PHOENIX (LifeSiteNews) — The state of Arizona is currently considering Senate Bill 1700, a parental rights bill that would restrict the ability of teachers to disseminate sexually inappropriate texts to their students.
According to the Fact Sheet, the bill would:
Require the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) to maintain a list of books that public educational institutions may not use or make available to students, including books that are lewd or sexual, promote gender fluidity or gender pronouns or groom children into normalizing pedophilia. Grants parents the right to request removal of school district (district) or charter school library or classroom materials, extends public review periods for library materials and district textbooks and removes exceptions from district curriculum approval and school library access requirements.
The intent here is to ensure that educators cannot smuggle in ideological texts featuring sexually explicit or pornographic content and to create a mechanism for accountability to the parents who entrust their children to these educators. In recent years, parents have felt helpless in the face of a wave of LGBT indoctrination. This bill seeks to address that. After a hearing, SB 1700 was passed by the Senate Education Committee.
On the face of it, the bill should not be controversial. Read the wording – this is about a) preventing books that are “lewd or sexual” or “promote gender fluidity” or “groom children into normalizing pedophilia” and b) giving parents a process through which to raise objections to materials being presented to their children. Thus, for educators to get offended by SB 1700 is rather saying the quiet part out loud.
Speaking to the Senate Education Committee, that’s precisely what Arizona special education teacher Alicia Messing did. In Messing’s view, education is about socialization – and giving parents veto power over LGBT curricula contradicts that goal. In fact, Messing stated that parents are not qualified to determine what their children are taught.
“I have a masters’ degree because when I got certified, I was told I had to have a masters’ degree to be an Arizona-certified teacher,” she told the committee. “What do the parents have?” (Here one might reasonably respond: “The children.”)
She went on: “Are we vetting the backgrounds of our parents? Are we allowing the parents to choose the curriculum and the books that our children are going to read? I think that it’s a mistake, and I am just speaking from the heart.”
“I have a Masters degree! We all have advanced degrees! What have parents got? Are we vetting the background of parents?” 🤡
— AZSuburbs 🌵 (@noprezzie2012) February 16, 2023
Messing closed by laying out her view of education:
The one line that I love is we must remember that the purpose of public education is not to teach only what parents want their children to be taught, it is to teach them what society needs them to be taught.
In Messing’s view, of course, that would include indoctrinating children into LGBT ideology – an ideology held by most of the American elites. That, in both her view and the view of most progressives, is what public education is for – to ensure that regardless of what values children are taught at home, the state gets at least forty hours a week to ensure that those values are subverted and replaced.
Messing’s quotation, incidentally, was posted to social media last month by the Michigan Democrats during a similar debate about parental rights in education. That, as far as I can find, is where Messing got it from, and I applaud them for being so admirably up front about what their view of the function of public education is.
I happen to agree with them – not in theory, but in function – and the sooner we can have that debate and openly discuss what public schools have become, the sooner parents will realize the danger of sending their children there. Public educators like Messing want access to the minds of children, and they think parents are unqualified. Note well, and act accordingly.