Project Veritas has just released another exposé in which a profiteering propagandist who self-identifies as an “educator” admits that he promotes critical race theory (CRT) to and in public schools by omitting the words “critical race theory.” Yes, Americans really are that gullible.

The racist scamster is Quintin Bostic, a homosexual who works for the Washington D.C.-based Teaching Lab that—according to Bostic—sells CRT-based curricula to school districts, including districts in the state of Georgia, where state law prohibits the teaching of “divisive concepts” related to race, most notably CRT.

In order to circumvent that law, Bostic gleefully admits to omitting the words “critical race theory.” To leftists hell-bent on socially imposing their moral beliefs and socially constructing their new world order, transparency is the enemy.

In the secretly recorded conversation between Bostic and Project Veritas’ undercover journalist, Bostic says,

If you don’t say the words “critical race theory,” you can technically teach it.

He then lightheartedly describes his work ethic:

I would say I’m a good salesman, but I’m also an evil salesman—like so bad.

He further admits that the good people of Georgia are paying for the curriculum his organization sells in violation of state law:

Project Veritas: “So, the state is paying for your curriculum without knowing what’s in it.”

Bostic: “They have no clue. And I’m like, “This is great—this is good!”

Project Veritas asks Bostic how he conceals the fact that the curriculum he sells is based on CRT, to which Bostic replies, “It’s a DEI work.”

Many will recall how leftists mocked conservatives relentlessly in the past few years for claiming CRT was being taught in public schools. As I wrote earlier, these deceitful or ignorant leftists were technically accurate. Public schools were likely not teaching CRT as an academic theory to middle school or high school students. Rather, they were teaching arguable ideas derived from CRT as objective truths and masking the arguable ideas under the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) rubric—an ever-present help to leftists in trouble.

The arrogant Bostic shared that his CRT-polluted curriculum is being taught in at least one kindergarten and that he couldn’t care less if Georgia parents are upset about the illegal use of CRT-based curriculum in their schools.

Like so many leftist activists, Bostic dismisses parents as their children’s teachers:

I hate to say it, but parents are like not teachers.

To emphasize his point, he says parents “are” ignorant.

I don’t at all hate saying this: Bostic is “like” not a teacher. He is a propagandist.

Bostic makes clear that he shares the widely held leftist goal of undermining children’s relationships with their own parents:

And these kids are also pushing against their parents, like, “Mom, that’s not right! You shouldn’t say that!”

Nothing sends a thrill up the legs of leftist “educators” quite like turning other people’s children into activists for leftist causes.

Bostic has other troubling goals not exposed in Project Veritas’ video but available in this interview:

I grew up in a real small town. Um, I was a minority as far as race and sexual orientation. … I also had no one to relate to and to connect with and talk to and to share those same like backgrounds and understanding. And so like with me and my identities, that moment let me realize like [teaching is] more than just opening the book and reading and teaching the standard. It’s you being here in this space and like being present, because as a teacher … you’re that everything for that child eight hours a day 40 hours a week. You are that person for a child who gives them comfort, who gives them love, who gives them passion, who gives them knowledge, who gives them guidance, and you cannot put a price and you cannot put words on that.

Take a moment to absorb Bostic’s claim: He says teachers are “everything” for children “eight hours a day, 40 hours a week.” Many leftists understand the profound affect teachers have on the minds and hearts of children and are exploiting their roles to destroy children.

For parents who believe—rightly—that homoerotic acts are dishonorable acts that put at risk the eternal lives of those who engage in them, the goals of Bostic are evil. No one and no organization that receives funding from the government has a right to promote controversial moral beliefs about sexuality to children.

No matter how many parents object to their children’s public school education being infused with controversial ideas derived from CRT and no matter how strenuously they express their objections, leftists will not stop using taxpayer money to promote those ideas. Increasingly leftists openly admit they seek to indoctrinate other people’s children with leftist views of race (and sexuality) even if doing so disrupts parent-child relationships. They justify their subversive actions as necessary to promote their disordered understanding of what is right, true, and beautiful. And the goal of leftists to indoctrinate children in their leftist ideologies relies on lack of transparency.

One of the most astonishing and disturbing trends in evangelicalism over the last few years is the significant number of leaders and organizations that have succumbed to the pressure of the “Woke” mob to join them in their attacks upon the so-called “White” culture and traditional Christianity.  Evidence of “Wokeness” in organizations such as the Gospel Coalition, the SBC, and others, is troubling. Dr. Voddie Baucham, in his powerful book, Fault Lines, highlights the dangers to the church inherent in such actions.

The errors in this are not difficult to discern!  The Leftists are not clandestine with their motives and objectives.  We have clarity, and it ought to disturb every Christian that groups and organizations formally known for the Gospel have been badly distracted.

Setting aside the Left’s criticisms of Christians and America for the moment, (which at times and in some ways may be correct), one need only look at their proffered solutions to recognize that they are not of the same spirit as the Church and despise the Gospel of Christ.   It is impossible to be at peace with organizations such as BLM, and the CRT “Woke” crowd and to also be at peace with Jesus Christ or to obey His command to “Preach the Gospel!”

One need only consider how the movement deals with their own members’ faux pas to understand that they know nothing of grace.  They are consumed by hatred, bent on destruction, and are filled with irreconcilable animosity.  They provide no pathway to peace.  If they decide you are the enemy, you are forever the enemy.  Mercy and forgiveness are unknown to them; but James states, “judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy, “ (James 2:13, NKJV).

Add to their lack of mercy the destruction they unleashed upon American cities following the death of George Floyd and it is clear that they are not people of good will.  BLM, Antifa, and other radicals did billions of dollars of damage to property in numerous cities and dozens were slain.  On the other hand, God calls His people to be “wise as serpents and harmless as doves;” and we are also commanded to “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”

How can harmony or cooperation exist between the Body of Christ and such wickedness?  How can anyone who knows and has experienced God’s grace and forgiveness desire to join hands with a movement which despises God’s goodness?  Have these leaders forgotten the admonition of Scripture which states that “friendship with the world is enmity with God?”  Christ noted tersely that those who denied Him He would deny before His Father.

What is especially troubling about these evangelical leaders climbing aboard the “Woke” wagon is that it is quite impossible for them to be unaware of the stark contrast between Scripture and “Wokeness.”  To this writer it recalls James’s blunt retort,

“…you adulterers and adulteresses!  Do you not know that friendship with world is enmity with God?” (James 4:4).

The message of the Gospel breaths God’s grace. From before the foundation of the world He provided that the very course of history would tell the story of His mercy and forgiveness.  For those who at one time hated Him and rejected His rule yet turned to Him in repentance and faith He offers not only forgiveness but full reconciliation and a close personal relationship!

Yet the “Woke” BLM, CRT crowd not only fails to offer a pathway to forgiveness and reconciliation they actively and publicly reject making such an offer.  Their way is that of total and abject surrender by and subjugation of all of those they deem to be offenders.

Students of church history will remember that in the early twentieth century unbelievers took control of many American Christian organizations, seminaries, colleges, and denominations.  They did so by taking advantage of Christians who lived by the love principle of First Corinthians thirteen, “believing the best” about others and giving them the benefit of the doubt.  Those unbelievers veiled their real objectives behind confusing rhetoric while actively rejecting and undermining historic Christian doctrines.

Christians must develop the strength of character to confront their leaders if they are bending to the pressures of a woke and wicked culture.  This is not the time for forbearance, but for “fighting the good fight!”  Those who declare that these things are part of the gospel are preaching a false gospel, and must be abandoned.

Will we see a repeat of that fiasco in the 21^st Century?  We may if true believers do not respond biblically and soon.  For those of you who are paying attention, understand that the “Woke” movement is not about justice and peace.  And it is certainly not about the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

How completely antithetical to the mission of the Church!

One of the most astonishing and disturbing trends in evangelicalism over the last few years is the significant number of leaders and organizations that have succumbed to the pressure of the “Woke” mob to join them in their attacks upon the so-called “White” culture. Organizations, such as The Gospel Coalition, and leaders of the SBC, among many others, have gone on record as supportive of the objectives of BLM, CRT, and other leftist groups. Voddie Baucham, in his powerful book, Fault Lines, highlights the dangers to the Church inherent in such actions.

The errors in this are not difficult to discern!  The Leftists are not clandestine with their motives and objectives.  We have clarity, though it may be discomfiting to Christians and pseudo-Christians who have fallen in love with the world and desire the world’s approval!

Setting aside the message of the Left for the moment, which at times and in some ways may be accurate concerning the majority culture, one need only look at their proffered solutions to recognize that they are not of the same spirit as the Church and despise the Gospel of Christ. It is impossible to be at peace with organizations such as BLM, and the CRT “woke” crowd and to also be at peace with Jesus Christ!

One need only consider how the movement deals with their own members’ faux pas to understand that they know nothing of grace. They are consumed by hatred, destruction, and irreconcilable animosity. They provide no pathway to peace. If they decide you are the enemy, you are forever the enemy. Mercy and forgiveness are nonexistent.

How can harmony or cooperation exist between the Body of Christ and such ungodliness? How can anyone who knows and has experienced God’s grace and forgiveness desire to join hands with a movement which despises it? Have they forgotten the admonition of Scripture which notes that “friendship with the world is enmity with God?” Christ noted tersely that those who denied Him He would deny before His Father. What is especially troubling about their climbing aboard the “Woke” wagon is that it is quite impossible for them to be unaware of the stark contrast between Scriptures and “Wokeness.” To this writer it recalls James’s blunt retort, “you adulterers and adulteresses!” While none of us has the ability or authority to judge whether another person is born again or not, one is reminded of Paul’s scathing remarks to the churches of Galatia that he “stood in doubt” about them.

The message of the Gospel breaths God’s grace. He who from before the foundation of the world provided that the very course of history would tell the story of His mercy and forgiveness. For those who at one time hated Him and rejected His rule yet turned to Him in repentance, He offers not only forgiveness but full reconciliation and close familial relationship!

Yet the “Woke” BLM, CRT crowd not only fails to offer a pathway to forgiveness and reconciliation they actively and publicly reject making such an offer. Their way is that of total and abject surrender by and subjugation of all of those they deem to be offenders.

Students of church history will remember that in the early Twentieth century unbelievers took control of many American Christian organizations, seminaries, colleges, and denominations. They did so by taking advantage of Christianity’s I Corinthians’ 13 principle of “believing the best” and giving others the benefit of the doubt to veil their active undermining and destruction of historic Christian doctrines.

Will we see a repeat of that fiasco in the 21^st Century?  We may if true believers do not respond biblically and soon.  For those who are paying attention, understand that the “Woke” movement is not about justice and peace. It is about power!

How completely antithetical to the Gospel of Christ!

The Salvation Army, best known for the red kettles and bell ringers during the Christmas season, recently released disturbing statements regarding racism. These statements included several social justice and Critical Race Theory (CRT) buzzwords. As a result, numerous donors have pulled their financial support from the charity.

The International Social Justice Commission, a division of the charity, released “Let’s Talk About Racism,” a guidebook for donors. In the book, the organization asserts that donors may be guilty of “White supremacy, White-dominant culture, and unequal institutions and society.” The group also asks white donors and Salvationists (as their members are called) to apologize and “lament and repent” for any racism.

The charity also released a “Study Guide on Racism.” In this guide, they state “that Salvationists have sometimes shared in the sins of racism and conformed to economic, organizational and social pressures that perpetuate racism.” It is uncertain in what ways they believe that members are or have been involved in racism. The terminology suggests that they are applying the leftist woke gospel and dividing people rather than uniting diverse groups. 

Progressivism is not new to the Salvation Army. But the question remains. Why does a charitable Christian organization want to promote wokeness? It may be that someone in the organization is promoting these left-leaning ideologies.

The two guides included a great deal of language taken from leftist Ibram X. Kendi, Professor at Boston University and Director of the Center for Antiracist Research. There was also language and information from author Robin DiAngelo, who wrote White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism. Much of this language is very divisive, paints all white people as racists, and insists that all people of color are victims of oppression at all times. 

In 2017, the Salvation Army released an “International Positional Statement” on racism. Professor Jeffery Long, an evolutionary anthropologist who teaches human genetics and Darwinism at the University of New Mexico, was utilized as a source. It is confounding why a Christian charity would use resources from academics that believes in a philosophy that directly conflicts with the Bible.

As a direct result of the woke ideology printed in the literature of the Salvation Army, several donors have stopped financial donations to the charity. The Salvation Army issued a response to the claims in the media that they had asked donors to apologize for being “white.” The Salvation Army has refuted making any such statement and also claims that those making such claims “mislabel” the charity for “their own agenda.” Although it is accurate to say the charity never asked donors to apologize for being white, it is also true that the guidebook and the various other materials and resources regarding racism have the language of CRT and left-leaning philosophies. The Salvation Army has also used information from leftist academics and anti-Biblical ideology such as Darwinism. As a result, the charity may have done a great disservice to themselves but more importantly to the families and individuals that have come to depend on their services. 

The Salvation Army not only provides food and clothing to the needy but also has numerous other services. According to their “2021 Annual Report,” they were able to help 63,000 households with rent or mortgage assistance, served over 2 million with holiday assistance, provided over 7 million with disaster assistance, and helped 121,570 individuals fight substance abuse. The group also ran numerous centers, including 126 rehabilitation centers and 29 centers to assist those rescued from human trafficking. The good that the Salvation Army has done in the past should not be overwhelmed by woke ideology. 

The motto of the Salvation Army is “Doing the Most Good.” Indeed, all Christians should strive for unity and end all racism. Yet if we continue to divide ourselves using the Left’s narrative, this is not “Doing the Most Good.” The act of racism perpetrated by individuals is sin, and these individuals should repent. Nevertheless, demanding that an entire group be held responsible for the sin of racism purely based on the color of their skin is in and of itself racism. Christians best exemplify unity and anti-racism when we work, live, and worship together without the need to create racial division through fake social justice. Instead, we should seek God’s justice and spread the true gospel of Jesus Christ. As it says in Romans 3:22-23:

This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. (emphasis added)

Perhaps the best thing for the Salvation Army (and all Christians) is to leave behind the leftist woke ideology and do the “most good” by returning to the charitable demonstration of the love of Christ by giving freely to all people regardless of race. 

Take ACTION: Please click HERE to send an email to Commander Brian Peddle and/or visit The Salvation Army’s social media sites to let them know that they are alienating many potential supporters who reject the left-wing agenda to divide Americans by race. Please click the following links to visit their Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube pages to urge them to abandon  this politically “woke,” intellectually slumbering, and morally superficial agenda.

Someone I know from California told me recently that he has decided to pull his child out of public school and enroll him instead into a private, Christian school.

Why? Because during some of the Zoom instruction during the coronavirus pandemic, this concerned parent discovered some of the lessons they were trying to foist on his child. In this case, it was the anti-American historical revisionism that disgusted this parent.

Multiply this story many times over, and we are seeing a very important development right now—many parents are finding better ways to educate their children, including home-school and home-school co-ops, than the failing public schools.

But the left is pushing back. Perhaps the most galling thing about this debate is the arrogance of the educrats who think they are the ones who should be responsible for the education of the children—not the parents.

Former Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe let the cat out of the bag. The Democrat is currently running for governor again, and he said in a recent debate: “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

Unfortunately, McAuliffe is not alone in these sentiments.

Writing in wnd.com (10/3/21), Art Moore points out that parents are supposedly “not the ‘primary stakeholder’ in their children’s education”—even though they are “important stakeholders.” Who says this? Some left wing nut job on a TicTok video? No, Joe Biden’s education secretary Michael Cordona said this.

What’s more, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) asked the Biden administration to treat concerned parents at school board meetings as essentially domestic terrorists. They write, “Now, we ask that the federal government investigate, intercept, and prevent the current threats and acts of violence against our public school officials through existing statutes, executive authority…to preserve public school infrastructure and campuses.”

They add: “Further, this increasing violence is a clear and present danger to civic participation.”

Apparently, President Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland agrees. He is now claiming that concerned parents protesting at school board meetings are guilty of “domestic terrorism.”

In his End of Day Report (10/5/21), Gary Bauer of American Values responds, “So, let’s get this straight: The radical forces indoctrinating your children are trying to shut you up by utilizing the same agency, the FBI, that the left used to smear Donald Trump with the fake Russia collusion hoax.” He observes that the Biden administration is “turning the FBI loose on soccer moms.” Critics note that Garland has a conflict of interest here. Bauer says:

“His son-in-law is the president of a consulting firm that makes millions of dollars contracting with school boards to push the left’s radical agenda.”

If you look at the videos of the unruly school board meetings, what you see are parents visibly upset that their children are being taught a bunch of lies. They are not resorting to “violence.”

The most prominent areas of curriculum conflict include:

• Critical race theory (CRT), where by definition whites are oppressors and blacks are the oppressed. Little children who have done nothing wrong are being vilified for the color of their skin.

• Historical revisionism, which turns American history on its head. The settlers and founders of America were far from perfect. But they created a nation with unparalleled freedom and prosperity. Now political correctness has turned America’s founders into villains. One can only wonder why those would-be American immigrants trekking through Central America are currently risking their lives to come to this supposedly evil country.

• The dogmatic LGBTQ agenda. Many children (mostly girls) are questioning if they were born in the correct gender. Because of this fad that is sweeping through many of the schools and is being promoted by teachers and the school administrators, many young people are undergoing “irreversible damage” as puberty blockers and even surgery are administered to try and resolve a conflict that usually resolves itself in puberty. The fallout is horrible. Journalist Abigail Shrier wrote a book documenting this dangerous trend—Irreversible Damage.

The schools and teachers unions are acting as if they own the children. They do not. Children are on loan by God to the parents. Indeed, who is responsible for children’s education? Parents or educrats?

Who knows better than the parents what is in the children’s best interest? To whom have the children been given? Hasn’t God given the parents the responsibility of teaching their children, even if they delegate that teaching to others? Traditionally, teachers have been described as “in loco parentis”—acting on behalf of the parents, not against them.

Our current education crisis could actually prove to be a good thing—if we handle it correctly. This could be the time when many Americans seek to rescue their children from leftist and false indoctrination promoted by too many of our public schools.

This article was originally published by JerryNewcombe.com.

Here’s a statistic that may surprise many: It is estimated that less than 17% of U.S. doctors belong to the powerful leftist lobbying group, the American Medical Association (AMA). Remember that figure as you read on about the AMA’s role in promoting critical race theory and sexual anarchy.

In May 2021, the AMA issued a press release announcing its 86-page critical race theory-infused “ambitious strategic plan to dismantle structural racism” which acknowledges “that equity work requires recognition of past harms and critical examination of institutional roles upholding these structures.”

In the press release, the AMA makes clear its leftist leanings:

[T]he plan … is driven by the immense need for equity-centered solutions to confront harms produced by systemic racism and other forms of oppression for Black, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, and other people of color, as well as people who identify as LGBTQ+. 

The AMA’s ambitious plan seeks to eradicate “malignant narratives” like “a narrow focus on individuals,” the “myth of meritocracy,” and the “myth of American exceptionalism.” The AMA is committed to “rooting out racism and white supremacy in our workplace. … We must ‘get our house in order’ and direct significant focus on embedding equity within the management team.”

The 86-page plan makes even clearer that the AMA has abandoned commitments to equality in favor of collectivist notions of equity based on group membership. The plan is littered with quotes from far-left poets and activists like Ta-Nehesi Coates as well far-left jargon like this:

• “We must … ensure that we use the theories (intersectionality, critical race theory*, etc.).”

• “Equity solutions include … [e]liminating all forms of discrimination, exclusion and oppression in medical and physician education, training, hiring, [and] matriculation … by [m]andatory anti-racism … equity-explicit training … for all … staff [and] Publicly reported equity assessments for medical schools and hospitals … ensuring just representation of Black, Indigenous and Latinx people in medical school admissions as well as medical school and hospital leadership ranks.”

• “We operate in a carefully designed and maintained system that normalizes and legitimizes an array of dynamics … that routinely advantage white (also wealthy, hetero-, able-bodied, male, Christian, U.S.- born) people at the expense of Black, Latinx, Indigenous and people of color (also low wealth, women, people with disabilities, non-Christians, and those foreign-born).”

• “Where equality is a blunt instrument of ‘sameness,’ equity is a precise scalpel that requires a deep understanding of complex dynamics and systems with skill and practice in application. … Equity can be understood as both a process and an outcome. It involves sharing power with people … and redistributing resources to the greatest need.”

The AMA’s document includes this quote from “Sylvia” Rivera,” a deeply troubled drag queen who was homeless and working as a prostitute by age 11:

We have to be visible. We should not be ashamed of who we are. We have to show the world that we’re numerous.

The idea that no one should be ashamed of cross-dressing behaviors is a moral claim that falls far outside the purview of the American Medical Association, but grandiose moral and social engineering schemes is now apparently the business of the AMA.

At the end of June 2021, the AMA released a “resolution” created by a committee of homosexual activists and their collaborators calling for “Removing Sex Designation from the Public Portion of the Birth Certificate.” In a tortured effort to rationalize the AMA’s involvement in redesigning birth certificates to serve the desires of cross-sex impersonators, the activists wrote,

Gender is a social construct that describes the way persons self-identify or express themselves. A person’s gender identity may not always be exclusively male or female and may not always correspond with their sex assigned at birth.

To be clear, these medical doctors are just pretending that sex is “assigned” at birth. They know full well that obstetricians do not assign sexes—of which there are two—to newborns. Physicians identify the sex of newborns—an objective, immutable trait that never changes. There are a small percentage of babies born with disorders of sexual development whose genitalia at birth may be ambiguous, but those babies are not “transgender.”

While some persons may choose not to “identify” with their sex, they do have one and it never changes. The spanking new term “gender identity” was invented to disguise disordered feelings as something more substantive—something with a bit more ontological heft. While a “trans” identity—and every fanciful idea associated with it—is a social construct, biological sex is a material reality that cannot be erased by redesigning birth certificates, grammar, or bodies.

And while “trans”-cultists and their collaborators may believe that subjective feelings about maleness or femaleness (i.e., “gender identity”) are more important than objective biological sex, neither compassion, respect, nor justice obligates others to act as if such feelings are.

The committee cites a prior politically driven AMA policy that says,

“the AMA supports every individual’s right to determine their … sex designation on government documents and other forms of government identification.” The AMA supports policies that allow for a sex designation or change of designation on all government IDs to reflect an individual’s gender identity.

In other words, the AMA supports the bizarre notion that government documents should be falsified in order to conform to the socially constructed, science-denying belief that humans can be what they’re not.

Moreover, after the “trans”-cult has spent years establishing sex and “gender identity” as wholly severable and separate phenomena, they are now attempting to empty “sex designation” filling it with the socially constructed amorphous “gender identity.” George Orwell predicted this:

It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all… a heretical thought… should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. … This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever. … [T]he special function of certain Newspeak words … was not so much to express meanings as to destroy them.

The committee, a political interest group composed of self-identifying health providers, offers this pseudo-medical justification for their political effort:

For these individuals, having a gender identity that does not match the sex designation on their birth certificate can result in confusion, possible discrimination, harassment and violence whenever their birth certificate is requested.

Who may be confused? It seems unlikely that cross-sex impersonators would be confused, so how would the confusion of someone else be a health concern for cross-sex impersonators? What form of “possible discrimination”? Is harassment an issue that the AMA should address or the police?

And what about “trans”-agists, that is, people who identify as younger than their assigned birth date would suggest? If a 47-year-old man identifies as a 17-year-old, should he be able to change his birth date designation to reflect his age identity in order to avoid confusion, possible discrimination, harassment, or violence?

Come to think of it, if insurance companies are forced to pay for chemical and surgical procedures to make men look like women, shouldn’t they be forced to pay for chemical and surgical procedures to make old men look like the young men they identify as?

For some perspective on whose interest this resolution represents, a cursory look at the resolution process is in order. Resolutions are created by AMA Medical Student Sections (MSS), in this case the AMA MSS “Committee on LGBTQ+ Affairs,” which, to be clear, is an interest group.

The current Advisory Committee on LGBTQ+ Affairs has seven members, five of whom are homosexual. The remaining two are “LGBTQ+” collaborators. A committee’s resolution is voted on by the House of Delegates, which is the legislative and policy-making body of the AMA. The House of Delegates is composed of about 600 of the 240,000 AMA members. A two-thirds vote of the delegates present is required for adoption. So, the birth certificate redesign policy was conceivably created and passed by 400 of the 240,000 members of the AMA, and the AMA constitutes only 17% of all physicians in the U.S.

No further evidence is needed to prove that “progressivism” is an ideology of deceit than the spread of “trans”-cultic beliefs and practices throughout a society that purports to revere science and rationality. No sane person really believes men can be or become women. No sane person believes men can “chestfeed” or menstruate, become pregnant, or give birth. No sane person really believes that some women have penises and impregnate women—or men. Those who pretend they do are liars or cowards or both.

No further evidence is needed to prove that the ultimate goal of “progressives” is totalitarian political and social control than their tyrannical efforts to coerce Orwellian Newspeak. And no further evidence is needed to prove that America has become the land of cowards than the silence of many physicians on the chemical and surgical abuse of children by the medical community.

There are things that Americans can do to resist Big Brother and his apparatchiks and cowardly minions. Ask your pediatrician, obstetrician, gynecologist, and primary care physician if they support pseudo-scientific “trans”-cultic practices for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors. If they do, find new doctors. And if you’re a doctor who belongs to the AMA, cancel your membership and tell the AMA why.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/amaIsWoke_Audio.mp3

During China’s so-called Cultural Revolution, the mass-murdering monster Chairman Mao and his minions divided the children and the population as a whole into two broad categories: the black classes and the red classes.

The black classes — those who came from families that owned land or businesses prior to the revolution, for instance — were the “oppressors.” Individuals from those classes were ordered to stand in front of their peers and do “self-criticism.” They also had to repent of their supposed “privilege,” though all of the repenting in the world could not get rid of the stain of having been born into a “black” family. In many cases confused children were ordered to denounce their own parents.

The red classes, by contrast, which included landless peasant families and revolutionary Communist Party soldiers, among others, were members of the “oppressed” class that was set to “liberate” China. All of the oppressed’s problems,  claimed the propaganda and functionaries of the regime and its indoctrination centers, were the result of systematic exploitation and oppression coming from the evil black classes. To fix it, all of the “olds” — the habits, customs, culture, and ideas of China’s ancient civilization supposedly developed by the black classes to oppress everyone else and maintain power — needed to be dismantled and eradicated.

Before long, blood was literally running in the streets, as crazed and brainwashed “Red” youth in thrall to Chairman Mao’s lies terrorized and massacred their own countrymen. Children even turned their own parents over to the Communist savages to be tortured or executed. Libraries were burned, statues were torn down, professors and intellectuals who stood in the way were cut down, and frenzied children behaved more like rabid hyenas than human beings.

Lily Tang-Williams, who was just a young girl at the time, remembers it all like it was yesterday — and she remembers getting caught up in the mass hysteria, too. She was there. She lived it. She remembers the seething hatred and division that was inculcated in the population and especially impressionable young children. She remembers the violence that resulted. And she sees troubling parallels with the ideology and worldview that has taken over America like a fast-moving cancer.

They’ve seen this before: Lily Tang-Williams (left) grew up during Mao’s Cultural Revolution in Communist China, and she remembers how children were brainwashed and divided into “oppressor” and “oppressed” classes. After fleeing communist madness in North Korea, Yeonmi Park (right) came to America in search of freedom, but what she found in the “education” system was more outrageous than in her native land. (Photo credit: Left, John C. Williams, right, P Tore Sætre/Wikimedia)

“What is going on today in America with Critical Race Theory and identity politics really reminds me of what happened in China during the Cultural Revolution,” said Tang-Williams, who is now a proud American trying to sound the alarm about the mass insanity involving CRT and race that is gripping her adopted homeland before it is too late.

“I have witnessed how horrible social and political chaos can be when you tell the police to stand down and you … categorize people into classes, into two groups, oppressors versus oppressed, like the Marxists did,” she recalled, noting that there were five subcategories within the red and black classes that the communists used to foment more and more hate between people. “Mao divided the whole Chinese population into identity politics, fighting tooth and nail with each other, and 20 million people died.”

“I feel like this is a lesson I need to share with my fellow American citizens,” explained Williams, who serves on the advisory board of U.S. Parents Involved in Education (USPIE) and has been raising awareness about the dangers of CRT by doing everything from testifying in legislatures to publishing columns in major newspapers. “This is my new country, and I came here to achieve the American dream, not to relive another Cultural Revolution.”

It’s not just Chinese refugees to America who recall with horror the use of Critical Race Theory-style tactics to divide and enslave their nation. North Korean defectors and even those who fled from communist slave states in Europe remember it well, too — and they are expressing shock at seeing the very same techniques being deployed in America, from schools and businesses to government agencies and even in churches.

At a school-board meeting in Bedford Central, New York, in June, a mother who was born and raised in the Soviet Union spoke out against CRT and “equity” schemes. “The proposed ‘anti-racist program’ is just a prettier name for racial Marxist teaching. You don’t need to sugarcoat it for me. I lived it. Same methods, same vocabulary, same preferential treatment to certain groups,” explained the outraged mom. “That’s why equity is packed with good causes like ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion,’ so nobody can challenge it. But, I know.”

Blasting the “equity for all” program and other racialized Marxist teachings, she said it is “actually a tyrannical Soviet ideology” that has resulted in mass starvation and millions of executions around the world. “Ask me how I know? I was born in Soviet Union and my family has seen it all. Suffering first from Nazi and then from tyrannical Soviet ideology. Back there, what started with ‘equity for all,’ quickly ended with nothing to eat for my people,” she declared. “And now my family is here because of it — because ‘equity’ does not work.”

“They told us they were advocates for equity and enemies of privilege, people believed this, and we paid the awful price. This ideology killed millions of people worldwide. And now you’re bringing it here to indoctrinate our own children,” continued the mother. “Equity was just a tool used by communists to make sure everyone was equally poorly educated so people didn’t question authority. While in definition it was about fairness, in reality, it means same outcome — nobody excels, mind-boggling sameness. The key tactic is to remove all the incentives and motivation to succeed for all the students.”

Now, despite having fled that horror, she sees it rearing its ugly head in her new homeland. “We did not come here for a blanketed synthetic equity. We had enough of that one,” the mom concluded in her stinging three-minute scorching of the indoctrination taking place in government schools. “We came here for equal opportunity under the law and freedoms in this country. Soviets extinguished all the excellence and opportunity.”

According to a North Korean defector, the anti-American propaganda in America’s “education” system is even more extreme than the North Korean regime’s indoctrination. When Yeonmi Park fled to the United States from North Korea, she was under the impression that America was a land of free speech and freedom of thought. After attending Columbia University, however, her views changed. “Even North Korea isn’t this nuts,” she told Fox News.

The Critical Race Theory was laid on thick at Columbia. “Every problem, they explained [to] us, is because of white men,” Park continued. Many of the hyper-racialized indoctrination sessions on “white privilege” and similar CRT-inspired nonsense reminded her of the “caste system” in North Korea where individuals were placed in categories based on their ancestry and family history.

“I expected that I was paying this fortune, all this time and energy, to learn how to think. But they are forcing you to think the way they want you to think,” Park explained, saying she could not believe how much she was being asked to censor herself. “I realized, wow, this is insane. I thought America was different but I saw so many similarities to what I saw in North Korea that I started worrying.”

Divide and Conquer

The reason so many victims of communism from around the world see the parallels between CRT and what they experienced under communist oppression is simple. Critical Race Theory, a derivative of Critical Theory, is literally a Marxist tool created by Marxists to be used for dividing and conquering nations to further Marxist objectives.

Leaving aside the fact that the Bible never speaks of “race” as an issue — in fact the Bible says all men come from “one blood” and are descended from Adam and Eve — the New Testament in the Bible sheds light on the dangers of CRT and its utility for subversives. Three of the four Gospels quote Jesus warning that a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand. In fact, in Matthew, Jesus is quoted warning that divided kingdoms will be “laid waste” or “brought to desolation,” depending on the translation used. And that is the point: Marxists have known all along that the way to destroy a nation is to divide it — especially one as powerful as the United States.

Marx, of course, viewed the key fault line to base conflict around as being bourgeoisie (capitalist class) versus proletariat (working class). In Russia, revolutionaries backed by American mega-banks, as documented by Stanford historian Antony Sutton in his essential book Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution,succeeded with that class-struggle formula. After all, Czarist Russia was already a deeply divided society with a relatively oppressive, quasi-feudalistic ruling class lording over the peasantry. Backed by Wall Street money, Marx’s formula proved successful.

In America and Western Europe, however, the class conflict argument was far less appealing. Indeed, trying to persuade “working-class” Americans that they were being “oppressed” by their employers proved largely futile. The “American Dream” was real: People from anywhere could come to America with nothing and, if they worked hard and served their fellow man, they could become rich and successful beyond anything that the world had ever seen. Thus, the Marxists needed a new tactic to divide America.

Enter the exploitation and even weaponization of “race.” Communist operatives recognized early on the potential of exploiting racial division in America. In fact, documents from both the KGB and the FBI reveal a Soviet plan to create what they described as a “Negro Soviet Republic” in the American South that could serve as a beachhead for Communist slavery on the American continent.

Black American revolutionaries were brought into leading positions in the Communist Party USA to help advance this agenda. Among them was Manning Johnson, a black radical who rose so far through the ranks in the Communist Party that he was invited to Moscow. But eventually, he realized what was going on and blew the whistle in his historic book Color, Communism, and Common Sense. Not only did communists not care about black Americans, he explained, but the Reds were actually vicious racists exploiting black Americans to enslave mankind.

“The placing of the repository of everything, right and just, among the darker races is a dastardly Communist trick to use race as a means of grabbing and enslaving the whole of humanity,” explained Johnson, who defected from the party after realizing he was being used. “Moscow’s Negro tools in the incitement of racial warfare place all the ills of the Negro at the door of the white leaders of America…. Moreover, while they talk about ‘racial strife’ in America as providing grist for Moscow’s propaganda mill they are busy creating it.”

Like old friends: Black Lives Matter co-founder Opal Tometi (right), whose parents came to America from Nigeria (presumably not for the alleged “systemic racism”), stands next to murderous Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. (Photo credit: Twitter)

Today, the situation is the same: Behind the race-mongering and CRT are Marxist operatives. Consider, for example, Black Lives Matter. All three of the co-founders are proud Marxists. Speaking on The Real News Network, BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors admitted that she and fellow BLM co-founder Alicia Garza were “trained Marxists.” The third co-founder, Opal Tometi, posted to Twitter a photograph of herself in Venezuela with mass-murdering Marxist dictator Nicolás Maduro. “Currently in Venezuela,” she tweeted along with the picture. “Such a relief to be in a place where there is intelligent political discourse.”

And just like the black Marxists pushing racial hatred in Johnson’s day, behind the three BLM co-founders are wealthy white financiers such as George Soros, the Rockefeller dynasty, and many of America’s Fortune 500 corporations.

CRT fundamentally rejects the official rallying cry of Martin Luther King, Jr., and (more broadly) the Civil Rights movement — the idea that people should be judged on the “content of their character” rather than the color of their skin. Instead, Critical Race theorists argue that people should be judged by the color of their skin. But as always with Marxist campaigns, the issue is never really the issue — the issue is always the revolution, as the 1960s Students for a Democratic Society used to say.

Marxist Race-mongering

Almost a century ago, a cabal of Marxists led by law professor Carl Grünberg organized around the Institute for Social Research (ISR) at Goethe University Frankfurt in Germany. More commonly known as the “Frankfurt School,” this subversive operation was actually hatched in a Moscow meeting at the Marx-Engels Institute convened by the Communist Internationale and mass-murdering Soviet dictator Vladimir Lenin’s key operative Karl Radek. Other key players included Soviet secret police boss Felix Dzerzhinsky, Hungarian Bolshevik “cultural commissar” Gyorgy Lukacs, and Communist Internationale (Comintern) bigwig Willi Münzenberg.

Around the same time that Italian communist Antonio Gramsci dreamt up what came to be known as cultural Marxism, the forces behind the Frankfurt school also realized that Marxist “revolution” would not be possible in the West — at least not until the nuclear family, Christian culture, religion, and other key institutions were undermined. And so they set about destroying the pillars that sustained civilization so that a new Marxist society could emerge from the ruins of the old world. After helping lay the foundation for National Socialism’s rise in Germany by promoting Nietzsche and others, the Frankfurt School ended up having to flee from the Nazis. They ultimately landed at Columbia University in New York.

There were many tools used to break down the old order — radically sexualizing the youth, demonizing religion, weaponizing education, and more. But among the key weapons formed by the Frankfurt School to deploy against Western civilization was Critical Theory. In his 1937 work Traditional and Critical Theory, ISR Director Max Horkheimer explained that the goal of Critical Theory was to bring about radical social change by exposing the alleged oppression of people by capitalism and traditional culture.

Analyzing everything through the lens of “oppression,” Critical Theory was used to criticize every institution and idea that was contrary to the Marxist agenda until it became discredited in the mind of the people. The theory was promoted primarily through academia at first, but from there worked its way into K-12 schools and eventually into every American institution. From Critical Theory grew Critical Legal Studies, which worked to demonize the American legal system, grounded in the Constitution and the laws of Nature and Nature’s God, as a tool of oppression.

By the 1990s, CRT had been born. In 2001, Critical Race theorists and pioneers in the field Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic published Critical Race Theory: An Introduction outlining the key beliefs of the CRT movement. Among other ideas, they claimed racism was the norm in America and that any advances made by non-whites were only allowed because such advances supposedly served the interests of  “whites.”

But again, behind the façade, Marxism was never far away. Another modern pioneer of Critical Race Theory, for example, was fringe left-wing UCLA law professor Cheryl Harris. Among other Marxist ideas, she proposed confiscation of private property, including land. The primary difference from traditional Marxism was that, rather than redistributing the property to the oppressed proletariat, it would be doled out by the nation’s new racial overlords based on race. In practice, though, it would almost certainly end up with property in the hands of a centralized state, just as Marxist redistribution schemes always do.

More recently, CRT kingpin Ibram X. Kendi, who leads Boston University’s Center for Antiracist Research, has proposed a full-blown racial dictatorship. This would include the creation of a “U.S. Department of Antiracism” with the power to overturn any law or policy at any level of government if the department, which would be beyond the reach of voters, determined that it did not contribute vigorously enough to “antiracism.” Even the speech of politicians would be subject to controls from the new department.

Basically, the goal is to destroy Christian civilization and replace it with Marxism. “In order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anti-capitalist,” explained Kendi, who has also publicly argued that orthodox Christianity, particularly the Christian doctrine of salvation, generally “breeds bigotry.”

CRT Is Everywhere

Today, Critical Race Theory has become ubiquitous in America. From corporate boardrooms and church pulpits to government agencies, entertainment, and even schools, there is no “safe space” to hide from the escalating madness. “Critical race theory is fast becoming America’s new institutional orthodoxy,” warned Christopher Rufo, founder and director of the public policy research center known as Battlefront and a leading figure exposing CRT.

“Relegated for many years to universities and obscure academic journals, over the past decade it has increasingly become the default ideology in our public institutions,” Rufo continued in a talk for Hills-dale College that was adapted into an essay for the school’s Imprimis publication. “When I say that critical race theory is becoming the operating ideology of our public institutions, it is not an exaggeration — from the universities to bureaucracies to k-12 school systems, critical race theory has permeated the collective intelligence and decision-making process of American government, with no sign of slowing down.”

CRT now dominates federal agencies and bureaucracies. This very much includes the U.S. military, where soldiers are being taught that America is plagued with white supremacy and that all whites contribute to this, fomenting division and distrust between soldiers and sailors based on “racial identity,” not to mention encouraging a hostile view of their nation and its institutions. The national-security implications of this madness cannot be overstated. Meanwhile, the toxic ideology has overrun federal law-enforcement agencies, the “intelligence” apparatus, the bureaucracy, and much more. Rufo gives a brief overview of CRT indoctrination within the federal government:

The FBI was holding workshops on intersectionality theory. The Department of Homeland Security was telling white employees they were committing “microinequities” and had been “socialized into oppressor roles.” The Treasury Department held a training session telling staff members that “virtually all white people contribute to racism” and that they must convert “everyone in the federal government” to the ideology of “antiracism.” And the Sandia National Laboratories, which designs America’s nuclear arsenal, sent white male executives to a three-day reeducation camp, where they were told that “white male culture” was analogous to the “KKK,” “white supremacists,” and “mass killings.” The executives were then forced to renounce their “white male privilege” and write letters of apology to fictitious women and people of color.

Of course, Trump famously banned CRT training within the federal workforce by executive order. But the fact that it was going on even during the Trump presidency highlights the fact that this insidious weapon — much like termites eating away at the structures that support a building — was already very advanced in destroying the nation before most of the public caught wind of it. In any case, Biden overturned Trump’s executive order on his first day in office so that the dangerous CRT brainwashing of America’s millions of federal employees could continue.

“This is a revolutionary change,” continued Rufo, adding that the entire machinery of the federal government and even state and local power is increasingly being “turned against the American people.” “This ideology will not stop until it has devoured all of our institutions.”

And indeed, CRT now dominates major corporations, megabanks, and more. Coca-Cola even famously told its employees they should try to be “less white.” Mega-corporations across the nation are forcing their workers into training sessions where CRT dogma is pounded into them. Those who dare to publicly disagree can be drummed out of their jobs, denied promotions, and more. An entire cottage industry of grossly overpaid “consultants” and “experts,” along with “chief diversity officers” and “equity and inclusion directors,” is now a staple at nearly every major business and institution.

Training the next generation: America’s children in all 50 states — even those that banned CRT — are being indoctrinated with CRT and lies to hate their churches, families, and nation. (Photo credit: AP Images)

Even more alarming, perhaps, is the infiltration of CRT into the churches. Despite the Bible specifically pointing out that God created all people of “one blood” and never dividing human beings by “race,” churches, including even many conservative evangelical churches, have fallen victim to the poisonous Marxist narrative. In fact, the CRT banner has been picked up even by the Southern Baptist Convention, which infamously adopted a resolution claiming it was a useful “analytical” tool. While the SBC walked that back somewhat in 2021 following outrage, CRT and its proponents continue to wreak havoc among Southern Baptists and Christian denominations across the board. For a much more detailed treatment of this subject by prominent Pastor Voddie Baucham, who argues that CRT is actually an anti-biblical “cult” animated by “demonic” ideas, see his book Fault Lines, reviewed on page 18.

CRT in the Classroom

Nowhere is the CRT extremism more out of control than in government schools, however. As detailed in The New American’s June 21 Special Report on education headlined “Save Our Children,” CRT is now the lens through which everything from math and science to English and civics is taught. Racial propaganda and Black Lives Matter dogma are taught literally from pre-K to university in every state in the union.

To get a sense of what this looks like, consider an exercise forced on third-grade children, typically aged eight or nine, in one of the wealthiest school districts in the nation, Silicon Valley’s Cupertino Union School District. The confused children were ordered to “deconstruct” their racial, gender, religious, family structure, and sexual identities. After that, they were told to create an “identity map” and rank themselves based on the “power and privilege” received from the “intersection” of their various “identities.” “A white, cisgender man, who is able-bodied, heterosexual, considered handsome and speaks English has more privilege than a Black transgender woman,” offered the school materials in an example of how to understand the results.

Despite growing outrage from parents of all skin tones across America, the three-million-member National Education Association recently approved a resolution at its convention vowing to teach CRT everywhere. Amid half-hearted denials from dishonest union bosses that CRT is being forced on children, the far-left NEA even vowed to create a team to help teachers “fight back against anti-CRT rhetoric.” Even in the states that have banned it, CRT brainwashing of children continues. Indeed, Biden’s Department of Education is bribing state and local governments to peddle the poison to children in government schools using “stimulus” money.

Of course, promoting a false narrative such as CRT depends on the creation of fake history to support the narrative. Enter the 1619 Project, written by a virulent racist for the far-left New York Times and taught nationwide in government schools. This fraudulent narrative holds, among other claims, that “anti-black racism,” slavery, systemic oppression, and other evils are embedded “in the very DNA” of America. Of course, if America’s very DNA is evil, there can be no change in policy and no possible transformation that would make the nation redeemable. In other words, the only solution is to kill America and replace it with something new. That is the point.

The 1619 Project was so dishonest that even the Times’ own fact checker argued against publishing it, and countless left-wing historians have debunked it. Indeed, the screed even omits the historical fact that the first legal slave owner in America was an African named Anthony Johnson, who arrived in America as an indentured servant like most Africans and many Europeans at that time. After serving his time, Johnson purchased rights to many indentured servants, including Europeans.

The CRT-peddling history books have completely rewritten American history. Christian America, organized under the self-evident truth that God created all equally with unalienable rights, went from being the very first society in human history to abolish slavery (numerous states abolished it before Britain) to being portrayed as a uniquely evil nation that practically invented slavery. Instead of being proud of their incredible heritage, young Americans are taught to be ashamed. Even the struggle for independence is falsely portrayed as an effort to preserve slavery.

Of course, to peddle that false narrative, lies and omissions abound. Virtually all the so-called history books today have removed any reference to the first martyr for the cause of America’s independence, a patriot of African heritage named Crispus Attucks, who was the first casualty of the Boston Massacre in 1770, and thus, the first American killed in the revolution. How could Americans of African descent be convinced that they needed their own “Independence Day,” so-called Juneteenth, if they knew the truth? Many other great American patriots of African heritage have similarly been deleted from history because, if people knew their stories, the CRT narrative would implode.

What Next?

The goal of CRT promoters is to dismantle America. Ultimately, the goal is the complete overthrow of the free market, freedom of speech, Christianity and Christian culture, federalism, Western civilization, separation of powers, the U.S. Constitution, God-given rights, equality under the law, and even America itself. This can be seen clearly in the effort to demonize each of these as the product of — or even perpetuator of — “white supremacy” and “systemic racism.” If the evil forces behind CRT succeed, America will go the way of many nations before it — China, Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam, Germany, Russia, Ukraine, Venezuela, Angola, Mozambique, North Korea, and so many others.

Because CRT and its offshoots and proponents increasingly have a bad smell associated with them — and because in some jurisdictions CRT has been banned in government institutions — new terms and phrases are constantly being dreamed up. After all, CRT itself is just re-branded Marxist propaganda. Today, this poison hides behind seemingly innocuous and non-threatening terminology such as “equity,” “social justice,” “inclusion” and “inclusivity,” “diversity,” and so on. No matter what disguise the monster takes, it must be opposed and exposed.

Defeating CRT will require a multi-faceted response. And it will not be easy. Tens of millions of Americans — including millions of teachers shaping the minds of America’s youth — now see the world from a Marxist-CRT worldview. That means simply passing a state law or school board resolution purporting to “ban” CRT will be totally ineffective. A much more comprehensive approach will be required.

At the political level, Congress, governors, legislatures, and even local governments must root it out from government. Not one cent of taxpayer money should flow to any institution or individual promoting this evil, anti-American ideology. Lawsuits against this poison are already making their way through the courts and may offer a useful avenue when it comes to reining in public institutions. In the business world, consumers should avoid doing business with any company that promotes CRT or any of its derivatives. Churches that embrace CRT should be corrected or, if that proves impossible, abandoned. And parents must get their children out of government schools before another generation of children is raised to believe these deadly lies.

More importantly, though, will be developing and propagating a truthful narrative about America, Christianity, and Western civilization that exposes the evil fraud of Marxism and CRT. Of course, America has had its flaws, and still does, because it is made up of sinful human beings. However, it is also unique and amazing: Americans, first at the state and then at the federal level, were among the first people in human history to reject slavery, an institution that has been ubiquitous throughout human history and was not even criminalized in parts of Africa until the 21st century. America created a model for the rest of mankind to follow. It established liberty and protected the God-given rights of more people, and created more material prosperity and human well-being, than any other nation in history. America is amazing, and it is worth not only preserving, but celebrating. The dishonest Marxists and their useful idiots must never be allowed to obscure that.

This article was originally published at TheNewAmerican.com.

Ever since the D.C. marsh rodents regained control of both legislative chambers and the executive branch in a murkier, mustier way than usual, the evening news has gone from depressing to unbearable. But just because the political marsh is controlled by R.U.O.S. (rodents of unusual size, hat tip Princess Bride) doesn’t mean all the Wesleys are pinned beneath them.

Last month, U.S. Representative Chip Roy (R-TX), introduced H.R. 3163 in the U.S. House of Representatives. Roy’s proposal, titled “Combatting Racist Teaching in Schools (CRT) Act,” would forbid federal money (aka taxpayer’s moolah) from funding any elementary, secondary school, or institution of higher education that teaches race-based ideologies. Rep. Roy is fulfilling his role as a representative of the people with this resolution, and he should be applauded for being bold enough to do his job.

This bill has 32 Wesley-esque co-sponsors, all Republican, including Illinois Congresswoman Mary Miller, who is one of the original co-sponsors.

In a Daily Signal podcast, Roy expounded on the dangers that will result if America’s youth keep being brainwashed in Critical Race Theory (CRT):

The danger is that we destroy the republic because we’re no longer united under the idea of what it is to be an American. And people say, “Oh, you guys are overstating this.” No, we are great because we’re united around these ideas. We’re great because we have values that bring us together. … And when you … destroy all those things that hold us together, including a belief that we’re united as Americans, then it destroys the fabric of the country.

Congressman Roy specified in his press release that this legislation would ban funding to institutions that propagate ideologies teaching any of the following:

• Any race is inherently superior or inferior to any other race, color, or national origin.

• The United States is a fundamentally racist country.

• The Declaration of Independence and/or Constitution of the United States is a fundamentally racist document.

• An individual’s moral character or worth is determined by the individual’s race, color, or national origin.

• An individual, by virtue of the individual’s race, is inherently racist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.

• An individual, because of the individual’s race, bears responsibility for the actions committed by other members of the individual’s race, color, or national origin

Not many good things occur in the political swamp, so when an occasional fresh breeze like H.R. 3163 stirs the fetid air, we should do all in our power to let our lawmakers know that we approve wholly and heartily.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to ask him/her to support or even co-sponsor this legislation to ban federal tax dollars from going to any school that promotes CRT.

CRT has managed to sneak into government schools, corporate training programs, and even the military. Yet, most Americans reject this insidious Marxist-derived ideology that claims that racism (or white privilege) is the evil foundations force at work in society. CRT is sowing seeds of division and hatred, or as Rep. Roy said, CRT is “teaching our children to believe that America is evil, to be ashamed of ‘their whiteness,’ and how they can undo their whiteness.”

“Worse yet is its pernicious demands to ‘divvy us up by race’ and perpetuate the lie that we should be treated differently by virtue of our skin color. There is no room for state-sanctioned racism anywhere in our society, and we must oppose it with all our might.”

Three recent articles, one on NBC on June 15, one in Vanity Fair on June 16, and one on CNN on June 18, futilely attempt to recast conservative objections to the use of public schools to promote Critical Race Theory (CRT) as a “freakout,” “national panic,” “moral panic,” and “hysteria.” When leftists lack sound arguments, they resort to demagoguery. Any means to the ends of preventing conservatives from being as vocal as leftists in shaping culture are, in the narrow minds of leftists, justified.

This introductory sentence in the Vanity Fair article illuminates much of the problem with leftists when it comes to their use of public schools and funds to promote Critical Race Theory:

The right-wing freakout over critical race theory—or, at least what some Republican politicians and pundits think it is—has been playing out simultaneously in statehouses and TV studios, with lawmakers crafting bills to ban schools from teaching about systemic racism and conservative media figures fanning the flames.

Reading left-wing analyses of anything pertaining to race or sex requires a close look at every term to determine whether and how it’s been redefined. By “freakout” leftist writer Charlotte Klein, who writes for the appropriately named Vanity Fair Hive (lol), means the objections of “Republican politicians, pundits,” and “disgruntled parents” to the use of public schools to promote uncritically CRT and its many manifestations.

CNN’s Nicole Hemmer views opposition (what she calls “hysteria”)  to public school advocacy of assumptions derived from CRT as a red herring used by conservatives to divert attention away from the institutional racism poisoning America:

[A]rguing about critical race theory shifts the conversation away from the continued consequences of structural racism.

That conversation opens up challenging issues about equity, affirmative action, reparations, and government intervention to dismantle racist systems.

Both Klein and Hemmer assume that systemic/structural racism exists. And they assume the objections of conservatives to the promulgation of CRT in government schools are impelled by their desire to stop teaching about racism. In the view of leftists, the only way to think about race and racism is through a CRT-beclouded lens.

Moreover, neither Klein nor Hemmer acknowledges that CRT (and its many incarnations manufactured by racist “antiracism” profiteers) is a theory—a collection of arguable ideas—about race; race relations; oppression; “identity,” American history; equity; and equality (not to mention biological sex, homoerotic attraction, and cross-sex identification).

Leftists don’t want students to study assumptions derived from CRT along with critiques of CRT and resources that offer dissenting views on those topics. Leftists want CRT promoted uncritically and dissenting resources banned.

NBC slyly suggests that schools don’t even teach CRT, so what’s all the brouhaha about:

Virtually all school districts insist they are not teaching critical race theory, but many activists and parents have begun using it as a catch-all term to refer to what schools often call equity programs, teaching about racism or LGBTQ-inclusive policies.

Weeelll, that may be technically true. School administrators are gifted at the art of speaking technical truths with forked tongues. But take a look at the “equity” programs, racism teaching, and “LGBTQ-inclusive” programs. Then go read a primer on CRT. If I were a betting woman, I would bet you’d find some, shall we say, overlap.

NBC writes,

There’s no shortage of free publicity for the cause. The conservative focus on critical race theory is pervading right-wing news publications, like Fox News and Breitbart.

And CNN’s Nicole Hemmer writes that according to Media Matters,

Fox News … has mentioned critical race theory … nearly 1,300 times in the past three-and-a-half months.

What NBC failed to mention is the ample free publicity from the New York Times, Washington Post, NBC, CNN, Daily Beast, Slate Magazine et al. for the arguable assumptions derived from Critical Race Theory and embedded in government schools, colleges and universities, corporate diversity re-education, and military diversity re-education.

And Hemmer failed to mention the countless times arguable assumptions derived from Critical Race Theory have been uncritically “mentioned” in resources used in classrooms and professional development training throughout the country over the past 30 years. Her failure to acknowledge what can only be described as decades-long CRT advocacy in government schools reveals that she is either profoundly ignorant or indefensibly deceitful.

NBC’s lengthy hit-job describes the epic plague that conservative opposition to CRT has–in the view of leftists–become:

The groups swarm school board meetings, inundate districts with time-consuming public records requests and file lawsuits and federal complaints alleging discrimination against white students.

Awww, poor wittle school districts having to endure swarms of locust-like conservatives attending board meetings and forcing districts to use valuable indoctrination time to reveal what goes on behind the scenes. Leftists are looking back wistfully at the good old days when conservatives had no idea what resources were used in classrooms and professional development—you know, the days before our re-educated youth looted and burned down our cities in racist, maskless, spittle-fueled insurrections.

NBC’s piece tries to recast long-overdue organized efforts by conservatives as some sort of secret nefarious plot to take over schools. But every strategy and tactic NBC attempts to besmirch has been used by leftists for decades. Leftists want to stop conservatives from doing exactly what leftists have been doing for decades and which enabled them to gain control of government schools. They desperately want to stop conservatives from organizing. They want to smear conservatives for using think tanks, political action groups, non-profits, and legal foundations to aid in the effort to restore pedagogical soundness to government schools.

But here’s what’s remarkable about the high dudgeon of leftists: This is their playbook.

The article mentions school board meetings attended by conservative “local residents, many without children in the district,” implying without asserting that it is illegitimate for local taxpayers without children currently attending schools to object to funding the promulgation of leftist ideas about race and sex.

What the NBC article didn’t mention is that for years leftists without children in district schools have both spoken at and served on school boards. And leftists have spoken at school board meetings who don’t even live in the district whose policies or curricula those leftists were addressing.

In a richly ironic statement cited by NBC, Sonja McKenzie, “a member of the board of directors of the National School Boards Action Center” claims to be “disturbed” by efforts of conservatives to oust leftist school board members:

The thing that disturbs me the most about politicizing school boards is there is no mention of kids. It’s not community centered, it’s centered on political thought and theory and things that don’t connect to education. 

Surely, she jests. Leftists have been colonizing and politicizing school boards, state boards of education, university teacher-training programs, teachers’ unions, the American Library Association, the Modern Language Association, and educational conferences for decades to ensure leftist political thought and theory on race and sexuality shape curricula, policy, practices, and professional development—all of which are intended to “connect” to the “education” of “kids.”

Just curious, how are the efforts of community members to oust leftists on school boards “not community centered”?

Here’s NBC’s objective reporting on two school board meetings in Nevada:

In Nevada, Washoe County’s school board halted in-person meetings in April, after residents filled a large auditorium and lobbed insults and threats of violence during the public comment portion. …

During the most recent meeting, which lasted 11 hours, speakers railed at school board members, calling them Marxists, racists, Nazis and child abusers, among other epithets.

Kristen De Haan, the mother of a senior in a district high school, said she attends the meetings in support of an expanded social justice curriculum and LGBTQ-inclusive sex education.

“I don’t always agree with the board by any stretch of the imagination,” De Haan, who is white, said. “But listening to the anger, and what truly feels like hatred … it’s really hard. I definitely get glares when I go up and speak.

What is notable about this “reporting,” is how different it is from reporting about school board meetings when conservatives who oppose, for example, co-ed locker rooms, obscene novels, or CRT, are routinely called racists and ignorant hateful bigots who support the bullying of children. No anger or hatred in those epithets, no siree. Just love, sweet love.

Notable too is missing context. Why might some community members call school board members Marxists, racists, or child abusers? Could it be that the accused school board members support the use of government funds to teach positively about controversial racist, Marxist CRT-infused ideas? Could it be that some parents view teaching children that their white skin makes them oppressors constitutes child abuse? Could it be that some parents view the sexual integration of children’s private spaces—also supported by CRT-infused organizations like BLM™—as child abuse?

Perhaps nothing better demonstrates both the arrogance and panic of leftists than the title of Charlotte Klein’s article: “The Right-Wing Meltdown Over Critical Race Theory is Spiraling Out of Control.”

To leftists, conservative efforts to stop the heretofore unobstructed ideological rampage of leftists through taxpayer-funded schools must be controlled. The Hive will leave no child’s mind unmolested by leftist dogma.

Leftists have thrown down the gauntlet. Take it up and slap ‘em—hard—figuratively speaking, of course.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/leftistsFreakOut_audio.mp3

Illinois Democrats are hell-bent on passing a new law—the REACH Act (HB 1736 and SB 647)—that will require every school-age child in Illinois public schools to be introduced to homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation through mandatory “comprehensive sex ed.” To be clear, that’s every child from kindergarten on up and the indoctrination will take place every school year, increasing in detail each year. This will be in addition to all the other pro-“LGBTQ” material in which leftists are drowning children via the proposed “Culturally Responsive Teaching and Leading Standards”; the existing “LGBT” school indoctrination law; the homosexuality- affirming “anti-bullying” law passed in 2010; and the novels, plays, movies, essays, and articles teachers are already choosing to teach.

Every year the amount of time and number of contexts in which positive images of and ideas about homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation—topics that no adult other than parents should introduce to children or teens—grows. Leftists have been planting a dark, impenetrable forest while self-neutering conservatives fret about the trash tree they just bumped into and left standing. Can conservatives not yet see the forest?

Leftists have their gimlet eyes always focused on the big picture as they play the long game to rule the country. And they know the big picture depends on shaping the hearts and minds of children. While conservatives dismiss the “little” offenses and fume briefly about the big offenses against decency, morality, and truth, leftists continue their march through every institution that shapes culture, including our schools which create our future culture-makers—or as we learned in 2020, our culture-destroyers.

Illinois made the national press recently for the youth mind-grab called the “Culturally Responsive Teaching and Leading Standards” that require teacher-training/professional licensure programs, all in-house professional development, and all classrooms to be infused with leftist beliefs about race, homosexuality, and cross-sex impersonation. That amendment will be decided in just a few days by a rules committee in Springfield composed of twelve lawmakers and controlled by leftists.

Meanwhile, here comes the REACH Act, which will enable leftists to reach deeper into the hearts and minds of impressionable children to shape their feelings and beliefs about sexuality under the viperish guise of protecting children.

IFI warned parents about this bill when it was first introduced last year. If passed, this legislation will require leftist-created “comprehensive” sexuality indoctrination to start in kindergarten. Currently, sex education is not required in Illinois, but if it is offered, the only type of curriculum that can be used is leftist “comprehensive” sex ed. That’s thanks to a 2013 law. More on that shortly.

Here are some morsels from the REACH Act (highlighted in yellow):

• “It is the intent of the General Assembly that comprehensive sex ed shall [must]… promote awareness and healthy attitudes about gender identity, gender expression” and “sexual orientation … and must be available to students in kindergarten through 12th grade.”

Since when did it become the job of public school teachers to promote “awareness” of homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation? When did it become their job to promote “healthy attitudes” about homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation? Who decides what constitutes a “healthy attitude” toward these phenomena, and on what criteria are such judgments made?

• “Comprehensive sex ed in kindergarten through second grade shall [must] include … instruction on the following topics: human anatomy … gender roles … [and] varying family structures.”

Discussing human sexual anatomy in co-ed K-12 classes is yet one more way for our leftists to dissolve feelings of modesty in young children just as those feelings are beginning to develop. Leftists view that as a good thing. Discussions of “gender roles” and of “varying family structures” are ways of introducing little ones to “trans”-cultic beliefs and homosexuality.

• “Comprehensive sex ed in the third through 5th grades shall [must] include information about diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, and gender expressions. … and an examination of the harm caused by gender-role stereotypes.”

No requirement that all competing views of “sexual orientation” be included or that criticism of “gender theory” be included.

No requirement that materials be presented that challenge the idea that all “gender-role stereotypes” are socially constructed and imposed.

No requirement that materials be presented that espouse the idea that “gender-role stereotypes” emerge organically from a recognition of sexual differentiation.

No requirement that materials be presented that discuss the possible ways “gender-role stereotypes” may serve a healthy cultural function.

No requirement that materials be included that argue that leftist gender theory is socially constructed and is being imposed on children with little to no public debate.

No requirement that materials be included that explain the serious health risks of chemical and surgical “treatments” to facilitate cross-sex impersonation.

No requirement that materials be presented on the social contagion that afflicts mostly adolescent girls called Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria.

No requirement that materials on desistance and detransitioning be presented.

• “[C]omprehensive sex ed must include … Discussion about … sexting” with 8-10-year-olds.

Leftists may be unaware of the many 8-10-year-olds who have never heard of sexting, never heard of porn, and don’t have cell phones. In those many cases, the passage of this law would mean the government would be introducing these young children to sexting. The innocence of their children that, at great effort and vigilance, parents have been able to preserve in the midst of this sex-saturated and defiling culture, the government would steal.

• Comprehensive sex ed “may not use stigmatizing or shame-based instructional tools or stigmatize parenting or sexually active youth,” “may not employ gender stereotypes” [you know, like saying only girls menstruate or only boys have penises], and “may not teach or promote any religious doctrine.”

In other words, schools must express only one judgment on homosexual behavior, cross-sex identification, and same-sex parenting: approval. So, what happens when the next sexual lobby gets their sexual identity added to the lawbooks? What happens when polyamorists are successful in having “polyamory” included in law as a “sexual orientation” as they already seek to do?

Enquiring minds wonder why this bill does not include these words: “Comprehensive sex ed shall not use stigmatizing or shame-based instructional tools to stigmatize religiously based parenting and shall not implicitly or explicitly teach or promote views critical of religiously based beliefs on the nature and morality of homosexuality or cross-sex identification.”

This bill follows the aforementioned comprehensive sex ed law passed in 2013. That bill required that any school that has a sex ed curricula in any grade must use only comprehensive sex ed—no abstinence-based sex ed. The bill’s sponsors argued at the time that the law was needed to reduce the number of STIs and unintended pregnancies among minors but then provided zero research proving that comprehensive sex ed achieves those goals better than abstinence-based curricula. And no Republican demanded such research.

The one good thing in the 2013 comprehensive sex ed law was that schools were left free not to offer any sex ed at all. That was then. This is now. The wolves waited for seven years, and then they pounced. Those little ones are so tender and tasty.

Last week, a video went viral of a justifiably enraged father taking a school board to task for the way his district was mishandling the education of children during the pandemic. Why haven’t there been an army of enraged fathers and mothers in Illinois taking school boards, administrations, and lawmakers to task for promoting evil ideas to their children? Why haven’t pastors and priests told parents that training their children up in the way they should go must never include even one positive teaching about homosexuality or cross-sex impersonation? Why haven’t churches made it possible for their members to remove their children from the ideological cesspools that self-identify as schools? Why are Christian teachers calling boys by female pronouns or saying nothing to oppose the sexual integration of children’s private spaces?

This is how leftists work:

Slowly they come, step by step, prepared for the wailing of conservatives, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Leftists bide their time, knowing the annoying sound and fury will shortly abate. Exhausted, conservatives will go home, abandoning all that messy, unpleasant opposition to the culture-unmaking of leftists. Conservatives won’t organize, won’t persevere, and won’t sacrifice. And the ones who do fight the evil-doers are alone and isolated because the masses of conservatives don’t want to do the hard work of culture-making.

They don’t want to say or do anything too public–anything that may affect their reputation in the neighborhood, their careers, or their children’s GPA. Even if they have the time and money to educate their children outside of government schools, they don’t want the hassle or expense. They don’t want to sacrifice those fantastic athletic and arts opportunities public schools offer. And they certainly don’t want to turn down a Big Ten or Ivy education for their children even if they—the parents—are feeding the very beasts who are destroying their children and freedom for people of faith in America.

There is no tiny sliver of the hearts, souls, and minds of Illinois school children that presumptuous Illinois lawmakers will allow to remain untouched by corrosive leftist beliefs on sexuality. And there is no child that presumptuous Illinois lawmakers view as too young to be exposed to those corrosive beliefs. Wail all you want, my conservative friends. Big Brother’s minions are patient. They’ll wait for the wailing to cease. They see in the distance a glorious time when wailing will be illegal.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your state lawmakers to ask them to vote against the REACH Act (HB 1736 and SB 647). This radical sex education bill is heartily endorsed by Planned Parenthood of Illinois and by Illinois’ premiere “LBGT” activist organization, Equality Illinois, which should tell you everything you need to know about it.

Impressionable students in public schools should not be exposed to body- and soul-destroying messages that promote leftist beliefs about sexuality.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/audio_Another-K-12-School-Indoctrination-Bill-Coming-Through-the-Illinois-Sewage-Pipeline.mp3

Please consider supporting the good work of Illinois Family Institute.

Click HERE to learn about supporting IFI on a monthly basis.

Our notorious Illinois lawmakers must really want to hasten the exit from Illinois public schools and the state. A woke committee created by the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) concocted a partisan amendment to the ISBE teacher standards. The amendment is called “Culturally Responsive Teaching and Leading Standards”—heavy emphasis on “leading.” The wokesters are trying to strengthen their iron grip on the hearts and minds of Illinois children by requiring government schools to disseminate leftist beliefs about identity politics—beliefs that derive from Critical Race Theory/Critical Theory and which inform BLM and the 1619 Project.

read more

Since diversity re-education is all the rage these days (and if Harris and her shadowy, confused puppet win the election will only get worse), I thought it might be helpful to publish the letter I emailed to Deerfield High School’s principal in about 2007 when I dropped out of an ongoing divisive diversity workshop due to the intolerance, close-mindedness, bigotry, and dishonesty of my un-collegial colleagues.

Here’s my lightly revised letter:

There’s gold in them thar hills–I mean, I have good news about the diversity group. I am so out of there. My time is better spent working for equity, balance, religious freedom, and parental rights as a parent rather than as participant in a diversity group. 

I am incensed at the rhetorical manipulation that took place in the meeting. For a faculty member to imply or state that somehow it is illegitimate or inappropriate for me to challenge the use of the word “safety” is itself, inappropriate. Liberals have co-opted the word “safety” precisely for its political efficacy (i.e., “safety” carries more gravitas and urgency than does “comfort”). After co-opting and redefining the word “safety,” liberals then criticize others for challenging its linguistic accuracy as well as the reality of their assertions regarding “safety.” 

I do not, in any rational way, make homosexual students unsafe. If they know my moral views—which I do not discuss with students—they may feel uncomfortable. But uncomfortable does not mean unsafe no matter what someone may “feel.” Sometimes feelings are not based on reality, and sometimes “bad” feelings are actually good things.

Then one administrator [a lesbian] said that she doesn’t like that I said she “was not legitimate.” I did not say that, nor do I think that. I said I believe homosexual acts are not morally legitimate. But I guess those are her “feelings,” so to hell with truth or reality. Actually, I had earlier said that we should value the dignity and worth of all people, which does not necessitate valuing, celebrating, or affirming homosexuality.

And we expect kids to negotiate this terrain when we can’t make it through a one-hour conversation without one administrator making things up and a faculty member attempting to prohibit me from dissenting.

Even the most fundamental aspects of debate are now controlled by liberal ideology.  That is, feelings have assumed some privileged polemical position that renders challenges to them unethical.

Feelings, in reality, have no inherent analytical value, although a society increasingly unable to think analytically, finds feelings increasingly persuasive (Read Neil Postman’s book Amusing Ourselves to Death). Feelings are neither the arbiters nor signifiers of right or wrong. They tell us precisely nothing about morality. If we can’t even agree on the relative value of subjective feelings, then dialogue, discussion, or debate is a meaningless exercise in futility.  

The arrogance of educators asserting, as our liberal faculty members do, that it is their job to compel kids to negotiate difficult conversations and their job to challenge the morals of students about arguably the single most controversial issue in society is astonishing. I don’t understand why the administration cannot see the intractable, irreconcilable nature of addressing this at school. Conservative beliefs will always be viewed as discriminatory, hurtful beliefs that make others “unsafe.” Liberal beliefs will always denigrate the deeply held beliefs of conservatives and–in my view–encourage destructive choices, and violate religious and parental rights.

And the assertion by the administration that the school must address this because “kids are growing up in a different world” is nonsense. Perhaps you live in some parallel universe, but I inhabit the very same world with the very same diversity issues and the very same communication challenges as my children. And when they get out in the real world, they will choose to negotiate this problematic terrain in the very same ways we adults do: some will avoid the topic in all contexts, most will avoid it except with those who share their views, and some will choose to become active on one side or the other for one reason or another.   

How dare the school compel adolescents who may be struggling with academics, peer pressure, drugs, alcohol, athletics, or family dysfunction to confront this issue that they will not be compelled to address publicly as adults. No one in the administration ever seems to entertain the possibility that this grand social experiment may indeed lead to greater division and greater stress for students—not less. I not only suspect it will exacerbate disunity, I’m certain of it. 

The administration and liberal faculty members are selective, however, in the issues and aspects of issues that they feel obliged to compel students to confront. They say the school must address homosexuality because it’s “in the world” but that homosexual kids can’t hear that many believe homosexual acts are immoral, because they will feel bad. Well, that’s the real world too. Some people will find our beliefs wrong, our behaviors immoral, our desires misdirected, and our feelings disordered.  

Our mission as educators should be much more humble, modest, and circumscribed. It is not our job to fix every problem in the world. It is not our job to expose students to every phenomenon that exists in the world. It is not our job to take our political or moral views into the classroom. It is not our job to compel others to view the world through the lens of our choosing. It is not our job to lead kids in areas for which we were not hired or try to mold our area of expertise into one that comports with our ideology. But the issue at hand is even more complex because we can’t even agree on what the problem is, let alone fix it.

The implication that the presence of bad feelings, or shame, or “lack of safety” proves that an injustice has been done is fallacious. Any time a government, society, school, or parent asserts that some behavior or impulse is wrong, those who choose that behavior or have that impulse feel bad. We don’t automatically condemn the judgment of those who assert moral principles.  

We abdicate our right to lead if we abdicate our responsibility to make judgments about right conduct. But now that some have arrived at the moral judgment that homosexuality is moral, everyone else is expected to refrain from expressing an opposing judgment so as not to make anyone feel bad.  

Polyamorists feel bad, “unsafe” and stigmatized due to societal disapproval of polyamory. Are we now expected to refrain from asserting that polyamory is wrong? Would you like your child exposed to an idea that you find profoundly immoral, just because a phenomenon exists, or because some feel bad when you assert it’s wrong, or because some want to coerce society into approval?

I also feel frustrated with the hypocrisy of colleagues who declare repeatedly how deeply they value diverse voices. Last year, I had a private conversation with a colleague in which I respectfully expressed my concern over what appeared to be a lack of balance on the topic of homosexuality in the school. I suggested that since he was teaching The Laramie Project, perhaps he could bring in an essay articulating an opposing view. Well, he shared my wrong-thoughts with other faculty members–an act for which he later apologized to me when he saw what his sharing caused.  

His sharing of my wrong-thoughts—which were that there should be ideological balance when addressing this controversial issue—prompted three colleagues in paroxysms of rage to send a letter to the local press and then demand the English Department chair have a meeting in which the three—all men by the way—could gang up on me in a man-splaining struggle session. … Oh, and guess what: one of those teachers is also in this diversity group. 

A school administrator at the time told me that actively addressing controversial issues related to sexuality is necessary in public schools in order to teach children “how to negotiate difficult conversations.” Who said that’s the role of government employees in public schools hired to teach English, social studies, world languages, calculus, or physics to other people’s minor children? What is their expertise in the fields of morality, ethics, ontology, epistemology, psychology, endocrinology, neuroscience, and conflict resolution—all of which are central to discussions on homosexuality and “trans” cultism? And if that is a responsibility of government employees, why are we letting people who are manifestly unfit for such a task, as demonstrated by their eager willingness to censor dissenting voices, take charge of it?

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/audio_Drop-Out-of-Diversity-Re-education-Struggle-Sessions-While-You-Can.mp3