|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The push to remove taxpayer-funded ‘porn propaganda‘ from government-run schools in South Carolina gained momentum earlier this month when the S.C. State Board of Education (SCSBE) voted unanimously to advance new draft guidance on the subject.
A second vote on the proposed policy is expected to take place within the next three months – at which point a decision regarding implementation will be referred to the S.C. General Assembly.
More on that process – and its potential political implications – in just a moment.
The guidance – which has been inaccurately labeled “censorship” or “book banning” by some in the media – would prohibit government-run schools from exposing students to materials deemed sexually explicit by state law. It would also give parents new options for protecting their children from such materials in taxpayer-funded schools.
Specifically, the new guidance would “establish a clear, transparent and uniform process that provides certainty for local educators, respects the legitimate prerogatives of parents and protects students from materials that are not age or developmentally appropriate.”
Final authority on these matters would reside with the state board, with its decisions being “conclusive and binding on all districts in South Carolina.”
(Click to View)
State superintendent of education Ellen Weaver is the driving force behind the new guidance – which has been assailed by the South Carolina chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as a “book ban.”
The ACLU also attacked Moms for Liberty, a group whose members have been challenging the escalating infusion of “porn propaganda” in South Carolina’s taxpayer-funded schools.
“If enacted, this policy would throw open the floodgates for extremist groups like Moms for Liberty to challenge books in bulk,” Palmetto State ACLU executive director Jace Woodrum said. “With this policy in place, self-appointed censors could do an end-run around local control and enforce their view of the world on all South Carolina children.”
You mean like the far left has been enforcing its world view? At taxpayer expense?
I’ve been clear about my views on this issue …
“This isn’t just about porn – it’s about propaganda. It’s about institutional grooming … it’s about amplifying the programmatic woke onslaught being mainlined into our children’s minds via their smart phones, tablets and televisions 24/7/365,” I noted in a recent post.
***
As I have previously written, Weaver’s policy is not censorship. Nor would it “ban books.” Parents remain free to purchase whatever books they want for their children. All the new policy would do is prevent certain explicit books from being purchased by taxpayer-funded schools – or at least require parental consent before such books were used as “instruction” or made available to children.
“No one is saying the state should ban books,” I noted earlier this month. “Buy whatever book you want. And share whatever you feel is appropriate with your kids in your own home. All I’m saying is don’t make other people pay for your kids to read porn – and don’t expose it to other people’s kids without their consent.”
As I’ve previously noted, such a common sense demarcation line only looks “extremist” if the far left – and their eager mouthpieces in the mainstream media – are able to successfully reframe this debate. You know, to convince the public they are “free speech champions” as opposed to peddlers of porn to middle schoolers.
“The only way those pushing this ongoing indoctrination will emerge victorious is if they change the underlying framework conversation to make them the guardians of goodness and virtue,” I noted. “Or more to the point: If the media allow them to change the underlying framework of the conversation.”
***
RELATED | SC SCHOOLS CHIEF TACKLES ‘PORN PROPAGANDA’
***
As noted earlier, this conversation is just getting started. Written comments on the state’s proposed rule change are already being solicited, with a deadline of January 22, 2024 for those submissions.
A second vote on the proposed guidance is scheduled to take place in mid-February, according to a synopsis obtained from the SCSBE. Assuming the proposal passes on second reading, the clock would start on the legislative review process.
Lawmakers in Columbia, S.C. would have 120 calendar days to approve, disapprove or allow the regulation to become law without input. They cannot amend the language of the proposed regulation, although they can strike “clearly separable portions.” Approval or disapproval must come in the form of a joint resolution of both the S.C. House and State Senate – two chambers currently controlled by “Republican” supermajorities.
Absent a joint resolution of disapproval from lawmakers, the measure would be deemed “approved” on the 120th day – or June 12, 2024. Why does that date matter? Because partisan primaries in South Carolina are scheduled to be held just hours earlier – on June 11, 2024.
As this media outlet has previously noted, GOP supermajorities in the Palmetto State are hardly conservative – although there is a ferocious inter-party battle currently underway in the hopes of making them more so.
Think this issue will figure prominently in that fight? You better believe it …
***
TIMELINE …
(Via: S.C. State Board of Education)
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and seven children.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to proactively address? We have an open microphone policy here at FITSNews! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
7 comments
Hey, what’s the Outreach Leader at Mom’s for Liberty been up to?
Besides being a registered sex offender fur molesting underaged boys?
If Mom’s fur Liberty was truly concerned about children being sexualized and abused they would be in the churches. Not school libraries.
I bet if you even scratch the surface of the people that make up Mom’s for Liberty (especially behind the scene) you’ll find some true deviants and perverts. I can actually guarantee it.
Every accusation is an admission of guilty with these right-wing crazies.
Has anybody defined porn yet? What is the specific definition that applies to this regulation that will become law without approval from the legislature? NOTHING should just become law because it is proposed… that’s just legislators throwing rocks and hiding their hands. The deviants and cowards are running this state into the ground….
Hey, it’s hard to define because the extreme left keep changing definitions i.e womxn, womyn, womin, woman, racism, feminism, intersectional feminism, critical theory. But a practical example would be to look into the books looks for ‘All Boys Aren’t Blue’. That book is in all of the libraries. Lexington 2 especially loves it. There’s very detailed descriptions of anal sex, lube, etc. I’m having a hard time figuring out how it makes a young, 6-8 year old child better at reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Excellent article Will. As one of the two complainants against Beaufort County School district over the past 13 months, we are finally seeing the fruits of our labor. Not only is the proposed Regulation by the SCDE and great step forward, I can proudly say I have been involved with some of the leaders in the SC House of Representatives who are crafting policy and language to run side-by0side with this regulation, in the SC Code of Laws that accurately makes the definitions that are missing or not clear; makes penalties crystal clear; and set guidelines for penalties, and procedures for all School Districts and School Boards. “That” should all be introduced into committees sometime as the 2024 Session gets underway.
Reading writing and arithmetic. Schools cant teach the basics anymore and fail to give even a basic education. Instead they want to create confused, sexualized young adults. Is there any question why youth and society are so F’d up
Federal code under Title 18 defines pornography.
And the Moms for liberty outreach leader- that was in Philadelphia and the background check cleared that person. Careful with your slander post. Do your research.
And if you’re going to point fingers at churches- remember to be balanced- schools have sex offenders too- this month 2 teachers arrested for having sex- middle school and high school- Taylors and Holly Hill. So let’s be fair and balanced in finger pointing shall we?