A retired educator once told me, “Parents don’t have rights, they have responsibilities.” Considering this viewpoint alongside the comment below, I can’t find any context in which these statements are appropriate.
In the same vein, former state Governor Terry McAuliffe (D-VA) said, “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what to teach.” Not to mention, the National School Board Association incited FBI Director Merrick Garland to declare war against parents.
In light of all the anti-parental rights sentiments infecting our education system, I declare:
Children are an inheritance, a reward, and a gift from God (Ps. 127:3). Therefore, they belong to their parents/guardians, not government employees. If your beliefs run contrary to this truth, then the following commentary was written with you in mind.
Two incidents lead to my discussion on parental rights in education. The first involves backlash I received after posting this flier in a parent group on social media:
Group members were appalled that I used the page to inform parents of their right to choose how their children are educated. One said, “I wonder what teachers would think?” Another member incoherently stated that teachers were being “used as political pons.” (I think she meant “pawns,” but we’ll blame public education for the error). The elementary shoving match in the comment section revealed that my primary opponent was, in fact, a teacher.
I was pitifully accused of being a “political operative” and called out for not focusing on strengthening relationships in the district. Never mind that I’m one of five people willing to attend board meetings. I’m also willing to find common ground with opposing leaders to improve academic success and student safety.
Our Parental Bill of Rights is one radical majority vote away from destruction. So, if giving parents options to circumvent government schools triggers you, then you’re part of the problem.
The second incident occurred on January 25, 2024, when teacher and Peoria Education Association (PEA) President, Trina Berg, requested public comments be moved to the end of the board meeting. Berg stated:
“My request is that we consider, and you have a discussion, and vote on moving public comments to the end of the board meeting. The reason why is because we have business we have to do. And I would appreciate it if we actually came in and did our business first … People still have the ability to speak on whatever they want, but it’s when business is done.”
Wouldn’t you know that public comments were relocated from position 5.1 to position 9.1 at the February 8 board meeting. Peoria Unified School District (PUSD) Board President Rebecca Proudfit — appointed by the financially compromised Maricopa County Superintendent Steve Watson — led the charge in compliance with Berg’s request.
When confronted about moving the comments, Proudfit claimed some teachers were uncomfortable with the atmosphere at PUSD board meetings. She also said the results of a survey — somehow received by educators but missed by parents — favored changing the meeting format. When pressed further about the timing of her decision, Proudfit said, “[Berg] did email me afterwards to say thank you … But I swear I wouldn’t do anything like that just because someone asked me to do it.”
Bear in mind, this is the same Trina Berg who staged an illegal sick out in defiance of the board’s decision to resume in-person learning after the 2020 winter break. District emails reveal that Berg and her co-conspirator, PEA Treasurer Jessica Batty (also a teacher), planned the union-backed catastrophe. At one point, Berg wrote, “[W]e are trying to show that this decision was especially dumb for retention.”
Berg’s shenanigans — which resulted in the closure of 13 schools — disrupted academic progress and left parents without childcare. So, why wasn’t this activist, posing as a teacher, fired?
The statement, “Teachers are not the primary stakeholders in public education,” is true contractually and financially. This is why teachers’ unions exist. Of course, educators typically have children, own property, and pay taxes in their district. But from a business standpoint, certified staff members do not hold revenue-generating positions — they are paid to provide a community service. For clarification: parents (and constituents) are patrons, students are beneficiaries, teachers are public servants.
Without parents and students, teachers wouldn’t have jobs.
When it comes to directing a child’s education, the law clearly identifies parents as the experts. And whether we consider parents “good” or “bad,” their rights are protected under the United States Constitution. The place of a teacher is to transfer knowledge, not propaganda, and foster an environment that’s conducive to learning, not excessive self-expression.
Communist dictator Vladimir Lenin — the man history deems responsible for the death of 10 million people — is credited with saying, “Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.” This is the ideological framework of someone who aims to incite rebellion and break family bonds. I implore leftist educators to reject radical approaches to instruction, abandon hypercritical theories, and, instead, work to form an alliance with parents/guardians.
Finally, I commend sensible and honorable educators who practice transparency, partner with families, and build strong support networks for their students. You are the teachers we can entrust with our youth. Now more than ever, your skills and compassion are needed to shape young minds for the betterment of society and secure the future of our nation.
Tiffany Benson is the Founder of Restore Parental Rights in Education, a grassroots advocate for families, educators, and school board members. For nearly two decades, Tiffany’s creative writing pursuits have surpassed most interests as she continues to contribute to her blog Bigviewsmallwindow.com. She encourages everyday citizens to take an active role in defending and preserving American values for future generations.
For the past thirty years or so the left has invented a narrative that there are two Americas. A group of very super-rich people (the one percenters) who have prospered over the past several decades, and everyone else who has gotten poorer. It’s a fairy tale narrative because almost all Americans have seen financial progress. The median household income adjusted for inflation rose by more than 40% since 1984.
Prosperity isn’t an “us versus them” zero-sum game. A rising tide really does lift all boats.
But there really are Two Americas today. First, there are the cultural and over-educated snobs – the kind of people who religiously read the New York Times, drive EVs, wear Harvard or Yale sweaters, and have never even heard of NASCAR or eaten at Popeyes or ridden a John Deere tractor.
And then there is normal main street America. The snobs thumb their collective noses at the unrefined working-class Americans. The elites believe they are intellectually, culturally, and morally superior to the working class and rural America. You won’t see too many elites at a Trump rally with 30,000 people.
A group I helped found, the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, just published a study entitled “Them Vs. U.S.” examining how America’s cultural elites (defined as at least one postgraduate degree, $150,000+ annual income, high-density urban residence, and attended an Ivy League school) are hopelessly out of touch with ordinary Americans. Pollster Scott Rasmussen did the research.
Here are some of the key jaw-dropping revelations from the survey:
Financial Well-being: Nearly three-quarters of the elites surveyed, believe they are better off now financially than they were when Joe Biden entered the White House. Less than 20% of ordinary Americans feel the same way.
Individual Freedom: Elites are three times more likely than all Americans to say there is too much individual freedom in the country. Astonishingly, almost half of the elites and almost six-of-ten ivy leaguers say there is too much freedom.
Climate Change: An astonishing 72% of the Elites – including 81% of the Elites who graduated from the top universities – favor banning gas cars. And majorities of elites would ban gas stoves, non-essential air travel, SUVs, and private air conditioning. That means no air travel with the kids to Disney World.
Education: Most elites think that teachers unions and school administrators should control the agenda of schools. Most mainstream Americans think that parents should make these decisions.
Oh, and about three-quarters of these cultural elites are Biden supporters. Surprised?
The Grand Canyon-sized divide between the elites in America and ordinary Americans is so profound that it is as if they live in two different countries. Silicon Valley, Manhattan, and Washington, D.C. have become bubbles that have lost contact with everyday Americans. This explains why the political class – which is a big part of the elite group – is confused by poll numbers showing that voters are feeling financially stressed out. The elites are doing fine, so they believe that everyone is prospering. I suspect that most don’t want radical change in the public schools because their kids attend blue-chip private schools. They are fine with abolishing SUVs because in big cities Americans generally don’t drive those cars – if they drive cars at all.
Crime, illegal immigration, inflation, fentanyl, and factory closings aren’t keeping the elite up at night because in their cocoons they don’t encounter these problems on a daily basis the way so many Americans do today. Not too many main street Americans are losing sleep about climate change or LGBTQ issues.
The elites in America tend to work in the “talking professions” – university professors, journalists, lawyers, actors, and lobbyists. They keep talking and normal Americans are more than ever not listening to them.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, co-founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, and chief economist with FreedomWorks.
In September 2023, four DUSD high schools were named 2023-2024 Best High Schools by U.S. News & World Report. Three of the four were also named A+ Schools of Excellence by the Arizona Educational Foundation. Although DUSD has a lot of work to do, school board members across the Valley now have a model for governing with sense and sensibility.
Of course, every free-thinking, constitutional, conservative board member will have progressive dogs nipping at their heels. Such is the case with the uprising of emotional activists after DUSD opted to not renew Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds.
Save Our Schools Arizona—a leftist group that identifies as a “nonpartisan community based organization”—led the campaign of oppression by posting a hack opinion editorial on social media. Anxiety-ridden constituents (including the director of an anti-God organization) manifested in the comment section with cries of outrage. Wow. I didn’t know saving Arizona schools meant converting every campus into psychiatric medical facilities!
With sensational clarity, Arizona’s Family reported that DUSD’s decision came amid “a fiery exchange after [board] members voted to eliminate the role of social workers within their school district.” Did anybody in the bullpen even watch the November 16 board meeting? I did. Of course, I don’t have a predisposition to rage, so I viewed it as a thoughtful discussion with differing opinions. Board Member Jo Grant blessed me with her deliberate and persistent, social-emotional vantage point. She got outvoted. Where’s the fire?
Board Members Dawn Densmore and Jennifer Drake personally assured me that because ESSER funds were drying up, it was in the district’s best interest not to renew without a financial plan to supplement looming deficiencies. They also confirmed the district would retain numerous student support positions, including psychologists, counselors, and behavior interventionists.
Densmore said, “For me…it’s not a slam on the profession of social workers. I genuinely don’t think all of them [have a leftist agenda]. But at the same time…places of education should not be healthcare institutions. If parents have children who go through issues where they need additional support—and I [personally] had one child who needed it—take them out of school and get them into counseling. I would have never expected the school to take care of that and replace me as a parent in that situation.”
Drake agreed, “It is the parent’s responsibility [to take care] of the health and wellbeing of their child—not the school. When a child is at school, their priority is safety and education. If your child needs mental health or medical services, then as a parent, it is your responsibility to provide that. The school can get outside resources, but having these services inside the school is unacceptable. Taxpayers should not be paying for this.”
Densmore and Drake also emphasized that educators should not bear the consequences of attendance deficits and low test scores when emotional needs become disruptive to learning environments.
In response to the small faction of obnoxious critics who branded DUSD “cruel” and “irresponsible,” Densmore and Drake said, “Parents need to start parenting. Stop using schools as a crutch—for vaccinations, for dental work, etc.…If your kid is sick, whether it’s physical or mental, take them to the doctor. If your kid is suffering mentally, why would you rely on a school [district] for something like that?”
I’ll wrap this up by pointing out that 2020 was America’s Enlightenment period where we discovered a supposed new and improved job function for social workers. According to the National Association of Social Workers, these mental health warriors are now equipped to practice a more inclusive, equitable, anti-racist approach. And they want us to rest assured that no matter what issues students face inside or outside the classroom, affirming their gender-identity and empathizing with their skin color is sure to be the cure.
Seriously, parents, why haven’t you pulled your kids out of Arizona public schools?
For nearly two decades, Tiffany Benson’s creative writing pursuits have surpassed all other interests. When she’s not investigating Kennedy Assassination conspiracy theories, she enjoys journaling and contributing to her blogBigviewsmallwindow.com. She encourages average citizens to take on an active role in the grassroots fight for future generations.
From the South Lawn of the White House to the pulsing heartbeats of North America’s bustling metropolises, Democrats are stepping into the 2024 electoral fray armed with a transgender-dominated platform that makes the riots of 2020 look like a block party.
This time, the spotlight is focused on the very future of the country: our children.
In a repudiation of the family as the foundation of society, the Democrat platform contends, “Your children are not your children.” And it doesn’t stop there. The Democrats are loud and proud that they’re “coming for your children.”
This was echoed by President Biden himself in April when he proclaimed at a White House event, “There’s no such thing as someone else’s child. Our nation’s children are all our children.”
His sentiment was further reinforced by the LGBTQ activists during their Pride Month celebrations. The rallying cry of “We’re here. We’re queer. We’re coming for your children!” may have escaped the notice of those consuming mainstream media, but as Tucker Carlson has demonstrated, the traditional news platforms no longer control the narrative.
America is turning to Twitter for an unfiltered snapshot of reality, and reality is not pretty. The videos of the LGBTQ agenda are being shared, as citizen journalists take over telling a truth that legacy media won’t touch.
One could write off a single declaration of seizing the children as a mere slip of the tongue, but the unwavering commitment of the progressives suggests deliberate intent to make it a bedrock principle woven into the very fabric of the Democratic Party.
The party finds itself flanked by a president whose mental acuity is questionable at best and demonstrators whose behaviors set a new standard for raunch. By raunch, I refer to the naked men dangling their parts at children along the Pride parade route, and naked women in heavy makeout sessions in a public fountain, while children played nearby.
These individuals are the ones taking over our schools, libraries, parks, and city councils.
Even a top cabinet official – Rachel Levine, the Secretary of Health and Human Services – has officially declared that it’s not just Pride Month but Pride Summer.
Levine, a transgender individual, is determined to see the Democratic Party transgender platform permeate the cultural fabric of America. Levine’s aim is to dismantle the traditional family unit and supplant it with the state, utilizing the powers of the DHHS to cement this agenda ahead of the 2024 elections.
Democrats like Levine appear to be drawing from the Marxist ideology of Frederick Engels and Karl Marx, who famously critiqued the family and foresaw its inevitable demise.
Engels said “On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.”
Thus, he predicted, the family “will vanish as a matter of course.”
His colleague Marx explained how that would be achieved: “The education of all children, from the moment that they can get along without a mother’s care, shall be in state institutions at state expense.”
The American middle class, with its inherent kindness and compassion, has proven to be fertile ground for this Democrat redefinition of “love,” which amounts to actual hatred of the nuclear family.
Leveraging the tolerance of centrists, the Left has weaponized the Christian principle of “What Would Jesus Do” to quell debate and sway major Christian denominations to their cause. It has worked with many mainstream Christians, who haven’t found a good response to that rhetorical question.
The platform for 2024 looks set to feature a triumvirate of transgender dominance, the sexualization of children, and a critique of the traditional family. Why this direction? Because the Democratic Party, now under the influence of its most radical elements, finds itself incapable of reining in its fringe. The genie cannot be returned to the bottle.
Parents, brace yourselves: They are coming for your children. Alphabet agencies and unions like the National Education Association, and even the State of California, have made it clear and are leading the charge.
California Republican State Sen. Scott Wilk issued a warning: A new bill that would criminalize parents who don’t affirm their child’s “gender transition” is a bridge too far. It’s time for parents to run for the border.
“If you love your children, you need to flee California,” he said.
Democrats, seemingly emboldened by favorable polling in the 18- to 34-year-old demographic, are confident they have the winning issues for 2024.
For much of America, however, Democrats have simply packed the powder keg, stretched out the fuse, and are holding a match aloft.
After a period of relative peace between Arizona Legislative Republicans and Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs, her veto pen has again enflamed the political division between the two sides.
On Monday, Arizona Senator John Kavanagh announced that Governor Hobbs had vetoed SB 1001, relating to school policies about pronouns and biological sex. According to Kavanagh’s release, his bill “would have prohibited a school district or charter school from knowingly referring to students under the age of 18 by a pronoun that differs from the child’s biological sex, or a first name that is not listed in school records;” and it “would have also prevented schools from requiring their staff to use a pronoun that differs from a person’s biological sex, if doing so is contrary to their own personal convictions.”
Kavanagh blasted Hobbs for her veto, saying, “Parents have a right to know if their children are in psychological turmoil. Parents also need to know if their children are confused, depressed, anxious, isolating themselves, having suicidal thoughts or are in need of mental health care because of gender dysphoria. Parents can’t get their children the counseling or therapy needed if their school is hiding this information from them. Additionally, if a child is receiving mental health care and that child’s physician advises not to treat the child as a different gender, then a school going against the doctor’s wishes without the parent’s permission would create reason for a lawsuit. This is a dangerous situation for children who are struggling with mental health issues. For the Governor to turn a blind eye to what’s happening is reckless and irresponsible. I would expect more from a former social worker.”
Last week, Hobbs transmitted a veto letter to the Arizona Senate, explaining her justification, writing, “As politicians across the country continue to pass harmful legislation directed at transgender youth, I have a clear message to the people of Arizona: I will veto every bill that aims to attack and harm children. I want to thank the young people that bravely testified against SB 1001 at the Legislature. To you, I promise to be an ally and to uplift your stories. Additionally, I would like to thank Representative Lorena Austin for telling their story and speaking their truth. I would like to reemphasize their words to all the young people of the state, ‘You have every right to be who you are.’”
Today, I proudly vetoed SB1001, which was an attack on transgender youth. Instead of coming up with new ways to target and isolate our children, we should be working together to create an Arizona where everyone has the freedom to be who they are without fear of harassment or…
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) May 22, 2023
After the Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill last week, Janae Stracke from Heritage Action issued a statement in support of the Legislature’s efforts, writing, “As the Left continues to push radical gender ideology in schools and strip parents of their right to know what their children are learning, it’s time for parents and legislators in Arizona to start fighting back with common sense. By passing SB 1001, legislation that ensures school systems obtain parental consent before changing a student’s name and pronouns and protects school employees from violations of their religious or deeply-held beliefs, the Arizona Legislature upheld parental rights across the Grand Canyon State.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
