Author Archives: pandora

About pandora

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Red Clay Super’s Message Regarding The Priority Schools’ MOU

Can anyone help decipher this?

From Dr. Daugherty

On September 4, the Delaware State Department of Education announced three Red Clay Consolidated School District elementary schools (Highlands, Shortlidge and Warner) would be designated as Priority Schools. The last few weeks have brought questions, concerns, excitement and apprehension from many in the schools, community and state. The district has spent a great deal of time to understand the proposed MOU and the turnaround guide provided by the DDOE and the implications for students, families and staff.

The Priority School designation provides an opportunity for additional resources to drive improvement in our schools, however it also presents challenges as we work through the development of each school’s plan.  Please be aware that the MOU and the planning process are not the same. The MOU is an agreement to collaborate during the planning process. Once approved by the school board, RCEA and myself, the MOU will be sent to the Delaware Secretary of Education for approval. After this approval, all parties will begin the work to develop the school plan. School staff, administrators, parents and community members will work together to create a plan for student success. I believe we have a template for success and understand that each school’s plan will be unique. One plan does not fit all schools.

As we work through this process, it is critical to recognize the staff and tremendous work that is already happening each day in these three schools.

Many remember that several years ago Red Clay had three schools designated as part of the State’s Partnership Zone initiative. Red Clay learned many lessons through the Partnership Zone process with the most important lesson being that when our parents, teachers and administrators work in a collaborative and purposeful manner, we can increase achievement. We are proud to say that Lewis, Marbrook and Stanton all met the state targets and were removed from the PZ list as successful schools.

In the coming months, we will continue to partner with parents, RCEA, local leaders and the Delaware Department of Education to develop a plan that will move the academic achievement of our students to greater levels. The success of our students depends on the willingness to work together for a common cause: children and their future. I do not believe the answer to this situation rests on charter schools or nonprofit agencies operating these schools. If there was an easy solution, this problem would not be a national issue. We have the ability and the track record to meet these challenges.

Children First,
Merv

“Please be aware that the MOU and the planning process are not the same. The MOU is an agreement to collaborate during the planning process.”

So… is Merv saying that the MOU is simply an invitation to get-together and chat?  That nothing in it is binding?  It’s just a “Hey, could you RSVP so we can set up a time to come up with a plan that doesn’t exist – just ignore all that talk in the MOU about the school leaders’ salaries and teachers having to reapply for their jobs, etc. because none of that means anything.”

Question… the 9/30 due date is today – there’s a workshop scheduled tonight. Can the board vote at a workshop? If not, what happens if the deadline isn’t met?

What The… This Is Not Okay

I was just listening to Al Mascitti on WDEL and this happened.

A song was playing in the background and Al asked if the song was by Nicki Minaj and Gary Mullinax said something along the line that she wasn’t the only one who “slutted” it up this week.

WTF?

He then went on to say that new feminism = whatever women want to do.  I’m sorry, does Gary have a list of what women shouldn’t do?  (It seems he does)

Earlier he went after domestic violence victims – pretty much saying that only poor women can be abused, because, you know, Rhianna is rich. (For reasons why the abused don’t leave the abuser watch this video – pay careful attention at the 11 minute mark – Gary, you need to watch the entire video.  But I’m sure this woman’s story won’t count in Gary’s eyes because she was successful – and should have known better.)

And this isn’t the first time he’s crossed the line.  A while ago he went after Lorde’s looks – a 17 year old child.  She wasn’t pretty enough for him.  And that’s really creepy.

Nothing like listening to an old man talk about sluts.  Can we stop pretending that Gary Mullinax is the Minister of Culture.  He’s not.  He’s an old man telling kids today to get off his lawn – and focusing pretty much on girl kids.  And Jason330 pointed this out in 2009.  Good going, J!

Seriously, Gary Mullinax, clean up your act – or get off the air.

Joe Biden Shows How To Speak About The Ray Rice Abuse/Assault

I love Joe!

Here are his comments regarding the Ray Rice “incident” or – as it’s known when it happens outside of a relationship – assault.

It’s never, never, never the woman’s fault. No man has a right to raise a hand to a woman. No means no. […] The one regret I have is we call it domestic violence as if it’s a domesticated cat. It is the most vicious form of violence there is, because not only the physical scars are left, the psychological scars that are left. This whole culture for so long has put the onus on the woman. What were you wearing? What did you say? What did you do to provoke? That is never the appropriate question.

And…

The next challenge is making sure, ironically, we get college presidents and colleges to understand that they have a responsibility for the safety of women on their campus. They have a responsibility to do what we know from great experience works. Bringing the experts. Provide people, give the young woman the support that she needs. Psychological support. the medical support, and if need be, the legal support. Societal changes taking place. It takes time. But I really believe it’s taking root, and we have an obligation to just keep pushing it.

This is how it’s done, people!  Really, it’s not difficult.  Go Joe!

Governor And Department of Ed: “Announcing New Education Initiative” Event

I just returned from attending this:

 Announcing New Education Initiative

What: Governor Markell and the Department of Education will announce a new initiative to support many of the state’s most disadvantaged students–Joined by state legislators and education and community leaders, the Governor will provide details of the state’s plan.

Who: Governor Markell
Secretary Mark Murphy, Department of Education
State legislators
Education and community leaders

When: ­Thursday, September 4th at 10:00 a.m.

Where: Warner Elementary School, 801 W 18th Street, Wilmington

Here’s my summary.  (It was extremely difficult to hear so please correct any mistakes I may have made.)

Governor Jack Markell:

6 schools – 3 in Christina (Stubbs, Bancroft, Bayard) and 3 in Red Clay (Warner, Shortlidge, Highlands) will be part of this initiative

Poverty is a big problem, but can’t delay in improving education

Research shows it can be done – cites Boston

New strategies = 6 million dollars = hold them accountable

There will be “unprecedented authority” for school leaders (things like extending the school day, recruiting teachers) – I’d list other things, but I don’t think any were mentioned – the sound quality was awful, so if anyone knows what else “unprecedented authority” included, please  let me know.

Accountability for everyone, but parents and teachers were mentioned most often by almost every speaker.  Parent accountability was stressed a LOT, but no details were given on how one would achieve this.

Below I will briefly summarize what I heard (and that wasn’t easy to do) from each speaker.  (Needless to say, this is not a transcript.)

Guest speakers:

Mervin Daugherty (Superintendent Red Clay): We need to summon the will/ We have to do it now.  This is a state issue not a school issue

Freeman L. Williams (Superintendent Christina): New day, new opportunity – opportunity to cut down barriers

Pastor Merredith Griffith (IMAC): Education is a community issue.  Excited that action is being taken.  Parents and children are/need to be (not sure due to mic quality/traffic) represented.

Councilman Nnamdi O. Chukwuocha: Attended Warner.  This is a wonderful opportunity.  Not a magic wand, but a step in the right direction.  City needs a defined role.

Mayor Williams:  I’m sorry, but I couldn’t understand what he said.  If anyone else did, please let me know.  I did hear part of his closing – Our children are the future.

Senator Margaret Henry:  Hold teachers and parents accountable.  (Again, it was so hard to hear all she said)

Rep. Stephanie Bolden:  Need parent involvement.  “We (city schools) have all the resources other schools have.”

*Sorry, but that last statement of Rep. Bolden’s isn’t true and a big part of the problem facing city schools.

Councilman Jea Street:  Separate but equal is inherently unequal. As soon as court order lifted we intentionally re-segregated our schools – cites NSA (Neighborhood Schools Act), Choice and Charters.  Called for less districts in the city – city has no control.  Funding equalization.  Has 6 million reasons why he’ll support this initiative.

Okay, here’s the gist of it… This is a “great opportunity” that will cost 6 million dollars and we need accountability.

What?  You expected details of the initiative?  Me too.

 

HB 424 – Eliminating The “Special Interest” In Charter And VoTech

On July, 1,2014, Rep. Darryl Scott introduced HB 424:

Primary Sponsor: Scott
CoSponsors: { NONE…}
Introduced on : 07/01/2014
Long Title: AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 14 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
Synopsis of Orginal Bill:
(without Amendments)		 This bill eliminates the ability of charter schools to give an enrollment preference to students who have a specific interest in the school’s teaching methods, philosophy, or educational focus, or who are within a five-mile radius. It also requires that admission to vocational-technical high schools be determined by a lottery system.

Looks like Rep. Scott has handed the House his retirement gift, and I really hope other members pick up his call.

First, I’ve always had a problem with picking a career path for a 10 and 13 year old (and in some cases younger).  And I’m really not sure how children that age “demonstrate” special interest.  Of course, those with financially secure parents will have quite a resumé of science, math, arts camps and visits to the Met or NASA, but how does an average kid, who doesn’t have those advantages, demonstrate special interest?  Especially when you consider the admission’s requirements for certain Charters, Vo-Techs and Magnet schools (Yep, magnet schools should be in this bill, too).  It doesn’t appear to be enough to say, “I really like and have always been interested in science, art, math, etc.”.  Or, why taking the time to complete an application to a specific interest school doesn’t demonstrate… well, interest.

We are all aware that The Charter School of Wilmington has an admissions, I mean placement test.  It is used as way to determine which classes to place a student.  They also require an essay to be completed on the test day, and according to CSW’s website the essay “is also used to phase students once they are enrolled at  CSW.” Well, if that’s true, then why not give the test/essay after the student is accepted?  Seriously, why not?

And it’s not only charter schools that have the special interest requirement.  Magnet schools are doing this as well.

Conrad Schools of Science requires an interview/assessment appointment for all high school and in District applicants. This consists of an approximately 10 minute interview and an approximately 30 minute writing assessment.  As well as submitting… Current year’s report card, Previous year’s report card, Standardized test scores (DSTP, DCAS, Terranova, CAT, MAP, etc.), and Student work from science class (project, poster, etc.).  Conrad transformed into a magnet in the fall of 2007.  In the year before the transformation, Conrad had 74% low income and 18.4% special ed.  In the 2013 – 2014 school year, Conrad has 35.6% low income and 2.9% special ed.  Draw your own conclusions.

Cab Calloway School of the Arts requires an assessment.  They say… “Your enrollment is based solely on your performance during the assessment.”  Here’s where all those expensive piano lessons and art camps pay off.

Even Vo-Tech is requiring an essay: An application is complete when the form (with parent signature), essay, final report card from the previous school year, and a most recent report card are submitted.  Why is that?

Back to HB 424… Scott also wants to eliminate the 5 mile radius, which brings Newark Charter School’s policies into play.  I’ll sit back and wait for the explosion.

All of these schools require more than specific interest, and every additional requirement for admission is a way, imo, to shape their populations.

I really hope someone picks up HB 424.  It’s past time to address these issues.  We really need to stop carving public education into slices.

Are You Ready For A Labor Day Weekend Foodie Post?

It’s been a while since we had a foodie thread.  As usual, please share your recipes in the comment section.

Have you ever made pizza on the grill?  No?  Well, you’re missing out.  This pizza is amazing.  Do not be daunted by dough making.  The olive oil in the dough makes for easy kneading – or if you have a KitchenAid mixer with a dough hook even better.

Perfecting this pizza took several tries (it was delicious every time) due to the speed at which it cooks.  Below the recipe I’ll include some helpful hints!

PIZZA ON THE GRILL

Dough:

1 2/3 cups water
2 teaspoons active dry or instant yeast
1/4 cup olive oil
5 cups all-purpose flour
2 teaspoons salt

Combine water and yeast and let sit for a few minutes until yeast is dissolved.  Add remaining ingredients in order listed.  Use a spatula to combine all ingredients.  Knead the dough to form a smooth ball.  By hand: approx. 6-8 minutes. By mixer with dough hook: 5-7 minutes on low speed.

Once the dough is ready, separate into 4 balls, place on a lightly greased cookie sheet (I use olive oil and coat each dough ball) and let rise until doubled in size (1 – 1 1/2 hours).

Roll out dough – mine end up being more rectangular in shape.

Ready for the notes?  Yep, I have a lot of them!

1. Do not roll your dough out too thin or it will fall through the grill grates!
2. I roll out the crust on an olive oiled surface.  Then I brush a sheet of wax paper with olive oil, place one rolled out crust on it, brush the top of the crust with olive oil, and place another piece of wax paper on top.  Brush the top of that piece of wax paper with olive and continue procedure with remaining crusts – form a stack.  This allows the dough not to stick and makes making multiple pizzas easier and much quicker.
3. Unless you have a really large grill, do one pizza at a time.  The dough will cook quickly.
4. Have all your toppings prepped and within easy reach.
5. If you’re using garlic – and, really, who wouldn’t? – chop it in a mini food processor with olive oil  The chopped garlic and olive oil mixture will allow you to use a pastry brush to apply.
6. I saute bell peppers and onions (or any other veggie that takes time) rather than use them raw.  The pizza cooks so fast that they won’t soften if used raw.  Cook all meat beforehand.
How I grill the pizza:1. Make sure your grill is hot – around 400-450 degrees.  If your grill isn’t hot the dough will fall though the grates.
2. Brush the side you’re placing down on the grill lightly with olive oil.  Place on grill and close the lid.  With tongs/spatula check the underside of the pizza.  It should be lightly browned with grill marks.  This will not take long!
3. Before flipping the pizza, lightly brush the raw dough side (side facing up) with olive oil so it won’t stick to the grill.
4. Once the first side is done, flip the pizza.  Allow the second side to cook briefly – firm, but not completely cooked.
5. Remove from grill.  Add toppings. Return to grill and cook until done.  *I do this because I have found that the dough finishes cooking before the cheese melts.  Also, use cheese sparingly.  These pizzas are done quickly and it’s easy to burn the crust while waiting for the cheese/toppings to be ready.
Yes, this seems like a lot of steps, but most of them concern timing and will really help.
Tres Leches Cake
Looking for a great dessert?  Ever try making a Tres Leches cake?  Amazingly, good.  I experimented with several recipes and this one, from the Food Network, is simply the best.  (It’s rare I don’t tweak a recipe, but this one is really great.)
Of course, I do have some suggestions to go with this recipe!
1. I make this is a 9″x13″ pan.
2. Once the cake is slightly cooled do not forget to make holes (I use the rounded end of a wooden spoon) all over the cake – or else the milks will all run to the edges.
3. When I’m pouring the milk over the cake, I place a ramekin/bowl/cup on a cookie sheet and place the cake pan on the ramekin to elevate. This way when the milk overflow the edges – and it will! – I don’t make a huge mess!
4. This cake needs to chill for at least 3-4 hours or overnight.
5. I have made this with the Grand Marnier, but I’m going to try it with Amaretto or Kaluha this weekend.
Enjoy!  And please share your recipes below!

California’s “Yes Means Yes” Bill

Via Washington Post:

The California state senate unanimously approved a bill on Thursday that defines when “yes” means “yes” to sex.

Instead of “no means no” – the phrase commonly associated with sexual assault prevention – the law would require “affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement” by each party to engage in sexual activity. If Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signs the bill into law – he has until the end of September – colleges and universities would have to adopt the so-called affirmative consent standard to continue receiving state funds for student financial aid.

[…]

Under the proposed standard, the fact that a person didn’t say “no” is no defense in a campus sexual assault investigation.

In addition to consenting up front, the bill requires affirmative consent to be “ongoing throughout the sexual activity,” meaning that sexual partners must agree to each step of a sexual encounter as it progresses and consent can be revoked at any time. The standard would apply to all sexual encounters regardless of whether the parties are having a one-night stand or are in a long-term relationship.

One thing the bill doesn’t say is that affirmative consent must be verbal.

Does everyone remember, during the Steubenville trial, where the defense attorney, in regards to the passed out girl not giving consent, said, “Well, she didn’t say ‘no’.”  Yep.  That was an eye opener and gives us insight into where, in part, this bill is coming from.

It’s no surprise that I’m okay with this bill.  The previous “No Means No” criteria put the responsibility on the victim – even if they were incapable of saying no.

And I really don’t get why consent is always a big deal – some sort of onerous burden.  Anyone having sex knows that consent is part of the act – every step of the way.  They are aware that sex isn’t a solo act.

But just in case there’s still some confusion, here’s my advice.  If you are with someone and the idea that they may claim rape in the morning pops into your head (not likely, but I’ll play along with this myth) then it is your responsibility to not have sex with them.  Got it?  It’s your responsibility – especially since thinking such a thing about a person you’re about to have sex with is a HUGE red flag.  Proceed at your own risk – and I do mean your risk.

Everyone owns their sexuality and placing your future – reproductive, health, freedom – into the hands of someone else is you abdicating your responsibility.  (I stress this because I had this conversation with my son and nephew this summer.  They were watching some show, and on the show one guy said, “She’s pregnant?  Oh man, she trapped you.” and the other guy responded, “She “claimed” she was on the Pill.”  I paused the show and told them that no one was in charge of their reproductive future but them.  And if they made the choice to abdicate their sexual responsibility by not wearing a condom then they had no right to point fingers at anyone but themselves.)

Basically, all this bill does is acknowledge that it takes two conscious, willing people to have sex.  Which seems pretty obvious, but maybe not.  And that’s a scary thought.

 

 

Badges? We Don’t Need No Stinking Badges

Matthew Yglesias at Vox brings up an important question.

Above you’ll see a picture of Scott Olson, the Getty photographer who’s brought us many of the most striking images of protests and police crackdown that followed the shooting of Michael Brown. [Click on the link in my first sentence to see the picture]

The other two men in the photograph have not yet been identified to the public. […] Reasonable people can disagree about when, exactly, it’s appropriate for cops to fire tear gas into crowds. But there’s really no room for disagreement about when it’s reasonable for officers of the law to take off their badges and start policing anonymously.

There’s only one reason to do this: to evade accountability for your actions.

Olson was released shortly after his arrest, as were Reilly and Lowery before him. Ryan Devereaux from The Intercept and Lukas Hermsmeier from the German tabloid Bild were likewise arrested last night and released without charges after an overnight stay in jail. In other words, they never should have been arrested in the first place. But nothing’s being done to punish the mystery officers who did the arresting.

[…]

Policing without a nametag can help you avoid accountability from the press or from citizens, but it can’t possibly help you avoid accountability from the bosses.

For that you have to count on an atmosphere of utter impunity. It’s a bet many cops operating in Ferguson are making, and it seems to be a winning bet.

Let’s get this out of the way.  I am not anti-police.  I am a cop’s kid.  So… I called my father and asked him about police not wearing identification.  Yep, that’s a big no no.  The public has a right to know who’s arresting them.  What happens if a person being arrested has a complaint about the way an officer handled the arrest?  How would they file that complaint without the officer’s name?

Here’s the bottom line.  The police have the power to arrest/detain citizens.  They also have the power to use lethal force.  With those powers come responsibility, accountability and transparency.  I’m sorry, but that is not debatable.

Removing identification doesn’t inspire trust in Ferguson/St. Louis law enforcement (Is there much trust left?).  In fact, it plays into the narrative that the police in Ferguson are functioning with impunity.

Not All Accidents Are Created Equal

Josh Marshall, TPM, has a post up about gun shootings and language clarity.  While I see where he’s coming from, I think he misses the point with these “accidental” gun shootings.  Here’s how he explains it:

Over the last 18 months, we’ve made an on-going effort to highlight various cases of accidental shootings – sometimes leading to grave injuries, other times to minor ones, but usually illustrating the straightforward fact that guns are dangerous and people often do stupid things with them. Like showing them off to friends while they’re loaded, or showing them off when the gun is loaded and the gun-shower is also loaded, or leaving them unsecured where 3 year olds can find them and blow their heads off. But frequently, and increasingly of late, we get emails from readers criticizing our decision to call these shootings ‘accidents’ because that is not, in their view, what they are.
But, of course, that is exactly what they are. Of course, shooters may have fooled authorities into believing an intentional homicide was unintentional. But that’s a different issue.

Here’s an example I just received from TPM Reader, in reference to this about a pregnant Florida woman shot dead by a friend who was showing her some of his new guns …

Please, I am tired of this misrepresentation. She was not accidentally shot in the head. She was shot in the head by a grossly negligent gun owner. These are not accidents.

I am always a little mystified by these emails because at one level they seem to show a simple lack of understanding of what the word ‘accident’ means. The primary meaning of ‘accident’ is an unfortunate and usually unexpected event that happens without anyone intending it. Most of us know this. So I assume there’s no need to be belabor the point. Calling something an ‘accident’ doesn’t mean it is blameless or doesn’t involve negligence. In fact, most accidental shootings almost by definition involve some level of negligence, whether or not authorities decide it rises to the level of criminal culpability. Indeed, calling something “grossly negligent” basically requires an ‘accident’ since a person cannot be negligent about something if the outcome is one they intended.

I see what he’s saying, but I disagree – mainly because we don’t apply this sort of reasoning to our daily life.  When my kids were younger they use to think I was psychic, that I could see the future.  I always seemed to know when the glass of milk was going to spill.  Now, I wasn’t psychic, I simply saw, due to their behavior, what was going to happen.  And while they had no intention of spilling the milk, their actions resulted in spilled milk.

Texting/talking on a cell phone while driving is a similar example.  Does the person texting/talking on their phone intend to cause a car accident?  Of course not.  Are they more likely to cause a car accident due to their behavior?  Yes.

So there are degrees of accidents.  Driving carefully and having a deer dart out in front of you is a very different accident than driving while using a cell phone.  And that’s the difference when it comes to “accidental” gun shootings.  The introduction of a gun into these situations makes the tragic outcome more likely.  If the gun isn’t brought out to show off (and, really, that’s why it’s brought out) then no one would be shot.

So while technically these shootings are “accidents” they aren’t accidents in the way of “who could have known that would happen?”  These gun shootings deserve their own category, because “Oops!” doesn’t cut it, and pretending these shootings could happen to anyone simply isn’t true.  Introducing a gun into a room full of people isn’t an accident.  It’s a deliberate act with dire consequences.  When these shootings happen no one is surprised – and surprise at the outcome is one of the major components of an accident.  If you aren’t surprised that someone is shot when a gun enters the room then that isn’t really an accident.

Cape Henlopen School Board: Banning Books And Emails

I’m sure everyone is familiar with latest book banning drama from the Cape Henlopen School Board.  If not, here’s the recap:

Cape Henlopen School District’s decision to take a book off a summer reading list for incoming high school freshmen has drawn protests from librarians, some parents and teachers.

The young-adult book, “The Miseducation of Cameron Post,” which features a main character who is gay, was removed from the list by the school board in late June. The board majority cited foul language, not sexual orientation, as the reason for their action.

Which was followed by this:

Several Cape Henlopen School Board members indicated a willingness to reconsider their vote last month to remove a young adult novel from a freshman summer reading list at a Thursday meeting where librarians and a parent criticized them for it.

Now, this isn’t the first time the Cape Henlopen School Board went after a book.  It’s obviously a “thing” for this school board.

But today’s article in the Cape Gazzette brings a new tactic to the the table.

Danforth’s letter was not the only letter to the board. Brittingham forwarded a selection of letters to the Cape Gazette.

Chris Spicer, identified as a Cape High parent, questions what damage would have been done if the book was kept on the list.

“I feel strongly that the value of the content of this book far outweighs any poor language. You as a board member are empowered to make decisions for a public school system that should promote the best opportunities for all students,” Spicer writes.

In another email, Joe Niemand, who identifies himself as “a gay man who would like things to be easier for future generations,” sarcastically thanks the board for a knee-jerk, homophobic reaction.

“As a result of your ignorance and prejudice, this book will receive a tremendous amount of attention over the coming weeks,” he writes.

In responding to all the emails, Brittingham thanks the writer for their concern and stands by the board’s decision to remove the book from the list based on the language. [emphasis mine]

First, did the Cape Gazette file an FOIA requesting those emails?

Second, why would the Cape Gazette only publish the emails (complete with the email writers’ names) that disagreed with the board?  Did Brittingham forward all the emails surrounding this issue, or just these?  And was he complying with FOIA request, or did he just forward a selection of emails to the Cape Gazette on his own?  That’s a pretty big question.

Why aren’t the emails (and their authors’ names) complaining about the book listed in the article?  Why are they still referred to as “parents” in articles?  When will their emails and identities be published? (FYI: I don’t think anyone’s personal emails to their elected officials should be published this way.) And should we all be prepared for the emails we send to our elected officials to be published in the newspaper?

Even more interesting, it appears that the people whose private emails (to their elected school board representatives) were published in the Gazette may not have been consulted.

As I write this, I have received confirmation that Chris Spicer was not asked if it was okay for Brittingham to release her email to the press.  She’s not ashamed of her views, but when the people who wrote/complained to have the book removed are anonymous… Well, If I were a Cape parent/citizen, I would think twice before emailing that school board.

It has also come to my attention that parents and citizens have filed a formal complaint with the district demanding that the book be returned immediately to the summer reading list on the grounds that the board failed to follow their own written policy when they voted to remove the book.  Good for them!  Since when does a school board dictate curriculum?  Answer:  Never.

The Hobby Lobby Ruling Is A Slippery Slope That Will Affect More Than Contraceptives

If you haven’t read Justice Ginsburg’s dissent in the Hobby Lobby case you really should.  She makes excellent points – points that demonstrate how this ruling will extend beyond contraceptives.

In a decision of startling breadth, the Court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.

She’s correct, of course.  No matter how the majority opinion tried to limit this ruling to controlling women (and Alito didn’t even bother to explain why this ruling was limited) it opens the door to every company’s “sincerely held religious beliefs”.  How could it not?

What other laws could a corporation opt out of due to their religious beliefs?  Could they cite their religious beliefs to pay men more?  Could they refuse to hire homosexuals due to their “sincerely held religious belief” that homosexuality is an abomination before the eyes of their god?  Why not?  Seriously, why not?  Go read the ruling and show me (other than Alito saying so) why this ruling couldn’t be applied to other sincerely held religious beliefs.

And you know this is coming.  No matter how much the 5 conservative men on the Supreme Court put their fingers in their ears and went, “Lalalalala!  We can’t hear you!  This only affects contraception!” we knew, as soon as the ruling was handed down, that religious groups lawyered up.  Which will leave the Court with the option of acknowledging all “sincerely held religious beliefs” or ruling that all religions aren’t created equal, thereby establishing a… national religion?

Ginsburg Points addresses this:

Indeed, approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be “perceived as favoring one religion over another,” the very “risk the Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.” Ibid. The Court, I fear, has wandered into a minefield.

The ruling states that this only applies to certain contraceptives (for now, because we know they’re coming for the Pill next, since Plan B is the flippin’ Pill.  And if you “believe” Plan B is an abortifacient then you believe the Pill is as well. You’d be an idiot who doesn’t understand the science behind contraceptives, but the Hobby Lobby case showed that science and facts don’t matter.  Only beliefs matter – even when they’re wrong.), but how is applying this ruling only to contraceptives possible unless the Court only recognizes Hobby Lobby’s religion?  There are religions that don’t believe in blood transfusions, vaccinations, HIV treatments, etc..  Are their beliefs not sincerely held?  Are they not considered “real” religions?

Talk about a slippery slope, and Ginsburg is correct, we have wandered into a minefield that extends far beyond contraceptives.

BREAKING: Hobby Lobby Ruling Today In

I’m not sure what to expect, but I’m leaning towards the Supreme Court, yet again, not doing their job.  My guess, and I could very well be wrong, is that they rule in favor of Hobby Lobby, but pull a Bush v Gore cop out – meaning that the enforcers of the law of the land will make their ruling extremely narrow.

But one of my biggest problems with this case is that it’s not based on facts.  Hobby Lobby doesn’t want to cover emergency contraceptives like Plan B, Ella and IUDs.  Hobby Lobby says their “religious beliefs prohibit them from providing health coverage for contraceptive drugs and devices that end human life after conception.”

Um… okay… but… Plan B, Ella and IUDs don’t end life after conception.  Plan B and Ella delay ovulation.  If you’ve already ovulated when you take them they won’t work.  No egg = no pregnancy.  The IUD functions by affecting sperms movements so the sperm can’t join with an egg.  Hormonal IUDs prevent ovulation.  Everybody with me?  Hobby Lobby’s reason for denying these contraceptives is medically and scientifically wrong.  They base their case on what they “believe” not facts.  Kinda scary, no?  What if someone “believes” blood pressure medicine causes abortions and don’t want to cover them in their health plan?  Should the SCOTUS hear that case?  Based on this case, they should.

I’ll update this post when the ruling comes down.  Until then… share your thoughts on this case.

UPDATE:  Supreme Court rules that closely held corporations cannot be required to provide contraception coverage. Win for Hobby Lobby.  Get ready for employers denying blood transfusions and vaccines.

Update/Update:  I was correct.  The court’s ruling was extremely narrow, applying only to women’s health.  Anyone surprised?  Get ready for corporations to convert to religious beliefs.  Science and women lost today.  And the court is kidding itself if it thinks this doesn’t set precedent, because it does.