In “Enforcing Tolerance,” Kiyoshi Martinez makes two incorrect characterizations concerning the ACLU. First, he claims that the ACLU is making education a secondary concern because part of the initial settlement with Boyd County instituted mandatory tolerance training. We would ask, however, what good the “three Rs” are when people grow up thinking we need to “take all the f***ing f**gots out in the back woods and kill them” (an actual quote). The goal of an education isn’t simply to learn how to read and write, but how to function within society. Also, in case no one noticed, absentee parenting has been on the rise for a good time and the unfortunate reality is that many parents expect their children to learn right from wrong at school.

Kiyoshi’s second misleading argument is that the ACLU and its lawyers benefited financially from the Boyd County lawsuit. In reality, the lawsuit didn’t seek monetary damages, just as Kiyoshi mentioned, because it would divert funds from the school district. The ACLU and its lawyers (who, by the way, work pro bono) made exactly zero dollars; they were suing not for money, but for the right of students to express themselves in a public school. Yes, tolerance won’t come from a judge’s gavel, but ignoring intolerance won’t get rid of it either.

Maeve Anderson

Co-President, student ACLU

Vinay Tota

Co-President, student ACLU

Nick Smith

Vice President, student ACLU

Nellie Waddell

Secretary, student ACLU

Liz Wagner

student ACLU

Muni Nakamura

student ACLU

Ed Remus

student ACLU

Jennifer Hill

student ACLU

James Adler

student ACLU