When the notion of race-based reparations was first advanced, I didn’t take it seriously. Surely, something so costly and unhelpful would never gain traction with the American public, so why worry about it?
But on further reflection, it seems several ideas have graduated from the unthinkable to reality over the last few years in today’s America. The idea that reputable physicians would actively encourage even pre-adolescents to retard their sexual development and permanently mutilate their bodies, based on nothing more than a probably transient feeling of gender dysphoria, would have seemed absolutely bizarre not long ago.
So would the idea that schoolchildren should learn to reject the teachings of Martin Luther King and instead be taught that there were irreconcilable inborn racial differences that warranted further discrimination. Spending trillions of dollars we don’t have on unnecessary programs. Allowing immigrants by the millions to illegally breach our border. Even allowing a top government official to walk after intentionally destroying thousands of evidentiary emails during an active investigation. We can no longer count on rational thought to prevail.
Thus, the drive for race-based reparations continues to advance. Nearly every year, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee introduces a bill calling for a commission to compile documentary evidence of slavery(?), analyze its effects and recommend ways to remedy the effects of servitude including an apology and, of course, cash.
Now others are joining the chorus. California’s Task Force to Study and Develop Reparations Proposals for African-Americans issued a detailed calculation of recommended awards. They include $13,619 for each year of residency in the state for healthcare disparities, $3,336 per year for housing discrimination, and $2,532 per year for over-policing and mass incarceration. That’s up to $1.2 million for each of the 2.3 million black residents of the state.
Determined not to be outbid, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors unanimously endorsed a proposal to provide a $5 million payment to each black resident to compensate for past wrongs. Each would also receive forgiveness of all loans including credit cards and income subsidies for the next 250 years to bring them to the median city income, currently $97,000.
Two years ago, Evanston, Illinois became the first American city to actually pay racial reparations, $2,500 to each black resident to pay for housing improvements.
But the notion of reparations awarded to all members of a racial or ethnic group contains no guardrails to determine where the practice logically starts and stops. While reparations for specific incidents like the Holocaust and Japanese internment are easier to define and limit, abuse by and against races has been virtually constant in human history.
Slavery has been widely practiced for millennia. That doesn’t excuse it, but it does make just compensation awards more problematic. Do all the nations who practiced, or are still practicing, slavery owe compensation? Should descendants of the tribal chieftains who fueled the African slave trade by capturing and selling fellow Africans into bondage be liable? Should people whose ancestors never owned slaves have to pay anyway? Once the foolish principle is established, we’re just quibbling about amounts.
But the ultimate objection to raced-based reparations isn’t affordability or morality. It is that reparations are economically devastating to the recipients.
Think of America’s own history. Our modern relationship with the indigenous peoples was based on promises to atone for our admittedly shabby treatment of them. They were soon transformed from proud, capable human beings to highly regulated dependents who couldn’t build a bridge, provide their own housing, or obtain medical care without federal government permission and aid.
Black Americans were making significant social and economic progress until the entitlements of the Great Society in the 1960s broke up their families, robbed them of self-sufficiency, and preempted their prospects for prosperity. Many sank into dependence, criminality, and despair.
The newly proposed reparations would likely be just as toxic, killing the incentives for self-sufficiency. The greatest gift we could give to lagging minority groups would be to double down on equipping them with the tools to fully participate in the American dream.
Helping them to rebuild families, schools, and social structures, although difficult, would be helpful. Reparations and more entitlements are the road to nowhere.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
COVID mania just won’t go away. The deadly strains of the virus have been gone for two years now, and yet the recent outbreak of a mild flu-like variant is again stoking panic on the Left.
Nearly 100 universities are requiring masks this fall.
Lionsgate movie studios in Los Angeles and Atlanta-based Morris Brown College this week stated they are reinstating not just mask mandates but social distancing measures and contact tracing.
CNN, which led the panic in 2020 and 2021 — causing manic school, restaurant and business shutdowns and vaccine mandates — recently put out a headline on its website that encouraged its readers not to go outside without a mask on. Really? The latest evidence finds this is less dangerous than a normal flu virus and tracking data suggest that the wave has already peaked.
What’s even more disturbing here is that the leftist medical community and the media aren’t renouncing their calls for mitigation strategies that were catastrophically wrong in the panic era of 2020 and 2021 — but instead calling for more of these assaults on freedom in the future.
It is one thing for well-meaning medical experts to have disagreed about how to best combat a once-in-a-half-century deadly virus. We didn’t know exactly what we were dealing with. But now we know with concrete scientific evidence that most mandates and lockdowns had a small impact on the spread of the virus and on fatalities. It turns out there was almost no difference in death rates in states with strict lockdowns and no lockdowns at all. The same is true of cross-country evidence.
Healthy children were never at risk from COVID (something we knew early on), so shutting down schools for one or two years was a sop to the teachers unions but a disaster for this generation of kids. Test scores are the worst in 30 years.
Before the pandemic, only 15% of public school students were chronically absent — more than 18 or more days a year.
Stanford University education professor Thomas Dee’s data shows an estimated 6.5 million additional students are now chronically absent. In Connecticut and Massachusetts, chronic absenteeism remains double its pre-pandemic rate.
But polls show that Democrats — even those that are highly educated — generally still support the lockdowns that were mandated. These are the same people who lecture about “following the science.” The most comprehensive study by experts at Johns Hopkins University found death rates from lockdowns were reduced by 0.1 percent. But how many people died from the isolation of lockdowns, delayed health screening from cancer, the increase in drug overdoses?
Biden’s vaccine mandates only made Americans more resistant to get pricked. They backfired.
Worst of all, Anthony Fauci, who remains a hero of the Left, recently not only refused to admit the errors of his advice but said the “lockdown was absolutely justified.”
Why does this bizarre rewrite of recent history matter? Because the fearmongering Left can’t wait to install new lockdowns every time we have a new flu virus and health scare. They’ve even started putting out feelers for occasional climate change economic shutdowns.
Those who love freedom must strenuously resist this coming tyranny.
How many times have we heard our parents tell us “keep your hands to yourself”? Being one of four siblings, my parents had that phrase on replay—constantly. When we were children, my brothers and I were always trying to boss each other around and get our own way. But, as we grew up, we learned to mind our own business and control our own behavior. We began to realize that we might not LIKE what the other one was doing, but that their behavior was not up to us to control. Each of my brothers and I matured into grown-ups who understand that we are responsible for our own actions and reactions to other people.
The news media as of late has been replete with stories of how some people are “triggered” by words and symbols and even articles of clothing worn by other people. And, it is conceivable that those who are “triggered” are genuinely having an emotional reaction to their surroundings.
Humans are built to be relational, and part of relating is that we respond and react to those around us. Put two babies in a room together, if one of them starts crying, the other one will impulsively join in. But, as we mature, we learn that we can and must control our own responses to those around us. We can feel a “triggered” emotion without reacting to it, and certainly not by trying to control the people and things in our landscape to whom we are having an emotional reaction.
For example, if I were terrified of flying and seeing airplanes flying over my head does that mean that I should try to make airplanes illegal? They make me uncomfortable, people get hurt and injured in airplane accidents—I shouldn’t have to be made uncomfortable by seeing these things flying over my head…right?! Something should be done about these airplanes! Right?!
Of course not. My fears, my phobias, and my emotional reactions are MINE to deal with. It is MY responsibility to learn how to interact with the rest of the world and control my emotional responses through coping skills. I cannot expect the rest of the world to conform to what makes me feel comfortable. I have to learn to “keep my hands to myself.”
A more realistic example of how this scenario tends to play out is with firearms and our Second Amendment Constitutional Right to exercise our God-given Right to self-defense. Some people are made uncomfortable by the fact that I own firearms, even though I am a responsibly armed and trained citizen. They cite times when firearms have been improperly used by others to harm and murder our fellow men and women. They feel deeply that guns are bad, ignoring the obvious fact that millions of times each year guns are used to protect and save lives. The truth is that people who don’t “keep their hands to themselves” hurt other people, and guns are merely one of any number of tools used to maim and murder innocents.
Regardless, there are many who profess that the world would be a better place if everyone would simply listen to their “common sense” ideas of making these tools disappear. However, if those people can take from me my firearms and my right to own those tools, that makes ME feel transgressed and unsafe. Being deprived of my Second Amendment rights makes me deeply uncomfortable. Are my feelings less important than those of other people?
So, where does that leave us? If one person gets their way, the other is left feeling discomfort. What are we to do about that? Our Founding Fathers and Mothers created a solution. In fact, they believed so strongly in the principle of “keeping one’s hands to oneself” that they put everything on the line and fought, bled, starved, and died in order to have the opportunity to write a few documents about this very issue.
The Declaration of Independence was their instruction to the English Monarchy and Army to keep their hands to themselves. It was a boundary-setting written pronouncement of autonomy. It declared where the English Government ends and where the United States Government begins. The Founders followed that up with a missive called the Constitution of the United States, which set the rules for how our own government would behave. And the ultimate “keep your hands to yourself” document is the Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights tells our own United States Government what it can NOT do in the personal lives and with the personal possessions of We the People—including our “arms” (guns, knives, swords, bows and arrows, etc.) which free citizens have the right to keep and bear, which means to own and carry. And our Founders, realizing how important firearms are to personal safety and security, included the Second Amendment which codified those inherent rights, and added a clause that you will find nowhere else in our Founding Documents. They wrote, “shall not be infringed.”
It was an emphatic punctuation declaring that no matter what, this right stands unfettered by any other law, decree, or governmental regulation. According to the National Archives website, “[The Bill of Rights] spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government. It guarantees civil rights and liberties to the individual—like freedom of speech, press, and religion. It sets rules for due process of law and reserves all powers not delegated to the Federal Government to the people or the States.”
Part of being a grown-up is knowing that my rights end where my brothers’ and my neighbors’ begin. Keep your hands to yourself. These are timeless values and, in a way, our Founding Fathers and Mothers are continuing to parent each new generation in exactly that wise admonition nearly 300 years after they secured these rights for their own lives.
Cheryl Todd has an extensive history of being a Second Amendment Advocate. Along with being a Visiting Fellow for the Independent Women’s Forum, she is the owner of AZFirearms Auctions, Executive Producer & Co-Host of Gun Freedom Radio, the founder of the grassroots movement Polka Dots Are My Camo, and the AZ State Director for the DC Project.
The people of Arizona deserve elections that are both accessible and secure—where it is easy to vote and hard to cheat. It is the duty of the legislature to pass bills that ensure this, the Governor to sign those bills into law, and the Attorney General to enforce those laws.
But the Secretary of State’s role is different. This elected official is supposed to provide an Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) that provides impartial direction to county recorders to ensure uniform and correct implementation of election law. But just like his predecessor in this role before him (now-Governor Katie Hobbs), our current Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has filled his EPM with unlawful provisions…
“I have to go to a homeschool event for my grandson this weekend,” my co-worker said.
“Homeschool? What’s that?” I inquired.
And that was the beginning of a huge life-changing path.
My family and I moved to Arizona from NY in the 90s and had not heard of homeschooling. Since I never felt comfortable sending my first born to pre-K and was concerned about his education in grade school, I found this crazy idea of homeschooling very intriguing. Before I knew it, we pulled our son out of public school. My six children have since graduated from homeschooling and those 25 years were a gift from God, a privilege, an honor, and the greatest blessing.
Homeschooling may seem daunting, because it is. But that’s okay. If your heart is heavy because you’re sending your kids off every day, or you are concerned with the state of education, or you want to be your child’s main source of knowledge and values, then I would venture to say you are up to the challenge.
Let me address some common concerns and questions.
Question: “Homeschooling would be a challenge financially for my family. How can I afford it?”
Answer: It certainly was a financial challenge for my family. We were a two-income family and I had a career, though in retrospect, I really wanted to be a stay-at-home mom. So, we made sacrifices. No vacations, not everyone got braces, sometimes we only had one car, we had a humble home, my husband worked long hours, and we’ve been graced with family support. We also used affordable resources like the public library. We have never regretted the sacrifices because honestly, we found it to be a gift. And now, as of last year, Arizona offers home educators the ability to use funds to educate your children at home through the ESA program, which makes doing so more affordable, especially for families in need.
Question: “What about socialization?”
Answer: I’ll be honest: this is a tough one and it will most likely take a great deal of effort on your part to socialize your kids. But let’s take a step back and first realize that having children in a classroom with kids their same age who must be quiet most of the day is not ideal. It is the norm for modern day society, but not ideal. Picture this: going to a park (okay, for this to be pleasant, imagine it’s November or March) once a week with a group of moms, some dads and even grandparents, sitting around chatting with your baby in your lap while your young kids dig in the playground sand, play tag, and climb trees; your older kids are playing board games, listening to music, and chatting. These gatherings are called homeschool park days. Imagine having co-ops (planned learning groups run by homeschool families), book clubs, writing, science, history, project clubs, homeschool theater, music, speech, PE, art, etiquette classes, service, holiday and church activities often with the same families. Many places, like museums, rec centers, and theaters, even have classes just for homeschoolers. There are plenty of homeschool groups to choose from, such as the wonderful Catholic one my family joined a few years ago. There are even homeschool field trips, dances (my kids organized a few), proms, and graduation ceremonies. Can you begin to picture the beautiful bonds and enriching friendships you will form with other families? The life lessons learned and the unique relationships that are formed are priceless.
Question: “It’s important for children to hear other people’s ideas. How does one achieve this as a homeschooler?”
Answer: Again, this is a challenge, but not unsurmountable. It is vital that children are exposed to differing views for them to have a well-rounded learning experience. This is best achieved through engaging with other homeschool families and through extracurricular activities. Activities such as book and writing clubs, co-ops, church groups, and park days provide ample opportunities for the sharing of ideas and healthy debate. More than likely your kids will also participate in traditional after school activities like sports or music lessons where they can interact and engage with others.
Question: “I can’t homeschool. I don’t have the patience, the time, or the skills. How can I homeschool if I am not qualified?”
Answer: Simply put, you can. Because you love your children, you will find a way to practice patience, make time, utilize the skills you have, and find help with the ones you lack. The resources abound, from science center classes to tutors. As far as time goes, homeschooling generally takes a lot less time per day compared to traditional school, which is wonderful; it allows time for self-study and exploration of subject areas your children are interested in pursuing. My children have studied remarkable things on their own: American history, geology, nutrition, music composition, novel writing, graphic art, coding, politics, quantum physics, and theology! They found their own resources, mentors, and inspiration. And I was able to incorporate lessons on life skills such as personal finance, sewing a button, and how to give a good handshake. You can do this. Pray, lean on your spouse and family, and call a friend for support to get you through the decision process and those tough days.
Question: “There are so many homeschool resources out there. How do I choose the right curriculum and the right method?”
Answer: Ugh, I know. This can take a while. I went from a brief, rigid homeschool method to student-directed schooling to unschooling. I would wake up in the middle of the night many times to brainstorm a great new idea or to wonder if I was on the right path. The best thing I can say is to be kind to yourself, read and research, talk to others, and don’t be afraid to change. Most of all, enjoy and love your kids. I have had the greatest joys in my life waking up every day, because really: every day is a learning day. Every day offered the privilege of being with my children and being their primary source of learning (along with my husband). My fondest memories are laying on the floor reading. Reading, discussing, debating. We still do this!
There are so many homeschool choices from traditional online classes to learning through play. While I never did online work or followed a curriculum, I can say those options work for many families. I preferred learning through play (Lego, blocks, board games, critical thinking activities), exploring the outdoors, projects, reading, discourse, and writing. My family concentrated on rhetoric and logic. Through homeschooling, we were able to focus on virtues that can be incorporated into everything you do with your children, as God intended. Homeschooling is a natural and healthy opportunity to foster your children’s value system throughout their formative years so that they have a sound foundation as they enter the adult world.
Question: “How can my high schooler get accepted into college?”
Answer: I had some challenges because I designed my children’s education from scratch and composed their transcripts and diplomas. But as homeschooling became more the norm than when I started, college acceptance became easier. Most colleges have a homeschool applicant path. Many homeschool families choose to get official homeschool transcripts and diplomas through homeschool programs. Some children attend their local community college, get an associate degree, then transfer to a four-year university (though this path may limit the possibility for scholarships). My suggestion is to start the college search early. Get an idea of what your child is most interested in studying, and start researching what the requirements are for homeschool applicants. When the time comes, your child can study for and take any necessary standardized testing, then apply to a couple of “safe” schools that are most likely doable, a couple of dream schools, and a couple of in-between options. Know the deadlines, get recommendation letters if needed, and fill out those applications.
Question: “But what about…?”
Answer: There are so many questions, right? I highly suggest these helpful resources:
And guess what? I work with AZ Women of Action and would be happy to talk with you about homeschooling! Pray on it, do some research, join a couple of homeschool groups, and send in the homeschool affidavit. The blessings of homeschooling will bring you and your family priceless experiences and insurmountable joys. Send us an email to get in touch with Adrienne if you have questions about homeschooling your children!
Adrienne Johnson is a mom of six and serves on Arizona Women of Action’s Executive Team. You can find out more about their work here.
Higher education, ideally a bastion of free thought and inquiry, should eagerly embrace a multitude of voices and perspectives—we usually call that thinking and learning. Yet, in practice, the ubiquitous doctrines of inclusion inscribed into university charters are not without exceptions. These exceptions materialize from the judgments of self-appointed arbiters of speech, who wield the authority to classify ideas and individuals as hateful and unsafe as they break from a general orthodoxy of perspective. Disguised as protections of students from pernicious notions, these arbiters diligently strive to condemn, censor, and chill speech they do not like – while university leadership does nothing.
I experienced this exact condemnation when I orchestrated a university-sanctioned event in my capacity as the Executive Director of the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development at ASU’s Barrett Honors College. The event, titled “Health, Wealth, and Happiness,” took place at ASU Gammage Auditorium on February 8, 2023. Esteemed experts joined the panel, with Dr. Radha Gopalan, a distinguished heart transplant cardiologist, engaging on health; Robert Kiyosaki, expert on money and the acclaimed author of “Rich Dad Poor Dad,” delving into wealth; and Dennis Prager, co-founder of PragerU and, for over 40 years running, a nationally syndicated radio host, addressing happiness. Complementing the panelists were speakers Charlie Kirk, the visionary behind Turning Point USA, and Tom Lewis, a notable businessman, philanthropist, and namesake donor of the Lewis Center.
At Arizona State University (ASU), the culture of arbitration of speech has infiltrated deeply. This might come as a surprise given ASU’s acclaimed reputation for its free speech policies and its president’s commitment to this cause. In June, I published editorials in the Wall Street Journal“I Paid for Free Speech at Arizona State” and in the National Review, “Some Universities Care About Free Speech…Until They Don’t,” in which I revealed the free speech crisis at ASU’s Barrett Honors College while I also praised ASU for its free speech policies, at least as they state them on paper. I had hoped for a steadfast defense against blatant infringements on free speech that undermine ASU’s policies and declarations. Regrettably, my optimism faded. With each day, ASU’s actions, or lack thereof, erode my confidence in their stated defense of free speech.
It is imperative to grasp the suppression of speech in our academic institutions and to fully comprehend the essence of true freedom of thought which can only come from true freedom of speech. Only then can we embark on endeavors that genuinely promote the education and advancement of society.
ASU President Michael Crow may declare that “speakers speak at ASU,” but can we truly consider speech as free when over 80% of the faculty retaliates against speech they deem “wrong”? Do free speech ideals hold when deans prescribe limitations on speakers’ speech? Can we claim freedom of speech when marketing materials are removed due to faculty offense, while contrasting viewpoints bask in promotional spotlight? Is speech uninhibited when professors dedicate valuable class time to condemn the speech of other units? Does true free speech persist when professors discourage student participation in an event? And then stand vigilantly at the event entrance, watching attendees approach. Can we genuinely say that speech is free when college deans fire leaders and dismantle centers that uphold values no longer in harmony with the college’s leanings? The resounding answer is no. This is free speech under siege.
On August 3, 2023, a group of scholars who convened at Princeton established the “Princeton Principles for a Campus Culture of Free Inquiry.” This assembly distinctly underscores the pressing predicament faced by numerous higher education institutions that falter in upholding cultures of robust and uninhibited speech.
The Princeton Principles squarely confront this concern: “Some members of the university community argue that robust freedom of inquiry permits speech that can ‘harm’ students’ well-being or hinder institutional efforts to attain particular conceptions of social justice or ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion.’”
The case of the Lewis Center is illustrative, with 39 of the 47 Barrett Honors College faculty launching a nationwide condemnation campaign against the Health, Wealth, and Happiness program, speakers, donors, and staff. The Barrett deans actively endorsed this campaign and exercised censorship of speech the faculty found objectionable. The campaign led to intimidations and firings, which is to say prices to pay—sanctions—for exercising free inquiry and speech.
Having policies and ratings extolling free speech alone isn’t enough if university leadership doesn’t enforce their own standards. My experiences at ASU revealed a bureaucratic machinery that prioritizes safeguarding the institution’s interests over addressing free speech violations. I spent months reporting these violations internally and escalated the matter to ASU’s upper echelons and even testified in a legislative hearing. As of mid-August 2023, ASU and its board maintain that they have discovered “a series of examples of unfettered free speech,” aligning with the arbiters.
Self-governance alone proves inadequate in safeguarding our First Amendment rights on campus. The arbiters of speech are not likely to relinquish their control in the absence of decisive action by leadership. The responsibility rests upon parents, students, donors, the media, concerned citizens, and elected officials to unite and reestablish freedom of speech without fear of retribution, for there is no freedom of anything if it comes with a penalty for its exercise, including speech.
The Princeton Principles underscore that “If there is clear and convincing evidence that faculty members and administrators are not adequately fulfilling their responsibilities to foster and defend a culture of free inquiry on campus, other agents including regents, trustees, students, and alumni groups in the wider campus network may and indeed should become involved.”
Gratitude must be extended to parents, students, alumni, donors, lawmakers, and concerned citizens for following this story who rallied behind the cause of free speech. Special acknowledgment should be given to leaders like Arizona Senator Anthony Kern and State Representative Quang Nguyen for co-chairing the Joint Legislative Ad Hoc Committee on the Freedom of Expression at Arizona’s Public Universities. And sincere thanks should be extended to Arizona Speaker of the House Ben Toma and Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen for their unwavering support of free speech for all.
Despite receiving broad support, sustained vigilance is imperative. We must persist in recognizing speech suppression and holding university leadership accountable for defending the realm of free speech, even for ideas deemed offensive, such as, laughably, health, wealth, and happiness.
Ann Atkinson can be reached at her Twitter handle, @Ann_Atkinson_AZ.
