The United States enjoys as much religious freedom as can be found on planet Earth, and I will never understand why being free to worship as one chooses isn't enough for some people. They are obsessed with forcing their views on others in the public square, paid for with everyone's tax dollars. Evidently, they think by doing this it somehow validates their supernatural belief system. When prevented from proselytizing, they are of course the poor persecuted victims of the godless left.
It is but sometimes it’s almost an exaggeration to call it ‘cruelty’ but just petty ass shit.
Half the time they are committing human and civil rights atrocities and they are the kind of people to do lynchings and the other half they are like your worst mother in law nightmare. The world’s most evil boss. The meanest girls. The most backstabbing co-workers.
I still think that "cruelty" fits. They get to be mean and vindictive (as well as petty), and, most importantly, THEY GET TO GET AWAY WITH IT. It's the pecking order, weaponized, and they think that they get to use it without consequence.
I can answer you in one word: insecurity. Their faith is so phenomenally strong that they need everybody to agree with it, otherwise doubt creeps in like an unwelcome guest.
It's because, deep down, they don't believe the nonsense they peddle, so they have to wrangle as many others in their beliefs as possible to bolster their own. And also because they just don't give a shit what anyone believes. When you're convinced yours is the One True Church™️, you think you're entitled to privileges others don't get.
Of course not, but people whose beliefs are weak need the reinforcement of convincing others to believe what they can't quite accept themselves. Most of them will never admit to that motivation, BTW, but that's what's behind 'evangelization.'
There is a subset of evilgelicals who believe that if they are not inflicting their faith on others, they aren't living it. This is a gross waste of peoples' tax dollars and she should be responsible for the District's loss. But, AZ likely doesn't have the necessary laws to force the issue.
Here we have rules, where a local government office holder can be required to pay if their actions created a financial loss for the authority. The most famous case is Shirley Porter
In short, she engaged in unlawful actions for political gain. She was (sur-) charged with £27(?)m. To my knowledge, she never paid a penny, she left the country.
Not to forget in the USA religions have the special privileges, protections and exemptions. Most have the been pushed though over the past 50 years and sadly continue to this day.
I think many of these fine folks are actually secret atheists, just the angry shitty kind. They hate (resent) life and wish everyone else to suffer along with them.
There's actually an atheist-sponsored project [don't recall the name, help me out if anybody else does] that provides support to pastors, priests and ministers who've lost their faith but whose training hasn't prepared them for any other field.
If I were on that school board, I’d start quoting lyrics from songs just to show how annoying it is. I’d probably start with Cat Stevens - Peace Train.
That may seem like a lot, but what is the price of an immortal soul? Seriously. I need to know. I have three in my trunk and I need to off load them quick.
According to dnd about 6sp to 500 gp. Roughly $3-6 usd to $25,000 -$150,000 using a conversion chart. Though these are trade prices so conversion/experience may very. See descent into avernus plus others.
So, Rooks broke the law in an effort to ignore the Establishment Clause as a Free Exercise absolutist. She is a demonstrably bigoted Christian Nazionalist. (People like Rooks are why I started spelling it with a "z".) It would be enlightening to ask her, on the record, a number of things.
1. Ms Rooks, would you allow a Muslim board member, or any Muslim member of the public in attendance, to recite from the Koran? After all, that is also a book with a long history in this country. Jefferson owned a copy and there were Muslims who foughrt with the Continental Army in the Revolution.
2. Ms Rooks, why are you opposed to the circulartion of a promotional video that acknowledges the fact that there are chiuldren who are not white in your district?
3. Ms Rooks, could you please explain precisely how a transgender individual existing is "sexualizing children". To do so, you must explain what you mean by "sexualizing children", and you must cite your sources, and demonstrate how this "sexualizing" is being done by transgender people performing the exact same activites that cisgender people are doing.
4. Ms Rooks, although I support your First Amendment right to follow any social media accounts you wish, and to espouse any ideologies that tickle your fancy, do you think it is appropriate for an elected public servant to openly support Nazism?
I am sure my fellow commenters can think of more questions for this Nazi bitch.
5. Ms Rooks, why do you think that the First Amendment gives you the right to proselytize during a meeting of a secular government function? And why do you persist when you have been told repeatedly that you are violating the law and the Constitution?
6. Ms Rooks, are you aware that the word "secular", especially when applied to our government, does 𝗻𝗼𝘁 mean hostile to religion, but simlply neutral to religion? That promoting a secular government is not promoting atheism and supressing Christianity?
Sad fact is that, from her point of view, "neutral to religion" is tantamount to "hostile to religion." She wants universal agreement with HER point of view, mostly to spare her the cognitive dissonance she has to deal with every time an alternative opinion is voiced.
Her faith is a bad joke, and someone should tell her that, to her face.
She'd probably say "yes" to #1 simply knowing that there is zero practical chance of such an election. But I like your idea of a citizen using their open comment time to do it. That's a good test.
So her actions toward the transgender teacher is evidence her bible spouting during school board meetings is intended to harm citizens and residents of the district. Any lawsuit against her should be a slam dunk. Her actions, voting record and statements against racial diversity are further evidence she is not doing her job to provide a safe, effective learning environment for all students. She said “except girls” after the motto as sarcasm to pretend that protecting transgender students (not all of them are trans girls btw) was interfering in cis girls’ safety, but a more accurate snide remark would be to say “blacks, LGBTQ and other religious folks”. Because she doesn’t want these people in her community.
Regarding her continued presence on the board, it’s more to do with the interference of the Christian nationalist groups that are promoting candidates. And the lack of any sort of information of school board candidates during election time. Unless you are actively involved in school board meetings, or reading news about them, you cannot get straightforward information on your school board members. They write little q&a articles that are couched in dog whistles or so generic they are completely useless. Of course every candidate wants students to succeed, want to provide resources to teachers, but there’s never any information about whether they demand those resources to be religious, or they are only talking about the wealthy white students, or what the really mean by “diversity of thought”. Unless you know the candidate personally, you rarely get a glimpse of who they really are. Aside from the folks who write explicitly hateful editorials or letters to the editors anonymously but are outed by those in the know in the community, and many don’t because they’re smart enough to hide their bigotry during the election cycle, most extreme candidates just mouth generic pablum to get elected. Keep publishing the costs of this hideous woman’s nonsense, get it into the local paper, and the larger city paper, and on local news, even national news. Your school board is hurting your children, even if you don’t like other people’s children she’s harming yours.
I was referencing an editorial sent to our local Facebook pages and was written to a known right wing local online “news” outlet by one of our local candidates, pretty sure it was school board, might have been village board, but it was a couple years ago. I wrote about it here back then. It was horrible and attacked our local librarians. But there were folks who agreed with the sentiment and some folks who didn’t know it was that candidate. Fortunately, that candidate was solidly defeated. But if they don’t do things like that, we can’t know who they truly are.
Question - apologies, if it's a daft one: But why do you even elect school boards? Is it not a function of the local authority (which does have democratic oversight)?
Our schools are funded mostly by local property taxes, so each district has a different budget and thus it makes some sense that you would get locals to oversee the spending of local taxes.
Added to that, the US has no national curriculum...and many states don't even set a state curriculum. In many states, the local county or district sets the school's in it's borders curriculum. So again, in a system like that it makes sense to have local people be in charge of how those schools are run, rather than people appointed by, say, the Governor. Though I think in some cases that can happen too.
Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to explain.
Just for contrast - here in Scotland we have 32 local authorities ('councils'). They organise many of the local functions, such as bin collections, cultural activities, social care (care of disabled and elderly people) and many other things, including education.
Our councils are funded by a mixture of funds from the Scottish Government and local taxes and fees. Those taxes include 'Council Tax' which is levied on every dwelling, i.e. house or flat and is payable by the resident(s) there. (Yes, it's the resident(s), it doesn't matter whether they are the owner or a tenant.)
We elect councillors to the council, so there is democratic oversight over everything the council does, including education. We as a society clearly think that this is sufficient democratic oversight as no-one has ever raised the issue of having separate structures for local education.
(That's one thing which I really like about Substack, you meet people who'd otherwise never encounter. And then you have interesting discussions!)
Just for clarification - when I use the word 'local authority' it is a synonym of 'local government' and can mean county, district, region, canton, parish or similar. It seems that school boards are a separate structure? Separate from the (general) local government?
Apologies for asking daft questions, it is just that some things are different from what I am used to.
(PS Earlier today, I wrote a separate note explaining a phrase I had used in a response. It occurred to me, that Americans might not understand the meaning of 'I'll put the kettle on' ....)
Yes, school boards are a separate authority. Separate and not beholden to the Board of County Commissioners. They can set tax rates to finance the schools in their district.
I am dumbfounded as well, the only people elected on a school board are the parents, and they have next to no power regarding school decisions (they have consultation rights on festivals and school trips, and that's about all).
Question - apologies, if it's a daft one: But why do you even elect school boards? Is it not a function of the local authority (which does have democratic oversight)?
Easy fix to this is other board members using their time to recite Bible verses about slavery, incest, genocide, infanticide, rape, racism, and many other atrocities that fill their holy book from beginning to end. Let's see how they like that.
Probably best to get rid of "Board Comments," anyway (just like the US House of Representatives should get rid of "1-minute speeches" and "Special Order speeches" and restrict members speaking solely to debating legislation and resolutions). Taxpayers' time and resources at all levels of government (local, state, and federal) shouldn't be used for the politicians' equivalent of "Open Mic Night."
She and other cristers on the board demand that they should be able to pray publicly when their own Jesus specifically told his followers NOT to do this.
JESUS: "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46)
She's yet another in an unending parade of religious hypocrites.
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."
True story! Some years ago, there was a "preacher" standing in the shade of a tree outside of the Alamo reading (shouting) from the bible. Asked him if I could borrow it. Flipped to Matthew 6:5-6 and pointed at it. Shut him right up🤣🤣👍👍
I am from Arizona. Moved away a few years ago. I would pay money to watch an invocation by a Wiccan, Pagan, Buddhist, Sikh, any other belief system, actually, during the free comment period of PUSD’s Board meetings. Hilarity would ensue. The rwnj’s can’t have it both ways. But they sure as hell would try.
"The Manchurian Candidate" comes to mind, though in this case, there is hardly any skullduggery involved. Hell, it's out in the open for all to see, and yet there are those who refuse to see it.
He knows his approval ratings are in the toilet. Not just with Democrats but even Republicans. His numbers on every single issue are underwater. It's becoming impossible for him to deny reality no matter how hard he tries.
"...New York Times, the Washington Post and ABC News are "fake news organizations" reporting on "fake polls.""These people should be investigated for ELECTION FRAUD," the Truth Social post read."
If there's a difference between the two, anymore, it's that Putin doesn't have to spend a single ruble getting the MAGAts to spread his propaganda for him.
I see our regular reminder that elections have consequences is right on schedule.
So I went and took a peek at her Ballotpedia page. (https://ballotpedia.org/Heather_Rooks) It looks like she ran for office as as an advocate for 'parental rights' to get elected, but now she's all 'my Jesusway or the highway'. Four kids according to the page, which leaves me wondering who's caring for her kids while she's busy trying to turn her board position into a pulpit. She'll be in office until 2027, looks like, unless she wins her next election. Bonus points: She apparently decided to run for office because her autistic child was denied a mask exemption at school.
She's not someone I voted for, being that I'm not in Peoria. Good luck to Peoria United School District for the next couple of years, because this woman's probably going to cost a lot more to keep on the board.
"Parental rights" is the 2020s code words for Jesusway or the highway. They are the same thing. They didn't corrupt an existing term, they made it up as a slick PR move.
What they mean is parental rights to take books out of classrooms and school libraries. A parents right to prevent teachers from assigning readings they don't like. Parental rights to know what a kid says in confidence to their school counselor. A parental right to insist that teacher Susan never ever mention her wife Cindy in class. The parental right to be informed if their kid Charlene asks their school friends to call them Bob. Even the parental right to force a teacher to accept and give good marks to a kid's Jesusy essay even in an assignment which has nothing to do with the topic they wrote about.
[And yes just assume the word right has scare quotes around it throughout that paragraph.]
Parent's rights to completely withhold education in general---groups like the HSLDA will come out in droves to attack even the smallest regulation of homeschooling to make sure the kids are learning and not being abused.
I live in Arizona. I was raised in a fairly fundamentalist religion that expects major commitments of proselytizing from its members. I know some scripture. In Chapter 6 of the Book of Matthew, Jesus taught, “When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men … but when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your father who is unseen.”. These women quoting scripture where the public can see them seem to be this type of hypocrite.
“those attorneys said the First Amendment didn’t apply to Rooks in this situation because she was “speaking as a member of the public governing body, not an individual.””
This. She is speaking as the government, not an individual. Her first amendment rights are interfering in the first amendment rights of everyone else and, as she is speaking as a government official, her rights are secondary to the rest of the population affected.
“After all, the current U.S. President, the first U.S. President, and an unbroken chain of U.S. officials in between have quoted scripture to solemnize official occasions or speeches, encourage their fellow citizens, and fortify themselves to carry out their official duties. There is nothing unlawful about Rooks doing likewise.”
Just because they’ve been doing it, doesn’t make it right. Especially the current dictator who is not following the constitution at all. No due process, making up his own laws, claiming to be the sole arbitrator of what is law and what is not, allowing his cronies to withhold funding congress already passed, arresting judges for doing their jobs, and so so much more. Holding church services in the White House has never been a tradition and there’s good reason for that. He’s flouting the law in every word he speaks. We do not want to follow his example, ever.
I am pessimistic; I expect this will not hold up on appeal. The strict rules for teachers in school are there because minor's attendance is compelled. Students aren't compelled to attend Board meetings and, frankly, >95% of them probably will never attend even one. I am guessing if this goes higher that some circuit will overturn and say yes it's fine for a Board member to say stuff like this during their open comments time because no it is not equivalent to a teacher in school, and that if the public or board objects then the remedy is for the board to get rid of open comments time.
However these fundies always object when other people exercise the rights they demand for themselves. So a non-judicial way to solve may be to have board members use their time to hail satan or - as Joe King said - have members of the public show up and use their allotted speaking time to quote the Koran. Because you can almost guarantee that this same fundie would rather have "religious speech for none" over "religious speech you don't like for me...but also religious speech I don't like for you."
She feels like one of these christians whose entire spiritual life is to memorize verses and wave them around at every situation. "What did you say? Oh, here's a condescending verse I have for you!". Smug smile included.
Likely doesn't even care what the essence is she's saying, but just the fact she quoted a bible verse in her mind likely gets her closer to heaven. "God, did you hear me? I quoted another verse! Aren't you impressed?"
But, I wonder ... was her plan all along to sue? Was she just pushing and pushing and pushing, thinking she'd win and buy a new house? I wouldn't be surprised.
The United States enjoys as much religious freedom as can be found on planet Earth, and I will never understand why being free to worship as one chooses isn't enough for some people. They are obsessed with forcing their views on others in the public square, paid for with everyone's tax dollars. Evidently, they think by doing this it somehow validates their supernatural belief system. When prevented from proselytizing, they are of course the poor persecuted victims of the godless left.
Because they've been indoctrinated to believe they are "morally superior" so they feel compelled to shove it down everyone's throat.
Also, they love to torture people.
There’s absolutely nothing in their faith that requires them to cause other people distress, create conflict, act as a threat. They enjoy it.
Gotta say it again: The cruelty IS the point.
It is but sometimes it’s almost an exaggeration to call it ‘cruelty’ but just petty ass shit.
Half the time they are committing human and civil rights atrocities and they are the kind of people to do lynchings and the other half they are like your worst mother in law nightmare. The world’s most evil boss. The meanest girls. The most backstabbing co-workers.
I still think that "cruelty" fits. They get to be mean and vindictive (as well as petty), and, most importantly, THEY GET TO GET AWAY WITH IT. It's the pecking order, weaponized, and they think that they get to use it without consequence.
Which is why we can't let them get away with it.
I can answer you in one word: insecurity. Their faith is so phenomenally strong that they need everybody to agree with it, otherwise doubt creeps in like an unwelcome guest.
Thus is the nature of their faith. [/s]
preach Troublesh00ter!
It's because, deep down, they don't believe the nonsense they peddle, so they have to wrangle as many others in their beliefs as possible to bolster their own. And also because they just don't give a shit what anyone believes. When you're convinced yours is the One True Church™️, you think you're entitled to privileges others don't get.
An idea isn't validated by the number of people who support it when there is no objective evidence to support the claim.
Of course not, but people whose beliefs are weak need the reinforcement of convincing others to believe what they can't quite accept themselves. Most of them will never admit to that motivation, BTW, but that's what's behind 'evangelization.'
Right. The fallacy of consensus gentium.
Exactly. It’s the “herd” concept. They require numbers to feel more powerful. Deviators are seen as a threat to social order.
Speaking of herds, I'm hoping that we finally develop herd immunity from this kind of magical thinking.
Well stated, oraxx, and I agree completely.
There is a subset of evilgelicals who believe that if they are not inflicting their faith on others, they aren't living it. This is a gross waste of peoples' tax dollars and she should be responsible for the District's loss. But, AZ likely doesn't have the necessary laws to force the issue.
Here we have rules, where a local government office holder can be required to pay if their actions created a financial loss for the authority. The most famous case is Shirley Porter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Porter
In short, she engaged in unlawful actions for political gain. She was (sur-) charged with £27(?)m. To my knowledge, she never paid a penny, she left the country.
Not to forget in the USA religions have the special privileges, protections and exemptions. Most have the been pushed though over the past 50 years and sadly continue to this day.
Tax the Churches! Frank Zappa-1980
I think many of these fine folks are actually secret atheists, just the angry shitty kind. They hate (resent) life and wish everyone else to suffer along with them.
There's actually an atheist-sponsored project [don't recall the name, help me out if anybody else does] that provides support to pastors, priests and ministers who've lost their faith but whose training hasn't prepared them for any other field.
They are trained salespeople. After all, they have been selling a product that doesn't exist.
https://clergyproject.org/
If I were on that school board, I’d start quoting lyrics from songs just to show how annoying it is. I’d probably start with Cat Stevens - Peace Train.
You could try the 𝘚𝘶𝘳𝘧𝘪𝘯 𝘉𝘪𝘳𝘥 by The Trashmen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WNrx2jq184
Someone should have quoted from Ezekiel 23:20, and they would have saved a lot of money!
That may seem like a lot, but what is the price of an immortal soul? Seriously. I need to know. I have three in my trunk and I need to off load them quick.
Ask Hemant. He sold his on eBay. https://www.amazon.com/Sold-My-Soul-eBay-Atheists/dp/1400073472
🤣🤣🤣
Gimme 2!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1INWEq7E-9Q
North of the border version of "Come a Little Bit Closer" by Jay and the Americans.
1 million en roupie de sansonnet and 155 457 854 en monnaie de singe. Pas d'quoi.
"Monkey money!" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
According to dnd about 6sp to 500 gp. Roughly $3-6 usd to $25,000 -$150,000 using a conversion chart. Though these are trade prices so conversion/experience may very. See descent into avernus plus others.
Haha. 😂😂😂
What's the going rate on eBay?
Edit, Joe beat me.
𝐴𝑟𝑖𝑧𝑜𝑛𝑎 𝑙𝑎𝑤 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑎 𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑦 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑙𝑎𝑦 𝑏𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑅𝑜𝑜𝑘𝑠 𝑖𝑠 𝑑𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑛𝑜𝑛-𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠.
So, Rooks broke the law in an effort to ignore the Establishment Clause as a Free Exercise absolutist. She is a demonstrably bigoted Christian Nazionalist. (People like Rooks are why I started spelling it with a "z".) It would be enlightening to ask her, on the record, a number of things.
1. Ms Rooks, would you allow a Muslim board member, or any Muslim member of the public in attendance, to recite from the Koran? After all, that is also a book with a long history in this country. Jefferson owned a copy and there were Muslims who foughrt with the Continental Army in the Revolution.
2. Ms Rooks, why are you opposed to the circulartion of a promotional video that acknowledges the fact that there are chiuldren who are not white in your district?
3. Ms Rooks, could you please explain precisely how a transgender individual existing is "sexualizing children". To do so, you must explain what you mean by "sexualizing children", and you must cite your sources, and demonstrate how this "sexualizing" is being done by transgender people performing the exact same activites that cisgender people are doing.
4. Ms Rooks, although I support your First Amendment right to follow any social media accounts you wish, and to espouse any ideologies that tickle your fancy, do you think it is appropriate for an elected public servant to openly support Nazism?
I am sure my fellow commenters can think of more questions for this Nazi bitch.
5. Ms Rooks, why do you think that the First Amendment gives you the right to proselytize during a meeting of a secular government function? And why do you persist when you have been told repeatedly that you are violating the law and the Constitution?
6. Ms Rooks, are you aware that the word "secular", especially when applied to our government, does 𝗻𝗼𝘁 mean hostile to religion, but simlply neutral to religion? That promoting a secular government is not promoting atheism and supressing Christianity?
Sad fact is that, from her point of view, "neutral to religion" is tantamount to "hostile to religion." She wants universal agreement with HER point of view, mostly to spare her the cognitive dissonance she has to deal with every time an alternative opinion is voiced.
Her faith is a bad joke, and someone should tell her that, to her face.
So, we need to teach her basic English before we ask the questions.
Too bad you can't ask them in person.
6) your legal representative maintain you quote other books than the babble, can you repeat the quotes with the sources and the dates you said them ?
Wouldn't surprise me if one of those books was 𝘔𝘦𝘪𝘯 𝘒𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘧.
She'd probably say "yes" to #1 simply knowing that there is zero practical chance of such an election. But I like your idea of a citizen using their open comment time to do it. That's a good test.
I can hear the screaming about an out of state special interest trying to persecute her already.
7. Ms. Rooks, where does the Arizona public school system rank nationally for public education? Hint: Not good and your prayers aren't helping.
Train up a child is textbook grooming.
Read: Child abuse.
So her actions toward the transgender teacher is evidence her bible spouting during school board meetings is intended to harm citizens and residents of the district. Any lawsuit against her should be a slam dunk. Her actions, voting record and statements against racial diversity are further evidence she is not doing her job to provide a safe, effective learning environment for all students. She said “except girls” after the motto as sarcasm to pretend that protecting transgender students (not all of them are trans girls btw) was interfering in cis girls’ safety, but a more accurate snide remark would be to say “blacks, LGBTQ and other religious folks”. Because she doesn’t want these people in her community.
Regarding her continued presence on the board, it’s more to do with the interference of the Christian nationalist groups that are promoting candidates. And the lack of any sort of information of school board candidates during election time. Unless you are actively involved in school board meetings, or reading news about them, you cannot get straightforward information on your school board members. They write little q&a articles that are couched in dog whistles or so generic they are completely useless. Of course every candidate wants students to succeed, want to provide resources to teachers, but there’s never any information about whether they demand those resources to be religious, or they are only talking about the wealthy white students, or what the really mean by “diversity of thought”. Unless you know the candidate personally, you rarely get a glimpse of who they really are. Aside from the folks who write explicitly hateful editorials or letters to the editors anonymously but are outed by those in the know in the community, and many don’t because they’re smart enough to hide their bigotry during the election cycle, most extreme candidates just mouth generic pablum to get elected. Keep publishing the costs of this hideous woman’s nonsense, get it into the local paper, and the larger city paper, and on local news, even national news. Your school board is hurting your children, even if you don’t like other people’s children she’s harming yours.
"letters to the editors anonymously"
That's not allowed by the TBT, they check the DMV records to make sure people are who they say they are.
I was referencing an editorial sent to our local Facebook pages and was written to a known right wing local online “news” outlet by one of our local candidates, pretty sure it was school board, might have been village board, but it was a couple years ago. I wrote about it here back then. It was horrible and attacked our local librarians. But there were folks who agreed with the sentiment and some folks who didn’t know it was that candidate. Fortunately, that candidate was solidly defeated. But if they don’t do things like that, we can’t know who they truly are.
Question - apologies, if it's a daft one: But why do you even elect school boards? Is it not a function of the local authority (which does have democratic oversight)?
Our schools are funded mostly by local property taxes, so each district has a different budget and thus it makes some sense that you would get locals to oversee the spending of local taxes.
Added to that, the US has no national curriculum...and many states don't even set a state curriculum. In many states, the local county or district sets the school's in it's borders curriculum. So again, in a system like that it makes sense to have local people be in charge of how those schools are run, rather than people appointed by, say, the Governor. Though I think in some cases that can happen too.
Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to explain.
Just for contrast - here in Scotland we have 32 local authorities ('councils'). They organise many of the local functions, such as bin collections, cultural activities, social care (care of disabled and elderly people) and many other things, including education.
Our councils are funded by a mixture of funds from the Scottish Government and local taxes and fees. Those taxes include 'Council Tax' which is levied on every dwelling, i.e. house or flat and is payable by the resident(s) there. (Yes, it's the resident(s), it doesn't matter whether they are the owner or a tenant.)
We elect councillors to the council, so there is democratic oversight over everything the council does, including education. We as a society clearly think that this is sufficient democratic oversight as no-one has ever raised the issue of having separate structures for local education.
(That's one thing which I really like about Substack, you meet people who'd otherwise never encounter. And then you have interesting discussions!)
Electing councillors sounds similar to our system, frankly. School boards are just one of the local oversight committees a county usually elects.
Local control. It is the local authority.
Just for clarification - when I use the word 'local authority' it is a synonym of 'local government' and can mean county, district, region, canton, parish or similar. It seems that school boards are a separate structure? Separate from the (general) local government?
Apologies for asking daft questions, it is just that some things are different from what I am used to.
(PS Earlier today, I wrote a separate note explaining a phrase I had used in a response. It occurred to me, that Americans might not understand the meaning of 'I'll put the kettle on' ....)
Yes, school boards are a separate authority. Separate and not beholden to the Board of County Commissioners. They can set tax rates to finance the schools in their district.
Thank you.
I am dumbfounded as well, the only people elected on a school board are the parents, and they have next to no power regarding school decisions (they have consultation rights on festivals and school trips, and that's about all).
Val, sorry I lost your email adress.
Can you check if Bags/Mike the panicked is actif on face de bouc, please ?
I will see what I can do, it won’t be right away, I am at work.
Thank you.
Question - apologies, if it's a daft one: But why do you even elect school boards? Is it not a function of the local authority (which does have democratic oversight)?
Easy fix to this is other board members using their time to recite Bible verses about slavery, incest, genocide, infanticide, rape, racism, and many other atrocities that fill their holy book from beginning to end. Let's see how they like that.
And DO NOT FORGET Ezekiel 23:20!!!
Or the passages of mothers cooking and eating their children. So uplifting.
(And xtians accuse atheists of being baby eaters)
Or bashing kids' heads against rocks! [Psalms 137:9]
More children being dashed against the ground in Hosea 13:16.
Let's not forget the bears in 2 Kings 2:23-25!
And take 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 notes on which ones start drooling when you read those bits.
I'd prefer hearing extracts from the holy book of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster - surely that'd be uplifting?
R'amen
Probably best to get rid of "Board Comments," anyway (just like the US House of Representatives should get rid of "1-minute speeches" and "Special Order speeches" and restrict members speaking solely to debating legislation and resolutions). Taxpayers' time and resources at all levels of government (local, state, and federal) shouldn't be used for the politicians' equivalent of "Open Mic Night."
She and other cristers on the board demand that they should be able to pray publicly when their own Jesus specifically told his followers NOT to do this.
JESUS: "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46)
She's yet another in an unending parade of religious hypocrites.
I just like to remind them of Matthew 6:5-6.
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."
True story! Some years ago, there was a "preacher" standing in the shade of a tree outside of the Alamo reading (shouting) from the bible. Asked him if I could borrow it. Flipped to Matthew 6:5-6 and pointed at it. Shut him right up🤣🤣👍👍
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a0d8e83362173c09b2697367aa7f44ee144d6be3df34bcec5c5f8ad4005941d3.jpg
His own father Gustav joined the Nazi Party in '38 and the SA a year later.
"... misled into a losing ideology." Oh, man, did Arnold nail it THERE!!!
I am from Arizona. Moved away a few years ago. I would pay money to watch an invocation by a Wiccan, Pagan, Buddhist, Sikh, any other belief system, actually, during the free comment period of PUSD’s Board meetings. Hilarity would ensue. The rwnj’s can’t have it both ways. But they sure as hell would try.
I suspect Rooks of two things:
1) She hasn’t met her quota of souls to steal for whatever hinky church she belongs to or
2) She’s among the many idiots that think their case will get to SCOTUS and who will Make America Christian Again Though it Never Was
3) Of course there’s always the inevitable: why not both?
OT - Articles of IMPEACHMENT have been filed against Donald Trump!
https://www.news5cleveland.com/politics/democratic-rep-shri-thanedar-files-long-shot-articles-of-impeachment-against-trump?sfnsn=mo
No, it won't go anywhere, but the very fact that they are filed will rattle Trump's cage BUT GOOD!
It should become a weekly occurrence, with the list of charges continually updated to include every new offense since the last filing.
Force Republicans to put their support of this lawless regime on the record, constantly. Hang it around their necks and make them wear it.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5b7faf5878a51908200d3198d26e65a1b9fbd9debae2abf43a79278ec3ba9d98.jpg
Invasion of Grenada which had nothing to do with anything: GOP
Illegal and immoral invasion/occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan when neither was involved in 9/11: GOP
There’s a poetic irony that Russian is now doing to the U.S. what the U.S. has been doing to Iraq and Afghanistan years ago.
"The Manchurian Candidate" comes to mind, though in this case, there is hardly any skullduggery involved. Hell, it's out in the open for all to see, and yet there are those who refuse to see it.
Which is why my homeland is in deep sneakers.
Damned fine idea! 👍
He knows his approval ratings are in the toilet. Not just with Democrats but even Republicans. His numbers on every single issue are underwater. It's becoming impossible for him to deny reality no matter how hard he tries.
"...New York Times, the Washington Post and ABC News are "fake news organizations" reporting on "fake polls.""These people should be investigated for ELECTION FRAUD," the Truth Social post read."
More proof that Chump doesn't understand the difference between an election and a popularity contest.
Election fraud, Donnie? You mean the election you won?
With an ego like his, he's never won 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 by quite enough to be satisfied by it- and he never will.
So basically he’s admitting that he cheated in the election.
Doesn’t stop him from trying, though.
And sadly, his most loyal cultists and Russian bot farms still vocally support him.
If there's a difference between the two, anymore, it's that Putin doesn't have to spend a single ruble getting the MAGAts to spread his propaganda for him.
Heck, they’ll PAY HIM for the “privilege”.
I see our regular reminder that elections have consequences is right on schedule.
So I went and took a peek at her Ballotpedia page. (https://ballotpedia.org/Heather_Rooks) It looks like she ran for office as as an advocate for 'parental rights' to get elected, but now she's all 'my Jesusway or the highway'. Four kids according to the page, which leaves me wondering who's caring for her kids while she's busy trying to turn her board position into a pulpit. She'll be in office until 2027, looks like, unless she wins her next election. Bonus points: She apparently decided to run for office because her autistic child was denied a mask exemption at school.
She's not someone I voted for, being that I'm not in Peoria. Good luck to Peoria United School District for the next couple of years, because this woman's probably going to cost a lot more to keep on the board.
"Parental rights" is the 2020s code words for Jesusway or the highway. They are the same thing. They didn't corrupt an existing term, they made it up as a slick PR move.
What they mean is parental rights to take books out of classrooms and school libraries. A parents right to prevent teachers from assigning readings they don't like. Parental rights to know what a kid says in confidence to their school counselor. A parental right to insist that teacher Susan never ever mention her wife Cindy in class. The parental right to be informed if their kid Charlene asks their school friends to call them Bob. Even the parental right to force a teacher to accept and give good marks to a kid's Jesusy essay even in an assignment which has nothing to do with the topic they wrote about.
[And yes just assume the word right has scare quotes around it throughout that paragraph.]
Parent's rights to completely withhold education in general---groups like the HSLDA will come out in droves to attack even the smallest regulation of homeschooling to make sure the kids are learning and not being abused.
I live in Arizona. I was raised in a fairly fundamentalist religion that expects major commitments of proselytizing from its members. I know some scripture. In Chapter 6 of the Book of Matthew, Jesus taught, “When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men … but when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your father who is unseen.”. These women quoting scripture where the public can see them seem to be this type of hypocrite.
Someone has got to read that quote the next time this lady pulls her bs.
“those attorneys said the First Amendment didn’t apply to Rooks in this situation because she was “speaking as a member of the public governing body, not an individual.””
This. She is speaking as the government, not an individual. Her first amendment rights are interfering in the first amendment rights of everyone else and, as she is speaking as a government official, her rights are secondary to the rest of the population affected.
“After all, the current U.S. President, the first U.S. President, and an unbroken chain of U.S. officials in between have quoted scripture to solemnize official occasions or speeches, encourage their fellow citizens, and fortify themselves to carry out their official duties. There is nothing unlawful about Rooks doing likewise.”
Just because they’ve been doing it, doesn’t make it right. Especially the current dictator who is not following the constitution at all. No due process, making up his own laws, claiming to be the sole arbitrator of what is law and what is not, allowing his cronies to withhold funding congress already passed, arresting judges for doing their jobs, and so so much more. Holding church services in the White House has never been a tradition and there’s good reason for that. He’s flouting the law in every word he speaks. We do not want to follow his example, ever.
Consistency is hard.
Ever read the bible? Consistency is impossible.
Consistency is of the devil.
To the MAGA thinking is hard!
I am pessimistic; I expect this will not hold up on appeal. The strict rules for teachers in school are there because minor's attendance is compelled. Students aren't compelled to attend Board meetings and, frankly, >95% of them probably will never attend even one. I am guessing if this goes higher that some circuit will overturn and say yes it's fine for a Board member to say stuff like this during their open comments time because no it is not equivalent to a teacher in school, and that if the public or board objects then the remedy is for the board to get rid of open comments time.
However these fundies always object when other people exercise the rights they demand for themselves. So a non-judicial way to solve may be to have board members use their time to hail satan or - as Joe King said - have members of the public show up and use their allotted speaking time to quote the Koran. Because you can almost guarantee that this same fundie would rather have "religious speech for none" over "religious speech you don't like for me...but also religious speech I don't like for you."
Cause maximum chaos that looks ridiculous to non fundies by just using a Bible translation she doesn't like: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h8BkkEGkZZI
You forgot his violations of the emoluments clause.
You just know that this smug, sanctimonious cloth eared bint has a whole closet packed with skeletons. They always do.
It’s fast becoming a requirement.
She feels like one of these christians whose entire spiritual life is to memorize verses and wave them around at every situation. "What did you say? Oh, here's a condescending verse I have for you!". Smug smile included.
Likely doesn't even care what the essence is she's saying, but just the fact she quoted a bible verse in her mind likely gets her closer to heaven. "God, did you hear me? I quoted another verse! Aren't you impressed?"
But, I wonder ... was her plan all along to sue? Was she just pushing and pushing and pushing, thinking she'd win and buy a new house? I wouldn't be surprised.
She probably doesn't expect to win... but I'll bet she's planning a lucrative martyrbation tour for when she loses!