Don’t let the word “debate” in the term “floor debate” fool you. Floor debates in Springfield are no more debates than transwomen are women. There is no cross-examination or rebuttal, for which most of our lawmakers must be deeply thankful in that they couldn’t argue their way out of an imaginary paper bag—at least not using logic and evidence.

Floor debates in Springfield are occasions for bill sponsors and supporters—almost always Democrats—to pontificate and for opponents to try to point out flaws that are promptly ignored by Democrats no matter how reasonable and justified. A floor debate in Springfield for Democrat-sponsored bills is a tale told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing but more government restriction of liberty, more government spending, and more moral chaos.

For an example, let’s look briefly at last Friday’s floor debate preceding the vote in the Illinois House on the pernicious sex ed bill that now awaits Governor J.B. Pritzker’s signature. According to the bill’s chief sponsor, State Representative Camille Lilly (D-Chicago), the bill was socially constructed by three far left organizations—”Advocates for Youth, SIECUS and the Answer”—all of which are dedicated to normalizing abortion, early sexual experimentation, and sexual deviance. It is noteworthy that this bill is so perverse and troubling that even Illinois Democrats were barely able to scrape together the 60 votes needed to pass it.

Before looking at the “debate,” here’s a reminder of what lawmakers in Springfield think government employees should be exposing other people’s children to.

If signed into law, this bill will require all personal health and safety lessons in Illinois public schools—including charter schools—to teach children in grades K-2 about unmarried moms and dads and families led by homosexual couples. These very young children will also be expected to define “gender identity’’—a euphemism for the disordered desire to be the opposite sex.

Government employees will demand that children ages 8-11 explain, describe, and define masturbation, homosexuality, bisexuality, cross-sex impersonation, the use of hormone blockers for children who pretend to be the sex they aren’t, and “gender expansiveness”—a socially constructed leftist term.

Then in grades 6-8, government employees will instruct other people’s children in the ways of oral and anal sex; the “methods of contraception that are available without a prescription”; the “many methods of short- and long-term contraception that are safe and effective and … how to access them”; and the meaning of intersex, queer, twospirit, asexual, and pansexual. And, of course, leftists have snuck in some critical race theory, so 11–14-year-olds will be taught as objective and true the socially constructed theory of “intersectionality.”

To ensure that religious Illinois school children graduate from high school ashamed of and detesting the faith of their mothers and fathers, government employees will teach them about the evils of what leftists call “homophobia” and “transphobia.” In the Upside Down where leftists live and move and have their being, the true belief that homosexual acts and cross-dressing undermine the image of God imprinted on all humans constitutes irrational hatred.

State Representative Avery Bourne (R-Raymond) was able to get Lilly to admit that this law—like the ever-shifting moral beliefs of leftists—is fluid. If the bill becomes law, it will forever be tied to the National Sex Education Standards which change as progressivism affirms additional forms of sexual perversion. Bourne’s question elicited this shocking confession from the hapless Lilly:

As the National Sex Education Standards are updated, the State Board of Education shall update these learning standards.

All the ideas related to sexuality just mentioned are socially constructed leftist terms embedded with leftist assumptions. All the terms tossed about with absolutist certainty by Democrats to justify the indoctrination of other people’s children, including “age-appropriate,” “developmentally appropriate,” and “culturally appropriate,” are defined by leftists using criteria established by leftists.

Virtually no theologically orthodox Christian believes it is “culturally appropriate” for their 5-8- year-olds to be taught anything about homosexuality or “trans”-cultic beliefs and practices. SB 818’s supporters like to emphasize the sop they’re tossing to conservatives: Any parent may opt their child out of perversion-positive training.

Doesn’t sound very inclusive to me. In addition, conservatives still have to pay for perversion-positive “personal health and safety” training.

Curiously, in the floor “debate,” the issue of moral development never arose. It’s clear that moral assumptions/conclusions are embedded in the National Sex Education Standards with which this law requires all health and safety curricula selected by schools to align. How do I know that moral conclusions are embedded in these standards?

I know because these “standards” do not require schools to teach about, for example, polyamory, zoophilia, or infantilism—all forms of “identity” for some people. Even though these are forms of identity, Springfield Democrats don’t—yet –require that Illinois schools affirm them. The reason is that not enough Democrats—yet—believe these forms of identity are moral. Currently, Democrats believe homosexual and cross-sex identities should be normalized via taxpayer-funded schools because Democrats have concluded they are morally acceptable.

Remember what this bill requires as I quote some of the dumb things Democrats said about it in their fatuous floor speechifying, starting with the foolish sponsor of the bill, Camille Lilly:

Under SB818 … the materials and instruction must be age and developmentally appropriate, medically accurate, correct, complete, culturally appropriate, inclusive. … SB818 is not a mandate. Under SB818 parents, guardians and others will still be able to review the materials used by schools. Parents are still able to opt out, and local control applies to the selection of courses and materials and the curriculum. In addition to reducing stigma, SB818 would result in creating and the creation of learning standards that reflect the diversity of all students here in the state of Illinois.

Some brief thoughts about Lilly’s claims:

• SB 818 is not age-, developmentally, or culturally appropriate. The claims by leftist sexperts do not change reality.

• If by “correct” Lilly means “conforming to truth” or “proper,” she is incorrect.

• Clearly, materials and instruction will not be “complete” because the NSES do not include any information about polyamory, zoophilia, infantilism, sadomasochism, or any other paraphilias. I wonder if Camille Lilly et al. hate polyamorists, zoophiles, infantilists, and sadomasochists.

• SB 818 is a mandate in that no school may teach anything on personal health and safety in grades K-5 unless the materials they choose align with the age-, developmentally, culturally, and morally inappropriate leftist National Sex Education Standards.

• Lilly should explain which stigmas she seeks to reduce because this bill stigmatizes the moral views of many Illinoisans.

State Representative Delia Ramirez (D-Chicago) asked Lilly if it were true that the Illinois State Board of Education and the Illinois Association of School Boards are “neutral on the bill,” to which Lilly responded “Yes.” Then in an amusing and obvious manipulation of rhetoric, Ramirez changed the word “neutral,” saying, “So, educators don’t oppose the bill.” Well, it’s equally correct to say, “So, educators don’t support the bill.”

It would be interesting to poll anonymously all K-5 teachers in the state, asking if they are in favor of being required to teach about homosexuality, bisexuality, co-habitation, masturbation, cross-sex impersonation, hormone-blockers, and gender expansiveness in personal health and safety lessons.

And we should ask if they think there should be a law prohibiting all teaching on personal health and safety unless it includes those topics. No discussions of healthy eating permitted unless they’re accompanied by affirming discussions of cross-dressing, hormone-blocking, and self-pleasuring.

State Representative Maurice West (D-Rockford) apparently derives his hearty support for requiring public school teachers to instruct 5-year-olds in the intricacies of masturbation and 11-year-olds about anal sex from TLC’s programs about hoarders and obese people:

We view television shows on TLC like Hoarders, My 600-Pound Life, just for example, where they often recall their childhood experience with shame, emptiness, guilt, confusion from their dealings with that word: sex. This legislation’s primary focus is not about the birds and the bees. It’s about equipping our children with age-appropriate conversations about how they can be empowered within themselves.

Well, West is right on one thing: This bill is definitely not about the birds and the bees.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s not the job of education majors to sexually “empower” other people’s children with the pagan sexual beliefs of regressives.

Two questions for West and all leftists:

1.) Since when did it become the task, pedagogical obligation, or right of public school teachers to solve all societal ills?

2.) Are there any pedagogical, ethical, moral, emotional, or psychological problems potentially created by introducing sexual imagery, ideas, and beliefs to other people’s children who have never been abused or shamed and whose parents have successfully protected them from ideas they—the parents—believe are age-, developmentally, culturally, and morally inappropriate?

In case parents don’t yet realize it, this newest bill is centrally about normalizing homosexuality and “trans”-cultic beliefs and practices. In yet another statement made with a voice quivering with faux-emotion, lesbian activist with a burnt soul, State Representative Kelly Cassidy, made that clear:

For far too long, LGBTQ youth were either invisible or expressly stigmatized. And I remember that. It burned into my soul. …  I remember that. … And as a kid who didn’t understand why I didn’t fit in, who couldn’t define why I felt different, and whose parents were not an option to go to, I wish I had had a teacher I could turn to. I wish I had had a curriculum that didn’t call me unnatural.

The presumptuous Cassidy demands that public schools affirm her arguable belief that homosexuality is natural, and if parents disagree, Cassidy wants the state to come in between them and their children.

State Representative Ann Williams (D-Chicago) made this boneheaded statement:

[I]t’s hard to imagine why anyone would think our children should not learn about sex education in school, but rather should refer to the internet or Google to determine what sex is or what their questions are and get them answered there. Right now, if you Google any of these terms related to sex education, you’re going to get a lot more explicit information than anything would be provided in a curriculum.

Phew. I guess Illinois parents should thank Democrats. At least curricula aligned with leftist standards won’t be as bad as what kids can find on the Internet.

It’s unfortunate that Williams suffers from such a dearth of imagination. It’s true, many people don’t think children should learn about sex in public schools. Here’s something else that may surprise the unimaginative Williams. Many people don’t think children should be learning about sex in co-ed classes in public schools. They believe that talking about menstruation and nocturnal emissions in co-ed classes can be embarrassing, inhibit discussions, and undermine the virtue of modesty.

Poor Williams suffers too from an inability to reason logically. Suggesting that there exists only the choice between public schools and the Internet is a classic example of the fallacy of the false dilemma. In addition to leftist-controlled public schools and the Internet, there are parents, grandparents, churches, libraries, and bookstores that can and do educate children on sex. It is not the business of the government to step in and expose all children to assumption-riddled claims about sexuality because some parents are derelict in their responsibilities.

Here’s a modest proposal: Rather than devouring the hearts and minds of other people’s little ones, how about schools offer two classes in personal health and safety—a perversion-positive class and a truly age-appropriate class. The class descriptions should include all materials used, the name of all organizations that constructed the materials, all the standards employed by those organizations, and all the criteria used to determine what constitutes age-, developmental, and cultural appropriateness. Let parents opt-in to whichever class they want or none at all. And allow teachers to choose which class they want to teach. With their deep commitments to diversity, inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, and choice, leftists should love this modest proposal.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to Gov. Pritzker’s administrative staff to urge him to VETO SB 818 as a terrible overreach of government. 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/2021/06/Dumb-Things-Dems-Said-in-Sex-Ed-Floor-Debate.mp3

---

Conservative parents with kids in Illinois public schools, WAKE UP! Leftists on the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) and in Springfield aren’t anywhere near done with their indoctrination mandates. A new amendment to Illinois State Board of Education teacher standards has been proposed by an ISBE committee to infuse the assumptions of Critical Race Theory, identity politics, BLM, and the 1619 Project into 1.  all teacher-training programs/education majors, 2. all Professional Education Licensing (PEL), and 3. all public school classrooms. The proposed standards are called “Culturally Responsive Teaching and Leading Standards”–translated: Leftist Responsive Indoctrinating Diktats.

In an excruciatingly detailed 2,400- word document, leftists laid bare the comprehensive nature of the indoctrination they seek to mandate. These “standards” will apply to all teachers, administrators, school counselors, school psychologists, school social workers, school nurses, and speech language pathologists.

Not surprisingly, the ten-member steering team of the Diverse and Learner Ready Committee that concocted the new indoctrination standards has three lawmakers—all Democrats (Fred Crespo, Mary Edly-Allen, and Maurice West).

Knowledge of objective facts and the development of the capacity to think logically through critical examination of diverse ideas are relegated to the back of the “education” bus in favor of promoting propaganda about identity, “systems of oppression,” “sex and gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, racism, sexism, homophobia, unearned privilege,” and “Eurocentrism.”

I will attempt to make clear the loathsome outlines and dangerous implications of this proposal while sparing readers many of the excruciating details.

Teachers are expected to accept as objective truth and implement the following:

1.) Understand and value the notion that … there is not one “correct” way of doing or understanding something.

2.) Affirm students’ “backgrounds and identities.”

3.) Assess how their own biases and perceptions affect their teaching practice and how they access tools to mitigate their own racist, sexist, homophobic, Eurocentric behavior or unearned privilege.

4.) Be aware of the effects of power and privilege and the need for social advocacy and social action to better empower diverse students and communities.

5.) Align expectations … used in the classroom with the values and cultural norms of students’ families.

6.) Encourage and affirm the personal experiences … students share in the classroom.

7.) Consistently solicit students’ input on the curriculum.

8.) Co-create, with students, the collective expectations and agreements regarding the physical space and social-emotional culture of the classroom.

9.) Create a risk-taking space that promotes student activism and advocacy.

10.) Invite family and community members to teach about topics that are culturally specific and aligned to the classroom curriculum or content area.

11.) Intentionally embrace student identities and prioritize representation in the curriculum.

12.) “Curate the curriculum.”

13.) Employ authentic and modern technology usage inspiring digital literacy through an equity lens.

14.) Ensure assessments reflect the enriched curriculum that has embedded student identities.

15.) Embrace and encourage progressive viewpoints and perspectives … toward traditionally marginalized populations.

16.) Implement and integrate the wide spectrum and fluidity of identities in the curriculum.

17.) Ensure text selections reflect students’ classroom, community, and family culture.

18.) Ensure teacher and students co-create content to include a counternarrative to dominant culture.

19.) Use a resource tool to assess the curriculum and assessments for biases.

20.) Promote robust discussion with the intent of raising consciousness that reflects modern society and the ways in which cultures and communities intersect.

21.) Consider a broader modality of student assessments, such as … “community assessments, social justice work, action research projects, and recognition beyond academia.”

So many issues raised by this ethically repellent, logically contradictory bill:

• Should lawmakers, the ISBE, or departments of education that train teachers require school professionals to value the dubious claim that “there is no correct way of understanding or doing something”? If so, does that claim apply to the claim itself? Perhaps the claim that there is no correct way of understanding or doing something applies to the entire amendment, in which case it must, by its own logic, be rejected.

• Is it the proper role of lawmakers, the ISBE, or departments of education to require school educators to affirm all “identities”? Would those identities include trans-racialists like Rachel Dolezal? Trans-ethnicists? Trans-speciesists? Minor-Attracted Persons? Polyamorists? Zoophiles? Infantilists? Trans-ableists who identify as amputees or paraplegics? Who gets to decide which “identities” educators must embrace and affirm? I guess if there’s no correct way of doing or understanding anything, then “educators” must include all those marginalized groups or any others that may emerge.

• Don’t be fooled by any of the tricksy rhetoric used in this amendment. None of the marginalized groups that will be valued, embraced, affirmed, coddled, and mollycoddled will be conservatives or theologically orthodox Christians. The leftists who wrote this amendment are not interested in the “backgrounds, communities, or cultures” of conservative students or theologically orthodox Catholics or Protestants.

• Does anyone think the “enriched,” “curated” curricula and assessments, or the community speakers and robust consciousness-raising discussions will include conservative beliefs on race, cross-sex identification, and homosexuality?

• The “broader modality of assessments” is a way to incentivize and reward leftist activism. Leftists want, for example, an award for youth activism from BLM or a “trans” cultic organization to count toward a student’s grade.

Lest anyone be unclear of the focus of these new standards, Capitol News cites ISBE spokeswoman Jackie Matthews, who said this about the proposed standards:

Culturally responsive practices are especially important in better supporting Illinois’ LGBTQ+ youth.

As reported by Capitol News,

The state board is scheduled to act on the [proposed standards] at its Dec. 16 meeting. If the board approves them, the new rules would be published a second time, starting another 45-day period during which the proposed standards would be reviewed by the General Assembly’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, or JCAR.

If approved by JCAR, the standards would become part of the standards by which all teachers and administrators are evaluated.

This is how garbage gets into our children’s classrooms: It starts by either leftist professors in education departments, or state boards of education committees, or in state legislatures using their positions to advance their ideological beliefs.

Illinois leftists in control of everything have already mandated that K-12 public schools teach positively about homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation, and now they’re about to mandate that all college and university teacher training programs and all professional educators affirm leftist beliefs about systemic racism, homosexuality, and “trans”-cultism. If conservative Illinoisans are unwilling or unable to stop this, they better get their kids out of our government indoctrination centers pronto.

Those whose kids are grown or who don’t have kids ought not be complacent, because this indoctrination will use their taxes to infect the hearts and minds of kids who will be their culture-makers in 10-20 years. Those whose children are in private schools ought not be complacent because this amendment will affect teachers in their schools as well.  And home schoolers should care because their taxes are being used to infect the hearts and minds of kids who will be their culture-makers in 10-20 years—culture-makers who will one day try to ban homeschooling. Leftists are nothing if not all-inclusive totalitarians.

Leftist lawmakers in Illinois, who with their supermajorities in both the state Illinois House and Illinois Senate own our public schools, are hell-bent on supplanting education with indoctrination. The concern of leftist lawmakers and leftist activists operating in our public schools is to indoctrinate Illinois school children with leftist dogma on race, sexuality, and American history–dogma that will undermine faith and foment yet more division. They want to make it impossible for conservative parents to shape their own children’s views on these fundamental issues. Leftists achieve that goal through legislation, ISBE guidelines, professional development, curricula, and fervent opposition to school choice.

Teachers, leave those kids alone.

Take ACTION: It is vital that the members of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) hear from all Illinois taxpayers. Please click HERE to send a message to this committee urging them to vote against any proposal that would mandate left-leaning standards for educators in Illinois public schools.

The Democratic Co-Chairman is Illinois Senator Bill Cunningham (D-Chicago). His office number is (773) 445-8128.

The Republican Co-Chairman is Keith Wheeler (R-North Aurora). His office number is (630) 345-3464.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Indoctrination-Efforts-Accelerate.mp3

---

We take very seriously the trust you place in Illinois Family Institute when you send a gift.
We understand that we are accountable before you and God to honor your trust. 

IFI is supported by voluntary donations from good people like you.