A concerning bill is currently making its way through the California legislature, and as a mother deeply invested in our children’s education, I can’t help but feel alarmed. This bill has the potential to put parents behind bars simply for voicing their opinions at school board meetings – a place where our voices should be valued and heard.
It appears that the intention behind this bill is to curb protests surrounding curricula that some parents believe promote concepts like Critical Race Theory and radical gender ideologies. These concerns are valid, and it’s only natural for parents to want a say in what their children are being taught in schools.
The bill in question, SB-596, has already passed the state Senate with a vote of 30-8. If it becomes law, causing what it terms as ‘substantial disorder’ or ‘harassment’ at school board meetings could result in misdemeanor charges, carrying penalties of up to a $1,000 fine and a year in jail. The wording of ‘substantial disorder’ is worryingly vague, raising concerns that it could be used arbitrarily to silence parents who are merely trying to engage constructively in their children’s education.
This ambiguity has sparked concerns among conservative parents who fear that the interpretation of ‘substantial disorder’ will be left to the discretion of those with differing viewpoints. As one tweet from the conservative 1776 Project PAC aptly puts it: “‘Substantial disorder’ will be defined as anything the left-wing opponents of parental rights on California’s school boards decide.”
We all know how vital it is for parents to be actively involved in their children’s education. However, this bill seems to be designed to discourage parents from speaking out and participating in shaping the educational environment for our kids. Sarah Parshall Perry, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, rightfully points out that this bill could have a chilling effect, stifling the voices of concerned parents who simply want the best for their children’s education.
What is particularly disconcerting is that this bill comes at a time when many parents across the state are raising their voices against curricula that delve into social issues in ways they find inappropriate for their children. As parents, we have a right and a responsibility to speak up when we feel our children’s education is being influenced by ideologies we disagree with.
The next step for this bill is consideration in the California State Assembly. If it passes there, it will be up to Governor Gavin Newsom to decide whether to sign it into law. As parents, we must remain vigilant and engaged in this process, ensuring that our concerns about the potential consequences of this bill are heard and addressed. Our children’s education and our right to be active participants in shaping it are at stake.
BREAKING: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Stark Warning on Big Pharma
In recent interviews, independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been sounding the alarm on what he calls the “medical cartel” — a collaboration between Big Pharma, government regulatory agencies, hospitals, and insurance companies. Kennedy argues that this alliance is not only ignoring but potentially causing the surge in chronic diseases in the United States. In this article, we delve into Kennedy’s compelling arguments and the concerning statistics he presents.
The Medical Cartel’s Profitable Web: Kennedy places blame on the medical cartel, asserting that Big Pharma, government regulatory agencies, hospitals (allegedly owned by hedge funds), and insurance agencies are working together to exploit the deteriorating health of Americans. “The sicker we get, the richer they get,” Kennedy declares, highlighting a disturbing trend where these entities benefit financially from the increasing poor health of the population.
Shifting Priorities at the NIH: Kennedy points out a shift in the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) focus from helping Americans prevent and recover from sickness to prioritizing ways to “monetize science for the pharmaceutical industry.” This assertion raises questions about the motivations behind medical research and the impact on public health.
Staggering Statistics: Kennedy backs his claims with alarming statistics. He notes that the percentage of children with chronic diseases has increased tenfold since the 1960s, with a staggering 60 percent of young people now affected. The rise in autism diagnoses is particularly concerning, with rates increasing from one in 10,000 in Kennedy’s generation to one in 34 in his kids’ generation.
Economic Consequences: Chronic diseases are not only affecting the well-being of Americans but also wreaking havoc on the nation’s economy. Kennedy reveals that health care expenses have skyrocketed from 4 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) during his uncle’s presidency to a staggering 20 percent today. The economic strain is palpable, with 93 percent of Medicare claims attributed to chronic diseases, surpassing spending on defense by more than threefold.
Mass Poisoning of Children: Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of Kennedy’s warnings is the mass poisoning of the current generation of children. He identifies 1989 as a crucial year, marking a dramatic increase in neurodevelopmental disorders, autoimmune diseases, and allergic conditions among children. The correlation between the rise in childhood ailments and the proliferation of environmental factors raises questions about the long-term consequences of our society’s choices.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s cautionary words about the medical cartel and its role in the escalating health crisis in the United States urge us to reevaluate our trust in the current healthcare system. The statistics and trends he presents are a call to action for parents, policymakers, and the public to question the motives behind the pharmaceutical industry, regulatory agencies, and healthcare institutions. As we navigate the complexities of modern healthcare, skepticism and informed decision-making may be our most potent tools in safeguarding the well-being of future generations.
BREAKING: What Are We Doing To Stop The Disturbing Trend of Transgender Shooters?
As a concerned conservative mom, the shocking events that unfolded at Lakewood Church in Houston during the Spanish-language mass on Sunday have left me deeply troubled and questioning the safety of our places of worship. The attempted mass shooting by 36-year-old Genesse Ivonne Moreno has taken a distressing turn as new details emerge about her identity, motives, and legal status.
The Scene: Lakewood Church, home to renowned evangelical pastor Joel Osteen, witnessed terror around 2 PM on Sunday when Moreno entered the church with a rifle and her 5-year-old child. Despite off-duty officers swiftly neutralizing the threat, the tragic incident resulted in one churchgoer injured and Moreno’s child caught in the crossfire, with a grim prognosis for survival.
Another Transgender Shooter: What raises additional concerns is Moreno’s identification as transgender, having previously referred to herself as ‘Jeffrey.’ This incident adds to a disconcerting trend of transgender individuals involved in mass shootings, including Dylan Butler in Iowa, Audrey Hale in Nashville, Anderson Lee Aldrich in Colorado, Alec McKinney in Colorado, and Snochia Mosley in Maryland.
Political Affiliation: Moreno’s social media posts reveal her support for Bernie Sanders, with a “Free Palestine” sticker adorning her rifle. This political alignment adds a layer of complexity to an already perplexing situation, leaving many wondering about the potential influence of political ideologies on acts of violence.
Legal Status: Unconfirmed reports suggest that Moreno may have been an illegal alien from El Salvador, arriving in 2005. If true, her extensive criminal record since entering the country, which includes assault, theft, and drug possession, raises serious questions about the effectiveness of our immigration system in identifying and addressing potential threats.
Motive: Law enforcement is currently unable to determine a motive for the shooting, adding a frustrating layer of uncertainty to an already distressing situation. The lack of clarity raises concerns about whether there were warning signs that were overlooked or if there are deeper societal issues contributing to these acts of violence.
As a concerned conservative mom, I find myself grappling with the implications of these events on the safety of our communities and places of worship. It is crucial that we engage in open and honest discussions about the factors contributing to these incidents, addressing issues such as mental health, political extremism, and the effectiveness of our immigration system. Only through a comprehensive examination can we hope to prevent such tragedies in the future.
Shocking Betrayal: Ohio’s Republican Governor Abandons Conservative Values, Backs Transgender Agenda!
Ohio’s Republican Governor, Mike DeWine, has sparked controversy and disappointment among conservatives by vetoing House Bill 68, also known as the SAFE Act. The bill sought to ban medical practitioners from providing gender-affirming care to transgender minors and block transgender student athletes from participating in girls’ and women’s sports. DeWine defended his decision, emphasizing the importance of family autonomy in making decisions related to gender-affirming care.
The Veto Decision:
DeWine’s announcement on Friday marked the veto of House Bill 68, a move that sets him apart from many of his Republican colleagues both in Ohio and across the nation. In his statement, the governor expressed his belief that decisions about gender-affirming care should be left to families rather than being dictated by the government.
The governor highlighted the difficulty of the choices faced by parents, stating, “Were I to sign House Bill 68, or were House Bill 68 to become law, Ohio would be saying that the state, that the government, knows better what is best for a child than the two people who know that child the best — the parents.”
DeWine went on to elaborate on the complexity of the issue, acknowledging that parents often find themselves making decisions where neither alternative is ideal. He argued that parents are best suited to make such choices on behalf of their children.
Divergence from Republican Trends:
DeWine’s decision to veto the SAFE Act positions him against the prevailing trend among Republicans in various states who have been pushing for legislation to ban gender-affirming care for individuals under 18. Several states have already enacted such measures, raising concerns about potential overrides and legal challenges.
The governor’s approach underscores a departure from the more conservative stance taken by many of his Republican counterparts. While some states have prioritized restricting gender-affirming care, DeWine’s emphasis on parental authority in medical decisions has garnered attention for its more liberal tone.
Uncertain Legislative Future:
The fate of House Bill 68 now hinges on whether the Ohio Legislature can muster a three-fifths vote in both chambers to override DeWine’s veto. The governor’s decision has ignited speculation about the level of support the bill might receive, considering the dissent within the Republican party on this issue.
Governor DeWine’s veto of House Bill 68 has created a rift within the Republican party in Ohio, with conservatives expressing disappointment over what they see as a departure from conservative values. DeWine’s emphasis on parental autonomy in deciding on gender-affirming care reveals a nuanced perspective that sets him apart from the prevailing trends among his Republican counterparts. The fate of the bill remains uncertain, leaving the Ohio Legislature to grapple with the question of whether they can muster the votes needed to override the governor’s veto and enact the proposed restrictions on transgender issues.
Get Right4 months ago
BREAKING: Are Flu Shots Harming The Elderly?
Did You See This?6 months ago
Challenging Mainstream Narratives: Unpacking the Latest Nonsense Study on ‘Top Surgery’
Raising Them Right5 months ago
BREAKING: CNN Host Grills Fauci on Mask Lies – You Won’t Believe His Response
Did You See This?6 months ago
WOW! Did A Federal Court Just Admit They Unfairly Targeted Pro-Lifers?
Did You See This?6 months ago
New Research Exposes Alarming Connection Between Abortion and Mental Health
Did You See This?5 months ago
BREAKING: Are We Really Going To FORCE KIDS To Wear Masks Again?
Did You See This?6 months ago
BREAKING: Did Barack Obama Really Smoke Crack and Engage in Same-Sex Relations?
Did You See This?6 months ago
Exciting News About Parents’ Rights! New Bill Puts Parents in the Know