To the Editor:

What an eventful day this past Tuesday was! Let’s discuss the rally and the Board of Ed meeting this past week.

The topic at hand? Book bans.

For those who did not attend the rally, we got to hear from law and educational professionals about the legal and administrative issues that mark a clear path to the only legal and ethical decision the Board can make.

How refreshing (and helpful!) to get this information without needing it constricted to the arbitrarily dictated two-minute limit now imposed on public speaking in Board of Ed meetings!

And the meeting itself! So many students got up to speak to how the ban is meaningless, that the so-called pornography in the contested books does not compare to their daily experiences in the Newtown Public School system.

Numerous adults added their voices against the ban, giving legal, ethical, practical and emotional witness based on their areas of expertise and their lived experience.

The Board was reminded of the qualifications of each member of the committee that recommended keeping the books on library shelves and that their job was to delegate responsibility, not to assume it.

But the Republicans on the Board were not convinced. Let’s talk about that.

Let’s talk about how Deb Zukowski feels her opinion on what constitutes porn should carry more weight than the subject matter experts and the dozens of people who spoke up about how these books are not pornographic.

One of my favorite pundits often states that “they don’t want to represent us, they want to rule us.” Deb seems determined to prove this assertion.

Janet Kuzma, who compassionately struggles to find some compromise for the handful of parents who have issue with these books, proposing a solution that imposes a burden on the majority who oppose the ban in favor a few. What Janet has failed to disclose is that one of those parents is her husband, who has made his feelings about Newtown Public Schools and how these books should be banned on his Twitter account. Or to acknowledge that her own father spoke not once, but twice, in favor of banning books during Board of Ed meetings.

And then there is Jen Larkin, who dropped the Freudian slip of Freudian slips — “I don’t care about the first amendment!” But then, after the public outcry, she covered. Of course she cares about the first amendment. But gosh golly gee, there has to be a way around it for this!

Let’s not forget the brief appearance of our former DEI director, Wes Johnson, who pointed out how the partisans on this board repeatedly, conspicuously undermined his efforts.

On the one hand, this meeting was joyful. To see so much passionate support for not instituting any ban or compromise gave me so much pride for my community. On the other hand, it is so painful to watch the partisans on this board try to twist reality to fit their agenda.

Don’t forget to vote this November.

Linda O’Sullivan

Sandy Hook