Posted on 12/16/2004 10:05:07 AM PST by presidio9
Two parents, shocked at frank talk during a gay and lesbian awareness day at Newton North High, were forced off the property after one parent whipped out a video camera and started taping.
``This does not belong in curriculum,'' said Kim Cariani, who said four police officers and the principal told them they would be charged with trespassing if they did not leave.
``It's against my religion. It's morally wrong and forced in a child's face.''
Each year, some students at Newton North forgo classes during To BGLAD: Transgender, Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Awareness Day with assembly-like sessions including ``Out at the Old Ballgame'' and ``Color Me Queer.'' Students are not required to attend.
Cariani kept her two kids home during the day, but she was curious.
Cariani and another parent, Brian Camenker, were in the audience when adults in a panel discussion talked about being gay. When one man told the students he was attracted to his sister's husband, Cariani said she started to record the ``propaganda, false information and lies.''
The principal demanded Cariani turn over the videotape or leave, Camenker said.
``They took the two of us and pulled us out and gave us one minute to leave and if we came back on the property we would be arrested for trespassing,'' he said.
Tom Mountain, a columnist for the Newton Tab, was also barred from the assembly ``for the safety and security of the children,'' he said he was told.
Newton schools Superintendent Jeff Young said it is a violation of school policy to tape or photograph students without parental permission. Cariani refused to give up the tape, so they were asked to decamp, he said.
The awareness day, held for the past 10 years, is one of several ways the schools highlight diversity, Young said. Students who don't want to go can go to the library or computer lab.
Well, I don't beleive for a second that the parent of every kid there expressly gave permission for their kids to be taped. The liklihood of that is practically zero.
She has every right in the world not to agree with this and to lodge a complaint. She just cannot tape it.<<
I see no reason why taping the event would be trespassing. But since this liberal school obviously has something to hide, I suggest the Mom (or any other objector) should have sat happily listening on the front row, nodding her head in agreement..while the micro-cassett taped rolled.
I saw the tape contents. It was run on Fox 25 local newscast at 11:00 last night. There isn't much on it except the angry faces of the school bureaucrats harrasing her before they called the cops to have her removed.
I'm sure it's selectively applied, but it's not because they're worried about other Newton parents seeing it, it's because the individuals involved have a record of bringing tons of publicity (often quite harsh) onto whatever corner of Massachusetts they're focusing on at the time.
LOL!!!
"Small optional assemblies."
You're too clever by far. I went to Newton High School, which became Newton North High School. It is one of two public high schools in a city of over 100,000 population and it serves about 65 percent of that population.
Assemblies at Newton North are not small and as proven earlier on this site, the administration did as much as legally possible to make opting-out difficult. This was clearly not an opt-in assembly.
Having read over 180 postings on this topic, I am convinced that Newton North officials barred videotaping because that's what got agenda-pushers in trouble at Tufts. All high-school assemblies should be taped by the school for posterity and legal purposes. The rights of those individuals wishing to also tape should be respected.
Why should school officials fear being recorded if they are doing nothing wrong?
It means you're either:
1. Seriously mentally retarded and are unable to read articles on FR (doubtful since you write English competently)
2. Want to remain ignorant of the "gay" agenda and purposely avoid reading articlces about it (doubtful, since you so often show up on the "gay" agenda threads to argue against its existence
or
3. Agree with it and therefore it isn't an "agenda".
Case close again and appeal denied.
Well, wrongdoing by government officials if often perceived as being intentional when really they are just trying to cover thier rear-ends. I will concede that this is a possibility here.
Yep. Do a google on Tufts fistgate.
Has anyone contacted the Newton police to ask why they assisted in removing this woman who was not trespassing and was not disruptive and was singled out for harassment by school officials?
Why aren't police versed in the rights of those who are being harassed by government officials? Why must rights always be redressed in court?
The police should be included in any lawsuit for wrongful arrest.
Schooling not for the people, not of the people, and not by the people.
Proposing that all assemblies be taped is novel, but it is not the case here. If the board, acting on behalf of the people of the city, approved it, I would see no problem with it. But that simply is not the current policy.
I disagree. In this day and age, only a videotape is acceptable to the public as proof positive something actually happened. Mere written notes, or recollections afterwards, are not. I can easily envision a scenario in which the woman did exactly what you suggested, but was later found to have "exaggerated" or "made stuff up" because of her ideological opposition of the material presented. With a videotape, detractors could not make those assertions.
Besides, what possibly could be wrong with recording this information? It's supposed to be helpful and beneficial for high school students---why isn't it helpful and beneficial for all? What's wrong with bringing forth all this knowledge, so it can see the light of day and be judged on its merits?
You hide behind legal-ise.
Since the article states that she clearly wasn't taping the students, your point is moot.
After the slate of school shootings in the late 90's, most schools instituted a very strict policy of who is allowed on the grounds at any point in time.
Unless the days activities were open to invited parents, no one outside the school is allowed on the grounds. So if this woman was on the grounds, she technically was tresspassing (especially since her kids weren't even in class that day).
This is a great point. I wonder if we could find out if there are events that are permitted to be taped at that school and others that are not?
Also - in the denomination I use to belong to, the United Church of CHrist, I once video taped a public meeting open to anyone who would attend and there were homosexuals telling why they ought to be permitted to be counsellors at camp and ordained. I was told to turn over the tape or else...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.