Sunday, March 10, 2019



South Carolina Stands Up to University, Defends Study of Founding Documents

Should college students be required to study America’s founding ideals and the founding documents from which they emanate?

Many people in South Carolina do.

Last month, the South Carolina Senate passed the Reinforcing College Education on America’s Constitutional Heritage Act (REACH Act), which requires all college students at state colleges to take a three-credit-hour class on the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers.

In fact, the REACH Act passed by the South Carolina Senate is not a new law, but merely updates existing law.

For 95 years, South Carolina law has required public colleges to teach students the founding documents of the United States for “one year.”

But in 2014, University of South Carolina President Harris Pastides called this law “archaic” and refused to comply with it.

He said the law was inconvenient to follow, in need of “modernization,” and that the University of South Carolina teaches the founding documents in ways that “best benefit modern undergraduate … exposure and understanding” by passing out pocket Constitutions on Constitution Day.

Under this logic, the university must also think it could teach chemistry by handing out copies of the periodic table on World Science Day.

As The Daily Signal previously reported, the college president’s argument for why he won’t comply with the state law hinges on a portion of the statute that requires that before a student can graduate, the “power of his loyalty” to the Constitution must be examined.

Pastides claims that’s “problematic” and would generate “lawsuits in the federal judicial system.” So, because he views one small non-essential portion of the law as unconstitutional, he has elected to ignore the other requirement that mandates classes on the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers.

This resistance by Pastides to teaching the Constitution—as required by existing law—is what prompted the South Carolina Senate last month to act to “update” the law by passing the REACH Act.

South Carolina Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey said he was more than annoyed that the “universities don’t think they have to follow the law.”

The REACH Act updates the existing law by removing the law’s loyalty provision and by revising the length of required instruction from “one year” to three credit hours.

The South Carolina Senate debated this legislation for more than three hours, with opposition from several Senate Democrats. Ultimately, by a vote of 29-7, the Senate passed the REACH Act and sent it to the state House of Representatives.

In 1776, 56 Americans signed the Declaration of Independence, recognizing God-given unalienable rights and pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor in support of that.

These were not just words for these men, but a commitment. Three of the four signers from South Carolina paid a price when they were captured by the British during the War for Independence.

The United States is an exceptional country because of its founding principles. Knowledge of those principles is not something with which we are born. It must be learned.

Therefore, it’s critical that students are equipped with a firm understanding of the documents where these principles are enshrined—the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers.

Let’s hope the South Carolina House of Representatives follows the Senate’s lead and embraces the REACH Act.

SOURCE 






Remember the Professor Who Erased Pro-Life Messages on Campus? Here’s How His Actions Backfired

By: Bernadette Tasy

It has been almost two years since Fresno State Professor Greg Thatcher recruited students out of his classroom to help him wipe away university-approved pro-life chalk messages written by my student group, Students for Life at Fresno State.

All of this was caught on video.

Shortly after this incident, in May 2017, Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit on our behalf to defend our First Amendment rights. And a few months later, we won the case.

As part of a settlement agreement, the court ordered Thatcher never to interfere with Students for Life at Fresno State’s activities again. On top of that, he was responsible for almost $26,000 in attorney fees, $2,000 to myself and another student club officer, and was required to attend a free speech training given by ADF attorney Travis C. Barham.

At the time, I did not realize how much of an effect this event would have on us. But looking back, it could not have come at a better time.

Up until that point, our group had struggled with low membership, as we had only three or four active members. When we put up fliers on campus, they were repeatedly torn down and defaced. This run-in with Professor Thatcher? That’s how we finished off an already-disheartening year.

Needless to say, we were discouraged in our on-campus fight to end abortion.

But what Professor Thatcher meant for harm, God used for good.

Within hours, the video reached hundreds of thousands of views, gained national media attention, and prompted individuals on both sides of the abortion issue to discuss free speech for weeks online and on other various platforms.

Since our victory, Students for Life at Fresno State has grown to over 25 active members and become increasingly involved on campus, in the community, and even at the California Capitol. This past January, Students for Life of America even named us the “College Group of the Year.”

And personally, I have been able to use my experiences to help enhance my group, fight against pro-abortion legislation targeting college students in California, understand our rights as a pro-life student group on campus, and grow in my faith.

I also learned this important lesson:

Our ability to spread the pro-life message on campus goes hand-in-hand with our ability to speak freely.

If it were not for this right, we never would have met Jess, a student at Fresno State. Jess visited an information table we held outside on campus, where we passed out 12-week fetal models showing that each child at that stage has arms, legs, fingers, toes, and all the facial features of any human being. Jess took one of these models with her and displayed it on her rearview mirror.

Soon after, she found herself faced with an unplanned pregnancy.

Frantic about financial instability and feeling unready for motherhood, Jess sought out her options at a Planned Parenthood, where a counselor tried to convince her that abortion was her only option. While driving in her car one day, however, the fetal model caught her eye. The model helped her to humanize the baby in her womb, and after speaking with her boyfriend, she decided to choose life.

A few months later, she gave birth to baby Eden.



That same semester, she earned a 4.0 GPA and reconnected with our group. She is now a co-vice president of Students for Life at Fresno State and is dedicated to helping other pregnant students choose life.

Jess is one of many pregnant and parenting students across America who are targeted by the abortion industry. They are told they can’t have a baby and go to school – that they won’t reach their full potential as a mother. But Jess is proof that isn’t true.

Thanks to ADF, we are now free to speak that message on campus, offering hope and help to pregnant and parenting students. Thanks to Professor Thatcher, we are now stronger and better equipped to face the challenges that greet us as we advocate for life on campus and beyond. And thanks to the way God works all things for good, at least one mom chose life, and at least one life was saved.

SOURCE






States Increasingly Police Family 'Thoughtcrimes'

As homeschooling rapidly grows, so too are state-level efforts to "oversee" families.

Oregon, Washington state, and even Iowa are trailblazing another assault on constitutionally protected individual rights. The state legislature in Oregon is currently mulling over a bill that “directs Oregon Health Authority to study home visiting by licensed health care providers.” The bill contends that home visits are “necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety.”

There’s a similar scheme being conjured up in Washington. In January, Gov. Jay Inslee (now a 2020 Democrat presidential contender) declared: “My budget would also offer universal home visits. This gives every new parent the opportunity to get a visit from a nurse during the first few weeks back home with their newborn to share important information and build confidence.”

“Iowa Democrats are also attempting to gain oversight of families, specifically those of homeschoolers,” The Resurgent’s James Silberman reports. “IA HF272 would mandate quarterly ‘health and safety visits’ to homeschool families by school district officials. The bill states that these visits would be with the consent of the parents but also specifies that parents can be overridden if a judge determines there is probable cause for home inspection.”

PJ Media columnist Paula Bolyard astutely observes, “As someone who has been involved in the homeschooling movement for more than 20 years, I have seen many attempts to increase the oversight of children taught at home by requiring home visits by a teacher or social worker. … Anytime a state or locality has tried to draft legislation requiring home visits for homeschooled children, the immediate response has always been, ‘What are they going to do next, require inspections for children from birth until they enter school?’ The answer to that, of course, is yes. That has been the plan all along.”

This is statism, pure and simple. The Daily Signal this week relayed the story of a parent who said, “I was shocked when my 13-year-old daughter told me she was really my transgender son.” The parent added, “Where did she get the idea she was transgender? From a school presentation.”

This is precisely why more and more families are pulling their kids from public schooling and increasingly homeschooling. And while their reasons for doing so are more than justified, statists are ensuring that no age and no home is off limits when it comes to regulating thoughtcrimes.

SOURCE 
 

No comments: