Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners
The 'queens' and 'queers' of the kindergarten alphabet book 'Pride Puppy' finally had their day before the Supreme Court. Predictably on Tuesday, the six conservative justices were not pleased with the Maryland school district that made exposure to this and four other LGBTQ+-themed books a mandatory part of the grade-school English curriculum starting in kindergarten.
Religious parents in Montgomery County, Maryland objected to what their kids were being exposed to and made a federal case out of it — this one centered on the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment.
As the First Amendment protects my writing, I am a big fan of an expansive reading of the five freedoms it protects — religion, speech, press, assembly and the right to petition the government. But it shouldn't take a coming rebuke from the Supreme Court to get schools to remember that they are only borrowing our kids. Parents' values should be treated with respect.
Public schools ought to be a little more modest about how they teach issues that divide us, particularly to young children not yet used to questioning the sanity of the adults around them. If parents don't have the bucks for private school or the time and patience for home schooling, they shouldn't have to hand their kids over for a first grade indoctrination in intersectional feminism.
Let's take LGBTQ and religious views out of it. We all know that kids are impressionable. What would you think if kindergartners were required to be exposed to books that presented smoking in a puppy-themed, sparkly and rainbow bedecked light?
We'd never do that. Indeed, the Maryland schools intended message of tolerance and support for some kinds of diversity can be widely found on the internet, cable and broadcast and streaming TV, movies and music. But positive depictions of smoking are rare. They can get you slapped with an R rating or raise questions about your broadcast license. We know kids are susceptible to influence from how things are portrayed and we know that some things are only appropriate for an older audience.
While most Americans think tobacco is bad for you and most Americans don't think that about being gay, for people who do object, the idea that images and the way things are portrayed to kids can be influential is well-accepted idea.
In the coming year, this issue is going to heat up. If you haven't noticed already, the 250th anniversary of the opening battles of the Revolutionary War have already passed. The drumbeat of anniversaries will continue to get louder culminating in a national celebration of the 250th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026. Next school year, the nation's pupils will be awash in Revolutionary War pedagogy.
Among the leading voices in shaping what they hear is the 1619 Project, an educational K-12 version of which has been adopted by 4,500 schools across the country. Among its more debatable contentions are the claims that American capitalism is intimately bound with racism, that the Revolutionary War was launched, in part, to protect slavery from British-led reform efforts and that the very idea of police in America is descended from patrols engaged in recapturing escaped slaves.
These aren't questions of religious orthodoxy that the Supreme Court can sweep in and give parents a right to opt-out of for reasons of religious freedom. Nevertheless, in the lower grades, schools shouldn't be using complicated and contested interpretations of history to encourage impressionable young children to hate their homeland. Leave such debates for the adults and older students who are equipped to interrogate the evidence for themselves and not as likely to take the word of a teacher as gospel.
Kindergarteners don't need to know the word queer any more than 1st graders need to critique capitalism or even know the word at all. Public schools should remember these kids are ours and treat us — and our kids — with a little more respect.
David Mastio
Opinion Contributor,
The Kansas City Star Go to X Go to Facebook Email this person
David Mastio has worked for newspaper opinion sections since starting as letters editor of USA Today in 1995. Since then he has been the most conservative member of the liberal editorial board at both USA Today and The Virginian-Pilot, the most liberal member of the conservative editorial board at the Washington Times and founding editorial page editor at the conservative Washington Examiner. As an editorial writer, he has covered the environment, tech, science, local business and national economic policy and politics. Outside of the opinion pages, he has been a Washington correspondent for The Detroit News where he covered the intersection of the environment, regulatory policy and the car industry, California editor of the Center Square and a speech writer on trade and economics for the George W. Bush administration. He also founded his own web company called BlogNetNews, which aggregated and reported on the blog conversations across the political aisle focused on local news and politics in all 50 states.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
NFL's Washington Redskins should restore name, logo says family of Indian chief it was based on
In July 2020, the NFL's Washington Redskins announced it would drop its name and Native American logo, which some deemed offensive. The team adopted the name Commanders in 2022. But the family of the man the logo was based upon — Blackfeet tribal chief John Two Guns White Calf — says no one bothered to ask their opinion. Below, his nephew, Thomas White Calf, tells The Post President Trump's recent support for the team's Blackfeet heritage gives the family hope for the first time that its voice will be heard. Blackfeet Chief Two Guns White Calf was my great uncle and a great American icon. Americans know his face: he was the face of the Washington Redskins for 48 years, until he was cancelled in 2020. Americans once knew his story. Advertisement White Calf defended tribal traditions in our Blackfeet homeland in Montana, where many of us still live today. He went to Washington D.C. where he forced the U.S. government to honor Indian treaties. He served as a model for the U.S. Mint's famous 1913 'Indian head' nickel. White Calf's face is still a collector's item. The family Chief Two Guns White Calf wants his image restored to the NFL team. Getty Images Uncle Two Guns was friends with Teddy Roosevelt Jr., New York Gov. Al Smith and made President Calvin Coolidge a member of the Blackfeet Nation. White Calf was so famous in his era that his death in 1934 was front-page news across the country. Advertisement White Calf became the proud warrior face of the Redskins in 1972, championed by Blackfeet leader Blackie Wetzel and with support of Native Americans across the country. Cancel-culture racists decided at some point they wanted to get rid of Indian images in the public domain. The Redskins and Two Guns were their No. 1 target. White Calf's name was dropped from the Redskins narrative. His life story was erased from history. Even worse: Uncle Two Guns was dehumanized. He was ridiculed as a 'savage and clownish mascot.' The National Congress of American Indians Fund, which led the effort to erase and ridicule Uncle Two Guns, was funded in part by the George Soros foundation. Advertisement They reduced a hero to a clown so they could remove American Indians from American history. Polls by the Washington Post and others showed that 90% of Indians supported the Redskins. Nobody cared what Indians thought. Nobody asked the White Calf family for our opinion. The family of Blackfeet chief John Two Guns White Calf is deeply grateful to President Donald Trump for his bold calls to bring back the Washington Redskins and expose racial injustice. Washington's NFL team is now known as the Commanders. Getty Images Advertisement President Trump cares. And here is our opinion: it is time to correct history and end racial injustice. We ask that the Washington Redskins — still the Redskins to us — work with President Trump to reclaim their rightful name and their proud image of American hero John Two Guns White Calf. We ask that the White Calf family be given a seat at the table. We ask that a Hall of Honor be established within a new Redskins stadium where the public can celebrate Two Guns White Calf, the Blackfeet people and American Indian contributions to the founding of the United States. Finally, we ask that the American Indian never be erased, dehumanized or forgotten again. God Bless the Blackfeet. God Bless President Trump. And God Bless the United States of America.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Trump Has No Cards
President Donald Trump berated President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office. He allowed the Pentagon twice to halt prearranged military shipments to Ukraine. He promised that when the current tranche of armaments runs out, there will be no more. He has cut or threatened to cut the U.S. funds that previously supported independent Russian-language media and opposition. His administration is slowly, quietly easing sanctions on Russia, ending 'basic sanctions and export control actions that had maintained and increased U.S. pressure,' according to a Senate-minority report. 'Every month he's spent in office without action has strengthened Putin's hand, weakened ours and undermined Ukraine's own efforts to bring an end to the war,' Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Elizabeth Warren wrote in a joint statement. Many of these changes have gone almost unremarked on in the United States. But they are widely known in Russia. The administration's attacks on Zelensky, Europeans, and Voice of America have been celebrated on Russian television. Of course Vladimir Putin knows about the slow lifting of sanctions. As a result, the Russian president has clearly made a calculation: Trump, to use the language he once hurled at Zelensky, has no cards. Trump does say that he wants to end the war in Ukraine, and sometimes he also says that he is angry that Putin doesn't. But if the U.S. is not willing to use any economic, military, or political tools to help Ukraine, if Trump will not put any diplomatic pressure on Putin or any new sanctions on Russian resources, then the U.S. president's fond wish to be seen as a peacemaker can be safely ignored. No wonder all of Trump's negotiating deadlines for Russia have passed, to no effect, and no wonder the invitation to Anchorage produced no result. There is not much else to say about yesterday's Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska, other than to observe the intertwining elements of tragedy and farce. It was embarrassing for Americans to welcome a notorious wanted war criminal on their territory. It was humiliating to watch an American president act like a happy puppy upon encountering the dictator of a much poorer, much less important state, treating him as a superior. It's excruciating to imagine how badly Trump's diplomatic envoy, Steve Witkoff, an amateur out of his depth, misunderstood his last meeting with Putin in Moscow if he thought that the Alaska summit was going to be successful. It's ominous that Trump now says he doesn't want to push for a cease-fire but instead for peace negotiations, because the latter formula gives Putin time to keep killing Ukrainians. It's strange that Russian reports of the meeting focused on business cooperation. 'Russian-American business and investment partnership has huge potential,' Putin said today. I appreciate that many Ukrainians, Europeans, and of course Americans are relieved that Trump didn't announce something worse. He didn't call for Ukrainian capitulation, or for Ukraine to cede territory. Unless there are secret protocols, perhaps some business deals, that we haven't yet learned about, Anchorage will probably not be remembered as one of history's crime scenes, a new Munich Conference, or a Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. But that's a very low bar to reach. The better way to understand Anchorage is not as the start of something new, but as the culmination of a longer process. As the U.S. dismantles its foreign-policy tools, as this administration fires the people who know how to use them, our ability to act with any agility will diminish. From the Treasury Department to the U.S. Agency for Global Media, from the State Department to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, agency after agency is being undermined, deliberately or accidentally, by political appointees who are unqualified, craven, or hostile to their own mission.
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
100 days of Pope Leo XIV: Calm papacy that avoids polemics is coming into focus
VATICAN CITY — When Pope Leo XIV surprised tens of thousands of young people at a recent Holy Year celebration with an impromptu popemobile romp around St. Peter's Square, it almost seemed as if some of the informal spontaneity that characterized Pope Francis' 12-year papacy had returned to the Vatican. But the message Leo delivered that night was all his own: In seamless English, Spanish and Italian, Leo told the young people that they were the 'salt of the Earth, the light of the world.' He urged them to spread their hope, faith in Christ and their cries of peace wherever they go. As Robert Prevost marks his 100th day as Pope Leo this weekend, the contours of his pontificate have begun to come into relief, primarily where he shows continuity with Francis and where he signals change. Perhaps the biggest takeaway is that after 12 sometimes turbulent years under Francis, a certain calm and reserve have returned to the papacy. Leo seems eager above all to avoid polemics or making the papacy about himself, and wants instead to focus on Christ and peace. That seems exactly what many Catholic faithful want, and may respond to what today's church needs. 'He's been very direct and forthright … but he's not doing spontaneous press hits,' said Kevin Hughes, chair of theology and religious studies at Leo's alma mater, Villanova University. Leo has a different style than Francis, and that has brought relief to many, Hughes said in a telephone interview. 'Even those who really loved Pope Francis always kind of held their breath a little bit: You didn't know what was going to come out next or what he was going to do,' Hughes said. An effort to avoid polemics Leo has certainly gone out of his way in his first 100 days to try to heal divisions that deepened during Francis' pontificate, offering messages of unity and avoiding controversy at almost every turn. Even his signature issue — confronting the promise and peril posed by artificial intelligence — is something that conservatives and progressives alike agree is important. Francis' emphasis on caring for the environment and migrants often alienated conservatives. Closer to home, Leo offered the Holy See bureaucracy a reassuring, conciliatory message after Francis' occasionally authoritarian style rubbed some in the Vatican the wrong way. 'Popes come and go, but the Curia remains,' Leo told Vatican officials soon after his May 8 election. Continuity with Francis is still undeniable Leo, though, has cemented Francis' environmental legacy by celebrating the first-ever ecologically inspired Mass. He has furthered that legacy by giving the go-ahead for the Vatican to turn a 430-hectare (1,000-acre) field north of Rome into a vast solar farm that should generate enough electricity to meet Vatican City's needs and turn it into the world's first carbon-neutral state. He has fine-tuned financial transparency regulations that Francis initiated, tweaked some other decrees to give them consistency and logic, and confirmed Francis in deciding to declare one of the 19th century's most influential saints, John Henry Newman, a 'doctor' of the church. But he hasn't granted any sit-down, tell-all interviews or made headline-grabbing, off-the-cuff comments like his predecessor did. He hasn't made any major appointments, including to fill his old job, or taken any big trips. In marking the 80th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki last week, he had a chance to match Francis' novel declaration that the mere possession of nuclear weapons was 'immoral.' But he didn't. Compared to President Donald Trump, the other American world leader who took office in 2025 with a flurry of Sharpie-penned executive decrees, Leo has eased into his new job slowly, deliberately and quietly, almost trying not to draw attention to himself. At 69, he seems to know that he has time on his side, and that after Francis' revolutionary papacy, the church might need a bit of a breather. One Vatican official who knows Leo said he expects his papacy will have the effect of a 'calming rain' on the church. Maria Isabel Ibarcena Cuarite, a Peruvian member of a Catholic charismatic group, said it was precisely Leo's quiet emphasis on church traditions, its sacraments and love of Christ, that drew her and upward of 1 million young people to Rome for a special Jubilee week this month. Ibarcena said Francis had confused young people like herself with his outreach to LGBTQ+ Catholics and approval of blessings for same-sex couples. Such gestures went beyond what a pope was supposed to do and what the church taught, she thought. Leo, she said, has emphasized that marriage is a sacrament between men and woman. 'Francis was ambiguous, but he is firm,' she said. An Augustinian pope From his very first appearance on the loggia of St. Peter's Basilica, Leo has insisted he is first and foremost a 'son of St. Augustine. ' It was a reference to the fifth century theological and devotional giant of early Christianity, St. Augustine of Hippo, who inspired the 13th century religious Augustinian order as a community of 'mendicant' friars. Like the other big mendicant orders of the early church — the Franciscans, Dominicans and Carmelites — the Augustinians spread across Christian Europe over the centuries. Today, Augustinian spirituality is rooted in a deep interior life of prayer, living in community, and journeying together in search of truth in God. In nearly every speech or homily since his May 8 election, Leo has cited Augustine in one way or another. 'I see a kind of Augustinian flavor in the way that he's presenting all these things,' said Hughes, the theology professor who is an Augustine scholar. Leo joined the Augustinians after graduating from Augustinian-run Villanova, outside Philadelphia, and was twice elected its prior general. He has visited the Augustinian headquarters outside St. Peter's a few times since his election, and some wonder if he will invite some brothers to live with him in the Apostolic Palace to recreate the spirit of Augustinian community life there. A missionary pope in the image of Francis Leo is also very much a product of the Francis papacy. Francis named Prevost bishop of Chiclayo, Peru, in 2014 and then moved him to head one of the most important Vatican jobs in 2023 — vetting bishop nominations. In retrospect, it seems Francis had his eye on Prevost as a possible successor. Given Francis' stump speech before the 2013 conclave that elected him pope, the then-Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio essentially described Prevost in identifying the church's mission today: He said the church was 'called to go outside of itself and go to the peripheries, not just geographic but also the existential peripheries.' Prevost, who hails from Chicago, spent his adult life as a missionary in Peru, eventually becoming bishop of Chiclayo. 'He is the incarnation of the 'unity of difference,' because he comes from the center, but he lives in the peripheries,' said Emilce Cuda, secretary of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America. Cuda said during a recent conference hosted by Georgetown University that Leo encapsulated in 'word and gesture' the type of missionary church Francis promoted. That said, for all Leo owes to Bergoglio, the two didn't necessarily get along. Prevost has recounted that at one point when he was the Augustinian superior, the then-archbishop of Buenos Aires expressed interest in assigning an Augustinian priest to a specific job in his archdiocese. 'And I, as prior general, said 'I understand, Your Eminence, but he's got to do something else' and so I transferred him somewhere else,' Prevost told parishioners in his home state of Illinois in 2024. Prevost said he 'naively' thought the Francis wouldn't remember him after his 2013 election, and that regardless 'he'll never appoint me bishop' due to the disagreement. Bergoglio not only made him bishop, he laid the groundwork for Prevost to succeed him as pope, the first North American pope following the first South American.
