The author, inspired by a recent Supreme Court ruling on parental rights regarding LGBTQ+ material in schools, argues that this decision allows them to shield their children from any lessons about Donald Trump. They believe that teaching children about Trump’s presidency could implicitly normalize behaviors they deem immoral, such as lying and bullying, which conflicts with their religious beliefs. The author draws parallels to the Supreme Court’s reasoning, citing the potential for classroom materials to undermine parental values. They conclude that any mention of Trump in the classroom could be seen as an endorsement of his actions and therefore an infringement upon their right to raise their children according to their faith.
Read More
The US Supreme Court’s decision to reject a case involving a twelve-year-old student’s “There are only two genders” T-shirt highlights a clash between parental rights, school dress codes, and the complexities of free speech in educational settings. The case, brought by the student, his father, and stepmother against the school and the town, sought monetary damages after the student was asked to remove the shirt.
The student’s parents framed the shirt as an attempt to spark a conversation about gender identity and protect other students from what they considered harmful ideas. However, this explanation rings hollow; it strains credulity to believe a seventh-grader is genuinely initiating a nuanced debate on such a complex topic.… Continue reading
Brevard Public Schools declined to renew Melissa Calhoun’s teaching contract due to her use of a student’s preferred name without parental permission, a violation of a 2023 Florida law. This decision sparked a Change.org petition garnering over 5,000 signatures advocating for Calhoun’s reinstatement. Supporters highlight Calhoun’s positive impact on students and argue the action lacked malicious intent. The school district maintains the parents initiated the investigation, citing the teacher’s awareness of the policy violation.
Read More
The Supreme Court will hear an appeal from parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, challenging a school policy that includes books with LGBTQ characters in elementary school classes. The parents contend this violates their religious freedom by not allowing opt-outs, citing similar provisions for sex education and the district’s initial allowance of such opt-outs. The books, which depict various LGBTQ+ themes and relationships, were part of the English language arts curriculum. The school district argues the books are a small portion of the curriculum and explore common themes found in classic literature.
Read More
Oklahoma’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, Ryan Walters, mandated that all public schools show students a video promoting religious freedom and patriotism, including a prayer for President Trump. This directive, issued through a newly created Department of Religious Freedom and Patriotism, was deemed unenforceable by the state Attorney General’s office, citing conflicts with parental rights and local control. Several school districts have refused to comply. This mandate follows previous controversial actions by Walters, including a mandate to incorporate Bibles into lesson plans, which is also facing legal challenges. The Attorney General’s statement highlights the conflict between Walters’ actions and established legal rights.
Read More
A federal appeals court has upheld an Indiana law banning puberty blockers and hormones for transgender children under 18, mirroring similar legislation passed in other Republican-led states. The court rejected arguments that the law discriminates based on sex or violates parental rights, concluding that the law applies equally to all minors and that parents do not have an unfettered right to any medical treatment for their children. This decision aligns with rulings in other states and sets the stage for the Supreme Court to potentially decide the fate of such laws nationwide, with proponents arguing they protect children from experimental treatments and opponents citing the positive mental health outcomes associated with these treatments.
Read More
Brittany Patterson, a Georgia mother, was arrested and charged with reckless conduct after her 10-year-old son walked a short distance from their home without supervision. Despite the boy’s safe return, authorities detained Patterson and demanded a safety plan guaranteeing constant supervision of her children. Patterson, who believes her actions were not negligent, is refusing to sign the agreement and plans to fight the charge, arguing that parents should have the right to make decisions about their children’s safety unless there is unreasonable danger.
Read More
As a parent, the idea that schools in California are now banned from notifying parents of a child’s pronoun change has sparked a range of emotions in me. On one hand, I understand the importance of creating a safe environment for children, especially those who may be struggling with their identity and fear the repercussions of sharing that with their parents. The stories of kids who have been homeless, abused, or even killed for being true to themselves are heartbreaking reminders of the harsh realities faced by LGBTQ youth.
The argument that if a child doesn’t feel comfortable sharing their pronoun change with their parents, then it’s a failure on the part of the parents, strikes a chord with me.… Continue reading
Paedophiles could be stripped of parental rights under new law. When I first heard about this proposed law in Wales, my initial reaction was one of disbelief. How is it possible that convicted paedophiles still have parental rights in the first place? It seems like a no-brainer to me that someone who has committed such heinous acts should not be allowed to have any involvement in raising a child, let alone have parental rights protected by law.
The fact that this proposal is specifically targeted towards convicted paedophiles, and not just anyone with paedophilic tendencies, adds an important layer of nuance.… Continue reading
As a resident of Florida, the recent bill signed by Governor Ron DeSantis, banning children under 14 from having social media accounts, has sparked a myriad of thoughts and reactions within me. The idea of restricting young children’s access to social media is not entirely unfounded, as the digital landscape can be a dangerous place for impressionable minds. However, the execution and enforcement of such a law raise several concerns and questions.
The practicality of enforcing this ban seems dubious, to say the least. With the prevalence of VPNs and various digital tools that can easily circumvent age verification processes, it begs the question of how effective this law will be in practice.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood