Utah's Republic

After forwarding out the announcement from Parents for Choice in Education (PCE) a few weeks ago as a courtesy to them on Jeb Bush’s visit and presentation on education progress in Florida, some of you were happy to get it, and some of you were surprised that I sent it out. I actually wrestled with the decision to send it out because I’m not a Bush-clan fan because of the Bush family stance on global government. I explained to one of you that the reason I sent it out was because there are 2 issues we are dealing with.

1) How do we improve the effectiveness of the current system until we achieve needed reforms?
2) What is the ideal education system and how do we move toward it?

Jeb Bush has had some success on item 1 and I forwarded out the email since it was directly pertaining to improvements to the current system. Some of you attended Jeb’s presentation and were very excited about the material presented. I believe the current system is in need of reform. Scores keep declining and we keep getting tapped for more money to prop up a system that is slow to respond and largely ineffective at course corrections (for many reasons).

A couple months ago, I asked the question if you were king for a day, what would you change about the education system. I got a number of great responses. Before you read those responses, I’d like to ask you to read this article I recently came across. Changes are coming to the education field. Whenever technology can dramatically reduce costs, change becomes inevitable. If an industry won’t adapt, they’ll get passed by eventually and go the way of the typewriter in the face of the computer.

Please read this article and then continue below.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north874.html

The “King for a Day” project can then be found here (or the link at the top of the screen). I struggled to find the best way to do this, and there are probably better ways, but please contribute and then come back frequently to see what people are posting and help vote the best ideas to the top in each category.
http://www.utahsrepublic.org/king-for-a-day/

Oak

I was sent an email this morning by someone reading FA Hayek’s book, “The Road to Serfdom” and she shared this bit knowing my interest in math education.

“Totalitarian control of opinion extends, however, also to subjects which at first seem to have no political significance…In particular, they [totalitarians] all seem to have in common an intense dislike of the more abstract forms of thought – a dislike characteristically also shown by many of the collectivists among our [England's] scientists. Whether the theory of relativity is represented as a ‘Semitic attack on the foundation of Christian and Nordic physics’ or opposed because it is ‘in conflict with dialectical materialism and Marxist dogma’ comes very much to the same thing. Nor does it make much difference whether certain theorems of mathematical statistics are attacked because they ‘form part of the class struggle on the ideological frontier and are a product of the historical role of mathematics as a servant of the bourgeoisie,’ or whether the whole subject is condemned because ‘it provides no guaranty that it will serve the interest of the people.’ It seems that pure mathematics is no less a victim and that even the holding of particular views about the nature of continuity can be ascribed to ‘bourgeois prejudices.’ According to the [Fabian] Webbs, the Journal for Marxist-Leninist Natural Sciences has the following slogans: ‘We stand for Party in Mathematics. We stand for the purity of Marxist-Leninist theory in surgery.’…It is entirely in keeping with the whole spirit of totalitarianism that it condemns any human activity done for its own sake and without ulterior purpose. Science for science’s sake, art for art’s sake, are equally abhorrent to the Nazis, our socialist intellectuals, and the communists. Every activity must derive its justification from a conscious social purpose…” p. 177

Now compare that with what Alpine School District had posted on their Mission Statement web page just a few months ago before taking it down from the controversy it created.

“According to Webster’s Dictionary, democracy is defined as a government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections. Our current government is best symbolized as a representative democracy.

The primary purpose of education is developing democratic citizens.

This preparation is not a matter of chance nor is it a matter of giving our pupils a few lessons in civics or teaching them about the Constitution.

It requires the development of a democratic character: fostering the growth of traits such as responsible conduct, critical reflection, compassion and integrity.

Thus, the task of readying the young for democratic life is the business of all educators.

Along with our social studies and history teachers, others must incorporate this objective into their curriculum.

Math teachers must help students gain a respect for inductive proof and certainty in argumentation.

The music teachers could help students gain a sense of responsibility to the group and playing in harmony with other citizens. Our English teachers should teach the responsibilities of expression and choice.

Of course, our administrators ought to help students understand that a democratic society cannot survive without respect for rules, law, and order.

Every teacher should have this major board objective in mind as he/she prepares the curriculum.

Parents, too, ought to incorporate these objectives into their family’s environment.

An interesting parallel… Progressives want control of every aspect of our lives and want everyone to participate in it.

The Nature of Rights

For many of you this may not be a revelation as it was to me today, but I would appreciate your feedback and any extra insight you may have into this topic.

“We the people.” The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States starts with these 3 words. We sometimes hear the phrase “by the people, of the people, for the people” tossed around but what does it really mean? OK, the people are supreme. That almost sounds like a democracy, doesn’t it? So what does it mean and how does it apply in a republic?

We know that rights come from God. God gave us unalienable rights which cannot be transferred by anyone or to anyone. We have core rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This means we also have a right to self-governance.

For example, if you were in a plane that crash landed on a tropical island and there was a tribe of natives on the island, you would have a God-given right to defend yourself and your property and to pursue a path of happiness (which is probably to make peace with the natives :)), but you would not have a right to demand the natives educate your children or provide you with medical service or build you a house for shelter. That would be charity on their part, but you have no right to force them to do it.

Many of you have probably read Ezra Taft Benson’s excellent treatise “The Proper Role of Government.” In it he describes how government only wields powers we delegate to them. In other words, if I don’t have a right, I cannot endow government with the ability to enforce it for me. Since I have a right to life and property, I can transfer powers to the sheriff to protect my life and property without precluding me from doing what I need to in order to protect my life and property. Likewise, government cannot assume any rights and powers that I don’t possess individually.

Since we as individuals have the rights, we then form government to protect our rights. We can delegate some of those rights to the sovereign state, which then delegates some of them to the federal government. They are OUR RIGHTS which WE THE PEOPLE inherently possess from God. We have chosen to DELEGATE SOME OF THEM to government in a WRITTEN CONSTITUTION because it’s more efficient to have a representative in a constitutional republic handle those things, otherwise we would have a democracy if we had to take care of every issue.

The U.S. Constitution as written by the states (it used to be the united states of America, not the United States of America) has specific powers delegated to the federal government from the states which the feds can handle better than the states such as national defense, coinage, treaties, etc… The powers not delegated were reserved to the states (10^th Amendment). The states have powers delegated to it in their written constitution by the people of their state. What isn’t delegated to the state is retained by the people individually. The states in turn delegate to local government the things best handled at that level.

The Education Question

With this understanding in place, by what right is compulsory schooling allowed to exist in our country?

I do not possess a right to force my neighbor to pay my taxes, to mow my lawn, to educate my children, so how is it that the government has taken a right to itself which the people themselves do not possess. Simply put, it is unconstitutional as well as immoral.

A few months back we discovered Alpine School District had a web page with several offensive quotes including this one:

“Arguments for compulsory education have been based on the idea that the school is the only institution that can counter the accident of birth, guarantee quality of opportunity, and provide objective and fair ways to select and train talented individuals.” (http://www.alpine.k12.ut.us/phpApps/genericPage.php?pdid=777)

Right off the bat you get a sense that something is wrong. The blatant statement of compulsion immediately strikes out at you if you know that to force someone against their will is at best, misguided, and at worst, satanic. It is a violation of moral agency which God gave each of us. Coupled with the phrase “accident of birth” and you start to wonder what type of individual would dream up such a phrase, and then wonder what kind of person would post it on a school district website. (Hint: a follower of John Dewey and a John Goodlad AED Scholar)

If I have no right to walk over to my neighbor’s home and force him/her to educate his/her child, then I clearly do not have the ability to delegate to government a right to enforce compulsory education on my neighbors’ child either. At its core, education by force is a socialistic concept where the elites believe they know what is best for parents and they seek to enact it by force in complete violation of individual’s moral agency.

In Ronald Reagan’s first inaugural address in 1981, he said:

“From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?”

So I ask the question, what does constitutional, non-compulsory schooling look like? Please leave your thoughts below.

I suppose this post is long overdue. I continue to hear rumors that go around the Alpine school district concerning how I criticize teachers or similar statements. I am grateful to those of you teachers who have helped defend me because you are able to see the issues as well. It seems that a lot of teachers don’t realize that criticism of the “district” isn’t necessarily criticism of them, in the same vein that criticizing the out-of-control federal government isn’t criticism of all the citizens of the country.

The answer to the question I’ve posed to myself is, yes and no. I will give each answer separately so that those at ASD who wish to pass on to others that I blame teachers can easily pass on the YES answer without the NO. :)  Please understand that there are teachers who fall into EACH category. I’ve never heard of anyone who has EVER lumped all teachers into one boat. There are good and bad in the profession just like everywhere else.

The NO answer: No I don’t blame teachers for our predicament. I blame those educrats in power at all levels who have corrupted the education system over decades of time, dumbed down our children through weak curriculum and revisionist history, and sought to ensure our children get a free education through compulsory means. Saying you’ll force people to learn or do good doesn’t achieve either in the long run and continually dropping test scores and college enrollments show this to be the case. Teachers who are concerned about their jobs but understand the issues have had hard choices to make while they’re trying to do the right thing for our children and I feel for them. I deeply sorrow for the hard working teachers who would rather just teach our children but instead have to play inane games with educrats looking over their shoulders telling them what the latest study says they need to do. If you’re in this category, you have my very sincere gratitude and thanks. Keep up the good work.

The YES answer: Yes I blame teachers who didn’t have a shred of common sense when the district told them to not teach the times tables anymore and they did it. This is just as wrong as a marine who is told by a commanding officer to do something he knows to be wrong but does it because he’s told to do it. I blame teachers who claim to teach the truth to our children about our constitutional republic but have never studied it, or even worse, they’re socialists at heart and teach our children how to embrace socialism. Yes I blame teachers who put more concern for advancement and doing the will of the district over the welfare of the children in their classrooms. Yes I blame teachers who buy into everything they are told by the district or college professors, and never take the time to validate what they are being told. There are no peer reviewed studies that support Investigations, Connected, and Interactive math regardless of what some district educrat tells you.

If you are a teacher, before you believe what is being said about me, please look at the amount of research I and others have done and then question those who tell you they are the “professional” and they know what’s right. As an accountant, I knew Enron was a disaster for the profession but wasn’t afraid to admit it. It’s time more teachers spoke up and displayed the intellectual honesty about the issues that the education profession faces. If you don’t, the education system will turn into the next Enron and when it goes down, it will be too late for you to speak up just like it was for the auditors of Enron. In fact, if you thought NCLB (No Child Left Behind) was bad for you, wait till we get federalized assessments and training to go with the new Common Core standards Utah just adopted. We’ve sold our souls gambling for a little pocket change. The assault on you continues to advance.

Some questions you might start with:

• Why is Bill Ayers the terrorist so interested in teaching democracy in education? (link)
• What is humanist John Goodlad’s Agenda for Education in a Democracy?  (link)
• Did you know these two men are birds of a feather and that Bill Ayers is the keynote speaker at Goodlad’s 2010 NNER conference? (link)
• What kind of beliefs are written in the anti-God Humanist Manifesto? (link)
• Why did BYU just drop their membership in Goodlad’s NNER after being one of the founding members back in 1986? (link)
• Why is the NNER trying to push the homosexual movement into BYU? (link)
• In all of the United States, there are only 30 Goodlad “AED Scholars” (Agenda for Education in a Democracy). Why does Utah have 4 of the 30 at ASD and BYU’s McKay School of Education? (link)

Does any of this trouble you?

Ever read the Humanist Manifesto? If not, here’s a link and a few quotes from it:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12293/Humanist-Manifesto

“There is great danger of a final, and we believe fatal, identification of the word religion with doctrines and methods which have lost their significance and which are powerless to solve the problem of human living in the Twentieth Century.”

Humanism and science can solve our problems but not God? I guess God’s teachings were OK for the nineteenth century and prior, but not the twentieth century. ;)

Today man’s larger understanding of the universe, his scientific achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion. Such a vital, fearless, and frank religion capable of furnishing adequate social goals and personal satisfactions may appear to many people as a complete break with the past. While this age does owe a vast debt to the traditional religions, it is none the less obvious that any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force for today must be shaped for the needs of this age. To establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present. It is a responsibility which rests upon this generation. We therefore affirm the following:

FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created

So religion as a term is applied to old outdated doctrines and methods of solving human problems. We owe them thanks, but it’s time to move on to the new religion…secular humanism which celebrates man over God.

FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.

In other words, eliminate faith, put religions on a 5 senses program, and then religion is OK.

ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.

IE. Stop using that crutch you call religion. Just figure that probabilities exist and you’re going to have to face some crisis without God’s help. Get a grip and get over your silly emotions.

TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.

Now we’ll replace faith-based joy in God’s creations with encouraging man to create things and supplant God as creator.

FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.

Voluntary socialism is an oxymoron. The only way to achieve a United Order or Zion like society is through moral absolutes and an acceptance of God’s commandments. This Utopian dream is nothing more than another counterfeit to God’s plan.

So stand the theses of religious humanism…

Utah state law says that no sectarian religion can be taught in our schools yet we as a state and nation accept it based on the premise that we can’t have God in schools or that’s a violation of the separation of church and state. That falsehood needs turned on its head. The only thing you get when you remove God from schools are schools without God.

The Humanist Manifesto was signed by 34 men including John Dewey and embraced by others including John Goodlad.

If you’ve never watched the republic video linked to in the top right corner of this website, may I suggest you make it a priority to understand there are only 2 forms of government. There never has been a lasting form of government other than a type of totalitarian government, and a republic.

In the scriptures we see various examples of this. Kings wield sovereign rule in 2 ways. Righteous kings (benevolent dictatorship) included King David (Bible) and King Benjamin (Book of Mormon-BOM), and wicked kings included King Ahaz (Bible) and King Noah (BOM) [sidebar: back in 1993 after President Clinton had been in office a year, I wrote a list of about a dozen parallels between his governmental actions and that of King Noah as found in Mosiah 11--it gave me a new perspective for how King Noah may have been a real schmoozer with the people and not just some fat gluttonous fellow as depicted in Arnold Friberg's picture].

We also see conniving individuals in the scriptures who formed what the BOM calls “secret combinations” so they could achieve dictatorships and bring all the people under their power and control. An example of this would be Amalikiah (BOM).

It will be recalled that in the Old Testament, the Lord had given Moses the law and they had a system of representatives to offload the burden from Moses. Someone was appointed over 10, 50, 100, etc… This was a republican form of government. A written law existed and the people had a scheme of representation.

Later, Samuel the prophet gave the people judges but the people found them corruptible so they demanded a king so they could be “like all the nations.” (1 Samuel 8:5). How many people in America today are clamoring for us to be “like all the nations.” Where are “all the nations” today? They are either under totalitarian rule or quickly getting there by use of democracy.

Democracy is a dangerous form of government because it devolves into anarchy over time as the people lack the ability to closely watch all the issues and they begin to only vote for the things that benefit them and not the country. The passing of the 17th amendment was a breakdown of the separation of powers to hold the voice of the masses in check by those specifically put in place to represent the voice of the state (ie. to strip away the protection of states’ rights).

What did it mean when the people in Samuel’s day wanted to be like “all the nations?” The Lord answered that in 1 Samuel 8:7.

“And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.”

Turning to a dictatorship is a rejection of God. Why? Because the primary element in worshiping the Lord is found in the principle of agency, or the freedom to choose. God doesn’t force you to worship him and he doesn’t force people to be good. He lets their own actions speak for themselves. When we choose to do good and charitable things, we are blessed for it. When we do evil, we are cursed. When we choose to have a king, we reject the one true King which is God. We can find many examples in the scriptures of wicked kings leading the people to do sin or bringing them into bondage by government policies or by morally weakening the people to the point that outside forces easily conquered them.

Concerning America, one Book of Mormon prophet wrote:

“Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written.” (Ether 2:12)

I believe our Founding Fathers were divinely inspired to set up a republic in America precisely because that is the only form of government that preserves agency and allows people the freedom to choose to serve God. They rejected the government of the king of England because God is King. Our freedoms have rapidly eroded over the last century the further God has been pushed from public dialog and from our schools.

Concerning democracy, the word doesn’t appear in scripture, but the word republic does appear one time in the LDS canon. Doctrine & Covenants 98:3 states:

“We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the voice of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.”

There are only 2 forms of government. A republic that is upheld by the voice of a moral people, or a form of a dictatorship. When people lose their morality and their worship of God as king, they embrace destructive government policies which tell them what to do and how to live and as that monster grows, liberty is destroyed.

If any of you would like to read a paper I wrote on why socialism is the devil’s plan, please click here to read my LDS perspective on freedom and agency.

In this awesome 2 minute video, someone has contrasted a speech by Reagan with what modern day politicians are saying. Check it out.

Part I: John Burton calls me a Bald-Faced Liar
Part II: John Burton’s Serious Ethical Dilemma

-Part I-

I want to make something very clear concerning what I write and publish to the website. I never publish anything that I don’t believe to be accurate information. I do not lie or *make up* anything to stir things up. I try to always make sure what I’ve published is correct.

I say this because it has come to my attention that John Burton has been calling me a liar in correspondence with people for insinuating that he may have been involved in the confiscation of math textbooks at several schools in Alpine. This is part of an email that was forwarded to me.

John Burton wrote:

“Since you call Oak your ‘friend,’ I’m sure you have read his personal home page. One of the statements that he makes on one of his links is very interesting because it talks about my involvement in Investigations Math. Let me quote it for you. ‘ASD actually confiscated textbooks at 4 known schools to ensure teachers had to switch to Investigations math. John Burton, candidate for school board in American Fork, was over those schools at the time. His direct role in that (if any) is unknown.’

[name removed] the statement that I just quoted to you penned by Mr. Norton is a bald-faced lie and Oak knows it!!! I am totally offended by it!” (John’s emphasis, not mine)

The careful reader will note that I said Mr. Burton’s role in the confiscations (which did happen) is “unknown” but that he was merely the administrator over the elementary schools at the time of implementation. My friend, who was kind enough to play ping-pong email for John and I, then received another email from John which contained this new information about his service.

“I wasn’t even at the district office when Math Investigations was implemented. Go check it out in the Human Resource Department and you will find out that I was appointed a supervisor of elementary schools after Math Investigations had been implemented. Obviously Oak hasn’t taken the time to do this.

At the time of implementation I was principal at Legacy Elementary and my school opted not to implement the program. Therefore it would have been ridiculous for me to confiscate the books at my school since the teachers and students would have had no books to use at all!!” (Emphasis mine)

On the first point, John is right. I didn’t take the time to do that. I wish I had more time on my hands to try and verify every fact with every available source, but I relied on a teacher who said she was there at the time and that was her recollection.

John’s second point claims he was principal of Legacy Elementary when Investigations was implemented and he turned down the program. This was new information to me so I emailed John and asked him for a timeline of his service so I could then provide it to my source and try to get to the bottom of the issue. I told him if I was wrong that I would gladly publish it on my website so everyone could know the facts as they really were.

John wouldn’t reply. I emailed again and he wouldn’t reply. I made a third and final offer to him nearly 2 weeks ago and he wouldn’t reply.

So I checked with my source and she maintains that her recollection was correct that John left Manilla to go to the district, but left a little wiggle room saying maybe he went to Legacy and then to the district, but she didn’t think that happened.

A small fragment of doubt had been cast between what John claimed and my source’s recollection, so I wavered a bit trying to know what to publish. Thankfully, my good friend Doug Cannon had taken up the anti-Investigations math fight a few years before me and just provided me with GRAMA data that helps reveal a much clearer picture.

First, I found on John Burton’s campaign website a timeline with some of the information about his service that I was trying to get from him.

Alpine School District, Administrator K-6 Schools, 2001-2008
Alpine School District, Elementary School Principal, 1980-2001

So John transferred to the district office in 2001, probably making the transition in the summer of 2001 so that a new principal could start the 2001 school year at John’s school.

This first pdf provided by Doug Cannon to me, shows the cost of Investigations math being implemented in Alpine School District, as well as a table showing when every school implemented Investigations math. You can see that both Manilla and Legacy elementary schools implemented Investigations math in the 2001-2002 school year, and that neither principal at the time was John Burton, he was already at the district. That is a direct contradiction to what John represented in his emails above and this comes from district materials.

PDF see page 4 (GRAMA Reply 1-14-2003)

The next pdf is dated in 2003 (which is after everything took place) and shows John signing a district document in favor of Investigations math.

PDF see page 1 (ASD letter 1-27-2003)

Giving John a big benefit of the doubt, maybe he was principal at Legacy when Investigations math was first offered and maybe he turned it down (don’t know since he won’t verify his service record), but it seems clear from the record that he was at the district office when the schools that confiscated textbooks performed that action and it seems clear he was fully on board with the district in embracing Investigations math. People that know John have identified him as a strong constructivist. In other words, if you want fuzzy math to continue in Alpine School District (as it does still continue), then elect John. He’s going to keep it going. His role in the confiscations mentioned above is unknown, but it seems clear he was at the district office from the records just provided, and he was not principal of Legacy Elementary when it was actually implemented.

-Part II-

John recently retired from Alpine School District (2008) and went to work for Utah Valley University as the Field Supervisor of Secondary Prospective Teachers. If he is elected to the school board, he will have a direct conflict of interest with his job because the students he reviews will also be applying for work at Alpine School District. If John will be able to put pressure on principals to hire his students, or if principals feel there is a benefit to hiring the students John recommends, or students want John to review them in hopes of getting favorable placement in ASD, these situations create ethical issues for John.

When I sent John the timeline request mentioned in Part I above, I also sent to him a question asking if he was planning to resign his job at UVU if elected to the school board. He refused to answer that question. He is certainly aware that this issue exists but he does not want to answer the question. It would be nice to know if he would resign so we could be assured there would be no ethical issues that surround hiring issues as they relate to his reviews.

Mr. Burton has avoided all of the Meet the Candidates events in AF so his refusal to answer the conflict question and to appear in public is disconcerting to say the least. Why would someone who wants the job of a school board member run a campaign in near complete isolation and privacy? It makes no sense unless he’s got something to hide or he is doing this under pressure from someone else such people at the school district.

I’ve also received reports from very unhappy parents asking why some sitting principals (Jason Theler at Lindon Elementary and Gary Gibb at Legacy Elementary) are campaigning for Mr. Burton.

If you would like to email John and ask him for yourself if he plans to retire from UVU if he is elected, please feel free to do so. Here’s his email address.
johncharlesburton@gmail.com

Dear John, if you would be so kind to answer this question, I’d be happy to post it here on the website so the public has your response.

So you don’t think Socialist Revolutionaries exist in Utah County? Think again.

I just read an article in the Daily Herald about Stephen Sandstrom’s new immigration bill. http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/article_c49d2be6-4311-59ec-a977-c96d1a42645a.html. Here are the 3 individuals/organizations quoted as being against tougher illegal immigration:

1) Utah Progressive Coalition

2) Stephen Baugh (Democratic candidate running against Sandstrom who was the former ASD Superintendent and current BYU CITES director pushing John Goodlad’s Democracy Agenda)

3) Revolutionary Student Union at Utah Valley University (UVURSU)

What?? A Revolutionary Student Union club? Curious, I looked them up. Want a real awakening? Holy Cow!!

This club encourages the REVOLUTIONARY overturn of capitalism in the US and is connected to many national and international Marxists, Leninists, Socialists, Anarchists, Palestinian Liberation groups and of course, Democracy Now. This group doesn’t just take the slow evolutionary approach to socialism like our public school system does, it actually calls for revolution and features a post about combating the police. It is very reminiscent of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) in which Bill Ayers started the Weather Underground to revolutionize America by blowing up buildings. Important: scroll down http://www.uvursu.com/ to see who RSU affiliates with to get an eye-opening education of what is going on at our campuses right here in Utah County.

Perhaps interesting to you might be a group the RSU links with, Mormon Worker (think Workers of America Unite). This site is published by LDS members “devoted to Mormonism and radical politics” http://themormonworker.org/about.php. Interesting to me is the contributor list which mentions many graduates from BYU who have gone on missions and fight for redistribution of wealth, feminism, sex-ed reform, the gay agenda, and other Progressive policies. http://themormonworker.org/contributors.php

What does this have to do with me? What can I do about it?

There is a reason many parents think there is a problem with Alpine School District pushing a Democracy Agenda over academics and why we are concerned that they won’t break up their love affair with John Goodlad, socialist/atheist/humanist who mentors the district with his socialist theories and writes in his books quotes like these…

“Enculturating the Young Into a Social and Political Democracy”

“Most youth still hold the same values of their parents… if we do not alter this pattern, if we don’t resocialize, our system will decay.”

“Parents do not own their children. They have no ‘natural right’ to control their education fully.”

“The curriculum of the future ‘will be what one might call the humanistic curriculum.”

If there is nothing going on here in Alpine School District promoting socialism or atheism, ask yourself this… Why can’t ASD pull itself away from the district motto and everything John Goodlad? http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/article_7d0cf17d-e17a-50e3-a1fa-8a51b871c75b.html

Why is Bill Ayers, socialist and former revolutionary terrorist-turned University educator the keynote speaker for an upcoming NNER Conference in October which Alpine School District employees attend each year? http://www.utahsrepublic.org/tag/bill-ayers/ (Read all 3 posts to see how Bill Ayers is connected with the Alpine School District.)

Why was the NNER’s last keynote speaker an anti-Mormon, ex-BYU feminist and Progressive, Nel Noddings, who wrote Women and Evil which scrutinizes the Bible’s male chauvinist writers for portraying women as evil? Her plea to educators is to re-define evil to fit in these modern times (moral relativism). By the way, this speech’s emphasis was on one of Goodlad’s 4 Moral Dimensions that our school board is so adamant on defending, nurturing our children. The question is, who is doing the nurturing? Parents or the state?

Please, it is time to educate our community, stand up for what is right and vote these current board members out who keep pushing this political agenda. We need to concentrate on academics and true principles. We need to raise a liberty-loving, moral generation if we want our Republic to be strong. And morals need to be taught by parents and churches, not government run schools! You might not see this in your child’s classroom…yet, but know that the ASD is pushing this agenda and spending our tax money doing it.

Susie Schnell

Someone emailed me this speech this week and I thought this is something everyone ought to read and then have your high schoolers and college students read it as well. I knew it was great but when I came on this passage I knew this bright student was well aware of the “critical” issues we face in education.

H. L. Mencken wrote in The American Mercury for April 1924 that the aim of public education is not “to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. … Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim … is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States.”

To illustrate this idea, doesn’t it perturb you to learn about the idea of “critical thinking.” Is there really such a thing as “uncritically thinking?” To think is to process information in order to form an opinion. But if we are not critical when processing this information, are we really thinking? Or are we mindlessly accepting other opinions as truth?

And this one.

The saddest part is that the majority of students don’t have the opportunity to reflect as I did. The majority of students are put through the same brainwashing techniques in order to create a complacent labor force working in the interests of large corporations and secretive government, and worst of all, they are completely unaware of it. I will never be able to turn back these 18 years. I can’t run away to another country with an education system meant to enlighten rather than condition. This part of my life is over, and I want to make sure that no other child will have his or her potential suppressed by powers meant to exploit and control. We are human beings. We are thinkers, dreamers, explorers, artists, writers, engineers. We are anything we want to be – but only if we have an educational system that supports us rather than holds us down. A tree can grow, but only if its roots are given a healthy foundation.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/212383-Valedictorian-Speaks-Out-Against-Schooling-in-Graduation-Speech

Here’s a video of most of the speech if you’d rather listen to it, but I think it’s best read.