[Vision2020] Re: Not a city resident (Donovan Arnold)

[josephc at mail.wsu.edu]

Mr. Arnold says, "if the parent does not live in the city, the parent does
not have a say in how the city operates and functions."

Doesn't it follow that no one has a right to criticize a jurisdiction
unless they live in that jurisdiction? Thus, anyone from Moscow
criticizing the city of New Orleans or the state of Louisiana for the way
that they handled things after Katrina was wrong to do so. It is fine to
criticize the federal government but we can't criticize New Orleans or
Louisiana since none of us live there.

And it would seem that neither Doug Wilson nor anyone else has the right
to criticize public schools in general. As Mr. Donovan has pointed out,
most public schools fall under the jurisdiction of the state. Unless we
live in that state, we can't be critical of its schools.

So where were you, Mr. Arnold, when your conservative friends were voicing
their opinions about topics over which, according to your principles, they
had no right to speak?

For the record, I live in Moscow and I am happy to have Rose and Joan and
Melynda share their opinions about the town. And not just because I tend
to agree with them. What we need is more discourse about Moscow, not less
of it. We should be grateful to get any feedback that we get, whether we
agree with it or not.

One more thing, Mr. Arnold. Could you please tell me where I might find
the footnotes to the First Amendment, the ones detailing the restrictions
to free speech and criticism of governmental agencies that you articulate
below? So far I seem to have missed them.

Joe Campbell

> "Does someone who lives in the Moscow School District,
> with children or grandchildren attending Moscow public
> schools, have any valid reasons to be concerned about
> the affairs of the city where their children attend
> school?"-Ted
>
> Interesting, Ted.
>
> First, the City of Moscow does not have, or control,
> any public schools.
>
> Second, the public schools that are located inside
> Moscow are controlled by the Idaho State School
> District 281, not the city.
>
> So, logically, it would not follow that the parent be
> given control of a government that does not control
> the school when it is the school they want control
> over. They need control of the school district.
>
> So, logically, yes, I support a legal guardian being
> able to vote and have some say in the school district.
>
> If a parent has children attending school within a
> city, the parent has a right and say of how the school
> operates and functions. But if the parent does not
> live in the city, the parent does not have a say in
> how the city operates and functions.
>
> If a parent that does not like the way a city operates
> and functions, lives outside the city, and has their
> child is in a school in the city, they can vote to
> move the school outside the jurisdiction of the city.
>
> Might I also be so bold, Ted, as to point out that the
> person complaining about city law was not complaining
> about schools, but about city code, and not for
> allowing schools, but getting rid of them.
>
> Take Care,
>
> Donovan J Arnold