new sex education program for Illinois

Illinois just signed into law new sex education standards for the state of Illinois.  (Pritzker says new sex education law ‘will help keep our children safe’ – but GOP rivals blast it as ‘obscene’, August 21)

These new standards are touted as medically accurate and age-appropriate.  I contend that they are neither. 

1)      The new standards assert that there is no normative sexual behavior.  I contend that biology regards sex organs as reproductive, and since evolution, which is taught as science, asserts that the purpose of life is reproduction, then using sex organs for the purpose of reproduction is normative sexual behavior.  But they say no.

If sex organs are not for reproduction, then they exist for our pleasure, and children then need to experiment with all the various ways to find what they like best.  I think this is highly inappropriate for children.

2)      Consequently, being cisgender, or attracted to people of the opposite sex, isn’t normative either.  Teaching this to children only encourages them to build on any and all impulses before they will even begin thinking about whether they want to have children or not.

3)      Sex is taught entirely on mechanical functioning without a context of marriage and love.  Girls used to save themselves for marriage.  Here, long before they have ever even given any thought to things like that, they will see sex as something to experiment with at the youngest ages and to make lifelong decisions.

4)      Religions teach values and things like the purpose of marriage and its sanctity, but here sex is no more religious and has no higher value than eliminating our bowels or digesting food.  It is merely a biological function, but one that you can share with somebody else.  Anyone.

The only purpose for this education is to try to gain more public acceptance for, let’s say, non-traditional sexual relationships. 

property tax woes and solution

I feel bad for the residents of Bellwood and Maywood and a host of other suburbs hit with these huge property tax increases.  (Businesses and minorities hit hardest by latest tax bills, county report says, August 17)

People buy homes to build up some equity, but property taxes can drive fear into the hearts of any homeowner.  Property taxes are absurd in that they don’t take into account a person’s ability to pay them.  People lose jobs, but the taxes are unaffected.

I have long suggested that we need to shift as much of these costs to the income tax.  Not only will they affect people proportionately, but the taxes are paid in increments rather than two large lump sums. 

The biggest single expense in property taxes is public education.  We always hear about poor school funding in poor neighborhoods.  Well, here is the answer.  Property taxes become manageable, and schools get their needed funding.

 

meaningful census data

I am always excited to see the new census data when it comes out.  (Second city still third, August 13)  I was a little disappointed, though, in the way the information was presented.

Imagine a questionnaire on the Olympics: what’s your favorite Olympic sport: gymnastics, swimming, or other?

To say other does eliminate two possibilities as our favorite sport, but it really makes you want more information.

The article broke races down into four categories: white, Black, Latino, and Asian. 

I think we can all pretty much agree on what constitutes the first three, but I think the Asian category is too broad to be meaningful, and I think if you going to take the time and effort to even take a census, then you need to make it meaningful.

I’m sure that a dozen people would break down Asia a dozen different ways, but I suggest at least three distinct people groups, or races, if you will.  I think, for practical purposes, people divide races by general characteristics without quibbling over the details.

First, there are Arabs.  And I would include the Persians with this as well.  The whole area west of the Himalayas apart from India, which is the second group.

Then there are the Far East Asians, all those east of the Himalayas. 

Three different groups, as distinct as groups can be, not only in appearance, but religions, customs, and cultures. 

If you’re going to take the time and money to find out exactly who is living in our country, then you need to take that extra step.  To say a person is Asian is just not enough to be meaningful in this context.

Is voter suppression really a problem?

No doubt you have heard about the hundreds of bills passed in the different states trying to suppress voting rights and voter turnout.  Evil people and coincidentally all of the same political party.

The Chicago Sun-Times gave a full page to a story about the “battle to pass federal voting rights legislation.”  (Aug. 28 marches for new generation, August 12)  The federal laws are needed to supersede all the malicious laws passed by the states.

The message of the article is urgent, because of “a wave of voter suppression laws” passing in our country.  “Voting rights are under attack.”  There is a “continuing fight for civil rights.”  “suppress voting rights”  “advance voting rights”

At this point, I was really anxious to read examples of these egregious acts of evil people depriving or suppressing people of their right to vote.

Here is a list of the ways that politicians of that other party are suppressing voting and voter rights, according to the article:

1)      banning drop boxes 

Who knew that using drop boxes was a right?  How did we get by for 240 years before this?  You do realize that putting a ballot in a drop box is not actually voting.  You haven’t voted until somebody puts that ballot into the tabulation machine.  When you vote in person, you put it in yourself.  When you use a drop box, you don’t know when or if that ballot is ever counted.  You have no idea if the person collecting the ballots opens each one first and discards the ones they don’t like.  And we don’t know if that person adds a bunch of her own.

2)      banning mail-in voting

Nobody is banning that.  There are always people who physically cannot leave their homes to go somewhere to vote, and they will always be able to vote absentee.

One of the principal tenets of elections in a free society is that people are able to vote in private, free from any outside influences.  When people vote in person, they go to a secluded place and make their choices, away from the eyes and voices of other people. 

We don’t have that with mail-in ballots.  We don’t know if people are pressured to fill out a ballot in a certain way.  We don’t even know who is filling out the ballot.  Plus, when officials have stacks of opened ballots that they then need to feed into a tabulation machine en masse, we have no safeguards that ballots won’t be discarded, changed, or if they even add fraudulent ballots to the pile.  We don’t know.  When people vote in person, you put your own ballot into the box.  That is the safest and most secure way to vote.

3)      slashing early voting hours

Early voting is a relatively new concept.  How is that a right?  And how many days and what hours are you entitled to?  And how are fewer hours suppressing your right to vote?  Nobody thought voter rights were suppressed when everyone had to vote in person on one day for almost our country’s entire history.  It was difficult for some people, yes.  But people planned their lives around that one day, election day.

4)      restricting mail-in eligibility

Two fundamentals of a safe and secure election in a free society: a) ensuring we know who is voting and that they are eligible.  That can only be done in person.  b) ensuring that the ballot is filled out without any coercion or undue influences.  Again, that can only be done in person.

People leave their homes for countless reasons: work, shopping, visiting.  Voting should be another one of those reasons.  Voting by mail is a luxury, not a necessity, for almost everybody.  Asking people to vote in person so we can verify their identity and ensure they vote in private is not a hardship.  Once, twice a year.  Make the effort.

Yes, voting is a significant responsibility in a free society.  The only way we can truly protect that right to vote is to put up the strongest and highest bulwarks against any possibilities of fraud. 

One fraudulent vote can erase your vote.  You’re worried about voting rights, then you need to protect your vote against any possible false votes.  As much as possible, you need to put your vote into the voting box yourself.  That’s the only way you know you voted and that nobody did anything to your ballot.  And the only way you know your vote mattered is if the election tried very hard to eliminate any possibility for mischief.