Is this the same kid that trash-talked parents (though he did apologize later, just to be fair) at a school board meeting? The same RINO that wholeheartedly supported a school district harassment policy that favored some kids according to who they have sex with? Yep. I believe it is.
SIDE NOTE ADDED 08/23/09: Knepel also supports sexually-explicit books for minors in the local public library.
West Bend News/08/13/09:
A former high school student has declared his candidacy for the West Bend School Board.
Carl Knepel, a 2009 West Bend West graduate, turned in papers recently to run in the April 2010 election.
Knepel, 18, has past experience as West’s representative on the School Board and the Citizen Facilities Advisory Committee.
.....
He ran unsuccessfully in the spring election for one of two open spots on the board and wasn’t appointed to fill out a oneyear term fo l l ow i n g the resignation of board member John Duwell.
....
Knepel says increasing cocurricular opportunities and advancing infrastructure are two of his key platforms.
Unsuccessfully, indeed.
36 comments:
do you think its ok to harass someone because they are attracted to the same sex?
No, Stephanie. I do not.
While its fine to remove comments that are patently offensive or vulgar, you seem to be censoring any comments that question your intelligence or incompetence.
I urge you to reconsider, and engage/respond to such criticism, rather than silence it.
Ginny I for one fully support you cause with and was proud to be a Christian parent when you were opposing the schools on this policy. You did so with dignity, poise and courage.
This guy should not get a second chance. He supports the harassment policy and pushing gay acceptace in the schools.
Kathy Zarling I think that is the womans name has no clue what she has done by writting and enforcing this policy. I wonder what her credentials are for this. She has said it is to protect all students but it seems it is geared more towards the homosexual kids and that it is OK to harass any other student. What about the kids that are slow learners or shy and picked on. Does it protect them? Does it offer protection to Christian kids who don't support homosexuality? Does it protect them from harassment if they want to pray or have a prayer vigil at school. Like they did at other schools with the meet me pole clubs in which students would meet at the flag pole before school to pray. Zarling seems to think that Christian kids don't need to be proected or have the same rights as homosexual kids. Is she a Christian, does she have kids? Would she be upset if her kids were being harassed for being Christian? Would she not want them protected the same way as the gay ones? This woman does not have a clue about kids and what they need to be protected from. It appears that she does not even care about the student body in general. Only the gay kids. Maybe she has sometihng hidden in her closet she would like to come out about. She has been so vocal about protecting the gay kids does she have a special connection to them?
More over it by passes parents rights of notification if something does happen. It totally takes rights away from parents over their own children. Her policy says that parents don't matter and the school will handle it how they best see fit. It's not right?
The harassment policy is wrong and should never have been written or enforced especially by a woman who does not apprear to hold the qualifications to even work in the district. What exactly is her position in the district? Is there anyway we can get her ousted from her position and get someone more qualified in?
Ginny do you know? Are you still staying up to date on what the schools are doing and is there anything else we need to be aware of in the future so parents that support your cause can be informed and offer support to you and oppose the direction the schools are taking to eliminate parents all together?
Thank you Ginny for fighting for all of our kids, parents and faith. You are doing a great job. Homosexuality has no place in the public schools!
"Homosexuality has no place in the public schools!"
Wow.
Ginny,
I'm not being smug here seriousy. I am trying to understand this, so please correct me if I am wrong here.
The harassment policy was regarding protected classes right? I guess what I don't understand is why you object to protecting children from being harrased for any reason, sexual identity included. Does it say that if you a student of faith that their rights are not protected? When I first read it, I admitt I had an issue with a few things but when I went to Herdrich with my questions and listened to her it makes sense.
Am I understanding that one of your issues is that you feel homosexuality is a behavior and therefor has no place in the policy? And you feel that it removes the parents first amendment rights by the district not having to inform parents is disciplinary action is taken or an incident at the school happens?
I guess I am just not understand the upset about the policy. It seems like it does protect all students.
Am I wrong?
Protect:
I think Kathy Zarling district administrator of pupil services, not positive. However, if the policy follows state and federal protocal how is that only protecting homosexuality? As far as protecting the Christian student body, as I understand it they are protected too. The policy seems to simply state that harassment of student will not be tolerated by the district.
Your post sounded like you were questioning Kathy Zarling herself and her sexuality? Maybe I read it wrong. Does it matter is she is a Christian or has children? What does any of that matter?
If she didn't care about kids or protecting them in the least I hardly think that she would be in education at all. You also said quote "especially by a woman who does not apprear to hold the qualifications to even work in the district." end quote. Do you know what her qualifications are? Have you looked into it? How do you know if she is or is not qualifies to participate in the writting of policy?
I guess I don't understand why the pin pointing just one of the people who wrote the policy. t is my understanding that there were 3 people involved in the process. Why just hit on one of them?
I also echo Local MLIS student in saying WOW.
Actually, Kristina, it does not protect all students "equally." However, I am not going to address this issue at this time. That would be a whole 'nother blog topic. Harassment of any type, in my opinion, is unacceptable.
MLIS: Time and again others comment on my blog to tell me how to run my comments, or how to tag, or how to write, or what NOT to write about. You do not know the history behind all the people who comment here. You do not know the reasons I may or may not have for allowing commentary, or subsequently DISallowing it. I don't ask you to understand it. Don't ask me to do my blog your way.
Mike shows up from time to time to leave only harassing commentary. This is his trademaker. It is old.
PTY: Thank you for your kind words of support. I stay in tune with the school district. Kathy Zarling is a hired employee of the district. In my opinion, the superintendent, who is chosen and hired by the school board, needs to go.
As for Knepel, his commentary to parents in the district has left a less-than-desirable taste in the mouths of the conservatives in the school district. He came in last with the last election. I suspect he will do no better in 2010.
Ginny,
I understand not wanting to get into in here. While I still do not understand in what way it does not protect all students 'equally' I respect not wanting to go into it in this posting.
"Homosexuality has no place in the public schools!"
Sad.
Protect the Youth:
Your chosen language regarding the harassment policy is disturbing. For being a "proud, Christian parent," hating a group of people does not seem very Christ-like.
CWBC: Your appearance and harassing comment despite being booted from this blog is proof of my excellent judgement. Thank you.
POOF (again - sigh...)
Protect TY: To say "homosexuality has no place in the public schools" is a bit misleading. The overall sexualization of children, the indoctrination by the public schools with reference, and the intrusion of government in the personal lives of our school children is unwanted.
Sorry, cut off my sentence above.
"..with reference to sex..."
i'm sorry; i hate to sound ignorant, but i fail to see how the public school system is "indoctrinating" children to be homosexuals.
oh, never mind. i see - the indoctrination of sexuality in children.
but again, how is the school doing this?
Maybe I did leave my statement too broad about homosexuality in the schools, but it seems like the schools are promoting it and exposing students that may not other wise be exposed to homosexality.
What I am saying is this Zarling character needs to go. If she wrote the policy and did not take into consideration all students right to equal protection that why is she still in the position she is in?
What other policies has she written we are unaware of that fail our children. I have 2 children in the district and I fear if they get accused of something I as their parent will not be notified.That is Zarlings' stance. The school will take measures to correct it. This woman just does not seem to be qualified to be writting these types of policies. I wonder if we put enough pressure on the district if we can get her ousted?
Ginny, what do you know about this Kathy Zarling? Is she qualified for her position? Does she honestly seem to have the best interest of all students in mind and maybe her hands are tied due to state and federal law? Is there anything in particular that stands out about Zarling that is a red flag? Is she writting any other policy parents need to be aware of? This all rather concerning to me. My children deserve protection just like every other student.
let's get one thing straight: do you want to protect your children from harassment or knowing about homosexuality?
I hear ya, sister. That harassment policy sucks. It also protects people from harassment because of their race. Can you believe it? Not only does that mean its okay to be non-white, it actually encourages it!. Heck, with a policy like that in place, my kid might even become non-white.
Yep, that's the ultimate, unfettered power of a harassment policy, folks.
I hear ya, sister. That harassment policy sucks. It also protects people from harassment because of their race. Can you believe it? Not only does that mean its okay to be non-white, it actually encourages it!. Heck, with a policy like that in place, my kid might even become non-white.
Yep, that's the ultimate, unfettered power of a harassment policy, folks.
PYT said a series of things that were absolute untruths and you don't delete the comments. Example:
The harassment policy is wrong and should never have been written or enforced especially by a woman who does not apprear to hold the qualifications to even work in the district.
The woman has a Phd in her field of work. Then comes the real doozy. PYT seems to think that administrators can put into place and enforce policy. That power lies with the elected officials of the school board. PYT you are an idiot.
Mike:
I don't know Kathy Zarling's credentials, so can't comment on that.
PTY may not be making clear statements, but they are not "untruths." The harassment policy, in my opinion, is biased.
As for not knowing who actually enforces district policy, perhaps a kind explanation instead of namecalling would look a little more, um, professional and believable on your part. As you know, an attack such as your previous statement is not acceptable on this blog. Please get back into the grownup chair.
Protect:
While your statements may be compelling for some, I suggest a tad bit of research here. Mike is correct, If you look Kathy Zarling up on the district site you will see she is highly qualified to have the position she does.
From what I know through talking to people she absolutly has the best interest of all students in mid. The policy makes it clear that harrassmet to any group or individual is not tolerated! I don't see how that is biased?
I would also like to add that further research has turned up that she at one point was a special education teacher for disabled kids. I don't think one can teach in that specialized area and got give a hoot abot kids.
Protect: you want to "oust" her for what? Should we get rid of all teachers and admin personal that give a rip about kids? I would think we would want more like that. Just my opinion here.
I think before anyone goes questioning her qualifications they do a little research themselves. I wonder what your qualifications are? How much do you know about the policy protect?
I am still a bit amused that you alluded to Kathy Zarlings sexuality prefeence. Why would it matter either way anyway? Do you have somethings in your closet you would like to share?
Just askin'
I know Mrs. Zarling. She was my teacher many moons ago when I was very young. For anyone to say she is not qualified to work with kids I disagee. She helped me in ways she does not know. For the time I had her I finally felt safe somewhere. I learned it was not going to have it be another year of the same as before. She cared about her students she cared about me and I think we knew it. For some of us had we not had her as our teacher at that time in our lives who knows what would have happened to us.
In many ways she was our savior is some very dark times. I have never forgotten her and would love the chance to thank her for treating me in a way I had not known was possible.
How could anyone question if she cares about kids and have their best interest in mind. Especially if you don't know her or anything about her. She was a wonderful individual and I am a better person for having her as a teacher.
I take offense for her at some of these comments on here about her. How dare anyone question her when you know nothing about her.
Some comments on here show just how easy some jump to conclusions you have no facts behind. How quickly people rush to judgement and condem someone else with out knowing the facts. She does not deserve the insults hurled towards her.
I know she would never comment here herself because is too grown up for that. She has her big girl pants on!
If you disagree with the issue that is fine but to say someone should be ousted or not qualified how do you know? She is more than qualified to work with and for studets than others I know that have been entrusted with the title teacher or administrator.
So before anyone goes and starts judging a person, questioning their motives or ethics maybe they need the facts about the person. Not the facts as they want to believe in their head. The real facts.
Thanks Mrs. Z you rock!
O&F: A very nice commentary on Mrs. Zarling.
I can't say that I don't agree with you. I felt Mrs. Zarling was very respectful in her demeanor, professional and caring. While don't agree with her on this one issue, I certainly do not condemn her performance in her job position.
Again, I believe the superindendent is of greatest concern here, not necessarily Zarling.
I'm sorry but i do not understand any of this. He is allowed to run as much as he would like. Don't vote for him if you don't like him but a lot of people do. He left the republican party by the way and it was probably to not be associated with intolerant people.
I don't understand how things like "acceptance" and guards against harassment could be combated with such strong feelings as hate and protest.
In my opinion acceptance is not a bad thing in our schools. Imagine if it was your child that was not accepted. Imagine if your child was gay? What would you do? Disown them? That is frankly sickening.
hate in responce to acceptance is absurd and certainly not progressive.
I beg you to provide us with undeniable evidence leading to the verification that Carl Knepel did in fact make insulting comments toward parents. Until you can provide undeniable evidence, that opinion will remain falsified and can never legitimately be considered more than a personal attack.
The description of the school district harassment policy is represented by the author in an extremely biased and unfair manner.
All in all, this should be considered no more than a personal attack on Mr. Knepel, as it lacks the validity and un-biased qualities that would provide any educational value whatsoever.
YS - No begging necessary. Simply do the homework. Go to the WB Community Cable offices and request the video tapes of the school board meetings during the time of the harassment policy proceedings. You will find Knepel's disrespect of parents, and you will also find his subsequent apology (which I mention in my post) in the following meeting.
Actually, Carl was responding to Mary Weigands claim that the school district should be ashamed of themselves. He said that the people that were against the policy in question should be ashamed for their behavior and the disrespect they showed to others.
For the record he spoke in favor of the policy several times as a student that felt he had been harrassed at school. Not for sexual orientation, but for other reasons. He was also defending himself with his comments.
Post a Comment