Mediaboss Marketing

For a while now, I have been waiting for the battle lines to be drawn in what many are calling the most significant leak of top-secret documents in at least a decade and maybe longer.

This seemed to be perfect culture-war material, because, lets face it, what isnt? As you may have noticed, the culture wars are only getting hotter particularly on abortion and guns, which, while always contentious, are now running code red and will presumably stay that way at least until the 2024 elections and, very possibly, forevermore.

All we needed in the leak case was some idea of whom to blame. Was it Joe Biden or the so-called Deep State? Was it Donald Trump, whos had his own issues with classified documents? Was it a whistleblower? Was it someone in the military tied to a right-wing militia group? Was it Russian-style cyberwar? Couldnt there be some way to blame the Chinese or at least the Iranians?

In any case, once we had a villain, then we could probably get really serious about a leak that, from all we know, seems to be plenty serious enough one that disclosed not only official insights into the state of the Russia-Ukraine war but also provided highly classified information on Americas ability to spy on Russia as well as on certain, presumably quite unhappy, U.S. allies.

Subscribe to get an exclusive first look at his columns twice a week.

So, now we have a villain, or at least a suspected one in Jack Teixeira a 21-year-old member of the Massachusetts Air National Guard who has been arrested and charged with leaking hundreds of classified documents in violation of the Espionage Act.

But even with a villain, we have a story that doesnt fit any easy classification because its a story that is, more than anything else, so hard to believe. And one, as Jonathan Last points out in Bulwark the anti-Trump website run by conservatives and former Republicans that shouldnt devolve into a culture war despite some of the usual more-than-disturbing details about the accused leaker and his friends. I mean, isnt everyone against the nether regions, and even some open regions, of the Internet?

Yes, Teixeira is, his friends tell us, a gun enthusiast, with libertarian views, who is antiwar (presumably channeling Tucker Carlsons version of Putinism), patriotic, religious, from a military background, and someone with real concerns about Americas future. He also has a lot of guns, and members of his chat group showed the Washington Post video of Teixeira shouting racist and antisemitic slurs before firing a rifle. Yes, so its very disturbing.

If it sounds like right-wing extremism, and it probably is, thats still not the whole story. There are other, important angles here.

We can begin with the fact that this obviously represents a failure, and only the most recent one, of the intelligence community and how, in this case, a 21-year-old, who was basically an IT specialist assigned to an Army intelligence unit, could have access to such sensitive documents. Were told thousands of people could have had access to them. And as many experts have pointed out, how good are background checks on teenagers? Teixeira apparently got his top clearance when he was 19. I guess we can say someone wasnt, uh, woke on this one.

Leaks can be beneficial. Think Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. And it has been clear for decades that we have too many classified documents, but its just as clear that far too many people have access to the classified information that is simply too dangerous to be revealed.

While the problem may be difficult to fix, it is easy enough to understand. Obviously, some serious reform is required.

And then theres the backstory on this case, which is another take on the dangers of social media. And, in this case, we cant even blame Elon Musk, although it would be simpler if we could.

This part of the story, I guess, is also easy to understand but much harder to fathom.

It starts with a chat group. Of course it does. The leaker and his friends met on a site called Oxide Hub on a platform called Discord and then decided to move to a closed gamer group, which apparently had somewhere between 20 to 30 members.

The group, also on Discord, was called Thug Shaker Central, a name apparently derived from a racist meme. According to multiple stories, the group enjoyed a game called Project Zomboid, which has been described as the ultimate zombie survival game. What else? And in their spare time, the group exchanged racist and antisemitic views and also talked about guns and about the war in Ukraine.

This is where the story turns. In an effort, were told, to inform and impress the group, Teixeira started posting elements of the information he had learned from reading classified documents on the Russian assault on Ukraine. The posts were long and complicated, and many of the members, were told, started losing interest.

And so the leaker upped the stakes, posting photos of documents labeled TOP SECRET, which got everyones attention. According to people on the chat group, Teixeira warned group members that the information had to be kept within the group. But according to the New York Times, a 17-year-old named Lucca would publish many of the photos on a group called #War-Posting.

The Times story generously suggests that Lucca might not have fully grasped the gravity of the documents he had been given access to. Thats a decent guess. It took weeks for anyone to notice including the U.S. intelligence community that this secret information had gone public. That is, until Telegram, which is a messaging app popular in both Ukraine and Russia, started posting the secrets.

And then came the firestorm. And then came word from Teixeira that he was shutting everything down.

One chat-room member, who went by Vahki, said Teixeira told them: Guys, its been good I love you all. I never wanted it to get like this. I prayed to God that this would never happen. And I prayed and prayed and prayed. Only God can decide what happens from now on.

As Vahki pointed out, this could be life-in-prison stuff.

It certainly could be life-and-death stuff. If we understand just that much, we know we dont have to take sides, or draw battle lines, on this one. The real battle lines, after all, are in Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine is, of course, a different matter. That should be debated and argued, just not the way the ultimate culture warrior, Tucker Carlson, wants to debate it, with the truth, as the saying goes, the first casualty of war.

But the fact is you can read all about it and in some cases, obviously much too much about it on a social media post near you.

Mike Littwin has been a columnist for too many years to count. He has covered Dr. J, four presidential inaugurations, six national conventions and countless brain-numbing speeches in the New Hampshire and Iowa snow.

Originally posted here:
Littwin: Now that we know the alleged villain in the leaked ... - The Colorado Sun

The Australian and Aboriginal flags fly over Sydney Harbour Bridge. Australians must now decide on a body to represent Indigenous people. Photo / Getty Images

OPINION:

A Kiwi wandering into an Australian pub these days might find the chatter at the bar is about something they didnt expect.

The chances are that bar patrons will be sparring over the upcoming voice referendum rather than, say, the weekend footy or the upcoming Ashes series.

Given that the voice debate has underlying themes of identity and belonging, it might have some degree of familiarity for Kiwis. They are, after all, the themes of some of the conversations (or slanging matches, more like) going on in New Zealand.

Across the Tasman, the voice in question is that of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. What Australians will be asked in the referendum is whether there should be constitutional recognition of the continents original inhabitants.

Its an issue thats dividing Australians and, whatever the outcome of the referendum, about half the country is going to be unhappy. Especially now that hopes of a bipartisan approach appear to have been dashed.

A yes vote would mean changing the constitution to give the Indigenous population a voice, meaning theyll be able to advise the Australian Parliament and Government on laws and policies that affect their wellbeing.

It wont deliver anything in the way of tangible benefits, such as new services or funding. And it wont lead to any laws being invalidated. It would simply enshrine two fundamental principles, recognition and consultation.

It doesnt seem a lot to ask on behalf of one of the oldest living cultures on Earth.

Yet the referendum subject is controversial and creating deep splits. Not surprisingly, its one of the five biggest news stories of 2023, as measured by the number of hours a story spends on the homepages of major Australian news sites.

The politics of the issue are intriguing. Since winning last years election, the Labor PM Anthony Albanese has been urging Australians to seize the moment. His catchcry is, if not now, when? The polls suggest hes on a winner, though the gap has narrowed slightly in the past month.

Meanwhile, the Opposition and Liberal leader, Peter Dutton, has decided to champion the no case. He argues the referendum is divisive and wont materially help First Nations people, many of whom continue to live in appalling conditions. Instead of a peoples vote, he wants regional and local voices established by legislation.

The sniping has gone up a level since Dutton made his call, as I observed on an Easter visit to Australia.

Hes been tagged a heartless Judas and accused of fuelling a culture war campaign. There are howls of outrage about race-based constitutional change. A Liberal grandee has denounced the yes camp for trying to denigrate and humiliate opponents. And the exercise has been described you probably guessed it as wokeness, a promotion of identity politics.

Duttons strategy sure feels risky.

Hes managed to alienate some of his own party. His shadow minister for Indigenous Australians has resigned the role, and the Liberals deputy leader and several other frontbenchers are refusing to say how theyll campaign ahead of the vote. Most worryingly, a shade under 40per cent of Liberal voters back the yes case, either strongly or partly, according to Newspoll.

Yet despite that latter statistic, his sagging popularity, and the fact the Liberals lost a March by-election the Government won an Opposition seat in a by-election for the first time in 100 years Dutton is going for broke and making the referendum a partisan political issue. Aussie commentators have had plenty to say about whether thats a wise idea.

If the referendum fails and many are pointing out that no referendum in Australia has succeeded without bipartisan support some warn of sorrowful times ahead. And Dutton will inevitably be blamed for that.

Thats the thing with polarising issues that attract labels such as culture war and wokeness. There is seldom, if ever, any upside for politicians who wade in, but there can be downside, as we have seen here recently.

We tend to remember only the blunders, like Greens co-leader Marama Davidson blaming violence on white cis men, and Nationals Simon OConnor boorishly responding, on the day after a US school shooting, that the shooter didnt fit that description.

We are getting used to New Zealand opposition politicians trying to capture and exploit the public mood on issues where theres a marked polarity of opinion.

Co-governance, hate speech laws, transgender rights and the use of Te Reo Mori have offered them plenty of material.

Co-governance is probably the foremost example.

Whether the public unease about it is a consequence of the issue being poorly communicated, or just the Government being tone deaf on where the political centre is, the upshot is that it has presented an opportunity for the doomsayers.

So Christopher Luxon demands an end to co-governance in public services because the conversation about it is immature and divisive. David Seymour derides it as a culture war that must be resolved by a referendum. And Winston Peters mentions co-governance when lamenting the seeds of apartheid being sprinkled around New Zealand.

By whipping up a squall of drama, they hope to position themselves on what they see as the right side of the divide over the issue, and if theres votes in taking that position, so much the better.

British academic Matthew Goodwin, a specialist in populist politics, has written of the lingering divides over values, voice and virtue that are emerging in the UK, and the political risks for parties that amplify those divisions.

In New Zealand, where the dark shadow of high inflation and rising borrowing costs means the upcoming election will be overwhelmingly about the economy, its difficult to see how such culture-war divisions will change many votes.

But that wont stop some politicians from trying.

- Mike Munro is a former chief of staff for Jacinda Ardern and was chief press secretary for Helen Clark.

Read more from the original source:
Mike Munro: Politicians wade into the culture wars - New Zealand Herald

In a slap to Muslim girls at Stuyvesant High School, the school is canceling single-sex swim lessons, even though swim instruction is required to graduate. That forces the girls to choose between preserving their modesty and getting a diploma.

Count on Muslim families to fight back and likely prevail. Nationwide, Muslims are taking up the battle in schools to protect traditional religious values, including modesty.

Move over, Roman Catholics, evangelical Christians and conservative Jews. Reinforcements have arrived, and theyre turning the tide.

Even in the Ivy League. After weeks of protests by female Muslim students, Yale University is switching its campus housing policy for the coming academic year to offer single-gender dorms and bathrooms.

From Michigan to Virginia, Muslim parents are showing up at local school board meetings to oppose graphic sex education and gender fluidity indoctrination. Their engagement is impacting politics. More Muslims are voting Republican, concluding that the Democratic Party is trampling Islamist values.

In Dearborn, Michigan, left-wing Democrat Rep. Rashida Tlaib opposed the Muslim parents in her district protesting sexually explicit materials in school.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues its lurch to the extreme left. President Joe Bidens Department of Education announced double-barreled rule changes last week, one favoring transgender athletes in elementary and middle school, and the other revoking a Trump-era commitment by the department to protect religious clubs and associations on college campuses. Flipping the bird to people of faith twice in a single week.

The Democratic Party is blowing off traditional values.

Sexual modesty is a core value in Islam. Muslims observe a dress code and guard against physical contact between sexes once students reach adolescence.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects an employees right to practice religion in the workplace, but there is no comparable statutory protection for students. Muslims are waging the battle one campus demonstration and school board meeting at a time, often winning.

Muslims are powerful at Yale. In 2021, undergrads elected a Muslim woman to be student body president. And on March 10, Yale acceded to demands from the Muslim Student Association, Orthodox Jews at Yale and other religious groups to provide single-sex campus housing. Muslim women students had protested that with men in the bathroom, they couldnt even remove their hijab.

Modesty is the issue at Stuyvesant High School, too. Brian Moran, assistant principal of physical education, told the student newspaper that the girls single-sex swim classes clashed with other scheduling priorities. He made it sound like a mere scheduling inconvenience was justification enough for the change, and told the girls to wear full-body burkinis. Sorry, but those still cling to the body when wet.

New York Citys Board of Education website promises trans students alternative arrangements for anyone with a need or desire for increased privacy. Why should Muslim students get less? One in every 10 students in the citys school system is Muslim.

Last September, Muslim women at Syracuse University waged a battle for swim time without men in the college pool and won a concession that starts next fall.

In Utah, the Muslim Civic League worked with the Sikh and Jewish communities to pass a state law in February allowing school athletes to wear turbans, hijabs and modest pants and tops in competition instead of the regulation form fitting uniforms.

Luna Banuri, the leagues executive director, said: All faiths have modesty standards. We believe this affects multiple communities. Maryland and Illinois recently passed similar laws.

In Bethel, Ohio, a coalition of Muslim and Christian parents are suing to preserve single-sex bathrooms and locker rooms and halt a rule change that would allow biological boys to use the girls facilities.

Most Muslims still vote Democratic, but the shift is beginning. According to a Wall Street Journal exit poll, 28% voted Republican in the 2022 midterms, a double-digit increase over the 2018 midterms.

Republicans are gaining ground as more Muslims conclude the Democratic Party doesnt show regard for Islamic values.

Tell educators to respect families with faith-based values instead of shunning them.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York and chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths.

More:
Star Parker Muslims turning the tide in the school culture wars - The Mountain Press

"Fortunately, the voters saw through the hidden extremists who were running for school board across the [Chicago] suburbs especially," Gov. JB Pritzker told reporters after last weeks election. | Susan Walsh/AP Photo

Amid all the attention on this months elections in Wisconsin and Illinois, one outcome with major implications for 2024 flew under the national radar: School board candidates who ran culture-war campaigns flamed out.

Democrats and teachers unions boasted candidates they backed in Midwestern suburbs trounced their opponents in the once-sleepy races. The winning record, they said, was particularly noticeable in elections where conservative candidates emphasized agendas packed with race, gender identity and parental involvement in classrooms.

While theres no official overall tally of school board results in states that held an array of elections on April 4, two conservative national education groups did not dispute that their candidates posted a losing record. Liberals are now making the case that their winning bids for school board seats in Illinois and Wisconsin show they can beat back Republican attacks on divisive education issues.

The results could also serve as a renewed warning to Republican presidential hopefuls like Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis: General election voters are less interested in crusades against critical race theory and transgender students than they are in funding schools and ensuring they are safe.

Where culture war issues were being waged by some school board candidates, those issues fell flat with voters, said Kim Anderson, executive director of the National Education Association labor union. The takeaway for us is that parents and community members and voters want candidates who are focused on strengthening our public schools, not abandoning them.

The results from the Milwaukee and Chicago areas are hardly the last word on the matter. Thousands more local school elections are set for later this year in some two dozen states. They are often low turnout, low profile, and officially nonpartisan affairs, and conservatives say they are competing aggressively.

We lost more than we won earlier this month, said Ryan Girdusky, founder of the conservative 1776 Project political action committee, which has ties to GOP megadonor and billionaire Richard Uihlein and endorsed an array of school board candidates this spring and during the 2022 midterms.

But we didnt lose everything. We didnt get obliterated, Girdusky told POLITICO of his groups performance. We still pulled our weight through, and we just have to keep on pushing forward on this.

Labor groups and Democratic operatives are nevertheless flexing over the defeat of candidates they opposed during races that took place near Chicago, which received hundreds of thousands of dollars in support from state Democrats and the attention of Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker, and in Wisconsin. Conservative board hopefuls also saw mixed results in Missouri and Oklahoma.

Democrats hope the spring school election season validates their playbook: Coordinate with local party officials, educator unions and allied community members to identify and support candidates who wield an affirming pro-public education message and depict competitors as hard-right extremists.

Yet despite victories in one reliably blue state and one notorious battleground, liberals are still confronting Republican momentum this year that could resemble Novembers stalemated midterm results for schools and keep the state of education divided along partisan lines.

Conservative states are already carrying out sharp restrictions on classroom lessons, LGBTQ students, and library books. And they are beginning to refine their message to appeal to moderates.

Trump, DeSantis, former Vice President Mike Pence, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and other Republican presidential hopefuls are leaning on school-based wedge issues to court primary voters in a crowded White House campaign.

That rhetoric, combined with Republican Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkins ability to harness voter frustration with education as part of his upset victory in 2021, has inspired a wave of conservative challengers to run for school board seats.

Once the domain for everyday academic concerns, mild-mannered bureaucracy, and the occasional controversy, school boards became a lightning rod for the right during pandemic lockdowns plus a national reckoning with gender identity and race.

Critical race theory was an obscure academic legal framework used to examine racism in American institutions. But it has been reframed by conservative activists to encompass broad complaints about issues related to diversity.

Conservatives have also seized on transgender students to rejuvenate a social agenda that includes a push to restrict transgender athletes in sports, gender-affirming medical care and access to LGBTQ-affirming library materials.

What I was most surprised by was just the sheer prevalence of these Republican candidates, said Ben Hardin, executive director of the Democratic Party of Illinois, after his party made an unprecedented decision to endorse dozens of local school and library board candidates and funnel nearly $300,000 into those elections.

Obviously this is not a new phenomenon, Hardin said in an interview. But to see it so widespread here in Illinois, across the state in regions that are across the partisanship spectrum, was what was most interesting to me.

In Oswego, Ill., a small community in Chicagos far southwestern suburbs, the 1776 Project supported four candidates running as part of a We The Parents slate on a platform aligned with the conservative parental rights movement. Each of those candidates lost, including to one candidate endorsed by a local Illinois Federation of Teachers affiliate.

The race, like many others across the region, featured core concerns that are often splitting school communities today.

The Chicago Tribune reported Oswegos We The Parents slate received support from the local Stamp Act political action committee, which proclaims it will fight to preserve our cultural and religious heritage and resist attempts by the Left to transform and reshape American society.

The conservative Awake Illinois group, which has opposed critical race theory and gender-affirming medical care for children, weighed in too.

A group of conservative candidates in the wealthy Chicago suburb of Barrington who were backed by the 1776 PAC, Moms For America Action and Awake Illinois also lost their school board bids.

Fortunately, the voters saw through the hidden extremists who were running for school board across the [Chicago] suburbs especially, Pritzker told reporters after last weeks election. Im glad that those folks were shown up and, frankly, tossed out.

Overall, the 1776 Project PAC endorsed 14 candidates but won six races in Illinois. Other conservatives also notched wins in Illinois, including two candidates who claimed seats in a suburban high school district in Lockport Township, Ill. over two union-endorsed aspirants.

The Democratic Party of Illinois said 84 of 117 candidates the party recommended won their April 4 races. The Illinois Education Association, the state affiliate of the National Education Association, said it won nearly 90 percent of the races where it endorsed candidates.

Part of the reason we did so well is because of how we are organized, said Kathi Griffin, president of the Illinois Education Association. The state organization does not tell the local affiliates who to support. It is the local affiliates that do the interviewing of candidates, have relationships with the community and with the parents. They are the ones that make the decision, then they reach out to us to ask for support.

Teacher unions are also celebrating a school board victory in a bellwether community in suburban Milwaukee.

Brian Schimming, chair of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, described the Wauwatosa School Board election last month as an important race for the whole state.

Schimming promoted candidates known as the Three Tosa Dads who emphasized a platform centered on school safety and academic performance after the Republican National Committee last year encouraged candidates to broaden their message beyond culture wars and court independent voters with a more nuanced message focused on parental involvement and student educational development.

Wauwatosas GOP-backed aspirants still lost by wide margins to teacher union-supported candidates. The 1776 Project won slightly less than half of the nearly 50 Wisconsin races it endorsed candidates in.

Other efforts led by Wisconsin Republicans were more successful.

In Waukesha County, where voters heavily favored Trump in the 2020 election, the local party successfully endorsed dozens of area school board candidates as part of a WisRed Initiative to dominate local government races.

But Moms For Liberty, a newly prominent conservative group that helps train and endorse school board candidates, said just eight of its candidates won races in Wisconsin last week. The group had endorsed candidates in another 20 elections, its founders said.

We are hopeful that as more people learn about Moms For Liberty and contribute to our PAC, we will be able to win more races, organization co-founders Tiffany Justice and Tina Descovich said in a statement. The majority of those [endorsements] were first time candidates who did not win, and that just gives us a great bench of folks to have trained and ready to run again to fight for parental rights in future elections.

The results offer lessons to both parties as they eye even more board elections this year.

Education was central to Youngkins win, though his political advisers have stressed the campaigns success was based on building custom messaging models targeted at different groups of voters instead of relying on a single message.

Conservative school campaigns should heed similar advice, Girdusky argued.

Dont assume that a blanket message on critical race theory or transgender issues is going to claim every district its very personalized, he said. If its happening in that district, speak to it in volumes. But dont tell parents something is happening if its not happening, because then it doesnt look like youre running a serious operation.

Read more:
Why GOP culture warriors lost big in school board races this month - POLITICO

DURHAM, N.C. (RNS) This month we have marked the Jewish Passover and Christian Easter, and Muslims will soon end the holy month of Ramadan with the feast of Eid al-Fitr a religious convergence that many celebrate as a sign of Americas robust religious diversity.

But in my purple state of North Carolina, Republican lawmakers have proposed another expansion of charter schools, a movement that has as one of its premises that parents ought to have the right to separate their evangelical Christian or Catholic children from Jewish and Muslim children and those of other faiths.

The topic of school choice has caused a fever here since last year, when the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals deemed that charter schools specifically one in Brunswick County, near Wilmington, that demanded girls wear skirts are state actors. This designation would prevent the state from approving religious charters publicly funded private faith academies as unconstitutional. Charter school advocates in at least 10 states are now seeking a reversal from the Supreme Court.

Attacks on public schools are hardly restricted to the right. A decade ago, the Gates Foundation funded a piece of propaganda called Waiting for Superman to persuade progressives that racial solidarity excludes support for teacher unions.

But in the past few election cycles, the anti-public school wing of the Republican Party has ramped up its use of religious freedom arguments to mobilize parents and convince voters that public schools are too progressive,too secular, too compassionate. The old arguments against public schools had it that teachers werent competent to teach. Today they are accused of being too good at brainwashing our kids.

The only cure for this, charter school backers say, is to redirect money for our public schools to charter schools, private schools, parochial schools any institution where privilege and exclusion can operate freely. They appeal to non-Christian and minority parents by offering them vouchers for, say, Jewish academies or by pointing to inner-city charters that build character and empowerment.

But as Ronit Y. Stahl wrote recently, these appeals are a fig leaf used by white evangelicals and a majority Catholic court to bolster a white, conservative Christian agenda.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten has named the escalation: Attacks on public education are not new. The difference today is that the attacks are intended to destroy it. In North Carolina, coalitions are seeking to counter these attacks and preserve public schools, but their funding is mere drops in a bucket compared to the rights water cannons.

A key moment was the trifecta of doom handed down by the Supreme Court last June. The Dobbs v. Jackson abortion decision, decided June 24, was bracketed by two decisions on religion and public education. In Carson v. Makin, decided June 21, the court prohibited a state from choosing not to fund religious schools with public funding. Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in her dissent: Today, the Court leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation.

In Kennedy v. Bremerton, decided June 27, the majority of the court went in from the other door, ruling that public-school officials are, in Sotomayors words, required to allow one of its employees to incorporate a public, communicative display of the employees personal religious beliefs into a school event. She continued, Government neutrality toward religion is particularly important in the public-school context given the role public schools play in our society.

This moment was decades in the making. The list of briefs on both cases shows that foundations committed to the privatization of public goods in the name of religion, and the use of public funding for religious endeavors, had invested heavily in the results.

The destabilization of public schools has an even longer pedigree, however. James Davison Hunter is the evangelical Christian sociologist at the University of Virginia credited by The Wall Street Journal with coining the phrase culture wars in 1991, the year before Pat Buchanan. In Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, published that year, Hunter borrowed the term, he explained, from the German kulturkampf of the last decades of the nineteenth century. In Germany, culture wars were a battle to preserve the religious content and character of public education.

Hunter, through his Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, established the conceit that the battles over education and children required a religious people versus secular humanist formula. He understood that the quickest way to portray public schooling itself as a problem was to paint public school proponents as enemies of religious freedom.

The Cato Institutes amicus brief in the 2022 Carson v. Makin case draws almost directly from his 2000 book, The Death of Character: Moral Education in an Age Without Good or Evil.

Indeed, secularism in public schools has become akin to a state-established religion: the secular values that the state promotes conflict with deeply and sincerely held religious beliefs, so classroom conflicts often arise. Maine unjustly alienates religious individuals, treating them as second-class citizens in the context of school tuitioning for merely living as their faith demands.

Sotomayors minority dissent comes from a core conviction shared by the majority of U.S. citizens. In North Carolina, polls show a majority of citizens want more funding for public schools, not less, and even deep in the conservative heart of Texas, rural residents have rejected plans for vouchers. Public schools have support across partisan and religious lines. It is a public good that people across faiths share, recognizing that integrated and well-funded public schools deserve our vocal, interfaith support.

Amy Laura Hall. Courtesy photo

(Amy Laura Hall is associate professor of Christian ethics and of gender, sexuality and feminist studies at Duke University. She is the author, most recently, of Laughing at the Devil: Seeing the World With Julian of Norwich. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

View post:
How school choice drives America's people of faith apart - Religion News Service