logo
Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners

Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners

Miami Herald06-05-2025

Opinion Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners | Opinion
The 'queens' and 'queers' of the kindergarten alphabet book 'Pride Puppy' finally had their day before the Supreme Court. Predictably on Tuesday, the six conservative justices were not pleased with the Maryland school district that made exposure to this and four other LGBTQ+-themed books a mandatory part of the grade-school English curriculum starting in kindergarten.
Religious parents in Montgomery County, Maryland objected to what their kids were being exposed to and made a federal case out of it — this one centered on the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment.
As the First Amendment protects my writing, I am a big fan of an expansive reading of the five freedoms it protects — religion, speech, press, assembly and the right to petition the government. But it shouldn't take a coming rebuke from the Supreme Court to get schools to remember that they are only borrowing our kids. Parents' values should be treated with respect.
Public schools ought to be a little more modest about how they teach issues that divide us, particularly to young children not yet used to questioning the sanity of the adults around them. If parents don't have the bucks for private school or the time and patience for home schooling, they shouldn't have to hand their kids over for a first grade indoctrination in intersectional feminism.
Let's take LGBTQ and religious views out of it. We all know that kids are impressionable. What would you think if kindergartners were required to be exposed to books that presented smoking in a puppy-themed, sparkly and rainbow bedecked light?
We'd never do that. Indeed, the Maryland schools intended message of tolerance and support for some kinds of diversity can be widely found on the internet, cable and broadcast and streaming TV, movies and music. But positive depictions of smoking are rare. They can get you slapped with an R rating or raise questions about your broadcast license. We know kids are susceptible to influence from how things are portrayed and we know that some things are only appropriate for an older audience.
While most Americans think tobacco is bad for you and most Americans don't think that about being gay, for people who do object, the idea that images and the way things are portrayed to kids can be influential is well-accepted idea.
In the coming year, this issue is going to heat up. If you haven't noticed already, the 250th anniversary of the opening battles of the Revolutionary War have already passed. The drumbeat of anniversaries will continue to get louder culminating in a national celebration of the 250th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026. Next school year, the nation's pupils will be awash in Revolutionary War pedagogy.
Among the leading voices in shaping what they hear is the 1619 Project, an educational K-12 version of which has been adopted by 4,500 schools across the country. Among its more debatable contentions are the claims that American capitalism is intimately bound with racism, that the Revolutionary War was launched, in part, to protect slavery from British-led reform efforts and that the very idea of police in America is descended from patrols engaged in recapturing escaped slaves.
These aren't questions of religious orthodoxy that the Supreme Court can sweep in and give parents a right to opt-out of for reasons of religious freedom. Nevertheless, in the lower grades, schools shouldn't be using complicated and contested interpretations of history to encourage impressionable young children to hate their homeland. Leave such debates for the adults and older students who are equipped to interrogate the evidence for themselves and not as likely to take the word of a teacher as gospel.
Kindergarteners don't need to know the word queer any more than 1st graders need to critique capitalism or even know the word at all. Public schools should remember these kids are ours and treat us — and our kids — with a little more respect.
David Mastio
Opinion Contributor,
The Kansas City Star Go to X Go to Facebook Email this person
David Mastio has worked for newspaper opinion sections since starting as letters editor of USA Today in 1995. Since then he has been the most conservative member of the liberal editorial board at both USA Today and The Virginian-Pilot, the most liberal member of the conservative editorial board at the Washington Times and founding editorial page editor at the conservative Washington Examiner. As an editorial writer, he has covered the environment, tech, science, local business and national economic policy and politics. Outside of the opinion pages, he has been a Washington correspondent for The Detroit News where he covered the intersection of the environment, regulatory policy and the car industry, California editor of the Center Square and a speech writer on trade and economics for the George W. Bush administration. He also founded his own web company called BlogNetNews, which aggregated and reported on the blog conversations across the political aisle focused on local news and politics in all 50 states.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

History, schmistory — MAGA has its eyes on the future
History, schmistory — MAGA has its eyes on the future

Boston Globe

time31 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

History, schmistory — MAGA has its eyes on the future

Advertisement However, if the issues that MAGA Americans find most vexing are either solved or substantially improved (by data and objective sources), their continued contempt for history will be justified and little attention will be given to precedent. In this scenario, all established American institutions will be in some form of jeopardy. I attribute the continued success of the MAGA ideology and its practices to a desire of many to deal with problems simply and in a straightforward manner. I also contend that this methodology is itself too simple and lacks the depth needed to solve complex problems. Advertisement As our Framers taught us all those years ago, successful outcomes are the result of intelligent, detailed, and informed compromise, which, sadly, is in short supply these days. Peter Vangsness Medway

US cities cap Pride Month with a mix of party and protest

time2 hours ago

US cities cap Pride Month with a mix of party and protest

NEW YORK -- The monthlong celebration of LGBTQ+ Pride reaches its rainbow-laden crescendo as New York and other major cities around the world host major parades and marches on Sunday. The festivities in Manhattan, home to the nation's oldest and largest Pride celebration, kick off with a march down Fifth Avenue featuring more than 700 participating groups and expected huge crowds. Marchers will wind past the Stonewall Inn, a Greenwich Village gay bar where a 1969 police raid triggered protests and fired up the LGBTQ+ rights movement. The site is now a national monument. In San Francisco, marchers in another of the world's largest Pride events will head down the city's central Market Street, reaching concert stages set up at the Civic Center Plaza. San Francisco's mammoth City Hall is also among the venues hosting a post-march party. Chicago, Seattle, Minneapolis and Toronto, Canada are among the other major North American cities hosting Pride parades on Sunday. Several global cities including Tokyo, Paris and Sao Paulo, held their events earlier this month while others come later in the year, including London in July and Rio de Janeiro in November. The first pride march was held in New York City in 1970 to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the Stonewall uprising. Pride celebrations are typically a daylong mix of jubilant street parties and political protest, but organizers said this year's iterations will take a more defiant stance than recent years. The festivities come days after the tenth anniversary of the Supreme Court's landmark June 26, 2015, ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that recognized same-sex marriage nationwide. But Republicans, led by President Donald Trump, have sought to roll back LGBTQ+ friendly policies. Since taking office in January, Trump has specifically targeted transgender people, removing them from the military, preventing federal insurance programs from paying for gender-affirmation surgeries for young people and attempting to keep transgender athletes out of girls and women's sports. The theme for the Manhattan event is, appropriately, 'Rise Up: Pride in Protest." San Francisco's Pride theme is 'Queer Joy is Resistance' while Seattle's is simply 'Louder.' 'This is not a time to be quiet,' Patti Hearn, Seattle Pride's executive director, said in a statement ahead of the event. 'We will stand up. We will speak up. We will get loud.' Among the other headwinds faced by gay rights groups this year is the loss of corporate sponsorship. American companies have pulled back support of Pride events, reflecting a broader walking back of diversity and inclusion efforts amid shifting public sentiment. NYC Pride said earlier this month that about 20% of its corporate sponsors dropped or reduced support, including PepsiCo and Nissan. Organizers of San Francisco Pride said they lost the support of five major corporate donors, including Comcast and Anheuser-Busch.

Justice Jackson: Supreme Court appears to favor 'monied interests' over ordinary citizens
Justice Jackson: Supreme Court appears to favor 'monied interests' over ordinary citizens

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Justice Jackson: Supreme Court appears to favor 'monied interests' over ordinary citizens

WASHINGTON − For the second time this month, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has complained that her colleagues are weighing the scales of justice differently depending on who is asking for help. 'This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens,' she wrote in her disagreement with the majority's June 20 decision that fuel producers can challenge California emissions standards under a federal air pollution law. Jackson's dissent came two weeks after she wrote that the court is sending a 'troubling message" that it's departing from basic legal standards for the Trump administration. The court's six conservatives include three appointed by President Donald Trump in his first term. In a case involving the Trump administration, the Supreme Court on June 6 said Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency could have complete access to the data of millions of Americans kept by the U.S. Social Security Administration. Jackson said a majority of the court didn't require the administration to show it would be 'irreparably harmed' by not getting immediate access, one of the legal standards for intervention. "It says, in essence, that although other stay applicants must point to more than the annoyance of compliance with lower court orders they don't like," she wrote, "the Government can approach the courtroom bar with nothing more than that and obtain relief from this Court nevertheless." More: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson can throw a punch. Literally. The court's two other liberals – Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan – also disagreed with the majority's opinion in the Trump case. But Kagan joined the conservatives June 20 in siding with the fuel producers. Jackson, however, said there were multiple reasons the court shouldn't have heard the case from among the thousands of appeals it receives. Those reasons include the fact that the change in administrations was likely to make the dispute go away. But by ruling in the fuel industry's favor, Jackson wrote, the court made it easier for others to challenge anti-pollution laws. 'And I worry that the fuel industry's gain comes at a reputational cost for this Court, which is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests,' she said in her dissent. A clock, a mural, a petition: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's chambers tell her story Jackson said the court's 'remarkably lenient approach' to the fuel producers' challenge stands in contrast to the 'stern stance' it's taken in cases involving fair housing, desegrated schools or privacy concerns. In response, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who authored the 7-2 opinion, pointed to other cases he said show the court is even handed. Those include its decision last year that anti-abortion doctors couldn't challenge the Food and Drug Administration's handling of a widely used abortion drug. More: Supreme Court revives suit against cop who fatally shot driver stopped for unpaid tolls 'In this case, as we have explained, this Court's recent standing precedents support the conclusion that the fuel producers have standing,' Kavanaugh wrote about the industry's ability to sue. 'The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders,' he wrote. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Justice Jackson questions if 'monied interests' are favored by court

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store