|
NEA:
Politicizing 'education'
July 12, 2003
Since the National
Education Association describes itself as "America's largest
organization committed to advancing the cause of public education,"
is it not fair to ask why it spends so much of its energy on political
issues having little to do with education?
It would be ludicrous
for the NEA to deny its political activism. In 1996, it employed
more political operatives than both major political parties combined.
It would be just as ridiculous for it to deny its liberalism,
but it does, claiming to be bipartisan. But since the NEA established
its Political Action Committee in 1972, it has supported and endorsed
every Democratic presidential candidate and has overwhelmingly
supported Democratic candidates at the congressional level as
well.
During the first week
of July, the NEA held its annual weeklong convention in New Orleans,
where it considered more than 300 proposed policy resolutions,
many concerning controversial issues not remotely related to education.
A review of the NEA's
consistent stances on these issues provides further proof that
whatever else it may claim to be, it is clearly a political arm
of the left wing that endorses the liberal position on such issues
as abortion, homosexual rights, capital punishment and gun control.
The NEA is also fully
supportive of what are called the "multicultural" and
"diversity" agendas. In two resolutions issuing from
its 1999 convention it affirmed its commitment not only to "diversity"-based
curricula, but urged that it be introduced in early childhood
(from birth through age 8) education programs. One of the resolutions
stated "that a diverse society enriches all individuals."
Part of this enriching diversity, it said, is people with differences
in "sexual orientation."
On Feb. 8, 2002, the
organization went further, adopting a plan to make schools safe
and hospitable for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students
and education employees. The plan was ostensibly targeted at punishing
"harassment" and "discrimination."
The NEA's press release
promoting the plan said the union would endeavor "to provide
students, education employees and the general public with accurate,
objective and up-to-date information regarding the needs of, and
problems confronting gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered
students." Any such information, according to the statement,
would be "nonjudgmental in terms of sexual orientation/gender
identification." This is how the NEA organizes its education
priorities. One is left to wonder what "objective" information
educators would provide under the plan, not to mention the import
of the word "nonjudgmental." Did it mean what it usually
does: that those with opposing views would be denied their voice?
This year's convention
saw some fireworks when a group of pro-life delegates appealed
to the NEA to stop promoting abortions for teenage students. "We'd
like it if the NEA would stick to education issues and not promote
abortion with the words 'reproductive freedom'" in a resolution
concerning family planning, said junior high school language arts
teacher Judy Bruns.
But the NEA has been
less than forthcoming about its position, denying the plain meaning
of the language in its resolution. The family resolution states,
"The National Education Association supports family planning,
including the right to reproductive freedom. The association urges
the government to give high priority to making available all methods
of family planning to women and men unable to take advantage of
private facilities ... "
David Kaiser, an elementary
school guidance counselor from Fort Recovery, Ohio, pressed the
NEA Resolutions Internal Editing Committee Chairman to explain
the meaning of "private facilities." Chairman Shirley
Cherry evaded the question. "I am not prepared to answer
that question to you at this time," she said.
Mrs. Cherry, however,
justified the NEA's habit of political advocacy, saying, "As
educators, everything is related to our children, and we have
to look out for the best interests of our children, students and
educators."
The federal and state
governments continue to pour more and more money into education
with pathetic results. When are politicians (and parents, for
that matter) going to wake up to the fact that the education establishment
is shirking its primary duty of promoting the education –
as opposed to the social transformation – of our children?
Is it any wonder more parents are turning to homeschooling and
private schools?
There are still many,
many outstanding public school teachers who do a superb job at
educating despite the obstacles, distractions and interfering
political agendas of the education establishment. But it is no
thanks to the NEA, and the more that word gets out the better
for the students and the cause of education.
|
|