Category: Government

Indoctrination vs. Education: The Legacy of American Public Schools

“The philosophy of the classroom in this generation will be the philosophy of politics, government and life in the next.” – Abraham Lincoln

There is a battle raging today upon which the future of America as a free and self-governing republic hinges.  At its center is the struggle of who is responsible for the education and upbringing of children—parents or government.  The answer to this question goes far beyond education and touches all aspects of life. 

Education involves developing knowledgeable, well-rounded Americans who can think critically, process information, make good decisions, support themselves and serve the needs of society.  In other words, real education produces productive members of society.

What passes as government education in America today is nearly the opposite of real education.  We are spending more money and committing more resources to public education than at any time in our history.  We have more federal bureaucrats, technocrats, instructional foundations, and corporate sponsors focused on improving education than ever before. 

Nonetheless, American public school students are doing worse overall in standard core subjects.  Our children remain ignorant concerning our history, are far less literate as readers, and are becoming more math deficient with every passing year.

However, it’s not the fault of the students. Rather, modern public school education is dominated by a statist, leftist agenda to reshape the core beliefs of American students and impose a form of cultural Marxism that precludes free thought, prohibits individual freedom and places democratic processes at risk. 

This deliberate plan confuses, politicizes, sexualizes, and indoctrinates our children into a worldview that contravenes the founding principles of our republic. 

Driving God out of government schools was necessary to this agenda.  The Declaration of Independence affirms that inalienable rights come from the Creator and government exists to protect those God-given rights. 

The Founders did not view this principle as a religious issue but as a “self-evident” truth.  However, under “the wall of separation between church and state,” this self-evident truth was gradually forced out of public schools, in addition to prayer and the Bible.

From a historical perspective, the move towards government control over education in the mid-19th Century was met with initial opposition.  In 1840, a legislative committee in Massachusetts found: “The right to mold the political, moral, and religious opinions of … children is a right exclusively and jealously reserved by our laws to every parent; and for the government to attempt, directly or indirectly, as to these matters, to stand in the parent’s place, is an undertaking of very questionable policy.”

Later, in the early-20th Century, the scope of government control was litigated through our federal courts.  In 1922, Oregon passed a compulsory public schooling law which made it illegal for students to attend nongovernment-run schools. In Pierce v. Society of Sisters, the United States Supreme Court struck down the Oregon law as unconstitutional.

Delivering the opinion of the Court, Justice McReynolds wrote:  “…the Act of 1922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control … The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only.”

“The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.” 

In Pierce, the Supreme Court acknowledged the important role of parents in the upbringing of their children and demonstrated that government does not have unfettered control over education. 

The problem is that real education is far down the list of priorities for our government co-opted public schools.  The leftist agenda has nothing to do with teaching children how to think and everything to do with teaching them what to think, or to think in politically correct terms according to the leftists’ own predetermined standards. 

For parents who do not agree with this leftist agenda, but are concerned about providing a quality education for their children, they should commit to education reform that builds an education system on a new foundation based on proper reading, proper writing and real knowledge, not indoctrination.

One idea to reform education is to eliminate government-controlled public schools altogether.  That is, transition to one of the many school choice options that put parents back in charge of their children’s education. 

As a fundamental matter, putting government in a position to answer the core educational question—what is most worth a child knowing—is a dangerous proposition and a violation of parents’ right to control the education of their children.

Calling for a mass exodus of children from government schools may be considered a radical proposal by some.  However, many parents are making personal and financial sacrifices to homeschool their children and the movement is growing. 

For other parents, homeschooling or private schools are not realistic financial options.  If government is going to provide education, then parents need to embrace alternative forms of public education, including vouchers and charter schools, to empower students with genuine knowledge and the skills they need to succeed in life.

Other ideas for public education reform include teaching the nation’s founding principles and the meaning of such phrases as “certain inalienable rights” and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Further, make the virtues of honesty, respect and fair play a focus of the public school curriculum and recognize students who model these habits of good character.

But the only effective, long-term solution to indoctrination is good teaching.  Good teachers, which includes parents, need to train students in methods of thought, how to properly evaluate an argument, find actual solutions to problems, and determine what is true or false. 

Sooner or later, indoctrination will breakdown.  By contrast, good teaching will sustain our society by fostering the presence of active thought and repairing the walls that deeply divide our country.

The battle over education is about more than just how children should be educated.  If a majority of students in government-controlled public schools in America are sufficiently indoctrinated by the leftist dogma, there is no future in our country for freedom and self-government.  As a result, education may have just become the single most important political issue we face in America today.

On Constitution Day: We the People Still Rule

“To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.” – Calvin Coolidge

On September 17th Americans commemorate the anniversary of the signing of the Constitution of the United States, one of the greatest political documents conceived by the mind of man.

On “Constitution Day,” we will remember the birth of a nation dedicated to the preservation of personal liberty, political freedom, economic opportunity, and the natural rights with which we are all endowed. 

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Empowered with the sovereign authority of the people and the consent of the legislatures of the states, it is the source of all government powers, and provides important limitations on government that protect fundamental rights of citizens.

The Constitution creates the structure of our federal government and the rules for its operation consistent with the statement of human liberty proclaimed in Thomas Jefferson’s revolutionary document, the Declaration of Independence. In 1776, as today, the Declaration establishes a new basis of political legitimacy: the sovereignty of “We the People.”

Jefferson said the Declaration was intended to be an expression of the American mind. The rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” are essential to live as free people. These rights are found in eternal “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”

The Declaration provides the philosophical basis for a government that exercises legitimate power by consent of the governed, and it defines the conditions of a free people, whose rights and liberty are derived from their Creator.

The Preamble to the Constitution contains what may be the most important three words in our nation’s history: “We the People.” These three words are often considered the strongest link between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

The Preamble incorporates the Founders’ vision that the rights and freedoms bestowed by the Constitution belong to all citizens and confirms its purpose to protect the nation’s rights to liberty, justice, and freedom from tyrannical government.

The Constitution limits the power of the government by establishing a system of checks and balances. The first ten amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, and subsequent amendments, either impose restrictions on government interference with certain enumerated rights, or grant new liberties and individual freedoms to each American.

By dispersing power horizontally among the three separate branches of the national government and vertically between the national government and states, the Framers devised a structure of government strong enough to ensure the nation’s future prosperity but without sufficient power to threaten the people’s liberty.

Although it was adopted more than two centuries ago, the Constitution is just as important today because it places the government’s power in the hands of its citizens, setting forth matters decided by the federal government and matters left to the states.

Our Constitution also enshrines the principle that government exists to protect the rights of all Americans, and has no legitimate power to deprive any citizen of their rights without due process of law.

In a country as large as the United States, it is impossible for any government official or agency to know all that is necessary to ensure the safety and happiness of the people. Our Constitution recognizes this certain limitation and guarantees the principles of individual liberty, limited government, and federalism.

The principles of individual liberty and limited government mean that there are certain areas of human activity that belong to individuals which government should leave alone because no just government should have power over those areas or government could not effectively make those decisions.

The principle of federalism says that the people in the states should govern themselves, but our national government should have the power to do things that states could not do on their own like provide a common defense, regulate a national currency, and facilitate commerce between the states.

Over the last several decades, our country has moved away from the founding principles. The ever-expanding federal government is intervening into more and more aspects of our lives and is reducing our personal freedoms in the process.

Government at all levels is engaged in activities that were once left to private individuals and groups, and the federal government is exercising authority over matters that were once the province of state and local governments where there is greater accountability to the public. 

Because of these incursions, our country stands at a dangerous crossroads, the likes of which were feared by our Founders. One road follows the path of liberty set by the Framers of the Constitution and the other one diverges from that path and leads down the road to tyranny.

In our country today, we have a class of dedicated leftist elites committed to destroying the Constitution and building a government so big that eventually “We the People” will be unable to fight back against the loss of freedom.

This group of leftists is made up of politicians who recognize no limits to their power, and their activist allies in the media, Hollywood, the judiciary, and academia, who have been working to undermine our constitutional order.

They welcome a tyranny of elites who govern as they see fit without being checked by what they view as an anachronistic document. This same group of leftists uses identity politics to divide Americans and expand the power of government.

Fortunately, there is a growing movement throughout America to reinvigorate the tree of liberty. There is a revival among American patriots, people who recognize the importance of preserving the Constitution as it was intended, to protect our God-given rights, and to prevent our government from becoming tyrannical.

Ronald Reagan once said: “Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and lost it have never known it again.”

Reagan had it right. Intrinsic to the story of our Constitution is the premise that the freedom of a nation can only be secured by citizens with firm conviction who understand their rights and liberties and will actively defend them. The preservation of our freedom is a daily battle, something the Founders understood.

The process of scaling back the size of government and returning it to its proper constitutional restraints will be a long haul. But, since the federal government is supposed to be our servant and not our master, citizens should not shirk from this important endeavor.

On Constitution Day, as American patriots, let us rededicate ourselves to secure the blessings of liberty by working to defend, protect, and preserve our Constitution.

No on CC

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION CC THIS NOVEMBER

It’s a Blank Check
Democratic Speaker of the House KC Becker admitted in a committee hearing earlier this year that there is no guarantee as to where Proposition CC’s money will go in the future. The legislature has tricked us before – don’t let them do it again.

State Government Refuses to Prioritize Coloradans’ Needs
The state budget is growing by over $1B every year, but the legislature still refuses to prioritize infrastructure. Despite a 20% increase in education spending since 1990, teacher pay is DOWN 20%. Giving more money to state government, without any reforms, is a bad deal for taxpayers. Since TABOR passed, our budget has grown 306%. State government has enough money – it must prioritize better.

It’s Permanent
Proposition CC would take away Coloradans’ TABOR refunds – forever. It also would permanently eliminate the spending cap on government. There is no sunset – and no real accountability to taxpayers.

It’s a Tax Increase
Despite what the ballot language says, Proposition CC is a tax increase. When the government keeps more of our money and spends it, it’s a tax increase. Current projections indicate that Proposition CC’s passage would cost taxpayers $1.3 billion in the next three years alone. Coloradans have rejected the last six statewide tax hikes for a reason. They want government to be more efficient and effective with the $32.5 billion budget it already receives.

It Would Gut the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights
This ballot issue would strip one of the main parts of TABOR – which limits the growth of government. Public polling shows that 72 percent of Coloradans support TABOR.

It Would Hurt Seniors and Veterans
Currently, refund money is first used to help localities cover the senior and veterans’ property tax exemptions. Proposition CC would take that refund money away – putting seniors and veterans at risk – and putting more pressure on local budgets.

Colorado Has the Number One Economy for a Reason
Colorado doesn’t have the number one economy in the country by chance. TABOR has greatly contributed to our state’s success. We don’t want to fall backwards. This ballot issue is the first step to repealing the rest of TABOR.

It Aims to Backfill Lost Revenue from Oil and Gas
Earlier this year, the Democrat-controlled state legislature passed an anti-oil and gas law that will almost certainly lead to lost revenue. Proposition CC is an early attempt to offset these self-inflicted losses – by taking away more of our money.

TABOR is the ONLY Remaining Check and Balance against Government Waste and Inefficiency
TABOR is the only remaining check on government overreach. Coloradans’ right to review and vote on tax increases protects the state from economic ruin. Proposition CC would take away our foundational rights as voters and taxpayers.

To learn more about No on CC, please visit www.VoteNoOnCC.com.

To donate to the freedomfy campaign to defeat Prop CC, please visit bit.ly/freedomfyNoOnCC .

Paid for by No on CC

Educational Principles

Douglas County Republicans
* Educational Principles *

Goal of Education

The goal of education is to effectively prepare students to become lifelong learners, productive contributors to society, critical thinkers, independent and responsible citizens who respect diverse points of view, and understand and promote the foundational principles of freedom and individual responsibility.

Roles and Responsibilities of:

Students
Students are responsible for coming to class ready to learn and taking responsibility for fulfilling the requirements of their coursework. Students should have the freedom to express their point of view and have a mutual respect for points of view that may differ from their own. Engagement in civil discourse and debate are the hallmarks of a vibrant educational community that fosters individual development and personal growth. We believe that all students, regardless of socioeconomic background, ethnicity, or special needs have the ability to learn given appropriate instruction and resources to fulfill their potential.

Parents
Parents are the first teachers of their children. As such, they are responsible for preparing their children to be ready to learn and provide them with the necessary foundation and tools to be successful in a learning environment. Parents play an active role in the lives of their children by working with and supporting teachers and administrators in the educational system. Parents should also have the freedom and ability to choose what kind of learning environment would best fit the needs of their child whether it be through home schooling, public/charter schools, or private schools.

Teachers
Next to the parents, teachers play an important role in the education of students. Teachers should be knowledgeable about cutting edge research in their field and also cognizant of the mental, social, and emotional needs of students at different stages of their development. Teachers should be recognized and rewarded, through bonuses and pay raises, for increasing their expertise in their discipline and proven effectiveness in the classroom. This can be accomplished through advanced graduate degrees, certificates, participating in quality professional development, and observations and evaluations by their peers and administrators. Teachers are also aware of different learning styles and recognize the importance of providing different teaching techniques to address the different learning styles of students. Teachers are able to cultivate a caring and supportive learning environment that fosters critical thinking and an openness and respect for diverse points of view as well as academic and “real world” experiences that effectively prepare students for the 21st century.

Curriculum
Curriculum that is state of the art, unbiased, research based, age appropriate, free of stereotypes and fosters open discussion and debate should be reviewed prior to adoption by a committee consisting of parents, teachers, and administrators. For example, in a social studies or history class, special emphasis should be given to developing an appreciation and respect for the founding principles of our country and how our Constitutional Republic differs from other political and economic systems in the world. Practical connections to current events, field trips, internships, mentoring programs, and experiential learning helps students to recognize that knowledge is not stagnant but is dynamic and on-going and has applications to the real world. As new curriculum programs are adopted, appropriate and high quality professional development should be provided to teachers to effectively integrate curriculum materials into their classroom.

Administrators
Effective administrators provide a collaborative open partnership among parents, teachers, students, and the community to foster a safe and enriching learning environment for all of its students. Responsive to the needs of the students, teachers, parents, and the community, administrators communicate an “open door” policy where all viewpoints and perspectives are respected and valued. Fiscal responsibility, transparency, effective communication, and developing public/private partnerships with the community ensures that all the key stakeholders are actively involved in the education of our students.

Board of Education
As elected officials, members of the School Board of Education represent the interests, concerns, and needs of all of its constituents. School Board representatives are responsible and accountable to the public for the safety, security, fiscal and academic oversight of the Douglas County School District. Openness to public opinion and civil debate, rather than censorship of ideas, is the hallmark of a free and open society. Modeling that behavior is critical to developing trust between the School Board and the community it serves.

Community
There are a wealth of resources that exist in the community that can be effectively tapped into and utilized. With the rise of teen suicide, drugs, alcohol, and school violence, school-community partnerships can be developed with mental health agencies, police agencies, and other profit and non-profit organizations. For example, community mental health agencies are responsible to provide outreach to the communities they serve. At no additional cost to the school, a partnership can be developed where a psychologist can be assigned to a school to provide information, resources, training, and counseling to students and teachers. Additional partnerships can include internships, mentoring, and experiential learning opportunities with the surrounding businesses, technical trades, and the community. Application to federal, state, and county grants that are compatible with the mission of the Douglas County School District is fiscally responsible and provides additional financial resources without an additional tax burden on its citizens.

Written by Aleta You – 2019

What are the Bill of Rights?

During the Constitutional Convention, as delegates debated adoption of the Constitution, two factions emerged: the Federalists, who advocated for a strong national government, and the Anti-Federalists, who wanted power to remain with state and local governments.

One of the many points of contention between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was the Constitution’s lack of a bill of rights that would place specific restraints on government power.

Federalists argued that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights because the people and the states retained any powers not given to the federal government. Anti-Federalists maintained that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty.

George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, was the first to suggest that a bill of rights preface the Constitution. His motion was rejected by the Convention but the divide between delegates remained.

In 1789, James Madison, the chief architect of the original Constitution, was persuaded by Thomas Jefferson to draft a slate of amendments that would satisfy critics who felt that the Constitution was incomplete without human rights protections.

Madison, who was heavily influenced by George Mason’s Virginia Declaration of Rights, proposed the changes as amendments to the Constitution. The House approved 17 amendments, the Senate approved 12 and the states approved 10. Those first 10 amendments to the Constitution became known as the Bill of Rights.

 

Rights Preserved Under the Bill of Rights:

The First Amendment addresses certain enumerated fundamental rights and freedoms, including speech, religion, assembly and the press. The Second and Third Amendments offer protections against arbitrary military action, including the right to bear arms and that troops will not be quartered in homes during peacetime. The Fourth through Eighth Amendments provide protections against arbitrary police and court action such as no unlawful searches and seizures, the right to a speedy trial and prohibiting cruel or unusual punishments, among others. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments protect states’ rights and unnamed rights of the people. 

When the Bill of Rights first went into effect, it only applied to laws and activities at the federal level. There was no law preventing the states from denying these same rights to their citizens. That changed after the Civil War in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified. This amendment broadened application of the Bill of Rights to state governments. To this day, both state and federal courts must enforce the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

The story of the Bill of Rights illustrates that our Founders understood that for personal freedoms to be protected the power of the government must be limited.

Civics – Congress and the Colorado General Assembly

 

Words Mean Things:   Congress

It is common for people to refer to members of the Colorado General Assembly as “Congressman” or ‘Congresswoman.” Please note that is incorrect. In American government, the word “Congress” refers to the bi-cameral federal legislature.

There are 435 elected voting members of the lower chamber of Congress, the United States House of Representatives. There are also an assortment of elected, non-voting members of the US House who represent Washington, DC; Guam; the US Virgin Islands; and, a few other US territories.

There are 100 elected voting members of the upper chamber of Congress, the United States Senate. In addition, the Vice-President of the United States serves as President of the Senate and who, upon a tie vote, casts a tie-breaking vote as the 101st member.

The bi-cameral Colorado state legislature is referred to as the “Colorado General Assembly.”

There are 65 elected voting members of the lower chamber of our General Assembly, the Colorado House of Representatives. There are 35 members of the upper chamber of our General Assembly, the Colorado Senate.

The state legislature is never accurately referred to as “state Congress.” Why? Because “Congress” refers to our federal legislature. Calling the General Assembly “Congress” is contradictory. That literally means a state federal legislature, which doesn’t exist.

Using the word “Congress” to refer to a state legislature is like calling the chief executive of the federal government “Mayor of the United States.” Nope. That person is the President of the United States. Or, calling the Governor of Colorado the “President of Colorado.” Nope, that person is the Governor.

President, Governor, and Mayor are all titles assigned to the chief executive of a certain level of government, but those titles are not interchangeable. They actually designate the level of government: federal, state, or municipal. Much the same, the labels Congress, General Assembly, and City/Town Council refer to elected policy making bodies at the federal, state, and municipal levels of government.

In some states, the legislature might be called the “House of Delegates” and members referred to as “delegates.” In other states, the titles of “Assemblyman” and “Assemblywomen” are used. Here in Colorado, we use the titles “Representative” and “Senator” to address the members of our bi-cameral state legislature, the Colorado General Assembly.

At the federal level, all members of the US House and US Senate are members of Congress. The word “Congress” doesn’t mean the lower chamber, it refers to both chambers.

However, members of the US House generally like the titles of “Congressman” or “Congresswoman” as opposed to “Representative.” Why? Because it equalizes them with the members of the US Senate. Meanwhile, members of the US Senate generally prefer the title of “Senator” rather than “Congressman” or “Congresswoman.” Why? Because it sets them apart from the other 435 members of Congress.

It’s common to hear reference to “Congressmen and Senators.” That’s OK… but it technically means all 535 members of Congress and… for some reason… mentioning the 100 members of the upper chamber a second time.

Oh, and you can call me, “Chris” because I work so hard at just being me.

Written by Senator Chris Holbert, a member of the Colorado General Assembly, Senate District 30.

 

 

Civics – Quorum and Passage Requirements

Quorum and Passage Requirements
Explained by State Senate Minority Leader Chris Holbert Senate District 30

We’ll likely revisit this topic many times over the next two years, but for now, here’s the text of Colorado General Assembly, Senate Rule 2, Quorum:

(a) A majority of all Senators elected shall constitute a quorum, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, or for less than a day, and compel the attendance of absent members.

 

House Rule 5 mirrors Senate Rule 2. A simple majority, one more than half the number of all members of that chamber, satisfies the quorum requirement. A minority of members can COMPEL (call, require, force) the other members to return to their respective chamber.

 

Democrats will hold 41 of the 65 state House seats. Thirty-three seats is a simple majority of our state House. If 33 or more of the pending 41 Democrats are present, then a quorum will have been established.

 

Democrats will hold 19 of the 35 state Senate seats. Eighteen seats is a simple majority of our state Senate. If 18 or more of the pending 19 Democrats are present, then a quorum will have been established.

 

The same numbers (33 or more in the House/18 or more in the Senate) are required to pass a bill.

 

There is no filibuster in our state legislature. Members may speak at length, but they MUST speak to the bill. They/we cannot read the Bible or a phone book… unless the bill happens to be about such publications.

 

These are cold, hard, facts about our state legislature, which could only be changed by a vote of a simple majority or more of the members of a respective chamber… which isn’t going to happen. The majority isn’t going to relinquish such power.

 

Please keep these facts in mind and be prepared to share this information with others. I’m sure that there will be opportunities for folks to demand that something be done to stop certain bills that will be considered during the 2019 and 2020 general sessions.

 

As you advocate for or against legislation over the next two years, keep in mind that one party can establish quorum and pass bills completely on its own. In those cases, the only thing that can stop them is them.

 

Colorado General Assembly Math 101:

If five House members aren’t there on a given day, then the number doesn’t decrease to fifty percent, plus one of those in attendance. The number remains fifty percent, plus one of all members ELECTED.

33 or more in the House.

18 or more in the Senate

It doesn’t matter how many aren’t there in the House, it only matters if 33 or more vote “Yes” on that bill.

It doesn’t matter how many aren’t there in the Senate, it only matters if 18 or more vote “Yes” on that bill.

 

 

Civics – First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in two clauses:

The “establishment” clause, which prohibits the government from establishing an official church,
The “free exercise” clause that allows people to worship as they please.

FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND THE PRESS

What is free speech? The definition is not easy, and the courts have identified three types of free speech, each protected at a different level:

  • Pure speech is the verbal expression of thoughts and opinions before a voluntary audience. The courts have generally provided strong protection of pure speech from government regulation.
  • Speech-plus involves actions, such as demonstrating or protesting, as well as words. Speech-plus is not generally protected as strictly as is pure speech, because actions can be physically dangerous. The courts have ruled that demonstrators may not obstruct traffic, endanger public safety, or trespass illegally.
  • Symbolic speech technically involves no speech at all, but it involves symbols that the courts have judged to be forms of free expression. Symbolic actions such as wearing black armbands in school and draft-card burning fit this category. Symbolic speech is highly controversial, and as a rule, the courts have sometimes considered it to be beyond the limits of free speech. However, the Supreme Court did uphold the right of an individual to burn an American flag in the 1989 Texas vs. Johnson decision.

Many of the same principles that apply to freedom of speech apply to the press, but one with special meaning for the press is prior restraint. The courts have ruled that the government may not censor information before it is written and published, except in the most extreme cases of national security.
The “clear and present danger” test is a basic principle for deciding the limits of free speech. It was set by the famous Schenck v. the United States case from World War I. Antiwar activist Charles Schenck was arrested for sending leaflets to prospective army draftees encouraging them to ignore their draft notices. The United States claimed that Schenck threatened national security, and the justices agreed. The principle was established that free speech would not be protected if an individual were a “clear and present danger” to United States security.
US History.org /gov

FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

Freedom of assembly and petition are closely related to freedom of speech, and have been protected in similar ways. Former Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes wrote, “Peaceable assembly for lawful discussion cannot be made a crime.” Generally, that point of view has prevailed. Freedom of assembly has to be balanced with other people’s rights if it disrupts public order, traffic flow, freedom to go about normal business or peace and quiet. Usually, a group must apply for a permit, but a government must grant a permit provided that officials have the means to prevent major disruptions.
US History.org /gov

Learn More:
Newseum Institutes First Amendment Center

The First Amendment Doesn’t Guarantee You the Rights You think It Does

Ducksters US Government for Kids

US Courts

 

CIVICS – The Role of the Three Branches of Government- by Ben Sasse, Senator from Nebraska

This should be played in every classroom, every year. Ben Sasse, Republican Senator from Nebraska, explains. Watch now.

A wonderful lesson on how our 3 branches of government are supposed to work and the failure of our Legislative Branch to do their job, therefore ceding more authority to the Executive and Judicial.

The Origin of Identity Politics –

Speakeasy Ideas Tom Krannawitter explains in this 10 minute YouTube video, the Origin of Identity Politics.


Thomas Krannawitter, Ph.D.

Description: Cutting edge, progressive social scientists a hundred years ago rejected the idea that all human beings possess the same, equal natural rights to their own person, property, and individual freedom. Instead, progressive academics borrowed from 19th Century European philosophy and held that different groups and races of people evolve at different rates, and therefore have different kinds of rights at different points in evolutionary time, depending on the political “capacity” they had demonstrated. This is the basis of what we call “identity politics” today, the view that different groups of people deserve different kinds of rights. It is the opposite of the idea that equal laws should offer equal protection for equal rights. That is why all free people should reject all laws that divide citizens into groups and offer certain perks and benefits to some at the expense of others. ~Thomas Krannawitter, Ph.D.