Abstinence, patriotism and monogamy all required curriculum under new Ohio bill
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Ohio lawmakers proposed a bill that would require public schools to teach character education, including abstinence, patriotism and respect for religious faith.
House Bill 269 would require public schools to teach grades 7-12 about a success sequence for a good life, including 15 distinct morals like punctuality and respect for authority. Under the bill, dubbed the THRIVE Act, districts could also invite religious and political groups to provide after-school instruction about morality.
State, federal cannabis changes threaten Ohio festival's future
'The model curriculum shall consist of the value of finishing high school, working full-time, getting married before having children and instruction in the following character traits and fundamental values deeply rooted in the history and tradition of the United States,' the bill reads.
The bill is co-sponsored by Reps. Kevin Ritter (R-Marietta) and Jonathan Newman (R-Troy). Ritter said the idea came after speaking with employers and colleges about a lack of soft skills in applicants, like interpersonal skills or emotional intelligence.
'When you talk about 'soft skills,' you are really talking about virtue,' Ritter said. 'Representative Newman and I thought it was important to bring attention to these long-time American values by reintroducing them to our schools in an intentional way.'
The bill lists these 15 virtues as required education:
Trustworthiness, including honesty, reliability, punctuality and loyalty
Responsibility, including hard work, accountability, diligence, good judgment, perseverance and self-control
Care for family, including parents, siblings, and future spouses and children
Kindness and generosity toward others
Respect and care for human life
Respect for parental authority
Respect for parents' obligations to children
Respect for the property of other people
Respect for legitimate authority and law
Respect for patriotism, service to the community and concern for the common good
Respect for religious faith, morality, wisdom and knowledge
Respect for lifelong marriage, sexual fidelity within marriage and sexual abstinence outside of marriage
Gratitude
Charity
Courage
The bill would also require districts to teach the success sequence: graduating high school, getting a job and getting married before having children.
'Of course, this isn't the only pathway to a happy life,' Ritter said via email. 'Many people raised by single parents are successful. But the data shows that following this formula is the EASIEST way to be successful.'
Fire engine shortage felt nationwide, not just Columbus
The same sequence was introduced as possible required curriculum in the Senate earlier this year, although it has not advanced out of committee.
As part of the character education program, school districts would be allowed to invite partisan groups into district instructional buildings after school for optional instruction. With parent consent, these programs would expand on the success sequence or character education through a philosophical, historical, traditional or religious lens.
Under H.B. 269, districts could deny groups if the subject matter is not relevant, but they cannot otherwise exclude groups because of their viewpoints, including religious or political groups. Newman said this would be optional at no extra cost for school districts, adding that 'reinforcement is key.'
Some of the character traits are already included in Ohio's learning standards. Ohio's sexual education standards emphasize abstinence, and the state's social emotional learning standards include things like responsibility and respect.
Columbus social media influencer pleads guilty to $20 million Ponzi scheme
When asked how some of the skills, like abstinence or fidelity, relate to building stronger interpersonal skills, Ritter reiterated that the bill does not outline the only path to success, just a strong one. Ritter said the bill is 'pro-public-school' and 'pro-teacher' in introducing concepts and skills that allow students to prosper.
The bill had its first hearing in the House Education Committee on June 3 but does not have a second hearing scheduled at the time of publication.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Experts decry new language in tax-cut bill, say only billionaires could challenge U.S. government
Senate Republicans have shelved, at least for now, a provision of President Donald Trump's tax-cut bill that would prevent enforcement of some past court orders against Trump. It has been replaced by a provision that could make it virtually impossible for average Americans to seek injunctions against the government for violating their rights. The new language would require anyone seeking a court order requiring, or prohibiting, actions by the federal government to post a bond that would fully cover the government's potential damages and other costs of complying with the order. Opponents say the costs could amount to at least millions of dollars. Injunctions are judicial orders prohibiting the government, an organization or an individual from taking actions that a judge has found are likely illegal. The bill approved by the House on a 215-214 vote last month, which would cut taxes for the rich and health care for the poor, would also have allowed a judge to find a violator of an injunction in contempt of court, and impose fines or imprisonment, only if the judge had required the other party to post a bond of any amount. Judges commonly issue injunctions without ordering a bond. Because the House bill would have applied, retroactively, to past as well as future injunctions, it could have allowed Trump to ignore existing court orders like those prohibiting him from sending immigrants to prisons in El Salvador without facing penalties. That provision was quietly removed from the bill by Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans last week. In its place is a mandate that would apply to all future injunctions against the federal government and require a bond that would pay for the government's 'costs and damages' in complying with the injunction. If the injunction was upheld on appeal, the individual or group that sought it could recover the costs of the bond. If not, the funds would be transferred to the government. 'Finally, the Senate Judiciary Committee is advancing solutions in the One Big Beautiful Bill to restore the constitutional role of the federal judiciary,' Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the committee chairman, said in a statement, using Trump's label for his tax-cut bill. Grassley said the new provision would 'enforce the existing, lawful requirement that courts impose a bond upfront when attempting to hit the government with a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order that results in costs and damages ultimately sustained by American taxpayers.' A different perspective came from Alicia Bannon, judiciary program director at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice. If this language becomes law, Bannon said, 'it will be financially impossible for ordinary Americans to go to court to protect their rights,' like trying to make sure they receive Social Security payments or are protected against unlawful deportation. Bonds for those orders could cost many millions of dollars, she said. Or much more, said attorneys at the National Women's Law Center, if Trump's deep budget cuts to agencies such as the Department of Veterans Affairs were challenged by a group of military veterans. 'If this measure stays in the bill, only a billionaire would be able to get prompt relief from the courts when this administration breaks the law,' said Emily Martin, chief program officer at the Washington, D.C.-based law center. And Erwin Chemerinsky, the law school dean at UC Berkeley, said the new provision would also prohibit judges from considering the ability of an individual or group to pay the bond. That would prevent many whose rights have been violated from seeking help from the courts 'at a time when the President is violating the Constitution as never before seen in American history,' he said. Trump has denied violating constitutional rights in his deportation orders, shutdowns of federal agencies and attempts to deny U.S. citizenship to U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants, disputes that are before the federal courts. But a more immediate legal battle could decide the fate of the injunction bond requirement in the tax bill. Because it is a budget-related measure, the legislation can win Senate approval by a majority vote in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats, rather than requiring 60 votes to overcome a Democratic filibuster. The newly added bond requirement, however, would not directly affect the federal budget, although it could lower the government's costs by discouraging lawsuits and limiting injunctions. Democrats could ask the Senate's parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, to advise Senate leaders that the bond limits are not budget-related and should be removed from the bill. The Senate normally follows the parliamentarian's conclusions unless 60 senators disagree, but opponents of the bond requirements say they can't take anything for granted. 'Senate Republicans have overruled the parliamentarian before,' said attorney Alison Gill of the National Women's Law Center. 'It is possible that they may do so to include this dangerous provision.'
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Proposed bill would ban ICE agents, law enforcement from wearing masks in California
SACRAMENTO — In response to immigration raids by masked federal officers in Los Angeles and across the nation, two California lawmakers on Monday proposed a new state law to ban members of law enforcement from concealing their faces while on the job. The bill would make it a misdemeanor for local, state and federal law enforcement officers to cover their faces with some exceptions, and also encourage them to wear a form of identification on their uniform. 'We're really at risk of having, effectively, secret police in this country,' said state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), co-author of the bill. During a news conference in San Francisco announcing the legislation, Wiener criticized the Trump administration for targeting illegal immigrants without criminal records and alleged that current tactics allow ICE agents to make themselves appear to be local police in some cases. Under the proposal, law enforcement officials would be exempted from the mask ban if they serve on a SWAT team or if a mask is necessary for medical or health reasons, including to prevent smoke inhalation. Recent immigration enforcement sweeps have left communities throughout California and the country frightened and unsure if federal officials are legitimate because of their shrouded faces and lack of identification, said Sen. Jesse Arreguín (D-Berkeley), co-author and chair of the Senate Public Safety Committee. He said the bill would provide transparency and discourage impersonators. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection agencies, called the proposal 'despicable,' saying it posed a threat to law enforcement officers by identifying them and subjecting them to retaliation. 'We will prosecute those who dox ICE agents to the fullest extent of the law. The men and women of ICE put their lives on the line every day to arrest violent criminal illegal aliens to protect and defend the lives of American citizens,' the department said in a post on the social media site X. 'Make no mistake, this type of rhetoric is contributing to the surge in assaults of ICE officers through their repeated vilification and demonization of ICE.' Wiener, however, said members of law enforcement are public servants and people need to see their faces so they can be held accountable for their actions. He likened ICE officials to Stormtroopers, fictional helmeted soldiers from the movie 'Star Wars,' and said masking the faces and concealing the names of law enforcement officials shields them from public scrutiny and from the communities they are meant to serve. 'We don't want to move towards that kind of model where law enforcement becomes almost like an occupying army, disconnected from the community, and that's what it is when you start hiding their face, hiding the identity,' he said. California law already bans wearing a mask or other disguise, including a fake mustache, wig or beard to hide your identity and evade law enforcement while committing a crime, but there are no current laws about what police can or cannot wear. It was unclear whether the proposal would affect undercover or plainclothes police officers, or if a state law could apply to federal police forces. The proposal is being offered as an amendment to Senate Bill 627, a housing measure that would essentially be eviscerated. The bill also includes an intent clause, which is not legally binding, that says the legislature would work to require all law enforcement within the state to display their name on their uniforms. 'Finding a balance between public transparency and trust, along with officer safety, is critical when we're talking about creating state laws that change the rules for officers that are being placed into conflict situations,' Jason Salazar, president of the California Police Chief Assn., said in a statement. 'We have been in touch with Senator Wiener, who reached out ahead of the introduction of this bill, and we will engage in discussions with him and his office to share our concerns so that we ensure the safety of law enforcement first responders is a top priority.' Wiener said the new measure would make it clearer who is a police officer and who is not, which would be essential in the wake of the politically motivated killing of a Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband, and the attempted killing of another politician and his wife. The suspect, Vance Boelter, is accused of knocking on the doors of the lawmakers in the middle of the night and announcing himself as a police officer to get them to open up, authorities said. U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), wrote in an X post that the bill would endanger ICE agents. 'Do not forget — targeted attacks on ICE agents are up 413%. This is yet another shameless attempt to put them in harm's way,' she said.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Trump leaves G7 summit early after "evacuate Tehran" warning
President Trump called on Iranian civilians to "immediately evacuate Tehran" on Monday evening, shortly after which the White House announced he would be departing the G7 summit early to "attend to many important matters." Why it matters: It's not immediately clear what triggered Trump's dramatic post on Truth Social or his early return from Canada. Israel has been conducting strikes in Tehran since Thursday night, but the U.S. has so far declined to join the operation. White House spokesperson Alex Pfeiffer denied reports the U.S. was attacking Iran: "American forces are maintaining their defensive posture, and that has not changed. We will defend American interests," he wrote. Trump later told reporters before departing Canada that "they (Iran) want to make a deal, and as soon as I leave here, we're going to be doing something. But I have to leave here." Tehran is home to around 10 million people, with around 17 million in the metropolitan area. What he's saying:" Iran should have signed the "deal" I told them to sign. What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!" Trump wrote. Trump followed up with a post chiding "kooky Tucker Carlson" for not understanding that "IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON." Next, he posted: "AMERICA FIRST means many GREAT things, including the fact that, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!" State of play: The Israeli military has said it has complete control of the skies over Tehran. It signaled Monday that it's expanding its targets beyond strictly military or nuclear sites, including by bombing Iranian state TV. Israel issued several evacuation orders for civilians in Tehran, in areas where hundreds of thousands of people live. One of those evacuation orders focused on the neighborhood where Iran's state TV is located. It's not clear how many civilians have managed to evacuate, or whether such a mass exodus is even possible on such a short timetable. Split screen: Less than two hours before his Truth Social post, Trump said at the G7 summit in Canada that the U.S. was talking to the Iranians by phone and even suggested it will be "better to talk in person." Trump expressed hope that Iran would make a deal. "I think a deal will be signed. I think Iran is foolish not to sign one," he said. French President Emmanuel Macron said Monday evening that Trump had told his fellow G7 leaders that the U.S. had been involved in discussions to get an Israel-Iran ceasefire, and had offered to meet with the Iranians. What's next: By skipping the second full day of the G7 summit, Trump is also skipping meetings with leaders including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.
