As I posted yesterday, I’m kinda like the dog that finally caught the car bumper – but knowing that it is time to shake the car instead of doing the Scooby-Doo “Huh? Now what?”.
I did end up going to our School Board meeting last night to ask the questions surrounding:
1) The meaning of the word “should“ concerning gender dysphoria students, as in:
C. Names/Pronouns A student under this policy should be addressed by a name or pronoun that corresponds to the student’s gender identity that is consistently asserted at school
The problem that has gnawed at me since is how that word could be interpreted:
- A synonym for “shall” which means, essentially, “it will be done”
- A mere suggestion as in “you should but it’s your choice whether to follow it or not”. Leaving it as “should/shall” leaves the door open, still, for coerced speech. Substituting in:
2) When will the Board be addressing setting up a discrimination Policy for another Protected Class: Religion? After all, the Law is clear with SHALL as the imperative.
Given that last night was also the official “Organization Day” in which new people were elected to their official status (Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary), I don’t think that the new Chair was all that happy to be put on the spot (elections came just before “Public Comment” – she demurred actual answers.
The first was diverted to the next Policy Committee meeting – I wasn’t going to get a simple and quick answer to what does “should” mean even after I mentioned the two Circuit Court of Appeals have now stated that Constitutional Right to Free Speech trumps local ordinances and Policies. I guess I’ll have to be getting up early on April 13 to attend that.
The second draw a strange gaze from all of the Board members until “SHALL” started to sink in. Again, a deferral as it was clear that there was no clue to be found by looking at any calendar. I really do hope that they see me as the junkyard dog that caught their bumper because I am not going to let go of this one.
Especially, if you read the Law, I can get to a State of Being Aggrieved – and then it goes to Superior Court.
Mr. Sanborn will be sending the emails I had sent him on these two items (see the links above). I am hoping that they will be more illustrative of the pickle they may get themselves into than my short time at the mic.