Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Stay in Your Lane
I’ve been a school board member for five years now; I’m into my second term. I saw this article the other day and I’m surprised, but maybe I shouldn’t be: San Diego school board passes resolution in support of reproductive rights.
Now, I don’t know how differently school boards operate in California versus Texas. To pass such a resolution here, it would have had to have been added to the agenda before the meeting (72 hours before unless it was an emergency meeting). A bunch of people were just recalled from the San Francisco school board, mostly because during the pandemic they focused on everything except students. This strikes me as much the same thing.
Now, I’m a board member in a small rural district. People run for our board positions only for reasons to do with the schools; in larger urban districts many run as a stepping stone to some other elected position, and I’m sure in San Diego it’s much the same. What other reason could there be for even making such a resolution? I know progressives feel driven to virtue signal constantly; maybe they just can’t help themselves.
How much mischief would be avoided if politicians stayed in their own lanes?
Update: I just looked it up and San Diego board members are paid. Seems like a taxpayer would have a good argument for misconduct by board members.
Published in General
My guess is that they are in favor of abortion, not reproductive rights. You’re right. They should stay in their lane.
Technically, they’re in favor of NON-reproductive rights.
Companies are declaring that paying for abortions is cheaper than paying for maternity leave. Why should schools be any less gross? These people all deserve the Stink Eye.
I mostly blame social media for everything, but I think it is particularly culpable when it comes to the “why can’t people stay in their lane” department. Facebook and (especially) Twitter have given everyone a microphone of the same size and amplification, and people think that what they have to say on every single thing, no matter how inapt and irrelevant it is to themselves, and no matter how inappropriate or pointless their opinion is, actually matters and must be said. Also, thanks to Twitter, if they don’t “take a stand” on the topic of the day, then the howling mob descends. Most of this stuff, I think, is just an attempt to stay one step ahead of the howling mob. Shameful.
Social media does promote these things but it also exposes this stuff. I think this would still be happening maybe a bit slower but still happening. Now we can at least see it.
Well, when a High School also has “a climate action and civic leadership instructor” I’m not exactly surprised.
“You know, someday, we’re going to get enough people on the Supreme Court to change that law.”
It was on October 27, 1994 that Seinfeld ‘s “The Couch” episode first aired. That was 21 years after Roe v. Wade, or 27.5 years ago.
McLuhan said artists are the antennae of society. With a small moment they capture an undercurrent, and signal– or warn of — a future change. McLuhan compared such media signals to the DEW-line, the Distant Early Warning system for missile attacks.
The most successful (and prescient) artists are the ones who refuse to stay in their lane. That’s okay, because most societies can afford a few reckless artistic geniuses.
But what if a major institution like the Supreme Court veers out of its lane? Sometimes it can take half a century of patience to steer it back, you might say. But not if there’s oncoming traffic. That local school board’s gesture may seem like petty virtue signaling to some, but it may be a caution warning: Danger! Two-way traffic ahead.
I would take that further and think that it’s in a company’s best interest to require abortions for employees who can get pregnant who do get pregnant vs. any sort of benefits. It’s unfair and discriminatory to non-bleeders that we should have to fund someone’s Decision if there will be a negative financial impact to the rest of us.
That’s quite the disgusting way to look at things.
He’s not wrong, though. Add in incentive for profit for shareholders.