Jim Trelease, 1941 – 2022

EVERY DAY SHOULD BE TEACHER APPRECIATION DAY

No.

Today is not Teacher Appreciation Day

Or Teacher Appreciation Week

Although, every day should be teacher appreciation day. It’s likely that you wouldn’t be reading this if not for teachers.

Teachers help the majority of American children learn how to read.

Someone taught the programmers of this blog application how to code and how to design and construct the device on which you’re reading this post.

Someone taught your dentist how to check and repair teeth. Someone taught your veterinarian how to care for animals.

…and so on…

For me, the concept of teacher appreciation brings to mind the most memorable teachers from whom I’ve learned. One of my elementary school teachers stands out in my mind…several of my high school teachers…and several of my college teachers. My parents, too, as my first, and most important teachers, are important…most important (You parents should remember that you are your child’s first, and most important teacher).

There is one person, however, who stands above all the other teachers I’ve had (aside from my parents) as the man who had the greatest impact on my career as an elementary school teacher…and made an important contribution to my parenting skills

THE READ-ALOUD HANDBOOK

In 1979, when I was relatively new to teaching, I ordered a booklet from the Weekly Reader Book Club titled, “Jim Trelease’s Read-Aloud Handbook for Parents and Teachers.”

I had been reading aloud to my students since I started teaching. One of my education school professors had emphasized the importance of reading aloud to our classes, so, from my first class to my last, I tried to make time every day for read aloud. Looking back on my 35 year career I can remember only a handful of times I skipped reading aloud…whether I taught Kindergarten or sixth grade, or something in between, reading aloud was always the most important part of my reading program.

When I saw the pamphlet on reading aloud from the Weekly Reader Book Club I decided that it might be helpful. Thus began my relationship with Jim Trelease’s books and research which lasted the more than four decades I spent in elementary school classrooms (as a teacher and volunteer).

I’ve written about Jim Trelease often on this blog. In 2008 I posted my congratulatory letter to him when he announced his retirement (and I reproduced his response in the comments). In 2017 I wrote a Teacher Appreciation post about him and his Read-Aloud Handbook, now in its eighth edition (the seventh edition is the last one edited by Trelease).


LESSONS FROM JIM TRELEASE

Some of the books listed in the Treasury of Read-Alouds
which comprises the second half of the Read-Aloud Handbook might be
outdated, but the information about the importance of reading aloud to
children and the tips on how to read aloud are still valuable.

There are so many lessons to learn from his book (get a copy of the book!). Here are just two…

Lesson #1 (quoted from the Reading Research Quarterly. See #3, here)

…how exactly does a person become proficient at reading? It’s a simple, two- part formula:


  • The more you read, the better you get at it; the better you get at it, the more you like it; and the more you like it, the more you do it.

  • The more you read, the more you know; and the more you know, the smarter you grow.

Lesson #2 (emphasis added)

The single most important activity for building the knowledge required for eventual success in reading is reading aloud to children…It is a practice that should continue throughout the grades.

The second lesson was also quoted from another source. It came from Becoming a Nation of Readers published some years after the first Read-Aloud Handbook.

JIM TRELEASE, March 23, 1941 – July 28, 2022

Jim Trelease died on Thursday, July 28, 2022. I’m glad I was able to thank him for his help throughout the years I spent in classrooms. I can’t imagine what my teaching career would have been like if not for his influence.

My collection of Read-Aloud Handbook editions,
several of which have been signed by the author, Jim Trelease.
📚📚📚

Leave a comment

Filed under books, Jim Trelease, read-alouds

Random thoughts, July 12, 2016

THE TEACHER SHORTAGE AND MORE…

• Why don’t politicians who think “anyone can teach” all become teachers?

• The nationwide shortage of teachers is likely caused by media and politicians bad-mouthing public schools and public school teachers. Legislatures are trying to find ways to increase the number of teachers, but there are fewer and fewer young people going into the profession. Diane Ravitch suggests that “The best way to increase the supply of teachers is to raise salaries and reduce class sizes.”

So, I guess we’re stuck with the shortage given that our legislators don’t like spending money. We need to change our ways and make our children a priority.

• Hillsdale College President Larry Arnn said about teaching, “Anybody can do it” and claimed that teacher training programs were “the dumbest part of every college.” In his mind, it follows that “teachers are trained in the dumbest parts of the dumbest colleges in the country.” That attitude along with salaries more than 20% lower than other similarly trained college graduates, might have something to do with the teacher shortage. Prospective teachers either believe what they hear, or don’t want to enter a profession whose practitioners are overworked, underpaid, and regularly insulted.

VOUCHERS: FUNDING RELIGION

• Instead of fully funding public education, legislators fund those who fill their campaign treasuries. Last school year Indiana sent nearly a quarter million BILLION dollars ($241.4 million) to private, mostly religious, schools in the form of school vouchers. But Article 1, Section 6 of the State Constitution says that “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, for the benefit of any religious or theological institution.” Luckily for the religious schools, the state supreme court ignored the concept of church-state separation.

• Speaking of church-state separation, here are quotes from two American politicians about the topic…

Lauren Boebert said in a speech last month,

I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk — that’s not in the Constitution. It was in a stinking letter and it means nothing like they say it does.

Thomas Jefferson wrote this in 1802 — the letter that Boebert says “means nothing,”

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

Does the phrase “separation of church and state” mean nothing?

NO MORE STALE IDEOLOGIES

• It seems that the Florida legislature wants to keep tabs on the number of post-secondary students and faculty who believe in a “stale ideology.” Does the new law, approved and signed by Governor DeSantis, define what a “stale ideology” is, or who decides what’s stale and what’s not? Stale colleges and universities might be punished by funding cuts. What’s next? Loyalty oaths? A Florida House Un-American Activities Committee?

Does this mean that the funding from the right-wing Charles Koch Foundation to various Florida universities (see here for example) will have to end? Does it matter that Governor DeSantis gets campaign contributions from Koch Industries?

CIVICS EDUCATION

• Sheila Kennedy wrote about the lack of civic knowledge in the United States.

America’s political culture is the most toxic it has been in my lifetime– and I’m old. There are lots of theories about how we got here—from partisan gerrymandering and residential sorting to increasing tribalism to fear generated by rapid social and technological change and exacerbated by dishonest partisan media. But our current inability to engage in productive civic conversation is also an outgrowth of declining trust in our social and political institutions—primarily government. Restoring that trust is critically important —but in order to trust government, we have to understand what it is and isn’t supposed to do.

I would add that we’ve also lost the ability to see things from the “other’s” point of view which makes coming to a reasonable compromise impossible. We have allowed ourselves to fall into a Gingrichian, all-or-nothing mentality that defines compromise as impossible. Currently, the loudest politicians in the country are those who see winning or losing as the only options. They see governing as a zero-sum game, a false dichotomy, a “my way or the highway” mentality. They don’t understand that a free society cannot function without cooperation and compromise (think traffic laws, for example). We don’t have to agree with each other, but we need to open our minds and at least listen to other points of view.

AND A COUPLE OF TRIVIAL THOUGHTS

• I love baseball…and don’t care that it’s a “slow” game. The pace of baseball gives fans time to do something that doesn’t happen often enough — engage in conversation — and specifically, engage in conversation about the game. The digital revolution has damaged our attention spans. We’re losing the ability to concentrate for an entire baseball game to social media like TikTok, Twitter, and texting. IMHO, the length and speed of a baseball game is a feature, not a bug.

Watch your dog when you yawn…chances are he’ll yawn, too…and vice versa.

🚌🚌🚌

Comments Off on Random thoughts, July 12, 2016

Filed under Baseball, Charles Koch, church-state-separation, Civics, TeacherShortage, vouchers

2022 Medley #2 – SCOTUS Gets First Amendment Religion Guarantee Wrong

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District

All of today’s Medley articles address the June 27 Supreme Court decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. The court found in favor of the football coach (Kennedy) who was praying at the 50 yard line after games. The coach claimed that he just wanted a quiet place to pray after the games. The school system tried to accommodate him, but he decided that the center of the football field was the necessary location…and he was anything but quiet as you will read below.

The coach also claimed that he was fired because of this. The truth is that his contract expired at the end of the year and the school system decided not to renew it…plus, he didn’t reapply. There is some disingenuous information in the court’s ruling about this.

THE CASE

We can begin with a news report from the Religion Clause Blog which includes a link to the ruling. If you read the entire post you’ll learn that the ruling explained away ignored the “establishment” clause in order to promote the individual “free exercise” clause. The First Amendment says, in part, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” The Lemon Test, which the majority repudiated, has been used for more than half a century to balance the two clauses of the Amendment.

Supreme Court Upholds Football Coach’s Prayer Rights; Repudiates the “Lemon Test”

In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, (Sup. Ct., June 27, 2022), the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, held that a school district violated the First Amendment’s Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses by disciplining a football coach for visibly praying at midfield immediately after football games. Justice Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion…

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Breyer and Kagan, filed a dissenting opinion, saying in part:

Official-led prayer strikes at the core of our constitutional protections for the religious liberty of students and their parents, as embodied in both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

The Court now charts a different path, yet again paying almost exclusive attention to the Free Exercise Clause’s protection for individual religious exercise while giving short shrift to the Establishment Clause’s prohibition on state establishment of religion.

SCOTUS ONLY ACCEPTS HALF OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT

The coach wasn’t satisfied with the accommodation offered by the school system. He wanted to proseletize and that had to be done loudly…immediately after the game so that everyone could see.

The Bremerton Football Prayer Ruling Has Nothing To Do With Protecting Religious Freedom

Coach Joe Kennedy is no hero of religious freedom. The Bremerton school district was more than willing to accommodate his desire for a post-game prayer. Officials offered Kennedy space where he could have prayed privately. It wasn’t good enough for him. He insisted on being on the 50-yard-line, with students, right after the game.

There’s a reason for that: Kennedy sought to make a public spectacle of his religious activity, and he clearly hoped to draw students into participating alongside him. The photos don’t lie, and they show Kennedy, surrounded by football players, students and others, holding what looks like a revival service on the field. That’s a private prayer?

Compare Kennedy’s actions to the kind of truly private, non-coercive religious expression in public schools by staff that has always been legal – a private prayer over lunch, crossing yourself before an important meeting or spending a few minutes of free time seeking solace from a religious book. None of that puts pressure on students nor was it threatened by the district’s actions.

The following blog entry by Mercedes Schneider explains how the coach promoted his post-game prayer. This was one step in coercing his players (and others) to pray with him. Student players might have though “Coach wants us to pray…if I don’t do it will I get to play as much?”

In “Private Personal Prayer” Ruling, SCOTUS Bias on Full Display

On its face, the SCOTUS supermajority’s version of events leads one to believe that once the district discovered that Kennedy was praying and offering a sort of catechism with his football players in the locker room before games as well as leading a prayer midfield immediately following games, again surrounded by his players, Kennedy stopped praying all together, then hired a lawyer and decided he needed to pray alone on the 50-yard line following games, once his players left the field. Aside from what SCOTUS majority paints as students from the opposing team just coming up to pray with him of their own volition, Kennedy complied with praying alone, yet in 2015, the district recommended that his contract not be renewed, that the district was singling Kennedy out for his “private, personal” prayers.

The SCOTUS majority does not mention Kennedy’s active role in a publicity campaign in which he announced his plans to pray midfield following a game; that he did so immediately after a game, while students were still on the field; that he invited the coach and players from the opposing team to join him. Instead, the SCOTUS supermajority errantly and conveniently disposes of the greater course of events surrounding the Kennedy debacle.

In the SCOTUS dissent, Justice Sotomayor offers details conveniently and narrowly omitted from the supermajority decision. (More to come on this.) However, those familiar with the history of Kennedy’s case in the courts need only read excerpts from the Kennedy’s case with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In July 2021, the Ninth Circuit decided not to rehear the case en banc (that is, all judges hearing the case as opposed to one or a few; usually happens when a case is deemed particularly significant).

Peter Greene at Curmudgucation, explains how the majority ignored the “establishment” clause.

SCOTUS Okays School Prayer Based On Alternate Reality

In other words–and stay with me here–a prohibition against religious speech is discriminatory if it’s only applied to religious speech. I’m not sure–after all, I’m not a fancy lawyer–but I think Gorsuch is suggesting that the First Amendment’s Establishment clause is invalid because it only applies to religious speech. At any rate, since the District’s policies “were neither neutral nor generally applicable,” they don’t hold. Because the District admits that they didn’t want to allow “an employee, while still on duty, to engage in religious conduct,” they lose.

Gorsuch acknowledges that “none of this means the speech rights of public school employees are so boundless that they may deliver any message to anyone anytime they wish” because they are still government employees, which is a nice try, but I still will cross my fingers for a bunch of teacher lawsuits claiming “My sincerely held religious belief require me to teach about systemic racism and regularly say gay.”

I’m not going to try to capture the whole of Gorsuch’s next point, but it boils down to something like this– Kennedy’s speech must have been private because it has nothing to do with doing his job, and therefor the District has no business firing him for engaging in speech that has nothing to do with his job.”

Gorsuch goes on to acknowledge that those who say teachers and coaches are leaders and all that “have a point.”

But this argument commits the error of positing an “excessively broad job descriptio[n]” by treating everything teachers and coaches say in the workplace as government speech subject to government control.

If you listen, you can hear the sound of school administrator heads exploding all over America, as they realize they will now be responsible for figuring out exactly which words that teachers say count as workplace speech.

THE LOGICAL OUTCOMES

Will this decision give teachers more opportunity to pray with their students during school time? Would this case have been decided differently if the coach had been a Muslim and put down a prayer rug on the 50 yard line after each game? What are a teacher’s responsibilities as an “agent of the state” when it comes to prayer? Does the document, A Teacher’s Guide to Religion in the Public Schools have to be changed?

Rachel Laser, President & CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, responds to the ruling in this video. I’ll give her the last word.

…Justice Alito opened and shut the decision with a reference to morality. That is disguising what is really a conservative narrow belief system that says, “My religious freedom demands that I take away yours.”

🚌🚌🚌

Comments Off on 2022 Medley #2 – SCOTUS Gets First Amendment Religion Guarantee Wrong

Filed under Article Medleys, Constitution, Religion, SCOTUS

SCOTUS Takes on Vouchers

AMERICA’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE (STILL) NOT FAILING

Charter and voucher schools, while touted as panaceas for the “sorry state” of America’s education system, don’t do any better than public schools when based on similar populations of students. In fact, the so-called “sorry state” of our public education system is pretty darn good when you realize that we work to educate everyone who walks in our public school doors.

Back in 2017 Steven Singer, who blogs at Gadfly on the Wall, told us that our public schools are among the best in the world. He wrote…

Let me repeat that in no uncertain terms – America’s public schools are NOT failing. They are among the best in the world. Really!

Here’s why: the United States educates everyone. Most other countries do not.

We have made a commitment to every single child regardless of what their parents can afford to pay, regardless of their access to transportation, regardless of whether they can afford uniforms, lunch or even if they have a home. Heck! We even provide education to children who are here illegally.

Now is a good time to remind ourselves of that fact…especially after the difficult experience of “pandemic education” (or are we still “during?”).

We should also remember that private, voucher schools don’t have to accept everyone. They can pick and choose who gets to attend their school. In Indiana, more than 95% of our voucher schools are run by religious organizations. They can refuse service to religious “others”, low achievers, and students with special needs.

And they can do all that while still filling their sectarian wallets with your money…and my money…which, in the past, had been earmarked for public schools, for the common good.

In other words, when supporters say that they need vouchers so they can “choose” private schools, what they mean is, they’ll take our public education tax dollars and let private, religious schools “choose” which students get to attend. Your children might be able to attend because they’re white, they have high test scores, or they belong to the same religion. Someone else’s children, on the other hand, might not be able to attend because they are not the same religion, not white, or are more expensive to teach because they have some high-cost learning need.

Public education reflects society. The so-called “sorry state” of public education is not in our schools, it’s in our commitment to the support of the public good.

Supreme Court likely to drop school voucher bombshell

Schools in traditionally operated school districts are not allowed to violate Maine’s anti-discrimination laws, but a school run privately by a religious organization may be able to under such a ruling. The Supreme Court has in recent years laid the legal groundwork for courts to require authorizers of charter schools to allow religious organizations to be granted charters without regard to their religious status.

“The Supreme Court is just a few small steps away from transforming every charter school law in the U.S. into a private-school voucher policy,” [Kevin Welner, director of the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder’s School of Education] writes. “Further, the nation may be facing a future of religious organizations proselytizing through charter schools that have been freed from obeying anti-discrimination laws — with LGBTQ+ community members being the most likely victims.”

The particulars of the case before the Supreme Court underscore why we need to prioritize public education. When a state, Maine in this case, doesn’t support a system of public education (in direct violation of their state constitution), substituting private, religious schools, does not necessarily support the common good.

PAUL WELLSTONE ON EDUCATION

The late Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone spoke to the concept of the common good when he said…(emphasis added)

That all citizens will be given an equal start through a sound education is one of the most basic, promised rights of our democracy. Our chronic refusal as a nation to guarantee that right for all children, including poor children, is a national disgrace. It is rooted in a kind of moral blindness, or at least a failure of moral imagination, that we do not see that meeting the most basic needs of so many of our children condemns them to lives and futures of frustration, chronic underachievement, poverty, crime and violence. It is a failure which threatens our future as a nation of citizens called to a common purpose, allied with one another in a common enterprise, tied to one another by a common bond. — 3/31/2000

The primary mission of public schools is not to teach individual students what their parents want them to learn. It’s to prepare the next generation for the task of running our society. It’s for the benefit of all of us…the common good.

🏫🏫🏫

Comments Off on SCOTUS Takes on Vouchers

Filed under CommonGood, Gadflyonthewall, Privatization, Public Ed, SCOTUS, vouchers, Wellstone

Gun Violence is Just a Fact of Life, Like the Weather

I’ve noticed that there’s not much — or at least very little — coverage of parents and activists who are badgering school board members about school shootings…other than demanding that teachers carry firearms.

Pro-gun rights lawmakers want to arm teachers, but there’s little evidence these programs work

The tragic mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, last week renewed calls for stricter gun control legislation, after 19 children and two teachers were killed, and 17 others were injured in the attack. But conservatives and gun lobbyists argue the only way to solve the country’s epidemic of mass shootings is to put more guns in the hands of the public. Some have even called for arming teachers and school staff with firearms of their own.

…The idea of training teachers, whose primary job is to educate students on lessons like math and English, as an extra security defense against potential school shooters is not new and such training programs have existed for years in some form in many states.

There is also little evidence to suggest arming school staff actually makes schools safer. On the contrary, school safety advocates warn about the potential risks of encouraging teachers to carry guns at school — increasing the number of guns in schools, even if they were put in the hands of responsible educators, may increase the likelihood of gun-related harm. Studies have also shown a direct correlation between the presence of guns and increased gun violence.

Hmmm…”studies have also shown”…sounds like science to me!

Click here or on the image, to see the entire Tom Tomorrow post.

Where are all the people who threatened, bullied, spouted conspiracy theories, demanded the banning (and/or burning) of books, and screamed at school board members about masks, critical race theory (CRT), and transgender rights?


MASKS DON’T WORK?

The “masks don’t work” theory of COVID-19: Masks don’t protect children from the COVID virus, yet somehow they do prevent O2 and CO2 from getting in and out of their lungs. This prevents breathing and will cause permanent damage.

Why aren’t they going to school board meetings demanding that ways be found to reduce school shootings?

The total number of students and school staff who died from lack of oxygen or too much carbon dioxide because they wore masks = 0.

(NOTE: The numbers of deaths quoted in the paragraph above and at other locations in this post are from a quick search of the internet and may not be 100% accurate.)

See also:

Fact check: Three children have not died from wearing masks in Germany
Mask Mythbusters: Common Questions about Kids & Face Masks


CRITICAL RACE THEORY

Teaching American history apparently makes some children feel sad, angry, or upset. But isn’t it appropriate to feel that way about various behaviors of the USA over it’s life as a nation? Slavery? Jim Crow? Japanese-American incarcerations? Does this mean we shouldn’t teach history? (NOTE: This is not a call to teach inappropriate content, or to teach content inappropriately to children based on their age and maturity. For example, we wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) use graphic images of violence, or descriptions of, the brutality of slavery with kindergartners.)

Should we not mention that ten of the first twelve presidents of the United States owned slaves?

Twelve U.S. presidents owned slaves at some point in their lives; of these, eight owned slaves while in office. Ten of the first twelve American presidents were slave owners, the only exceptions being John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams, neither of whom approved of slavery.

Should we not teach that the Civil War was mostly about slavery, for example, Mississippi’s Articles of secession included…

Mississippi: Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth… These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

…and Georgia’s…

Georgia: That reason was [the North’s] fixed purpose to limit, restrain, and finally abolish slavery in the States where it exists. The South with great unanimity declared her purpose to resist the principle of prohibition to the last extremity.

What is Critical Race Theory and Why is Everyone Talking About it?

Republican lawmakers in more than 20 states have introduced or passed legislation that would directly target the principles underlying critical race theory by banning schools from teaching about structural racism. These efforts to demonize critical race theory are gaining traction more than a year into a national reckoning with racism, following the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, and the ensuing protests.

Speaking at a conference held by the Faith and Freedom Coalition on June 18, former Vice President Mike Pence said that “critical race theory is racism.” Senator Ted Cruz, at the same gathering, compared the theory to the Ku Klux Klan saying the curriculum is “every bit as racist” as the white supremacist hate group. “Critical race theory,” the senator said, “says every white person is a racist.”

These campaigns are not just based on ignorance of how critical race theory developed and is now applied, but also represent an attempt to stoke a reactionary resistance, rather than a broader understanding.

(NOTE: Critical Race Theory is not “taught” in America’s K-12 schools. American history, on the other hand, is.)

Total number of students and school staff who died because of learning or teaching American history = 0.

TRANS RIGHTS

Do Trans girls have an advantage when participating in girls’ sports? Apparently not any more than some other girls, according to this article in Scientific American (There’s that “science” again!)…

Trans Girls Belong on Girls’ Sports Teams

…It turns out that when transgender girls play on girls’ sports teams, cisgender girls can win. In fact, the vast majority of female athletes are cisgender, as are the vast majority of winners. There is no epidemic of transgender girls dominating female sports. Attempts to force transgender girls to play on the boys’ teams are unconscionable attacks on already marginalized transgender children, and they don’t address a real problem. They’re unscientific, and they would cause serious mental health damage to both cisgender and transgender youth.

Policies permitting transgender athletes to play on teams that match their gender identity are not new. The Olympics have had trans-inclusive policies since 2004, but a single openly transgender athlete has yet to even qualify. California passed a law in 2013 that allows trans youth to compete on the team that matches their gender identity; there have been no issues. U SPORTS, Canada’s equivalent to the U.S.’s National Collegiate Athletic Association, has allowed transgender athletes to compete with the team that matches their identity for the past two years.

The notion of transgender girls having an unfair advantage comes from the idea that testosterone causes physical changes such as an increase in muscle mass. But transgender girls are not the only girls with high testosterone levels. An estimated 10 percent of women have polycystic ovarian syndrome, which results in elevated testosterone levels. They are not banned from female sports. Transgender girls on puberty blockers, on the other hand, have negligible testosterone levels. Yet these state bills would force them to play with the boys…

Total number of students and school staff who died because trans children played on sports teams = 0.

(On the other hand…A record number of transgender and gender nonconforming people in the US have been killed in 2020.)

SCHOOL SHOOTINGS

Nearly all of the school shooters since (and including) the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting in November 2012 have used semi-automatic weapons — either rifles or handguns. Have any of the people who wanted to ban the book Ruby Bridges Goes to School: My True Story by Ruby Bridges, demanded that we ban semi-automatic weapons?

Have any of the people who argued against mask mandates in schools also argued for common sense gun laws?

Isn’t there the least a bit of cognitive dissonance created by arguing against masks, CRT, or trans rights, and not doing the same about school shootings?

Total number of people who have died in US school shootings since November 2012 (including children, adults, and perpetrators) = 108.


AN OVERLAP?

Is there an overlap between people who complain to school boards about masks, Critical Race Theory (CRT), and trans children in sports, and those who identify as “pro-life.”

Is there an overlap between people who complain to school boards about masks, Critical Race Theory, and trans children in sports, and those who want to arm teachers?

Opinion: Why won’t pro-lifers act against our deadly gun culture?

Are the people who called teachers “groomers” now calling for states to arm those same educators?

And they want to arm the teachers . . .

But for God’s sake then what makes the Republicans who have produced this situation think it is reasonable to expect a teacher to engage in a gunfight with the same murderer that the police are afraid of confronting ?

🤷🏽‍♂️🙏🏽🏫

Comments Off on Gun Violence is Just a Fact of Life, Like the Weather

Filed under BannedBooks, Conspiracy, CRT, Pandemic, SchoolBoards, SchoolShootings, TransRights