Just Another Parent Speaking Out to the School Board

Our school board website says they have a meeting today. It turns out that is just a “work session,” and the real meeting, which will allow public comment, is Thursday, June 24, 6:00 PM.

Only ten people will be allowed to speak, so it’s likely that I won’t get a chance. But I want to be ready, so I’m preparing today what I would like to say.

The meeting only allows two minutes per public comment, which is at most 500 words. That’s a fraction of what I have in this preparation speech below; I’ll need to write an abridged version in case I need it on Thursday. But maybe what I say here will help someone else who has a chance to speak—or someone elsewhere in their own school district, which I hope is a movement that's spreading.

screenshot from Cy-Fair ISD Board Work Session
Monday, June 21, 2021

______________________

Public Comments Directed to the

Cy-Fair Independent School District Board of Trustees

A month or so ago I became aware of a magazine sent out to teachers in Cy-Fair ISD, called Teaching Tolerance. This was the Spring 2021 edition. On the cover it reads,

cover of the spring 2021 issue of Teaching Tolerance

White Supremacy in Education

White supremacy affects every element of the U.S. education system. Find out how students, educators and other stakeholders resist it daily.

When this was sent out, it wasn’t illegal. But with the passage of HB 3979 and Governor Abbott’s signature, this publication is full of propaganda that is against the law in the Texas education system as of this coming school year.

Today I want a promise from you that this publication—and anything like unto it—will no longer be made available to teachers in our district.

Beyond that, I’d like to say that, even without the law, these materials should never have been part of teaching materials in Cy-Fair ISD. It is all based on a lie.

White supremacy exists—but it is a tiny fringe of society, unacceptable among civilized people. Most of us have never met a person who believes this philosophy, because they are so rare.

But there’s a movement that has worked to do a bait-and-switch with the definition. Instead of this unacceptable fringe, they enlarge the category of white supremacy to include any culture in which people with white skin are or have been the majority. That means anything from a European heritage, or what we call Western civilization.

p. 48 of spring 2021 issue
of Teaching Tolerance 

It means the culture that produced Shakespeare—and these supposed anti-racists do indeed want to cancel Shakespeare. It means classical Greek and Roman philosophy. This magazine you sent out has a piece in it on why Aristotle and Plato should be canceled. Not because the words they say don’t have wisdom for all mankind—but because they were white in a white-majority society.

They believe our founding fathers should be canceled—and their writings, including the US Constitution. They fail to note that it is the founding doctrine that all human beings are created equal—revolutionary at a time when every society on earth was stratified into nobility and lower classes based only on the accident of their birth—that belief in equality before the law led to freedom everywhere on earth. Every country that has a representative democracy today—in place of a monarchy or tyrannical government—inherited the idea from the United States Constitution.

This is the philosophy that led to the elimination of slavery—not only in this country, but in places like Brazil and Cuba, and everywhere that followed the US in the elimination of slavery.

The American idea that all people are created equal did not lead to slavery. It led to its demise.

If the country were endemically racist, it would have maintained racism, not fought a Civil War to eliminate it. Obviously. Later, it would have kept Jim Crow laws, not eliminated them nationwide.

It was Christianity that led Britain to be the first nation to eliminate slavery. But Critical Race Theorists want to cancel Christianity—despite the New Testament teachings by Paul, concerning a slave named Onesimus, who had become a Christian. Paul told the slave master, Philemon, also a Christian, that, while they could do nothing about the law of that time and place, he was required to treat his servant as a fellow brother in Christ. Racially, by the way, this master and slave were likely the same color; back in that day, enslavement was done to those nearby enough to enslave, regardless of color. It was the consideration of one person as inferior to another that was at issue—but Christ invited all to come unto him: Jew and Greek, bond and free, male and female (Galatians 3:28).

This command to accept all as brothers is what the CRT pushers claim is white supremacy and should be eliminated.

And replaced with what? Hatred of whites? Supremacy of their preferred race over whites and other less preferred races? And we're supposed to just be nice and go along with this?

The new law contains a great many things that should be included in social studies teaching in Texas—including covering difficult topics such as slavery and civil rights. But it emphasizes accurate history with original source documents.

There’s a relatively small section of the law regarding what shall not be taught. It fits on a single page. I’ve printed it out for you.

the anti-CRT section of HB 3979

It includes, for example, that you shall not teach that:

one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

or that,

with respect to their relationship to American values, slavery and racism are anything other than deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to, the authentic founding principles of the United States, which include liberty and equality.

The law doesn’t use the term Critical Race Theory. The only named item is that you shall not teach the 1619 Project, which we know to be provably false and racist propaganda.

The problem we’ve seen in the past—concerning things like Common Core, for example—is that names and terms are fungible. Don’t want CRT? We’ll just call it something else.

So I’ve printed out for you a list of 87 terms that are interchangeable with or used in Critical Race Theory. These include terms like:

CRT terminology, source: Center for Renewing America

·         Equitable or Equity

·         Educational justice

·         Cultural relevance

·         Critical self-reflection

·         Land acknowledgment

·         Spirit murder

·         Whiteness

·         White social capital

·         Restorative justice

·         Racial healing

These myriad terms are the ones already in use to obscure the CRT ideology. I’m sure they will invent more.

By way of information, your Resolution Condemning Racism, which you all signed last September, says that you “resolve to engage an outside entity to conduct an equity audit that will lead us to develop an equity policy/policies.” Now that we know that equity, as opposed to equality, is a CRT term, it looks like you’re taking our taxpayer dollars to get some CRT organization to impose Critical Race Theory on our school district. Now that you know any such action is illegal, we’d like an update on that resolution.

Critical Race Theory is a reworking of Marxist critical theory. Originally, Marxism divided people and encouraged hatred based on economic and social class. That doesn’t work in America, where class mobility is typical. Instead, Marxists now divide and encourage hatred based on race. Their intention is to overthrow our constitutional republic, our free market, and our civilizational structures such as families and churches, in order to create enough chaos that they can step in and impose their tyrannical controlled social order onto us.

We’re not falling for it.

What we as the parents and taxpayers in Cy-Fair ISD want is a good education for our children. That absolutely does not include indoctrinating them in Marxist-based critical theory in any form.

We don’t want them to be taught to hate one another based on skin color. We don’t want them to be taught to feel guilty and hate themselves because of their skin color. We don’t want them to be taught to hate their country, or to misconstrue our founding, which has led to more freedom and opportunity for all races and ethnicities than any other governmental system in history.

We don’t want our children to be taught to consider skin color above character when they interact with one another, and when they consider the writings and thoughts of brilliant minds who have gone before.

We want them to be taught the truth.

And we’re asking for your promise today that you will abide by the law and preclude the teaching of any of this racist propaganda.

 

 

Fighting Off the Infestation

If you think you’re in a safe area where Marxist/BLM Critical Race Theory doctrines are not being taught in your schools, maybe you’d better check again.

 

TOO CLOSE TO HOME

cover of the spring 2021 issue of Teaching Tolerance

Yesterday I got a notice from a friend. A teacher in our local school district, Cy-Fair ISD (that’s short for Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District) had passed along to him a pdf sent to teachers in the district. It’s the spring 2021 issue of a periodical called Teaching Tolerance, provided by Tolerance.org. Their cover for this issue announces: 

White supremacy affects every element of the U.S. education system. Find out how students, educators and other stakeholders resist it daily.

Maybe you’ve noticed that the enemies to freedom and civilization frequently change the definition of words to the point that they have no meaning. White supremacy traditionally has referred to a fringe group of racists, so separate from normal society that you’d have trouble finding them and may not have met one in your entire life. There was a time when what few numbers there were of them congregated around a couple of small towns in northern Idaho. We fostered a teenage girl briefly, over 30 years ago, from that area, whose father was one of them. She didn’t even understand his beliefs, let alone share them. Even though she was in a pitiable condition herself, her situation wasn’t the fault of non-whites—few of whom had ever been part of her life, so why blame them? White supremacists are marginalized even further to the fringes today.

So the enemy is changing the definition.

There’s a quote you may be familiar with; I think it may have once become a song. Anyway, Edwin Markham wrote:

“He drew a circle that shut me out-

Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.

But love and I had the wit to win:

We drew a circle and took him In!”

It’s a Venn diagram, possibly reversing the purpose of that quote. The circle of white supremacists was so small—and yet so delightfully toxic—that the Critical Race Theorists drew a circle around all whites, with those actual white supremacists in the middle, and labeled the larger circle all white supremacists. Like this:

normal view (left) and Critical Race Theory view (right)

The handy thing is, the stigma of that tiny subset is still there; it is just smeared on the whole set.

So, how do you stop being a white supremacist? Stop being white. If you fall short of that (and what choice do you have?) then at least be anti-white and bow down to the supremacy of non-whites—blacks in particular—as penance for your inherited skin color sin.

The first inside page of the online magazine—before the table of contents—advertises a film for grades 6-12. Here’s the blurb:

Our new streaming classroom film, Bibi, tells the story of Ben, a gay Latinx man, and his complicated relationship with his father and his home. The 18-minute film can inspire critical conversations about identity, culture, family, communication and belonging.

Further in, they mention that the title of the organization/publication is being changed to Learning for Justice—so if you look for the Teaching Tolerance title, you won’t find it much longer. And, just as they weren’t teaching actual tolerance, the new publication will have nothing to do with learning justice. We’re told, on page 5, that in this issue,

We highlight stories across a wide spectrum of education, examining the ways systems and institutions perpetuate racism and white supremacy.

That doesn’t sound like it covers a wide spectrum of education; it sounds like it covers a tiny, narrow band of something irrelevant to our children in our very “diverse” neighborhood schools.

The new definition of “white supremacy” is “related to a society that historically had a majority of white-skinned people.” So Shakespeare is a white supremacist—and therefore unworthy of being taught. Even Greek classicism, along with any of its wisdom, is white supremacist and unworthy of being taught. (See p. 46, “The Classical Roots of White Supremacy.”

One discussion in the magazine mentions how horrible it was to read the classic novel The Scarlet Letter (see p. 24):

Like many products of the U.S. education system, I read The Scarlet Letter in high school. My English teacher practically danced around the classroom—she loved the story so much. I remember feeling conflicted. I knew some of my classmates had children. Others had unmarried mothers. The discussion felt unfair. I was left feeling dejected by a book that did not speak to me and by a lesson I knew could harm my classmates.

I did not love this book either. But it’s a style problem, not any problem this author notes. The lesson of the story was not that the woman deserved to be marked for life with a scarlet letter for bearing a child out of wedlock; it was that the hypocritical priest who had gotten her pregnant was not held accountable for his sin. She was seen as the more virtuous character, and he was despicable. This author misunderstood the story and missed the “lesson.” And I don’t think it’s because the theme is lost on someone with a different skin color from the person in the story, or from the book’s author, or even a different skin color from the teacher; it’s because this author is obtuse. Making an assumption that anything that comes from a white person must be unworthy of being taught sort of skews one’s ability to see value in stories from various cultures—something that Western civilization does remarkably well by any objective measure.

If this author had understood the book, she might have noticed that the message was that sex outside of marriage is not an act of love by the man; it is an act of self-indulgence at the expense of the woman. If only the author’s classmates had gotten that message early and often before they got themselves pregnant during high school! That message could have helped them, not harmed them, as this author mistakenly claims.

As the article’s author misinterpreted the book and its meaning, Critical Race Theory is a purposely obtuse misinterpretation of actual history. If you notice and disagree, you are, ironically, labeled with a modern-day scarlet letter—as racist, and probably also homophobic, transphobic, or whatever else they put in the Venn diagram, deeming you unworthy of participation in society.

 

WHERE HAVE WE SEEN HISTORY CHANGED BEFORE?

Let me remind you of the character Winston Smith from George Orwell’s 1984. Dr. Larry Arnn talked about this in a Constitution Day speech last year (reprinted in the December 2020 issue of Imprimis):

The protagonist of 1984 is a man named Winston Smith. He works for the state, and his job is to rewrite history. He sits at a table with a telescreen in front of him that watches everything he does. To one side is something called a memory hole—when Winston puts things in it, he assumes they are burned and lost forever. Tasks are delivered to him in cylinders through a pneumatic tube. The task might involve something big, like a change in what country the state is at war with: when the enemy changes, all references to the previous war with a different enemy need to be expunged. Or the task might be something small: if an individual falls out of favor with the state, photographs of him being honored need to be altered or erased altogether from the records. Winston’s job is to fix every book, periodical, newspaper, etc. that reveals or refers to what used to be the truth, in order that it conform to the new truth….

Winston’s awareness of this endless mighty effort to alter reality makes him cynical and disaffected. He comes to see that he knows nothing of the past, of real history: “Every record has been destroyed or falsified,” he says at one point, “every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute…. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”

Dr. Arnn then asks, “Does any of this sound familiar?”

illustration from Teaching Tolerance, spring 2021, p. 56

Incidentally, that CRT magazine regales students who pushed for changing the name of three schools named for Robert E. Lee, the anti-slavery general for the south, whose military acumen and personal honor were admired in both the North and the South during and after the Civil War (see page 54). Somehow I’m certain the students were unaware of anything about him other than that he fought for the South. The article has an “of course he was evil” assumption, but it’s really about turning students into activists. If you can get them angry enough, you can get them to make the demands they’re told they should make.

There’s this insidious infestation of a “new” history (based neither on history nor scholarship) claiming that the real beginning of this nation is 1619—supposedly the year African slaves were first sold on this continent, as though this is the seminal moment that led to the country.

If only black or Muslim Africans had never captured and sold their fellow black Africans to people on other continents! If only none was ever sold in the Western hemisphere! Then the world would have been free of the slavery that has plagued pretty much every part of the world throughout history. Except—slavery was already here—and of course all those other countries. So whatever happened in 1619 was absolutely irrelevant to what became the nation that was based on the revolutionary moral idea that God created all human beings as equal—an idea that birthed our nation in 1776, when we declared independence from a tyrannical monarchy. It was the birth of that idea of freedom that led to the end of slavery—even at the cost of a painful Civil War.

And, according to Mary Graber in Debunking Howard Zinn (p. 92),

The Civil War not only led to the emancipation of American slaves but inspired leaders in the slave-holding nations of Cuba and Brazil to take steps to end slavery and avoid a similar outcome.[i]

To gloss over the moral antipathy to slavery, the very thing that made black Africans more free—and offered them more opportunities—than anywhere else in the world is nothing short of the darkest lie.

Pretending that all people without a certain amount of skin melanin are evil and shameful is not only a lie; it is racist. They call it “anti-racist,” because they like to control words. But in thought and deed, it is simply racism. It does not heal old wounds—wounds that in almost all cases were not caused by any living person toward any living person. It stirs up hatred and division. You can’t get to civilization by heading in this savage direction.

 

AGAIN, TOO CLOSE TO HOME

This evening I happened upon a video about Critical Race Theory at Brigham Young University, my alma mater. BYU is a large private religious university with an excellent reputation. It’s one of only a few universities that still required a core curriculum when we sent two of our children there. I was saddened to learn that the problems of other universities are happening here as well, where we ought to feel safe from the infestation of these Critical Race and Intersectionality lies.

The podcast talked about how, after you’ve prepared your child with four years of early morning seminary (scripture study classes before school), family home evenings (weekly home gospel study), church youth programs, church attendance, and everything you can think of to prepare your child spiritually, you’re so happy to send them to this wonderful school where the gospel is taught as part of every subject. But you might be disappointed.

The video is from Cwic Media, which offers helps for family scripture study, often related to the standard reading for the week, which I’ve watched from time to time. I’m uncertain who the speaker is, or whether it’s always him on this channel. But he says, after all your preparations, you send your child off to BYU,

And within a couple of weeks of being at BYU, a teacher starts telling you about some aspect of Critical Race Theory, and asks you to do a report, let’s say, on race issues. And they begin to talk to you in a new language that you’ve never heard before, for that student. They bring up words like anti-racism and ideas like intersectionality. And they start introducing you into new authors and ideas. This could be in any class. This could be in your English class—especially in the humanities. This could be in your history class. This could be in your religion class.

And it becomes obvious throughout the semester that, with that teacher who’s there at BYU, that they support this ideology. And you start thinking to yourself, because of the way the teacher presents it, that this is part of the gospel. That this is good. Right? This has to do with race relations, for example.

And all of a sudden, all of the effort you’ve put in for 18 years with that child, in their home, starts to turn to an ideology that is un-Christlike. To an ideology that takes away from the complete doctrine of Christ. And that, as people pursue it stronger and stronger, begin to doubt their own testimonies.

This is a reality, folks, happening all the time at Brigham Young University.

Last September there was a discussion, on Instagram, with people sharing their challenges with Critical Theory—and just plain anti-gospel opinions—being taught at BYU. Here’s a sampling:

Something interesting the speaker said on the Cwic podcast was that it starts with empathy. You want to have empathy; you should have empathy. So they use that as a hook. But then they extend that: If you don’t think blacks should be given preferential treatment above all other races, then you must hate blacks; you’re not a good person. If you don’t think gays should have the right to marry—thus changing the definition of what marriage has meant for 6000 years—then you must hate gays; you’re a bad person.

Instead of defining “good” the way God defines it, suddenly this Critical Race/Intersectionality doctrine redefines what you must believe to be “good.” No heresy from their doctrine is allowed.

 

WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT? STAND UP.

If standing for something that all the people around you agree with was enough, it wouldn’t take any courage, or stamina. But we’re in a time when it does take courage—not so much because you’re standing up to your enemies, but because sometimes you’re required to stand up against friends, neighbors, and family. Still, you have to do it. Not shrilly. But resolutely.

My friend, Bill, who informed us about this CRT publication being sent to the teachers in Cy-Fair ISD, already came up with an action. He says,

I am working with constituents in my precinct to meet at the Cy-Fair Board meeting on June 24th, to understand and get them on record if they are supporting CRT or not.  There are 3 board seats up for election in November.  We need to understand where they stand on this Marxist propaganda.  If you want to get involved or can support me anyway, please let me know and I will do my best to keep you posted.

He also already contacted his state representative to ask for support.

Meanwhile, in the Texas Legislature this session—which is nearing a close in a week and a half—there’s a bill that has made it through the House, and out of committee in the Senate, and looks like it might get a floor vote: HB 3979 by Rep. Steve Toth, from Montgomery County, just north of here. It would outlaw Critical Race Theory from being taught in any form in our public schools, and would require the teaching of real history, including source documents.

I hope it passes. But the people who simply change words at will are likely to call their lies something not yet invented so they can say, “Oh, that’s not Critical Race Theory.” They did that when we outlawed Common Core; they just slapped a different label on it. And upped the ante with Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality.

I might as well mention one more thing you could do: homeschool.

---

[i] Graber includes this footnote: Paquette and Smith, “Introduction: Slavery in the Americas” in The Oxford Handbook of Slavery in the Americas, ed. Robert L. Paquette and Mark M. Smith (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 3-17.