- April 23, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Dear Editor:
Recently a School Board member in our school district is fighting against George M. Johnson’s “All Boys Aren’t Blue.” She is getting tons of flack for it, but she has my full support.
We have an age limit on cigarettes. There is an age limit on when you can drive. There is an age limit on when you can go to bars. There are limits on recreational drug usage and limits on illegal drugs.
Why do we as a society create these limitations? Could it be because we recognize that our brains need time to develop the ability to control our impulses?
For me, as a parent, this isn't about an LGBT standpoint. If this were a heterosexual couple, the descriptive details would be just as appalling to me.
My point is, removing this book from schools is not about censorship. It's about age appropriateness. If parents are OK with their children reading this, let them buy it for them. But having explicit porn in schools is not OK with me.
I have done extensive research on porn and the effects porn has on our brains. Did you know that the same center in our brain that lights up in heroin users is the same center of our brains that lights up with porn watching? What that means is that porn is just as addictive as heroin.
Would you hand your child heroin? Why then is it OK for the schools to hand this book to our children who do not have fully formed impulse controls?
What is next? Do we have live sex shows in school? I mean, we want the kids to be educated right?
It is the schools’ job to protect our children from harm — and porn harms!
Kay Raymond
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
In Mike Cocchiola's letter to the editor in the Oct. 28 edition, he encourages those of his persuasion to "get mad, stand up against radical right.” I am a bona fide member of the right; I am to the right of Attila the Hun, and every day I thank my ancestors for endowing me with the intelligence needed to become a conservative. Mike doesn't need to tell his coconspirators to get mad; they already are.
Blaming the Republicans for the condition of our sorry school system and saying they are becoming the American Taliban is delusional and a lie. The teachers unions and the Democrats run the schools.
Douglas R. Glover
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
I am submitting this rebuttal to a letter written by Mike Cocchiola, former head of a local Democratic Club, entitled “Get mad, stand up against radical right.”
Mr. Cocchiola states that our education system is under attack by the radical right; but our education system is being attacked, influenced and altered by the radical left of the Democratic Socialist Party. Canceling books, altering or erasing history, teaching our children to hate each other through critical race theory, and teaching that there are more than two genders are just a few of the examples of what is occurring in our education system.
Parents from all parties have started to stand up and resist this type of indoctrination in our schools.
We are trying to preserve our education system and have our children learn to think for themselves. We still believe in God, our Constitution and the freedoms our ancestors have fought and died for.
If the Republican Party, or the right wing, is the new American Taliban, then surely the Democratic Party, or the left wing, is the new Nazi Party of the United States!
I label myself as a Conservative Libertarian Constitutionalist. I am also an Army veteran (paratrooper) of 22 years. I love my country and our way of life. I do not love the path our country is headed down. I will fight to resist that course in whichever manner is required to preserve our country. In the eyes of the Democrats I am a potential terrorist, a threat. In actually, I am an American, just like Mr Cocchiola, and I support his right to freedom of speech, religion and pursuit of happiness, but I draw the line at his party’s tactics and labeling. We all need to remember, the right wing and the left wing are of the same bird!
Henry C. McMillan
Palm Coast
Dear Editor:
The fact that David Sullivan has used his position on the Flagler County Commission as a tool for intimidation is shameful. Dave Sullivan pulled consent item 7C from the Nov. 1 agenda to amend it to approve Jack Corbett but reject Mike Goodman from the Planning and Development Board.
The background information he cited was that because Mr. Goodman is a party with Captain's BBQ's current litigation with the county and that he has been a negative influence on the planning board. He provided no proof of this supposed negative influence, save his feelings. He further stated that until that lawsuit is canceled, Mr. Goodman should remain off the planning board until the lawsuit is resolved. The consent agenda part starts at 57:58 on YouTube; I recommend watching.
As stated by Commissioner Joe Mullins, the commission caused this litigation to be necessary. The county has continued to blatantly ignore a legal, binding and signed agreement with Captain's BBQ. This litigation could be resolved easily by the commission.
The item was approved as amended by Sullivan, Mullins and Commissioner Donald O’Brien, so they are complicit to this act of intimidation, in my opinion. Commissioner Greg Hansen voted no, and Commissioner Andy Dance abstained due to a business conflict.
If this is how the commission is allowed to operate, then we have taken quite an alarming turn at Albuquerque. Threats, intimidation and retaliation are often resolved by the courts. Perhaps this latest intimidation action toward a witness and plaintiff in a litigation proceeding needs greater scrutiny?
Paul Anderson
Palm Coast
