LETTERS

e Board shall work with the parent members of the DAC (District Accountability Committee) in creating, adopting, reviewing and implementing this policy.

is spring, director Susan Meek entered a formal complaint titled “Suspected violations of Board policies,” in which she included, “President Peterson is developing changes outside of the public eye and using his authority to set board agendas to put forward a policy for rst reading for policy adoption before the entire board has had an opportunity to discuss it publicly. Again, this exceeds his authority.”

Policy GP 1.3.1 Board President Responsibilities reads, “To lead the Board so that the Board’s performance is consistent with its own rules and policies and those legitimately imposed on it from outside the organization.”

Not following statute could lead to further costly litigation, which is an egregious disservice to all stakeholder groups. is could be avoided if the board followed its own policies.

Ti any Baker Highlands Ranch

We deserve better than Bradley Colorado Community Media published a letter to the editor from Rep. Brandi Bradley (HD39) in response to one entitled “Brandi Bradley spawns hatred.” It should be noted that before this more “polished” version was published on July 14, Bradley initially lashed out in the CCM comment section spewing vitriol, ending her online rant with “So if you think it’s the person who can scream the loudest who wins, buckle up …” CCM would serve our community well by publishing Bradley’s online comments (tinyurl.com/bradleyresponse) alongside her “polished” version, so we can see the whole picture of who she is as a legislator.

Bradley’s rhetoric often replicates that of Anita Bryant’s “Save Our Children” campaign from the 1970s, pathologizing the LGBTQ+ community and accusing them of being sexual predators. Bradley even continues to push the “groomer” narrative in her rebuttal to the original letter.

While she touts “freedom,” she notably does not support freedom for all, falsely equating individuals wanting to have basic civil rights with a desire to “elevate a particular group of people.”

Of course, Bradley is entitled to her Christian beliefs. e issue is attempting to legislate them onto others, based on what she believes is a “sin.” Bradley’s anti-LGBTQ+ actions and a liations are well-documented, including: protesting drag shows in Douglas County, introducing anti trans sports legislation rooted in national e orts to restrict the rights of transgender people to exist, introducing a resolution for parental rights which would have increased the risk of LGBTQ+ students to experience bigotry and retaliation for their identity, and alignment with the so-called “parents’ rights” movement, specically the anti-LGBTQ+ group, Colorado Parent Advocacy Network. Additionally, while Bradley declares “I do not hate anyone,” she also advocates for Moms for Liberty to start a chapter in Douglas County, an organization classi ed as an extremist group in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s 2022 Year in Hate & Extremism report.

When Bradley states that she is for “all,” there should be an asterisk, explaining that all does not mean all.

What can we expect to see from Bradley this next legislative session? Will she continue down this dangerous pathway of anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric with predictable attempts at banning access to healthcare and bathrooms? With Colorado GOP Chair Dave Williams as her legislative aide, that is a realistic possibility.

Residents of HD39 deserve better. Bradley’s term is up in 2024, and voters should keep this full picture in mind.

Megan Burch Roxborough

Bradley’s brew of confusion

We read state Rep. Brandi Bradley’s column (July 14, 2023), “Being ProAmerica is not about hating anyone,” and came away with a particularly strong sense of intentional misdirection and disingenuity.

e core misdirection is the portrayal by Bradley that the concepts of Hate, Religion and Freedom are somehow innately bound together, and not the result of conscious personal choices on her part.

Reinforcing this false construct is not new or even original. It’s disingenuous. If it was new or original, we wouldn’t see the same string of fake moral panics espoused across the country … anti-LGBTQ, anti-criticalrace-theory, anti-public education. And there is little doubt this wellcovered list will see new triggers as time goes on, because the goal is to keep us divided and o -center with disingenuity.

Let’s Not Confuse Hate, Religion and Freedom ... let’s not confuse truths with triggers.

HATE evolves out of every individual’s moral decision-making, reinforced by the choice of group associations. When an elected o cial makes a decision, it’s reasonable to push back in the name of democracy, especially when o -center ideology enters the frame. e personal choice to publicly huddle with ideological trigger organizations like Colorado Parents Advocacy Network and far-right think-tanks shows true personal motivation.

RELIGION is a personal choice until a local politician makes the decision to pull it in as a narrow set of conve- nient governance principles, to serve as a crutch for deeper motivations of exclusion and worse. en, religion becomes a political trigger. History is full of bad outcomes when religion falsely serves as the basis for public decisions, leading to exclusion and even hate. ere are many in our community who hold their religion in the highest order, but most are not engaged in religion as political cover. By the way, the Colorado Constitution disallows the mix of religion and public governance.

FREEDOM is the foundational concept to our American democracy. “All men are created equal” — we still have much to do to deliver the promise. Once thing is clear. rough our history, when public o cials confuse their own self-righteousness with “God-given” power to de ne freedom — that’s a trigger.

Friends, we would do well to understand the triggers, the purposeful rede nitions, for what they are — ideological misdirection and disingenuity coming from politicians and their associations.

Lloyd Guthrie Roxborough Park

Bradley seeks to divide

State Rep. Brandi Bradley wrote a column titled “Being pro America is not about hating anyone.” If this is true, I question why the representative chose to call the LGBTQIA community “groomers” in her Fourth of July post. Ms. Bradley could have simply posted about America’s birthday without including derogatory statements towards marginalized groups. If anything, this statement was the complete opposite of being pro America, a country founded on freedom and a melting pot of people from all di erent backgrounds. A record number of bills aimed to limit the rights and freedoms of LGBTQIA people were introduced this year including a couple of Rep. Bradley’s own bills. If Ms. Bradley feels that Pride month has become ampli ed and is an attempt to elevate the LGBTQIA community, maybe it is because this community is so under attack. Are Bradley’s bills and social media posts the words and actions of someone who touts being pro America and loving Christian? Having

SEE LETTERS, P39