<< Home