Utahs Republic

On January 15th, 2011, Utah Eagle Forum held their annual convention and among the speakers was Pamela Smith, speaking on the use of SHARP surveys in our schools. I believe these surveys are being administered on March 10th around the state. I strongly recommend you watch the video here and read the material below before you allow your child to be subjected to this survey.  The video quality here isn’t the greatest, but the content is vital.

To see copies of the survey, go here: https://sharp.tooeleschools.org/Questions.aspx

Here’s some summary information provided by Pamela.

SHARP Survey

(Dept. of Education, Dept. of Human Resources, Dept. of  Health)

Intended for 6^th, 8^th, 10^th and 12^th graders.  4 major concerns are as follows:
*  Introduces or educates children for drug use by giving a recipe card for names, use, and how to obtain drugs.  (See pg. 4 of survey)
*  Causes children to question their own family values: Is something wrong with their family if they answer yes to any of these questions?
*  Assumes guilt: children must declare their innocence over 150 times
*  Parental Concerns:  survey touches on the 8 areas protected by Utah Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act – (code sections 53A-13-301, 53A-13-302) which requires parental consent if it touches on ANY ONE of these areas.

There is no way to reach the individual students who might have personal struggles because the data is gathered anonymously.  Monies collected from the SHARP data must be used to fund (usually federal) programs attached to it for prevention- schools are not at liberty to use those funds at their discretion..  Monies spent cannot reach the individual child for liability purposes, so a blanket approach to reach the neglected one is at the expense of all.

The 8 protected areas where a school may NOT administer a survey (especially when the purpose or evident intent is to cause a child to reveal information even if it is anonymous) concerning the student’s family or any family member are:

1. Political affiliations or beliefs of the student or student’s parent;
2. Mental or psychological problems of the student or student’s family;
3. Sex behavior or attitudes;
4. Illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, or demeaning behavior;
5. Critical appraisals of others with whom respondents have close family relationships;
6. Legally recognized privileged relationships, such as with lawyers, doctors, or ministers;
7. Religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or parents; or
8. Income, other than as required by law to determine program eligibility.

In order to allow a child to participate, written notice must be sent home two weeks prior to a survey, activity, curriculum lesson, etc… if it touches on the protected areas.  (A notice and signature are needed each time educational activities fall within the 8 listed protected areas.  One signature at the first of the year to cover all evaluations, surveys and curriculum doesn’t meet the intent of the law.)

Parents are under no obligation to give consent. If you do not give consent, the survey may not be administered to your child.

1. A “valid consent” can be sent back to the school acknowledging that the student may reveal information; or the school may ask questions or teach content that falls within the 8 protected areas. This requires a parental signature.
2. You may request further information: Who has access to the data collected?  How will the information be used or taught?  How can a parent review information or curriculum?
3. You may request your child not participate in the evaluation, survey, curriculum, etc.
4. If you do nothing and a “valid consent” was not obtained, then the evaluation, survey or curriculum may not be given or taught.

Pamela also informed me that there are so many programs being used in all of our schools that are not as comprehensive as the SHARP but are still invasive and touch on these protected areas. Most parents are completely unaware of these programs because they are called ‘prevention’ programs, and are titled: All-Stars, Empowered You, etc… I had no idea what this was until I heard Pamela’s presentation.

Protect your children. Please watch the video above to understand the psychological effects of this survey being administered. Please pass this on to all the parents you know.

A friend just sent me this list of a few quotes from the highly acclaimed (by educators) John Goodlad book “Developing Democratic Character in the Young.”

• “At its most basic, democracy means shared governance or shared decision making. In other words, if a decision will affect the lives of more than one individual, as most decisions do, that decision should be made by all of those affected, or by as many as possible.”  (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)

• “There are many ideas, everything from “computer democracy,” which would enable direct rather than representative voting at the state and even the federal level (thus eliminating the effectiveness of corporate lobbying efforts), to the creation of new state charters of incorporation.”  [he goes into some detail about why corporations are the source of injustice, and why we should essentially abolish them.]  (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)

• “What makes popular rule legitimate is that it is a fair process, not that it produces results that are right.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)

• In order to produce right results, he says that popular rule “must be constrained by some substantive values.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)

In other words:

1) Enculturate the young with the values the state thinks are best,
2) Promote popular rule through direct democracy, so that
3) The people will vote for themselves what the state thinks is best.

Here is some of what he has to say about John Lock, Adam Smith, and the US Constitution:

• “…we must dismiss that part of our Locke-Smith heritage that separates the social and economic life from the political sphere. This is not easily done given that so much of Smith and Locke went into the Constitution.” (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)t

• If the question of sustainability comes down to a struggle between those who value short-term economic gain [corporations/capitalists] and those who value long-term environmental well-being, then engaging in deliberative democracy…may be the only way to grapple with and overcome this issue in a collective manner. (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)

• “democratic character” that must be developed in the young is defined as a “democratic concern for social, economic, and environmental justice.” Goodlad’s organization, the NNER, advocates dispositions favorable toward redistribution of resources, promotion of GLBTQQIIAA  lifestyles, and environmentalism. (Paul Theobald et al., in Goodad, John: Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pp. 94-110)

Anyone care to argue that Goodlad isn’t looking for direct Democracy, the kind our Founding Fathers hated?

After Buffy Snell’s article exposing the indoctrination her child’s teacher engaged in in his classroom, a few emails were sent to Buffy from people expressing their feelings. Among them was one which this clip is from:

Dear Mrs. Snell
After reading your blog post on teachers at the Junior High, I would like to have you understand a few points from my opinion…

2. Karl Marx invented Communism to be the perfect government. The reason communism doesn’t work is because of selfish and corrupt leaders. If leaders did not become corrupt, but were more like King Benjamin, then communism could be the perfect government. Also have you ever noticed how similar the law of consecration and communism are?
…
Sincerely,
An American Fork City citizen

This person, obviously LDS for a couple of the references used, has fallen into the same trap that so many others do in our society because we are being enculturated into a social and political democracy.

 

I am honestly at a loss to understand how so many LDS people have the mistaken belief that communism would ever be ideal or that it is related to the law of consecration. Communism is the great deception.

I have already posted a couple times on this topic on these 2 pages, but I might as well post a few more quotes below.

https://www.utahsrepublic.org/lds/joseph-smith-on-socialism/

https://www.utahsrepublic.org/civics/socialism-is-not-the-united-order/

These quotes come out of a file I have and just to be perfectly clear, I did not look all of these up. I just looked up a couple which I have access to, but cannot validate all of them with my own resources. If anyone knows if one is incorrect, please let me know and I’ll remove it, but I think they’re all likely accurate.

David O. McKay, President of the Church, in Conference Report, April 1966, pp. 109–110:
The position of this Church on the subject of Communism has never changed. We consider it the greatest Satanical threat to peace, prosperity, and the spread of God’s work among men that exists on the face of the earth. In this connection, we are continually being asked to give our opinion concerning various patriotic groups or individuals who are fighting Communism and speaking up for freedom. Our immediate concern, however, is not with parties, groups, or persons, but with principles. We therefore commend and encourage every person and every group who are sincerely seeking to study Constitutional principles and awaken a sleeping and apathetic people to the alarming conditions that are rapidly advancing about us. We wish all of our citizens throughout the land were participating in some type of organized self-education in order that they could better appreciate what is happening and know what they can do about it. . . . No member of this Church can be true to his faith, nor can any American be loyal to his trust, while lending aid, encouragement or sympathy to any of these false philosophies, for if he does they will prove snares to his feet.

Letter from David O. McKay’s Office, signed April 12, 1969:
By reason of his office and calling, Elder Benson is entitled to inspiration when addressing Church groups, and, since Communism is a definite threat to the eternal principles of free agency, it cannot be considered that he is “out-of-line” when discussing it in talks.

First Presidency Letter (signed by Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark, and David O. McKay), written to U. S. Treasury, 30 September, 1941:
The Church has not found it possible to follow along the lines of the present general tendency in the matter of property rights, taxes, the curtailment of rights and liberties of the people, nor in general the economic policies of what is termed the “New Deal.” . . . Unless the people of America forsake the sins and the errors, political and otherwise, of which they are now guilty and return to the practice of the great fundamental principles of Christianity, and of Constitutional government, there will be no exaltation for them spiritually, and politically we shall lose our liberty and free institutions. . . . We believe that our real threat comes from within and not from without, and it comes from the underlying spirit common to Naziism, Fascism, and Communism, namely the spirit which would array class against class, which would set up a socialistic state of some sort, which would rob the people of the liberties which we possess under the Constitution, and would set up such a reign of terror as exists now in many parts of Europe. . . . We confess to you that it has not been possible for us to unify our own people even upon the necessity of such a turning about, and therefore we cannot unfortunately, and we say it regretfully, make any practical suggestion to you as to how the nation can be turned about.

David O. McKay, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in Conference Report, April 1962, p. 125:
Men today are rapidly classifying themselves into two groups: believers and nonbelievers. J. Edgar Hoover, and I quote, says: “There is no place here in America for part-time patriots. This nation is face to face with the greatest danger ever to confront it, a sinister and deadly conspiracy which can be conquered only by an alert, informed citizenry. It is indeed appalling that some members of our society continue to deplore and criticize those who stress the communist danger. Public indifference to this threat is tantamount to national suicide. Lethargy leads only to disaster. Knowledge of the enemy, alertness to the danger, everyday patriotism are the brick and mortar with which we can build an impregnable fortress against communism.”

David O. McKay, President of the Church, in Conference Report, October 1959, pp. 4–9:
On the fly-leaf of the book, The Naked Communist, by W. Cleon Skousen, we find this quotation, (and I admonish everybody to read that excellent book of Chief Skousen’s): “The conflict between communism and freedom is the problem of our time. It overshadows all other problems. This conflict mirrors our age, its toils, its tensions, its troubles, and its tasks. On the outcome of this conflict depends the future of mankind.”

David O. McKay, in Conference Report, October 1962, p. 8:
Above all else, strive to support good and conscientious candidates of either party who are aware of the great dangers inherent in communism and who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our founding fathers. They should also pledge their sincere fealty to our way of liberty—a liberty which aims at the preservation of both personal and property rights. Study the issues, analyze the candidates on these grounds, and then exercise your franchise as free men and women. Never be found guilty of exchanging your birthright for a mess of pottage!

David O. McKay, in The Instructor, February 1856, p. 34:
Next to being one in worshiping God, there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States! May the appeal of our Lord in His intercessory prayer for unity be realized in our homes, our wards, our stakes, and in our support of the basic principles of our Republic.

David O. McKay, in Deseret News, “Church Section,” 18 October 1952, p. 2:
During the first half of the twentieth century we have traveled far into the soul-destroying land of socialism and made strange alliances through which we have become involved in almost continuous hot and cold wars over the whole of the earth. In this retreat from freedom the voices of protesting citizens have been drowned by raucous riots of intolerance and abuse from those who led the retreat and their millions of gullible youth, who are marching merrily to their doom, carrying banners on which are emblazoned such intriguing and misapplied labels as social justice, equality, reform, patriotism, social welfare.

Joseph Fielding Smith, in Conference Report, April 1950, p. 159:
Now I tell you it is time the people of the United States were waking up with the understanding that if they don’t save the Constitution from the dangers that threaten it, we will have a change of government.

First Presidency Statement, in Improvement Era, vol. 39 (August 1936), p. 488:
With great regret we learn from credible sources, governmental and others, that a few Church members are joining directly or indirectly, the Communists and are taking part in their activities. . . . To support Communism is treasonable to our free institutions, and no patriotic American citizen may become either a Communist or supporter of Communism. . . . Communism being thus hostile to loyal American citizenship and incompatible with true Church membership, of necessity no loyal American citizen and no faithful Church member can be a Communist. We call upon all Church members completely to eschew Communism. The safety of our divinely inspired Constitutional government and the welfare of our Church imperatively demand that Communism shall have no place in America.

First Presidency Statement, in Conference Report, April 1942, p. 90; italics added:
We again warn our people in America of the constantly increasing threat against our inspired Constitution and our free institutions set up under it. The same political tenets and philosophies that have brought war and terror in other parts of the world are at work amongst us in America. The proponents thereof are seeking to undermine our own form of government and to set up instead one of the forms of dictatorship now flourishing in other lands.

President Spencer W. Kimball, Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, pp. 405:

“The only way we can keep our freedom is to work at it.  Not some of us.  All of us.  Not some of the time, but all of the time.  So if you value your citizenship and want to keep it for yourself and your children and their children, give it your faith, your belief, and give it your active support in civic affairs.”

Ezra Taft Benson (do I even need to start quoting him???) :), April 1965 General Conference

“Hear his words [speaking of President David O. McKay]: “No greater immediate responsibility rests upon members of the Church, upon all citizens of this Republic and of neighboring Republics than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.” (Cited in Jerreld L. Newquist, Prophets, Principles and National Survival [SLC: Publishers Press, 1964], p. 157.) As important as are all other principles of the gospel, it was the freedom issue which determined whether you received a body. To have been on the wrong side of the freedom issue during the war in heaven meant eternal damnation. How then can Latter-day Saints expect to be on the wrong side in this life and escape the eternal consequences? The war in heaven is raging on earth today. The issues are the same: “Shall men be compelled to do what others claim is for their best welfare” or will they heed the counsel of the prophet and preserve their freedom?”

Someone forwarded me this letter from Sterling Beck on Provo’s council. If you live in Provo you’d better get your voice heard quick before this meeting on March 1st. Read below and email Sterling with your thoughts. Be sure to let others in the Provo area know about this too.

Dear Neighbors,
During next Tuesday’s Council Meetings there will be a vote to consider implementing a ‘Daytime Curfew Ordinance’. (At 7pm in the council chambers at 351 West Center St. Provo)
I have already heard from parents of children that attend various public schools, as well as charter schools and home school.  They have all expressed concern about an ordinance which will cause children to be detained any time they are outside school during the day regardless of the reason.
This proposed ordinance will require our already overworked police department to stop, search, and detain any child that appears to be under the age of 18 that is outside during normal school hours.  For example, under this ordinance a home schooled child riding his bike to his grandmother’s house could be arrested, searched, and fined simply for being outside (its happened in other cities).
This ordinance has been widely criticized, the local paper has taken a stand against it, the tribune has questioned its constitutionality, and several council members and school board members have expressed concern over an ordinance that will essentially force every one in Provo that happens to look under 18 to carry an ID at all times or face possible arrest. This type of an ordinance has directly targeted and harmed homeschooling and charter school programs in other cities.
While the actual ordinance language has not yet been made public, past discussion indicates that home schoolers will be required to request a pass from the school district in order to be permitted to go outside without being arrested or fined.
I am writing this because unfortunately, there is still a strong push to pass this ordinance.  Consideration of this ordinance has spanned the course of nearly a dozen meetings making it impossible for the public to adequately follow what has been happening. We need more residents to make their opinions known to the municipal council!
Please take the time to forward this via email to other concerned residents, to contact me at sterling@sterlingbeck.com with your thoughts on this ordinance, as well as contact all of the municipal council members by clicking this link.
Please also consider attending the council meeting on Tuesday March 1st to speak against it.

—
Sterling Beck
Provo City Council District 5
801-472-3160 : www.followprovo.com

Dear Mr. Beck,

I was a homeschool kid in California and I was often stopped by police and harassed and interrogated for being out and about during school hours. We would ride our bikes from one side of town to the other to attend orchestra at the junior high. My parents made us school id cards and still this was not enough. We were told it looked homemade and not official enough. We then had to get a state issued id and a letter from the school district, both of which we had to keep on us at all times. To this day I still have an anxiety attack every time a cop pulls up behind me. Every time we were stopped it made me feel like I was a bad kid and heaven forbid is someone I knew saw me being questioned by a cop. There is already a system put in place to deal with truant kids. Lets enforce the system we have. I don’t think any kid, especially if they are not breaking the law, should be subject to or treated as a second class citizen. I know there are many kids who, like me, graduate early at 16 or 17 years and go on to attend college. This is a college town what about those kids. This is a bad idea! We have truant officers assigned to every school, we pay them, so let’s use them. Yes, there needs to be consequences for delinquent children but lets not make a sweeping assumption that all children who are not in school during school hours are delinquents. I want my kids to trust and respect the police and I don’t see this proposed ordinance as helping me to do that. Why does the city feel they need this ordinace? Are we really having a problem with delinquent kids running a muck all over Provo? I live downtown, and I’ve not see anything like that in my neighborhood. So if this is happening, where is it happening? I’m strongly opposed to this ordinance and I want my voice to be heard. Unfortunately, Tuesday night is the one night a week that I work, so, I will not be able to attend the council meeting. Thank you for informing me of this situation and for giving me the opprotunity to make my voice heard.

Sincerely,
[removed]

My daughter somehow stumbled on this and knew I’d love it. Enjoy!

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR2ipu20WBQ[/youtube]

Someone sent me a link to an article yesterday where someone had used a feature on Google to crunch numbers on the amount of times the words “republic” and “democracy” appear in print. The word republic is in red and democracy in blue. Note that the crossover happened during the progressive movement when the socialists were changing their line of attack on the constitution. You can read some of that history from this chapter on republics from the 5,000 Year Leap.

https://www.utahsrepublic.org/get-educated/5000-year-leap/

Here’s a link to the article this chart comes from.

https://utahdatapoints.com/2011/02/do-we-live-in-a-democracy-or-a-republic/

My daughter is actually studying the progressive era in her history class right now and I didn’t realize that initiatives, referendums, and recalls came out of that movement. These 3 items were designed by progressives to bypass constitutional government and begin to introduce direct democracy to the nation (ie. the kind the Framers warned us about). Each of these items gives citizens the ability to propose law, pass law, and undo appointments and elections, completely bypassing the normal process and doing it themselves. Thus by states adopting these measures they gave up republican government guaranteed in article 4, section 4 of the constitution. However, by writing them into state law, they are now constitutional at the state level. I would suppose a valid case could be made to overturn an initiative, referendum, or recall, based on them violating the U.S. Constitution since it is the supreme law of the law and trumps state law where it specifically declares something as law such as article 4, section 4 guaranteeing republican government to the states.

By Buffy Snell

I have lived in American Fork for 15 years, and have had 4 children excel in many ways because of the exceptional teachers of Alpine School District (ASD).  Understandably then, I am respectful and grateful to the staff.  At the same time I have noticed that relativism, a prevalent educational philosophy, is making its way into local classrooms and I feel parents need to be aware of what their children may be learning. Relativism teaches there is no absolute truth—that nothing is certain because it is subjective. Even though our community would largely agree that such a view is false; proponents of relativism, such as John Goodlad, have been influencing educators in our district for many years.  Our children and our country are reaping the consequences.  In fact, in a recent address to the Chapman University School of Law, Dallin H. Oaks has strongly condemned moral relativism because it leads to a loss of religious freedom.   (https://newsroom.lds.org/article/elder-oaks-religious-freedom-Chapman-University)

John Goodlad not only views morality as relative, but patriotism as well:

“…educators must resist the quest for certainty. If there were certainty there would be no scientific advancement. So it is with morals and patriotism.” –John Goodlad, Education for Everyone: Agenda for Education in a Democracy”, Woods Learning Center, pg. 6

If this were true, teaching children allegiance to our country and that 2+2 =4 would NOT lead to “advancement.”  I am deeply troubled that undermining views such as this would be allowed to influence the minds of an American classroom, especially my child’s.  Because of alarming instruction given to my son, I’ve filed a transfer request from his Jr. High Geography class. I have chosen to share the details of that transfer in hopes that the community will increase their vigilance and hold accountable those who are vested with the responsibility to teach and promote our American form of government.  Following are the details.

1. My son came home from his Geography class relaying that his teacher had explained to him why Communism “isn’t really that bad.” (those were my son’s exact words)

His teacher’s response to me was that he explores the pros and cons of many forms of government so that students can understand why different systems of rule appeal to different people.  He did this, he said, as a way to promote critical thinking.  He also said:

“I do not promote or decry any government, religion, or economic system over another one. It is not my place to put one thing above or below another– that is the job of parents and for the students to decide on their own….I have students who come from homes of MANY different political and religious backgrounds.”  He also said, “I will not infringe on people’s right to decide for themselves.”

While religious neutrality is important in a school setting, educators are required to promote our American form of government.  According to Utah Code I.53A-13-109 teachers are responsible for:

“reaffirming values and qualities of character which promote an upright and desirable citizenry…. Civic and Character Education are fundamental elements of the public education system’s core mission …students shall be taught in connection with regular school work…respect for and an understanding of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutions of the United States and of the State of Utah… and qualities of character which will promote an upright and desirable citizenry and better prepare students to recognize and accept responsibility for preserving and defending the blessings of liberty inherited from prior generations and secured by the constitution.” https://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE53A/htm/53A13_010900.htm

Not only has the teacher failed to prepare students to recognize and accept responsibility for preserving liberty, he has failed to help them think critically.  Critical thinking can only be done when students have an adequate amount of information.  And significant facts about Communism were clearly missing.

I have no problem with a teacher who wants to teach children about Communism.  In fact, it’s important that he does—as long as children are given enough information from which to draw a proper conclusion.  For example, one of the “pros” discussed about Communism was equality. But to truly educate children about the economic realities of Communism, one would have to inform them that the rulers live lavishly at the people’s expense and that “equality” of impoverishment and subjection could never be considered a “pro” for anyone but those running the government.

In addition, teaching that Communism “appeals” to some people and a Republic “appeals” to others, not only communicates relativism—that there is nothing certain because it is subjective; it gives children the impression that there is actually something good about oppression. When done in conjunction with a teacher who is unwilling to promote one form of government over another, it’s not surprising that a child comes to the FALSE conclusion that Communism “isn’t really that bad.”

Communism has been described as “the greatest crime against humanity in the 20th century” and has resulted in the estimated death of 100 million people. https://www.autentico.org/oa09347.php

2. Because of something his teacher said my son came home believing that Mormons are naive and uninformed. He was very upset about a certain aspect of our religion (which he learned from the teacher) and wasn’t sure that he wanted to be Mormon anymore.  According to my son, his teacher said he knows more about the Mormon religion than most Mormons because he goes on the Church web site all the time and Mormons can’t even go to the highest kingdom of heaven unless they practice polygamy. These remarks are disparaging and a contradiction of what he expressed to me in point 1 above.  The teacher was criticizing Mormons, not only for their views, but for their alleged ignorance.  The law states, “employees may not use their positions to …disparage a particular religious… belief or viewpoint. (See 53A-13-101.1. https://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE53A/htm/53A13_010101.htm)

When I reported these incidents to the principal, he defended the teacher and blamed my son for “misinterpreting” classroom dialogue without even verifying whether or not other students had similar views. He skillfully avoided my questions during our meeting, and refused TWO follow up requests for a WRITTEN response to the following:

1. Would it concern you (specifically) if teachers in your school taught as if they believed this statement by John Goodlad?

There is a belief by some that there exists “objective knowledge” and a
“correct” view of the world. This view is incorrect. All knowledge is partial
and subjective. There is no single worldview that deserves complete
acceptance. https://woodslearningcenter.org/Docs/EducationforEveryoneSummary.pdf

2.   I would like to know what the consequences are for violating the Utah Code and how the school plans to ensure that such violations will not continue.

After failing to get a response, I sent the following question to the Superintendent and the Board member for my district.

I would like to know what the consequences are for violating I.53A-13-109 and 53A-13-101.1 of the Utah code and what actions will be taken if there is a violation?

The correspondence from the Superintendent read,

“I encourage you to continue working with [the Principal] concerning this matter.”

My board member never responded to me.

What are my options?  If the teacher refuses to comply with the law; if the Principal fails to investigate; if the Superintendent simply deflects my concerns back to the Principal; and my elected representative doesn’t respond, how do I make sure that teachers are held accountable for what they teach in the classroom?

Although the teacher declined to address many of my concerns or promote our American form of government, he did apologize to my son for the offensive remarks he made about Mormons.  But I am troubled that the Principal refused to take any corrective action before amendments were made, choosing instead to blame my son.

The Principal informed me that the school would be happy to help me find a “better fit” for my son.  When I protested that the other Geography teachers at the school were also exploring the “pros” of Communism, I was informed that my child could do packets or go to a class at the High School.  I was also told that I am the only one who has expressed any concern. While that may be true, I believe it is because many parents are unaware of what is happening in some classrooms or what Utah law requires.  You can see below from a survey given to 10 students in this teacher’s Geography class that a high percentage of other children have drawn conclusions similar to my son’s—conclusions I consider dangerous to the future of our freedoms.

In the NNER Today 2009-2010 update published by the Center for the Improvement of Teacher Education and Schooling at BYU, it says:

“To join the NNER is to commit to action.  It means committing to the principles of the Agenda for Education in a Democracy and becoming stewards of our democracy.  As Dr. Goodlad has observed, education must be the foundation for seeking positive social and political change.”—Ann Foster, Goodlad’s Executive Director

Alpine School District is fully committed to the NNER and regularly attends their conferences. By committing to its agenda and allowing John Goodlad to influence education in our district, political change is upon us. Time is short.  And unless we hold public educators responsible for teaching this generation to preserve liberty, there will be no liberty left to preserve.

2010/2011 Survey for Geography Class (Semester I)

Y=Yes      N=No

Mr. Gray is a fun teacher.

8  marked (Y)

2  marked (M) for maybe

There are some good things about Communism.

9 marked (Y)

1 marked (N)

One of the good things about Communism is equality.

7 marked (Y)

3 marked (N)

We should respect others views, even if we disagree.  There is not one “right” view when it comes to different kinds of government.

10 marked (Y)– 100% lack the basic understanding that the American Republic is the most successful and superior form of government there is and well worth defending.

---

Ed. note: Are you really sure you know what’s being taught in your child’s classroom and what ideas your child is picking up on?

Ed. note 2: This article has been edited with the permission of the author so the article just focuses on the most pertinent issues which pertain to state law.

In April 1965, Elder Ezra Taft Benson delivered a landmark talk on the subject of being Anxiously Engaged in the fight for freedom. In that address he quoted President McKay and followed up with his own inspired counsel.

Hear his words: “No greater immediate responsibility rests upon members of the Church, upon all citizens of this Republic and of neighboring Republics than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.” (Cited in Jerreld L. Newquist, Prophets, Principles and National Survival [SLC: Publishers Press, 1964], p. 157.) As important as are all other principles of the gospel, it was the freedom issue which determined whether you received a body. To have been on the wrong side of the freedom issue during the war in heaven meant eternal damnation. How then can Latter-day Saints expect to be on the wrong side in this life and escape the eternal consequences? The war in heaven is raging on earth today. The issues are the same: “Shall men be compelled to do what others claim is for their best welfare” or will they heed the counsel of the prophet and preserve their freedom?

It is a bit surprising to me how many LDS people say they understand the concept of the pre-mortal war in heaven and the choice we made for agency, yet now believe in socialism (Satan’s doctrine) and even say that Joseph Smith taught it. He did not.

From the History of the Church, volume 6, pages 32-33, we read:

Wednesday, 13.—I attended a lecture at the Grove, by Mr. John Finch, a Socialist, from England, and said a few words in reply.
Thursday, 14.—I attended a second lecture on Socialism, by Mr. Finch; and after he got through, I made a few remarks, alluding to Sidney Rigdon and Alexander Campbell getting up a community at Kirtland, and of the big fish there eating up all the little fish. I said I did not believe the doctrine.
Mr. Finch replied in a few minutes, and said—”I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness. I am the spiritual Prophet—Mr. Smith the temporal.”
Elder John Taylor replied to the lecture at some length.

As further evidence, Elder Marion G. Romney was specifically asked by the brethren to deliver a talk in General Conference on the subject, Socialism is Not the United Order. I encourage everyone to read that talk to understand the difference if you are confused on the matter. Socialism is incompatible with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Please feel free to link to this post anytime someone says the LDS church practiced socialism in the past.

Aside from Elder Dallin H. Oaks’ great name, he’s also got a great legal mind. He recently gave a landmark speech on religious freedom and how our 1^st amendment protection is under attack. Several of his remarks are directly pertinent to the issues we are dealing with in Utah, while others are shocking to see them happening anywhere in America.

This talk is not an “LDS” talk. It is specifically non-denominational on this subject and he liberally quotes from non-LDS sources throughout his speech.  I have included a few quotes below but I encourage you to read the talk in its entirety (link).

“I submit that religious values and political realities are so inter-linked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of religion in our public life without seriously jeopardizing our freedoms.”

“Whatever the extent of formal religious affiliation, I believe that the tide of public opinion in favor of religion is receding. A writer for the Christian Science Monitor predicts that the coming century will be “very secular and religiously antagonistic,” with intolerance of Christianity “ris[ing] to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes.”¹⁰

“A visible measure of the decline of religion in our public life is the diminished mention of religious faith and references to God in our public discourse. One has only to compare the current rhetoric with the major addresses of our political leaders in the 18^th, 19^th, and the first part of the 20^th centuries. Similarly, compare what Lincoln said about God and religious practices like prayer on key occasions with the edited versions of his remarks quoted in current history books.¹¹ It is easy to believe that there is an informal conspiracy of correctness to scrub out references to God and the influence of religion in the founding and preservation of our nation.”

“Granted that reduced religious affiliation puts religion “in the background,” the effect of that on the religious beliefs of young adults is still in controversy. The negative view appears in the Oxford book, whose author concludes that this age group of 18 to 23

“had difficulty seeing the possible distinction between, in this case, objective moral truth and relative human invention. . . . [T]hey simply cannot, for whatever reason, believe in—or sometimes even conceive of—a given, objective truth, fact, reality, or nature of the world that is independent of their subjective self-experience.”¹³

This is precisely what John Goodlad, John Dewey, Bill Ayers, and the NNER are working toward…democratic classrooms where truth doesn’t come from God, it’s only what you can see, feel, hear, taste, and touch. If you can’t, then truth is relative to the experience of the individual. This is such a dangerous position to hold for the future of our nation. It is almost unbelievable how strongly this false philosophy has permeated our state of Utah, in particular in Utah county.

“It is well to remember James Madison’s warning:

“There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”⁴⁰

Part 4 of his speech completely focused on this issue of moral relativism. Here are a couple of great quotes from his talk.

“What has caused the current public and legal climate of mounting threats to religious freedom? I believe the cause is not legal but cultural and religious. I believe the diminished value being attached to religious freedom stems from the ascendency of moral relativism.

More and more of our citizens support the idea that all authority and all rules of behavior are man-made and can be accepted or rejected as one chooses. Each person is free to decide for himself or herself what is right and wrong. Our children face the challenge of living in an increasingly godless and amoral society.

I have neither the time nor the expertise to define the various aspects of moral relativism or the extent to which they have entered the culture or consciousness of our nation and its people. I can only rely on respected observers whose descriptions feel right to me.

In his book, Modern Times, the British author Paul Johnson writes:

“At the beginning of the 1920s the belief began to circulate, for the first time at a popular level, that there were no longer any absolutes: of time and space, of good and evil, of knowledge, above all of value.”⁵³

On this side of the Atlantic, Gertrude Himmelfarb describes how the virtues associated with good and evil have been degraded into relative values.⁵⁴

A variety of observers have described the consequences of moral relativism. All of them affirm the existence of God as the Ultimate Law-giver and the source of the absolute truth that distinguishes good from evil.”

“Moral relativism leads to a loss of respect for religion and even to anger against religion and the guilt that is seen to flow from it. As it diminishes religion, it encourages the proliferation of rights that claim ascendency over the free exercise of religion.”

In his conclusion he lists these 4 points:

1. Religious teachings and religious organizations are valuable and important to our free society and therefore deserving of their special legal protection.

2. Religious freedom undergirds the origin and existence of this country and is the dominating civil liberty.

3. The guarantee of free exercise of religion is weakening in its effects and in public esteem.

4. This weakening is attributable to the ascendancy of moral relativism.

This is ultimately what has been the debate in Alpine School district over the past year. Goodlad’s indoctrination center has been gradually teaching the need for democratic classrooms that are accepting of false notions in the name of tolerance for others’ beliefs. We face an incredible battle in the future to help people understand that only through belief in God and His absolute truths can we have any kind of anchor in this world that we can create common standards from. Without God, and religious belief in Him, we will be tossed as the waves of the sea.

There is much more in this excellent speech by Elder Oaks which covers persecution, the gradual loss of freedom, the redefining of rights, and anti-religious bigotry. I strongly encourage you to read the whole talk here:

https://beta-newsroom.lds.org/article/elder-oaks-religious-freedom-Chapman-University

Alpine School District just responded to criticism they received during a Senate Education Committee meeting last week. Their response on the Daily Herald website started with this statement:

“Members of the Alpine School District Board of Education take an oath of office to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Utah.”

Is it not beyond obvious that people can  take an oath and render it meaningless by constructing new meanings and understandings that are not grounded in fact? Our current president is a prime example.

As one of those that testified against some of the actions of Alpine School District during that senate meeting, let me say for the record that I disagree with the points made by the school district on the following grounds.

1) ASD has never been responsive to its primary stakeholders…parents. During one short period of time a few years ago when parents were upset at the district for removing the times tables from the curriculum, I received 4 separate phone calls and emails from individuals who spoke to the same administrator at the district who told each one of them they were the only parent to ever complain about the program. This was clearly an attempt to isolate parents and minimize their concerns. Prior to my involvement which started in 2005, hundreds of parents had been complaining to ASD since Investigations was first implemented in 2001 about the lack of solid math skills being taught. ASD ignored them all, confiscated books at 4 schools I am aware of, and threatened some teacher’s contracts if they taught the times tables to children. I have personally spoken with a teacher who this happened to along with her co-workers. Numerous other teachers have contacted me and told me they used to shut their doors to teach the times tables. How ridiculous is that?

2) This is clearly in dispute. One teacher in particular that was mentioned (not by name) had been teaching students the benefits of communism without the other horrific side of the story on the hundred million or so citizens put to death in the last century by communist dictators. When one student came home and told his mother “communism isn’t really that bad,” she thought maybe it was just her child misinterpreting what the teacher said. So she gave a survey to 10 other students in the class. 9/10 responded with “yes” to the statement “There are some good things about communism.” 7/10 responded “yes” to “One of the good things about communism is equality.” 9/10 responded “yes” to “Islam is a religion of peace.” 10/10 responded “yes” to “We should respect others views, even if we disagree.  There is not one ‘right’ view when it comes to different kinds of government.” There is one right view of government, and that is in following its proper role in protecting freedom and individual rights.

3) Testimony concerning Investigations math didn’t declare it a violation of state law to use the program. My testimony concerned Patti Harrington removing Investigations math from the approved list as a primary curriculum, yet ASD continues to allow Investigations to be used as a full primary curriculum in many classrooms across the district. They say they use “balanced math” which isn’t a program, and continue to let teachers use Investigations math solely. They also use 100% Connected math in many classes and that program has also been removed from the approved list by Patti Harrington because it is also an incredibly weak and ineffective program. These programs actually led to Utah raising it’s math standards a couple years ago.

4) ASD maintains that they invite “responsible and civil participation” to address parent concerns. For nearly a decade, parents have tried to get the district to listen to their concerns in a civil manner. Civility to ASD seems to mean open your mouth and take your medicine. Parents concerns are met with deaf ears and an attitude of, “you’re not a professional educator, we know best.” Whether it is stubborn pride or their own indoctrination in Goodlad and Dewey’s philosophies, ASD is not about to start listening to responsible parents and taking their concerns seriously. They took down the “Enculturating the Young into a Social and Political Democracy” sign just before the November election, yet two senior administrators told parents they may take the sign down but they weren’t going to change their philosophy.  If the district was really concerned with continuous improvement and listening to parental concerns, they would have dropped Investigations math in 2002 right after they were flooded by concerned parents who tried to inform the district about the damage being done by their pseudo-math. In spite of overwhelming evidence that contradicts their position, such as Project Follow-Through, they barrel on, causing untold damage to tens of thousands of children who might otherwise have a future in a math related field.