* Press release…
Paul Schimpf, Republican candidate for Governor, retired Marine announced an Illinois Parents’ Bill of Rights in a press conference by Zoom today. He made the following comment during this press conference:
“Over the past several years, Illinois parents have seen governments infringe upon their ability to raise their children in the manner of their choosing. Too often, the Illinois House and the Illinois Senate act as if they are 118 and 59 member school boards, making curriculum decisions for school districts and passing unfunded mandates. The time has come to reset and readjust the relationship between the parents of Illinois and their government. That is why I am unveiling this Illinois Parents Bill of Rights this morning.”
* His bill of rights…
Parents, not the government, have the authority and responsibility to raise their children to the best of their ability in accordance with their values. The following rights shall be given to Illinois parents who are raising minor children.
1. Parents, acting through locally elected school boards, have the right to control public schools in their respective districts. Local school boards will make curriculum, safety, and closure decisions. Children have the right to a public education free from political indoctrination of any kind.
2. The ability of parents to educate their children through homeschooling or enrollment in private schools shall not be infringed by the state of Illinois. No official representing the state of Illinois shall have the authority to order the closure of private schools.
3. Parents with daughters shall have the right to see their daughters flourish by having a fair chance to compete in sporting activities where they are not at a biological disadvantage due to their sex.
4. The parent, not the state, has primary responsibility and authority for the physical and mental wellness of their children. Parents will have knowledge and control over of any medical procedures and medicine that a child may be provided. Furthermore, schools will not provide non-emergency medical treatment or medical referrals to a child without the consent of a parent or a court order.
5. A parent shall be present during (or consulted prior to) the custodial questioning of their child by law enforcement personnel.
6. Parents have the right to review video footage (including footage from body cameras) and social media content of their child that is in the possession of law enforcement personnel or school administrators.
7. Parents, not the state, will control the transition from childhood to adulthood of their children. Parents have the right to “opt out” of subjects taught in public and private schools in which they choose not to have their children participate.
8. Parents have the right to have the taxes for schools go to either the public school or the private school of their choice.
Lotta hot buttons in there. But it’s not too difficult to poke holes in some of them. Forbidding the state to close any private school for any reason? What could possibly go wrong there? And we’re gonna divert local and state tax dollars to the Latin School?
- Anyone Remember - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:09 am:
===8. Parents have the right to have the taxes for schools go to either the public school or the private school of their choice.===
So, private schools will comply with ADA, IEP, have counselors for students with emotional problems?
- TheInvisibleMan - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:14 am:
Nice to see he supports private schools teaching Sharia law not being allowed to be shut down by the state.
- Techie - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:15 am:
I’ll bite.
“Parents have the right to “opt out” of subjects taught in public and private schools in which they choose not to have their children participate.”
Insanity right there. Parents don’t want their kids to learn evolution? Take them out of those lessons! Parents don’t want their kids to understand how vaccines work? Take them out of that lesson, too!
It’s abusive to exempt kids from education simply because the parents “disagree” with what’s being taught.
- Can - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:16 am:
Oof. How is Darren Bailey going to top that? Mandatory prayer in public schools? /s
All kidding aside, it will be fun watching Schimpf and Bailey try to outdo each other on Eastern Bloc-ish stuff.
- blu_dawg - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:21 am:
So he hid his real agenda in number 8.
- ChuckIL - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:24 am:
What a beautiful way for a minor Illinois political party to remain a minor Illinois political party. They have their finger on the pulse of failure.
- Skeptic - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:24 am:
1) Says Local control. No political indoctrination (whatever that means.) So what if the local board wants political indoctrination as part of the curriculum?
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:27 am:
=== So, private schools will comply with ADA, IEP, have counselors for students with emotional problems?===
I can’t speak for all private schools but my grandsons attend a special needs private school for autistic children. This school does comply with all regulations you stated. The local school district uses this resource when they are not able to meet a child’s needs. Not all private schools are religious oriented or for wealthy families.
- Observer - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:30 am:
11:27 am was me.
- RNUG - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:34 am:
== 8. Parents have the right to have the taxes for schools go to either the public school or the private school of their choice. ==
Catholic parents have been trying to get this for 60 years.
- Dance Band on the Titanic - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:36 am:
“Children have the right to a public education free from political indoctrination of any kind.”
Whenever I hear someone on the right complaining about “indoctrination” in education, I always remember they tend to be big supporters of teaching “American exceptionalism”, which itself is a blatant form of indoctrination.
- Quibbler - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:37 am:
Even Texas couldn’t pass a ban on trans kids in sports. Good luck passing one here.
- JS Mill - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:38 am:
Schimpf’s parent bill of rights is a powerful affirmative statement, just not the one he thought he was making.
His statement is:”as a legislator I do not even know the laws I am professing to talk about”.
“Rights” 1,2(the first half), 4, 5, and 7 are already in statute.
Local school district control curriculum, he is demonstrating that he does not really understand what that is. Parents already have the right to opt out of subject matter that they object too. few actually do because is is so silly.
Parents must give permission or can be present when their minor children are questioned by law enforcement and it is already a law and it has been best practice (not everyone practiced it though) for decades.
The first half of number 2 is already allowed, the second half is just dumb. The state cannot shutdown a school that is abusive or breaks the law? Right, never going to happen.
We don’t provide non-emergency medical treatment unless a parent gives consent.
#3 is conservative red meat.
#6 is done if no other student is identifiable. if another student (other than theirs) is identifiable sharing those images is a violation of student privacy statutes.
#8- tax dollars are for public use. You want your kid to go to a private school? You pay tuition. you take public money, you follow public rules.
He is such a hypocrite, no political indoctrination my eye.
It will be fun to see how Bailey doubles down.
- Candy Dogood - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:39 am:
===in accordance with their values===
What about when those values conflict with the child’s rights? What about when those values conflict with their own rights?
Someone should ask Paul if he thinks parents own their children. Someone really should ask him if he believes it is appropriate for parents to send their children to conversion therapy. If he’s going to put this out here, we need to get him on the record for a couple of things so we can find out how much torture he believes parents should be able to inflict on their children.
===The parent, not the state, has primary responsibility and authority for the physical and mental wellness of their children.===
Paul must really thing people own their children. I would imagine that DCFS could arrange for him to go on some ride-a-longs. Children have rights. A parent doesn’t get to override the rights of a child. He’s showing up here with some real 13th century thinking here.
===Parents with daughters shall have the right to see their daughters flourish by having a fair chance to compete in sporting activities where they are not at a biological disadvantage due to their sex.===
This would require a federal constitutional amendment to make it legal.
=== through locally elected school boards===
=== will make curriculum, safety, and closure decisions===
=== free from political indoctrination of any kind.===
These things don’t really seem to add up. Having local elections to determine what the curriculum is going to be is supposed to make kids free from political indoctrination? The dum-dum that came up with this must not recognize that things like creationism as a scientific alternative to evolution is political indoctrination.
I find it really difficult to believe that this list is the product of someone that was once a high school valedictorian.
5 and 6 or okay, though — so I guess I don’t completely disagree with Senator Schimpf.
- Pundent - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:45 am:
How can we possibly take Republican candidates for governor seriously when they are this uninformed on our current laws and political realities? Paul Schimpf just gave us 8 reasons why he will never be governor.
- Pot calling kettle - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:46 am:
==3. Parents with daughters shall have the right to see their daughters flourish by having a fair chance to compete in sporting activities where they are not at a biological disadvantage due to their sex.==
Will this new Republican doctrine be extended to women in the workplace and other situations?
-crickets-
- thoughts matter - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:50 am:
Regarding all of the education verbiage: Children grow up to be adults. They move away, get jobs, interact with the community. Opting out of subjects at a whim, not closing inferior schools, allowing absolute local control limits the students for the rest of their lives. It impacts their career choices and it impacts those they interact with. For example - do you want a nurse that didn’t take biology or didn’t study the reproductive system? We already allow certain students in this state to drop out prior to age 16 because of religious preferences if their parents. This essentially forces these students to remain in their home town and on the farm to survive.
My parents dropped out of school before graduating in the mid 50s- their career path was limited by the time I graduated in the 70s. These ‘rules’ are damaging the our future generations.
- cermak_rd - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:53 am:
Wouldn’t a competing right be parents of transgendered children shall have their children able to perform and compete under the gender identity they prefer? And is that not why we have a leg and courts to balance rights?
As for taxes, I have no children in the public school system. I have no children in a private school. Should I have the right to not pay for education? I would argue no because it is in my interest to have the next generation not be ignorant savages. The same should apply for everyone.
Our Lady Queen of Angels burnt down in 1958 killing several children and ushering in a wave of construction code changes to make sure school are safe. Should the state be unable to close schools that don’t meet these codes? I would argue the state has an interest in making sure children don’t die as a result of unsafe buildings.
- NIU Grad - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:57 am:
“Parents with daughters shall have the right to see their daughters flourish by having a fair chance to compete in sporting activities where they are not at a biological disadvantage due to their sex.”
It’s so sad how they’ve framed an anti-trans agenda to be about protecting young girls specifically…DeSantis even paraded his young daughter to his anti-trans bill signing. But if their daughters decide that they feel more comfortable as a boy…that’s where they draw the line.
If you were in another state, Schimpfy…but this isn’t going to fly in Illinois.
- Flying Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 11:58 am:
Bailey-do your thang.
This is great.
- Skeptic - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 12:02 pm:
8. Parents have the right to have the taxes for “schools” Maybe they might have a right for *their* taxes to go to a school (debatable at best), but their school spends *my* tax money as well, and they don’t get to spend it just anywhere.
- OneMan - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 12:07 pm:
=== 2. The ability of parents to educate their children through homeschooling or enrollment in private schools shall not be infringed by the state of Illinois. No official representing the state of Illinois shall have the authority to order the closure of private schools. ===
So know-it-all from Springfield is not going to stop Timmy from getting educated someplace without working smoke detectors, exposed asbestos!
== 3. Parents with daughters shall have the right to see their daughters flourish by having a fair chance to compete in sporting activities where they are not at a biological disadvantage due to their sex. ==
Is this really a problem? How many kids are participating where it puts “daughters” at a “biological disadvantage” Do we need boys and girls bass fishing? I have a daughter, if you list stuff I was worried about when she participated in sports, this was not on the list.
== 8. Parents have the right to have the taxes for schools go to either the public school or the private school of their choice. ==
So do I get this right at birth for my child? I live in a CSD, can I have my ‘taxes for schools’ go to a private school that only covers some grades? Does the private school get a proportional amount? Do I retain that right now that my kids are out of K-12 education? Does the school have to be in Illinois? Can I have my school taxes go to the college my kid attends out of state? Do I retain my ‘right to assign’ forever? Is this true for commercial property. Does my kid have to go to the school I send my tax money to? Can I create my own for-profit private school and have my ‘tax money go to it?
- Huh? - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 12:14 pm:
How did the wing nuts get out of the hardware store?
- NIU Grad - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 12:21 pm:
“Do we need boys and girls bass fishing?”
I don’t think he’s talking about having more opportunities to have girls competing in sports…that would require spending money on education. This is more about scaring parents about trans kids and shamelessly using them as a political stepping stone. This was done to gay/lesbian kids just a couple of decades ago, and this is the new “social issue” battlefield the conservatives are using to cling to power.
- @misterjayem - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 12:48 pm:
An eight-point temper tantrum.
– MrJM
- Skeptic - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 1:20 pm:
Huh? wins the Internet today.
- RNUG - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 1:48 pm:
== ===Parents with daughters shall have the right to see their daughters flourish by having a fair chance to compete in sporting activities where they are not at a biological disadvantage due to their sex.===
This would require a federal constitutional amendment to make it legal. ==
Would it? I don’t remember a US constitutional amendment being passed when the Federal government created the entire separate category of women’s sports using Federal dollars and grants under Title IX.
- Southern IL Bob Too - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 2:33 pm:
“Catholic parents have been trying to get this for 60 years.”
Not all Catholic parents. I happen to support a strong public school system.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 3:45 pm:
Why don’t these guys just move to Alabama??
- Candy Dogood - Friday, Jun 4, 21 @ 4:56 pm:
===Would it? I don’t remember a US constitutional amendment being passed when the Federal government created the entire separate category of women’s sports using Federal dollars and grants under Title IX. ===
Not my wheel house, but I believe that was summed up under Adams v. The School Board of St. Johns County, Florida. In my personal opinion it seems like pretty straight forward discrimination on the basis of sex and would be discrimination based off of my understanding of the case law.
If we’re discussing creating a separate category of sports that might be fine, but a school wouldn’t be able to deny the participation of a transgendered athlete without providing an alternative. Similarly this issue is fascinating because they apparently have no problem with people taking testosterone while competing in men-sports, but their choice here falls in line with the conservative Trope. For some reason, bigots always want to talk about protecting women but not when it comes to protecting them from sexual assault, wage discrimination, or the government’s intrusion into their reproductive choices. Just when it is an excuse for their bigotry.
I can’t be the only person that went to school with a girl who was on the wrestling team or a girl who was on the football team.