< PREVIOUS ] [ 2002 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
Our state constitution provides that Neither the
general assembly nor the state board of education shall
have the power to prescribe textbooks to be used in the
public schools,
but that doesn't stop certain
legislators from trying to bypass elected local school
boards by imposing a curriculum from Denver.
Five years ago, State Sen. Charles Duke introduced a
bill that would have required our public schools to teach
the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the
Federalist Papers, the Antifederalist Papers, the
Emancipation Proclamation and Washington's Farewell
Address, and to present each writing in the light most
favorable to the author.
That would have been tricky, since we don't always know the author. For instance, the Federalist Papers were published under pen names and their authorship is still a subject of scholarly debate.
Perhaps that explains why Duke's bill died. This time around, another Republican in the state senate, John Andrews of Centennial, has introduced a similar proposal.
According to its summary, SB 136 requires each public
school in the state to teach, in each grade level offered
in the school, an age-appropriate unit on patriotism,
including but not limited to a discussion of the rights,
privileges, and responsibilities involved with United
States citizenship and a historical review of what it means
to be an American.
State action is required, Andrews said, because It's
too important to leave up to the local option.
So much for the oft-stated Republican preference for
local control. They really favor it only when they
control the locals.
Just why is this so important? Maybe I've missed it in all the coverage of the Olympic-medal controversies, but I honestly believe that I'd have heard about it if Colorado teenagers were running off to enlist with the Taliban.
Nor have I noticed any outbreak of flag-burning among schoolchildren, and the local paper has yet to run a story about any youngster who refuses to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem or the like.
The children who walk by my house every weekday morning
and afternoon, on their way to and from the nearby middle
school or high school, can be overheard chatting about
musical preferences, weekend binge drinking and their
romantic adventures; I've never heard them chant Death
to the Great Satan
or Smash the Police
State.
Military recruiters appear to be filling their
enlistment quotas. American flags continue to sprout on the
antennas of cars driven by teenagers. The most subversive
bumper sticker I've seen in the school parking lot is a
fading remnant of the 2000 presidential election: George
and Al make me want to Ralph.
In short, there's no evidence of an outbreak of anti-patriotic sentiments among Colorado schoolchildren, so the Andrews bill is a solution in search of a problem.
Granted, children can develop improper attitudes. Our older daughter, Columbine, spent the 1993-94 school year in Iceland as an exchange student.
Upon her return, she reported that It's really hard
on your patriotism to live in another country, one where
there aren't any beggars on the street because everyone has
a job and a place to live. And kids there can go to any
college they're qualified for at state expense, so they
aren't thousands of dollars in debt when they graduate.
You can drink safely from any river or creek anywhere in
the country. Plus, families don't have to worry about
medical bills or losing their health insurance, and it's a
good system because they've got the longest life-expectancy
in the world.
As good American parents, we explained that Iceland was an evil socialist state and therefore an enemy of liberty and freedom. She pointed out that Iceland had been a faithful NATO ally, and that it held free elections, had an uncensored press, offered religious liberty and so forth.
We were tempted to blame the sponsor of her trip, that well-known subversive global enterprise, Rotary International, for the terrible attitudes she developed.
But this sort of thing could have happened even if Andrews's scheme had been in effect for the past century. And his proposal illustrates one of the major contradictions among our right-thinkers.
They complain (and they're often right) that our public schools aren't teaching basic skills. Kids graduate from high school unable to read their diplomas, they have trouble even counting change, etc.
So you'd think they'd want schools to focus on that. But you'd be wrong. If it isn't patriotic indoctrination, it's school prayer, or abstinence promotion, or creation science, or drug education -- adding material to the school curriculum is promoted by the same right-thinkers who complain that the schools aren't teaching anyway.
In other words, why would a patriotism class work better than a grammar class? Maybe Sen. Andrews can answer that question; I know I can't.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 2002 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >