If this isn’t #grooming, then what is it?

As we have previously noted, the Central Bucks School Board required teachers, administrators and staff to use students’ proper names, references and pronouns as recorded in school records, unless the individual student’s parents approved a change, and is removing materials with sexualized content from school libraries. Of course, the homosexual lobby are just spittle-flecked with rage, claiming that this discriminates against homosexual, bisexual, and ‘transgender’ students, as though normalizing and promoting homosexuality and ‘transgenderism’ is some sort of civil right, and not an attempt at grooming.

So now, the Biden Administration is getting into the act, wanting to advance grooming of abnormal sexual orientations. From The Washington Post:

Are book bans discrimination? Biden administration to test new legal theory.

The federal government is investigating a Texas school district over its alleged removal of books featuring LGBTQ characters

by Hannah Natanson | Friday the 13th, January 2023 | 6:00 AM EST

The federal government has opened an investigation into a Texas school district over its alleged removal of books featuring LGBTQ characters — marking the first test of a new legal argument that failing to represent students in school books can constitute discrimination.

The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights is investigating the Granbury Independent School District, department spokesman Jim Bradshaw said this month. The probe is based on a complaint of discrimination lodged last summer by the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said ACLU attorney Chloe Kempf. Continue reading

Central Bucks School District is doing the right thing

I am pretty sure that The Philadelphia Inquirer and Devontae Torriente, a student at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School would approve of Central Bucks School Board’s Policy 321, on restricting “Partisan, Political, or Social Policy Advocacy Activities” if it was aimed at preventing teachers from hanging MAGA banners or wearing golf shirts with DeSantis for President on them. It goes without saying — though I’ll say it anyway — that the Inky and Mr Torriente would say that a teacher, staffer, or administrator posting Bible verses or flags or banners promoting a particular religion should not be allowed.

Central Bucks’ new policy is an ‘anti-LGBTQ crusade’

I was once a closeted queer student in high school. Everyone who believes in freedom, equality, and fairness must do all that we can to defeat these policies. Children’s lives depend on it.

by Devontae Torriente, For The Inquirer | Thursday, January 12, 2023 | 12:00 PM EST

Devontae Torriente, from his UPenn Law School biography. Click to enlarge.

As a queer person in America, I am deeply troubled by the attacks on the LGBTQ community happening across the country. The anti-LGBTQ crusade has made its way to Pennsylvania and is now on display in the Central Bucks School District — one of the largest in the state.

Since Mr Torriente self-identifies as “queer”, I trust that I am able to use the description as well?[1]Actually, I chose not to use the term.

On Tuesday, the Central Bucks school board passed Policy 321, which the board named the “Partisan, Political, or Social Policy Advocacy Activities” policy. In a 6-3 vote, the board decided to ban teachers from hanging Pride flags and other types of “advocacy.”

The policy serves to target and further marginalize LGBTQ students in the school district. Even though the proposed policy makes no explicit mention of LGBTQ status, there should be no confusion about who it targets.

I was once a closeted queer student in high school. I know firsthand the mental and emotional toll that being forced into the shadows can take. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. This is why everyone who believes in freedom, equality, and fairness must do all that we can to defeat these policies. Children’s lives depend on it.

In this, the author conflates his deciding to remain “closeted” in high school with teachers not being allowed to hang homosexual ‘pride’ flags or banners in their classrooms. He still had the choice to disclose his homosexuality, and, in the middle of the last decade that would hardly have been controversial. There might have been students who would cease associating with him, some who would mock or bully him, but that has nothing to do with Central Bucks teachers not being able to advocate for, or against, tolerance of homosexuals.

No, Mr Torriente wants the public schools to advocate for the normalization of homosexuality. But that is clearly a political position, and a position with which some people disagree.

The policy is dangerous because, as the Education Law Center argued in an October letter to the school board, the policy will have a “harmful and chilling effect” on classrooms in the school district.

An updated version of the proposal — posted last month by the Bucks County Courier Times — prohibits school district employees from advocating to students “any partisan, political, or social policy issue.” The proposal does not specify what this means, but prohibits “flag, banner, poster, sign, sticker, pin, button, insignia, paraphernalia, photograph, or other similar material” related to these partisan, political, or social policies. (The American and Pennsylvania flags are exempt.)

This ambiguity, however, is no accident; it is the point. Because it is unclear what type of speech or actions are prohibited — and because teachers’ jobs are on the line if they violate the policy — many teachers will err on the side of caution, and avoid discussing sexual orientation and gender identity altogether.

And that is exactly the way it should be! The public schools should not be discussing “sexual orientation and gender identity” at all; those are personal matters, which teachers and staff ought not to be engaging with young and impressionable students. As we have previously noted, the school board required teachers, administrators and staff to use students’ proper names, references and pronouns as recorded in school records, unless the individual student’s parents approved a change. This was done to avoid legal repercussions if a particular student wanted to claim he was the opposite sex, and his parents sued the school for ‘enabling’ gender transition.

The author takes the position — without saying it explicitly — that acceptance of “LGTBQ” status is somehow beyond the range of political or religious debate, but that is clearly wrong. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, in their various denominations, are all based on religious laws which state that homosexual activity is inherently sinful, and if not all priests, ministers, rabbis and imams of those religions are willing to go along with that, many are. Mr Torriente wants the public schools to take a position which contradicts the religious faiths of many families. That some people’s political positions, regardless of their religious faith, or lack thereof, do not accept homosexuality or transgenderism as reasonable or acceptable, is clearly and obviously known, and the author wants to use the public schools to fight that political position.

The public schools must, of course, enforce the law: students who assault or bully others over their sexual orientation are just as much in violation of school rules and state law as assault or bullying over anything else. We have seen the results of a school board which did not enforce the rules and report to law enforcement an in-school assault by Nikolas Cruz; I am absolutely in favor of serious and strict enforcement of those rules and laws. But the public schools, with their legally captive audiences, should not be in the business of pushing political or religious positions. The Central Bucks school board is doing the right thing.

References

References
1 Actually, I chose not to use the term.

More public school failure in Kentucky

Linda Blackford is a long-time columnist for the Lexington Herald-Leader, and, despite being a long-time Kentuckian, she’s liberal to her core. We have previously noted the newspaper’s endorsements, and they are all to the left:

The voters of the Sixth District, and of Kentucky as a whole, rejected every one of the newspaper’s endorsements.

Come 2023, they’ll endorse Governor Andy Beshear, he who unconstitutionally suspended the free exercise of religion and freedom of peaceable assembly in 2020, for re-election, and in 2024, whichever Democrat runs for the Sixth District seat, assuming he’s not a kook like this year.

So I’ll admit it: even though I am subscribing to what my best friend used to call the Herald-Liberal, I don’t usually pay much attention to Mrs Blackford’s columns. I did, however read this one, in which she pushed for the Fayette County School Board to select “a person of color who understands what many of our students face in school”, as the replacement for Christy Morris, who resigned her position. The usual race-based drivel followed, and was mostly unremarkable and unimportant. There was, however, one very important statistic given:

Students of color make up about 53 percent of students, while about 48.5 percent of all students are considered low income.

Really? The Fayette County Public Schools are 53% “students of color”? According to the Census Bureau, a full 70.0% of Fayette County’s population are non-Hispanic white, with another 2.8% being white, but Hispanic as well. Perhaps they are being counted as “students of color”, “brown” perhaps, the way the left do these days. But it has to be asked: if Fayette County’s population are 70% non-Hispanic white, why are the public schools majority “students of color”?

Let’s face it: private schools are expensive! I know, as we put our girls in parochial schools for part of the time. Sayre School is the hoitiest and toitiest of the private schools in Lexington, with the high school tuition being $26,625 per year. That’s more than tuition at the University of Kentucky’s College of Law!

Lexington Catholic High School’s tuition is significantly lower, at $11,170 for one student, if the family are Catholic parishioners, and $13,690 for non-Catholics. That’s a significant chunk of change that people have been willing to pay rather than send their kids to the Fayette County public schools. In very liberal Lexington — Fayette Countians gave 59.25% of their votes to Joe Biden in 2020, in a year when Kentuckians as a whole voted to re-elect President Trump, 62.09% to 36.15% — much of the white population have rejected the public schools.

And today, the state Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional a Republican plan to assist poorer families to afford private schools.

Gov. Andy Beshear’s veto of the bill was overridden with a slim 51-member majority in the House.

In his veto message, Beshear said the bill would “harm public education in Kentucky by taking money away from public schools.” In a post to Twitter on Thursday, the governor took his message a step further. He compared the EOA law to the newly passed law funding charter schools in Kentucky.

“Today’s ruling by the Kentucky Supreme Court couldn’t be more clear: state funding for private or charter schools is unconstitutional – period. It’s time for the General Assembly to invest in our public schools, our teachers and our children,” Beshear wrote.

Fayette County Public Schools argued against the law, saying that it stripped resources away from its schools and students.

The Kentucky Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, celebrated the ruling.

“This decision protects the power of the people to decide important questions of public education policy and holds the legislature to account to uphold their oath to support and defend the Kentucky Constitution… We simply can’t afford to support two different education systems — one private and one public — on the taxpayers’ dime, and this ruling supports that concern. This decision is proof that the courts continue to serve as an important check against legislative overreach,” KEA President Eddie Campbell wrote.

So, what do we have? The state Supreme Court’s ruling that the law was unconstitutional may well be fundamentally correct based on the state constitution, but the fact remains that, in the Commonwealth’s wealthiest county, about as many families who can afford to send their children someplace other than the Fayette County public schools are choosing to do so. Even before the law was passed — it never took effect because Franklin County Judge Phil Shepherd, a Democrat and stooge of Governor Beshear, issued an injunction against it — parents in Lexington who could afford it were voting against the public schools with their private school choices. They were still being taxed to support the public schools, but sure didn’t want to send their own kids there.