Home » “The moral equivalence of racism”?

Comments

“The moral equivalence of racism”? — 19 Comments

  1. The problem here is that progressives deny that there should be any age limit below which teaching about sexual identity and sexual behavior is prohibited.

  2. Hauling a failing argument off to “racism” is an old technique. I am glad to see it’s losing its mojo.
    However, there isn’t much “religion” in what you see when you open your browser–make sure nobody’s around– and enter “youtube” “explicit readings” “school board”.
    You’ll get a bellyful. No racism, either.

    And then you wonder how the school boards in question ever got elected.

  3. Two points:
    (1) the Left is explicitly teaching racism in the schools beginning in pre-school; they just call it “anti-racism” because it’s aimed at the white children.

    (2) when the schools were racially integrated, many families withdrew and began home-schooling, which was Justice Brown’s explicit remedy in this case.

    Given the increasing decline of participation in public schools already, I wonder if she thought that through.

    https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/04/22/4-takeaways-as-supreme-court-hears-maryland-lgbt-school-books-case/
    “During the arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson suggested to Baxter, the lawyer for the parents, that it’s not coercion because children can attend private schools or be homeschooled.”

    Some more discussion:
    https://jonathanturley.org/2025/04/22/supreme-court-hears-major-parental-rights-case-over-lgbt-readings/

    https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/04/23/justice-jackson-suggests-maryland-schools-were-never-going-teach-kids-lgbtq-books-despite-districts-clear-mandate/

  4. I argue that ” LGBTQ” , especially the ” T” , is a quasi religion.

    They didn’t throw out the Judeo- Christian Ten Commandments and prayer in school just to leave a vacuum.
    LGBTQ is the replacement.

    They didn’t stop promoting Western Civilization just to leave a vacuum. Multiculturalism is the replacement.

    Slow motion Chinese Cultural revolution. Except at least the Chinese still wanted China to be strong, even as they were altering it’s culture. These people often want America weakened and some globalist ideas strengthened.

  5. Any guess on how Justice Thomas would vote on a case involving interracial marriage?

    We must either take control of the School Boards or remove so many of our children from the State Schools that they fold up and die. The national ‘education unions’ are in no way essential to education and serve only their own interests and success of the Woke Narrative.

    Vote NO on every school bond measure. Pressure your local politicians in the state government to institute the practice of ‘The money follows the child’.

    Yes, we as a society do not want the private Islamic school teaching ‘How to kill Jews’, nor the KKK advocating lynching.

    Since these WOKEists want to teach our children all about the perverse practices of homosexuals, they should be asked why they don’t want to teach about the disordered heterosexual practice popularized by the late Hugh Hefner: Change your bedmate frequently. Or about the sexual slavery popular with Muslims.
    Love is love, they say.

  6. “A local public school system makes a host of decisions about the content of teaching, and it would be too disruptive to allow parents unlimited ability to opt out of anything and everything within it.”

    Seems to me schools already do just that to accommodate every degree of “neuro-divergence” invented in the last few years. Why can’t non-religious parents get an opt-out on the basis of their humanistic objections?

    I’m just reluctant to allow faith of whatever shade to become the next cultural battle space. Like the aforementioned race card.

  7. Homosexuals are in the transgender spectrum. Gay describes a happy, merry state of mind. The Rainbow is a symbol of albinophobic character. Diversity is a religious doctrine of color judgment and class bigotry. DEI is systemic, institutional Diversity. Political congruence (“=”) is a principle of selective exclusion (e.g. baby “=” fetus, a technical term-of-art, under the Pro-Choice ethical religion). Abortion is homicide from six weeks, a hate crime from conception under Loving. As for Levine’s Dreams of Herr Mengele, gender refers to sex-correlated attributes including sexual orientation. Trans- to a state or process of divergence from normal.

  8. Religion refers to a behavioral protocol or model. Faith is a logical domain refers to trust… in an authority.

  9. And… “the moral equivalence of” murdering Gaia…as the grifts (and lies) keep acomin’….

    “EPA head demands answers from company putting sulfur dioxide into the air to address global warming”—
    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/epa-head-demands-answers-company-putting-sulfur-dioxide-air-address-global

    + Bonus:

    “Trump pulls plug on Maine’s offshore wind project”—
    https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/trump-pulls-plug-maines-offshore-wind-project

  10. Neo: “I’ll just stick to the legal reasoning I think underpins the parents’ position and makes it quite different from racism.”

    You’re probably right about the legal reasoning as things currently stand. My point is that the reasoning will naturally in time follow the morality, especially given the actual legal power of non-discrimination law and regulation. There has long been a limit on what can be accepted by the law as “free exercise of religion.” That limit can be adjusted when serious harm–as seen by the government–would result from free exercise.

    You may not be aware that there has been a huge amount of discussion over the past decade or two about whether religious liberty law can withstand the collision with progressive secular metaphysics and morality. Many on both sides consider it an irresistible force/immovable object situation. Sorry, I don’t have anything to point to offhand. I think the discussion has mostly taken place in Christian circles.

    This touches on the whole question of whether classical liberalism can survive when there is little or no common ground on first principles. A big question.

  11. @Richard Aubrey, “..And then you wonder how the school boards in question ever got elected…”

    When seeming conservatives run for office and then implement progressive liberal agendas once elected, then it means they were running as faux-conservatives just to get into office in districts where the demographics demanded it. We’ve seen this many times, in both state and federal races, especially at Representative and Senate levels. It really calls for a new way of assessing candidates, deep dives into their background and binding them in pledged or contractual ways to relinquish their positions when they betray their platforms. Will it happen? I haven’t seen it attempted yet.

  12. @ Aggie > “I haven’t seen it attempted yet.”

    And you never will while the Party leadership is often complicit in the bait-and-switch tactics.

    However, it is also true that many mostly-conservatives or centrist-liberals run as Democrats when the demographics demand it, and they have to support at least some of their constituents’ favored policies to keep their seats.
    GOP faux-conservatives don’t ever seem to be voted out for not honoring the electorate’s wishes.

    Also, if the only other choice is a real leftist, sometimes a faux-conservative is the best we can get.

    It’s a puzzlement.

    The rise of new media is addressing some of the vetting issues, but it’s not enough yet to swing the elections to genuine conservatives.

  13. Reading about the case I found myself coming to a similar philosophical conclusion as Mac and wondered whether there was a rule to be applied that public schools could follow so they don’t have to anticipate future, cultural trends in their current instruction.

    I came up with an 80% rule on cultural issues, especially in K – 5 instruction. If an attitude is held by about 80% or more of the households in a school’s jurisdiction, use those attitudes as “the norm.” If an elementary school in Dearborn, MI has 80% or more Muslim households, have a Ramadan pageant instead of a Christmas pageant. If 80% or more of the parents are homosexual, celebrate pride month, etc…

  14. @Rick67: Are these objections the “moral equivalent of racism”? I fully understand that Americans of a more progressive persuasion see it that way.
    _________________________

    I understand that too. I refuse to even begin a conversation with progressives who seem to assume that I must assume all their assumptions. Which will inevitably convict me in the end.

    I’ve noticed that most red-blue debates are about surface-level disagreements but the real disagreements are, iceberg-like, several levels below.

  15. @AesopFan:GOP faux-conservatives don’t ever seem to be voted out for not honoring the electorate’s wishes.

    It’s because their real constituency is not the “electorate”, it’s the people for whom they deliver appropriations.

  16. @ Rufus > “If 80% or more of the parents are homosexual,”

    I don’t even think that is possible, considering what same-sex couples have to do to “have children” even if some one in the couple is biologically female.

  17. Richard,

    I’d prefer as little opting out as possible. I don’t really like the idea of a rule preventing parents from choosing an opt out option, but one would hope it’s rare.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>