Yes, it will reset the conversation. Unfortunately, the state legislature
believes it is above giving into public pressure. They will forge on and show
that they don't really believe in parents' rights to choose the education for
their children. Perhaps this is another example of why they don't like the idea
of being a democracy.
Once again, in time of economic problems, our legislature has opened up a can of
social wedge issues.
Vouchers, GRAMA, and sex-educations bills wait until the last minute and draw
ire from the public and the legislature faces problems. This time the Governor
did the right thing and Legislators get elected this year with County and State
conventions where Legislators trying to keep their seats. The Republican Party
should be the emphasis at their own Convention. This is not a third-party
convention. The people at the caucus and conventions accept the Party Platform
but some want to splinter that by becoming elected as a delegate and then
pushing their own agenda. Some had the opportunity the last two years after the
defeat of Bob Bennett to change the platform for their groupÂs beliefs and
if the Party bought in, then they need to accept the Platform and By-Laws and
not go against them at the Conventions.
I agree with JWB about the tendency of the legislature to try ramming through
unpopular bills at the last minute. However, it is NOT the duty of delegates to
agree with the Party Platform. The reason it is read at the caucuses is to give
attendees an opportunity to discuss what they want to change or keep. The duty
of the delegates they elect is to control/revise the county and state platform
in their 2013 organizing conventions.Even the Republican Party is a
democracy where members choose the delegates who revise the platforms every two
years. I stood up and proposed a number of revisions, as did some others.
@Hutterite: That's been the plan all along. Distract the people with social
issues (gay marriage, immigration, healthcare, etc.) and completely eradicate
their way of life while they aren't looking.
I agree that in 2013, the Platform will be agreed to with changes but this year
the platform is final, next year is a different ballgame.Democrats
capitalize on our end game tactics.
RE: the Republican platform.... What is written now sounds lovely. I can agree
with the platform. I have a huge problem with the bills some legislators come
up with to match their own interpretation of the platform.The public
response to HB363 this year showed that most parents are fine with the way
things are right now. We can always look for ways to tweak things, but it takes
courage to look at something and say, "Nope, we're not changing it because
it's still a good thing and changes would only weaken it."
Legislators are part of the system too. It is not just what they interpret but
the other groups that link with the Republican Party and in Utah make their
views sort of sound like the Republican Party's views. Every Senator and
Representative candidate, whether already elected or wants to be elected the
first time get scrutinized by these outside groups placing undo pressure on
these candidates. Those candidates and elected officials are pressured by these
lobbyists to push their groupÂs agenda or face ouster the next election by
those groups. They are a factor in Utah and are not the Party but push their
agenda forward as if it was the Party. End-run tactics are their never ending
game as they donÂt want the public to really know until it is too late in
the legislative process. That is not necessarily the Integrity that Republicans
should have in Utah. To get around the rules is not the straight process.
However, it needs to be addressed or the Republican Party will be overrun by
outsiders that appear to be insiders. They need to work within the system and
not from without.
I hope that the conversation that is reset is the propensity of our elected
officials to pass bills that are not supported by the general public. Since the
legislature decided to pass a bill on sex education that was not supported by
the general public or by educators, I wonder who wanted the bill to be passed? I
am disappointed by the attitude that if we educate our children with the basic
facts of life, they will somehow feel that they have been given permission to
have sex. I mentioned this idea to my teenage children and they laughed. There
is a saying: "I teach them correct principles and they govern
themselves." We as parents can and should teach moral behavior. The
schools ought to teach the correct and scientific facts of life. "All we
have to fear is fear itself." Even in California, where I grew up, we were
taught that abstinence was the only sure protection from pregnancy,STD's, and
AIDS. We also need to realize that those who do not have good direction at home
need to know these facts. Our society pays for their lack of knowledge with
abortions and unwed pregnancies. Who wins then?
The solution is simple and it may partly already work this way:Have the lazy irresponsible parents be required to opt their lame children in
and bet required to pay a fee that fully covers the class and each child if they
want the governement to teach them all about sex.Really fearful
irresponsible left!? You need the 'guvmint' to teach you about sex?(my guess is if had to pay a significant fee they would suddenly find they no
longer need the government to do the teaching)