Unwise ordinances weaken laws and divide communities

Main Street, Edmonds, Washington

Edmonds, Washington is a small bedroom community north of Seattle that has become a tinderbox since the passage of its hate crime ordinance. Twice, in 2018 and again in 2020, police filed charging documents with the prosecutor. Twice the prosecutor declined to press “hate crime” charges after determining that the city could not prove its case in court.

The second incident pitted Mayor Mike Nelson against Snohomish County Prosecuting Attorney, Adam Cornel. In the riotous summer of 2020, a 69-year-old man defaced a Black Lives Matter display across the street from the police station. He told police that he was “upset with how the police were being treated.”

Defacing public property is normally a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $750. The mayor, however, wanted to charge him with a felony on the basis that the high school girl who made the display was “BIPOC” (Black, Indigenous, (or) People of Color). After investigating the elements of the crime, Cornel determined that he could not “advance the cause of social and racial justice by furthering an unjust felony prosecution. To do so would be unethical.”

Merrick Garland, A.G.

This was sound judgment. A recent study from the Department of Justice found that, in fifteen years (2005 through 2019), only 17 percent of federal “hate crime” allegations were ever charged. Fewer, still, were proven. The report cited insufficient evidence as being the most common reason why hate crimes were declined for prosecution.  

The stock-in-trade of prosecutors and defense attorneys consists of the “elements of a crime.” These are the elemental facts that must be proven to get a conviction. Most crimes have four elements. Hate crimes add another by requiring proof of the perpetrator’s state of mind. If proof is not available, the defendant is not guilty—even if the other elements are fully proven.

But the ginned-up rage of Edmonds’ social-justice warriors and its politically minded mayor wasn’t assuaged by the facts. Herein lies the problem. Public sentiment can be fanned into flame by irresponsible media and community organizers. But when it blows up, it burns the prosecutors, judges and mayors who have to make real-life decisions. Some will cower before the mob and unethically file bogus charges. Those that don’t will be unjustly hated by the mob.

Councilman, Richard Johnson

Now, Councilman Richard Johnson wants to bring this kind of ordinance to Cheyenne. He cut-and-pasted an ordinance from another state that would make it a misdemeanor “for any person to maliciously and with the specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of that person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, or disability.”

It is already a crime for any person maliciously to intimidate or harass another person. Wyoming Statute (Title 6 - Crimes and Offenses) specifies this, and other crimes against persons, property, and the public peace. It is written specifically to minimize the elements that need to be proved. This enables successful prosecution of harassment, assault, property destruction and other crimes. 

On numerous occasions, bills have been brought to the state legislature that would insert motivation as an additional element. Legislators have repeatedly rejected these bills precisely because they would allow criminals to get off scott-free. 

According to the proposed ordinance, if a prosecutor could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a perpetrator maliciously harassed someone, but could not prove the element, “because of that person’s race,” he must be found not guilty. By contrast, our current state law would punish that same perpetrator with a $750 fine and/or six months in jail—the very same penalty that Johnson’s ordinance proposes.

Why add a layer of red tape that could only quash otherwise successful prosecutions? I will not speculate on Johnson’s motives, but the Chamber of Commerce claimed that it would help Cheyenne’s economic development. Are they suggesting that companies will not locate in Cheyenne unless the city first makes criminal prosecutions more difficult?

For years, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has been making this baseless claim. By stoking fear, they have bullied numerous cities into passing similar ordinances. As a result, many small businesses have been bankrupted by unethical lawfare, and communities have been turned into tinderboxes. Then, when minority businesses actually go up in flames, the Chamber turns strangely quiet.

If the goal is successful prosecution of crimes that are motivated by hate, smart prosecutors know that adding “hate” as an additional element only weakens the law. 

What is happening in Cheyenne will likely not stay in Cheyenne. You can expect versions of this ordinance to pop up in city councils across Wyoming. They would be wise to learn from Edmonds’ mistake. Wyoming’s cities should defer to the wisdom of the legislature, the governor, and the prosecutors who deal with crimes every day. This will bring more criminals to justice; it will lessen the chances of politically motivated prosecutions; and, it will not create unrealistic expectations that can only divide previously peaceful communities.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, February 25, 2022.

Four canards that harm women and children

Photo by Devon Divine on Unsplash

Wyoming’s annual legislative scramble is underway. Over 260 bills are clamoring to win an “Introduction” vote. Only those that cross this threshold by Friday night will have a chance to become law this year. Pro-life citizens will be pulling for at least one bill from each chamber. 

House Bill 92 “Abortion prohibition-supreme court decision,” sponsored by Rachel Rodriguez-Williams (R-Cody), addresses the very real possibility that the U.S. Supreme Court may soon abandon its legally unsound, and constitutionally unfounded decision of Roe v. Wade. If the Court decides to return states’ rights, HB 92 would return Wyoming values to Wyoming’s Statutes.

Senate File 83 “Prohibiting chemical abortions” would protect Wyoming women from a corrupt FDA that is quietly stripping standard medical protections from women. This enables Big Pharma to make big money while exposing women to serious risks. SF 83 would stop these shoddy medical practices.

Of course, that’s not the way that pro-abortion lobbyists will portray it. You can expect to hear a litany of well-worn canards in opposition to these, and any other pro-life bills that may yet be filed before the deadline.

First, you will notice a refusal to grace the preborn with the status of “human being” or “person.” States that count people as people will always protect them from harm. To deny such protection in law requires, first, the denial of personhood in language. Often, the Latin word for child, “fetus,” is used as a sleight of hand to accomplish this dehumanization. 

A second canard is to claim that advocates for the unborn care nothing for the children after they are born. This is refuted once you notice that the same people who advocate for the unborn are those who establish, fund, and operate a dozen pregnancy resource centers around the state. Centers, like those run by Rodriguez-Williams, provide a cornucopia of gifts to mothers and fathers who need physical, financial, and emotional support both before and after the birth of the child. 

Churches often provide free diapers, formula, clothing, and other child-care necessities. My own denomination (the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod) recently launched a “Million Dollar Life Match” to help fund local congregations’ care for all children. The initiative is inspired by the biblical charge, “Little children, let us not love in word or talk, but in deed and truth” (1 John 3:18). Look for these services in your town.

Third, it is falsely claimed that Roe v. Wade protects the life of the mother. Since those who came of age after 1973 have little recollection of Wyoming Statute beforehand, this misinformation often goes unchallenged. The fact is that Wyoming’s abortion law always protected the lives of women. 

For nearly eight decades before seven men in black robes nullified our state laws, Wyoming recognized that medical procedures to save the life of a pregnant woman were both appropriate and legal. Even if an unborn child died in the process, this was never forbidden by pre-Roe abortion laws.

Roe gave no additional protections to the life of mothers. Rather, the Court inserted the word “health,” and deliberately left it undefined. As any lawyer knows, undefined words are legal gold mines. To insert an undefined term into law is to insert a wild card that can be interpreted to mean anything and everything. 

According to a January 2022 Marist Poll, 83 percent of Americans believe that there should be reasonable restrictions on abortion and 71 percent believe it should be restricted to  the first trimester. Few realize that the Supreme Court’s undefined term acted like a wrecking ball to demolish any and every reasonable limit. As a result, America allows abortion up to the moment of birth. This aligns us among the six most unreasonable and barbaric nations in the world,

Fourth, abortion lobbyists often claim that the needs of women and the needs of their children are in conflict. They assume that granting rights to children takes rights from women. This is not true. 

Pro-life efforts to support both the born and the unborn are informed by a deep understanding of the needs of women. Countless psychological studies tell us what our hearts already know: To support a mother’s desire to nurture her child is to support the mother herself.

The book, “Victims and Victors: speaking out about their pregnancies, abortions, and children resulting from sexual assault” (Reardon, Makimaa, and Sobie, 2000), thoroughly documents this fact. This study allows 200 women to speak for themselves. Their unfiltered words cut through artificially manufactured narratives and speak the truth with authenticity.

As citizens and legislators engage in lawmaking over the next several weeks, these four facts can help make sound policy decisions and contribute to a more civil society. Mahatma Gandhi had it right when he said, “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.”

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, February 18, 2022, and in the Cowboy State Daily, February 17, 2022.

Wendy Schuler, advocate for women in sports

Evanston’s own Wendy Davis Schuler was a member of the 1976 Olympic team. But you won’t find her name in the record books. Invited to the Olympic Trials, she made the cut and was selected to America’s first women’s basketball team only to sustain a broken foot in the closing hours.

Schuler had earned the right to go to Montreal and, could have joined her team on the silver medal podium. Instead, she voluntarily gave up her spot to an uninjured alternate. Almost five decades later, she told me, “I sometimes regret that. But it was just the right thing to do.” 

Her choice erased her from the history books, but it speaks volumes of her character. It is only one episode in a life dedicated to lifting up women’s athletics. That career, from athlete to coach, and now to state senator, spanned the most significant legislation in the history of women’s sports.

This year is the 50th anniversary of Title IX. On June 23, 1972, President Nixon signed legislation prohibiting sex discrimination in programs receiving federal financial aid. The effect was immediate. Prior to 1972 the NCAA had virtually no female sports. But by the 1972-73 school year NCAA women’s sports were a reality.

It was Schuler’s Junior year at the University of Wyoming, and she reveled in the new opportunities. Throughout her high school years and for her first two years in college, intramural sports and loosely organized athletic associations were the outer limits of women’s athletics. Funding was minuscule, equipment was second-rate, and travel to events was haphazard. 

UW volleyball, 1972-73 (Schuler back right)

Schuler recalls piling into her coach’s private car because access to university transportation was denied. Once, her team qualified for the regional tournament in Provo but, due to a lack of funding, could not compete unless they held a bake sale to raise travel funds.

Title IX changed all that. By carving out a niche for female sports, it took seriously the benefits and the uniqueness of athletics for the female body. Athletics are part of a well-rounded education of body, mind and soul. Since the fall of 1972, Title IX has contributed to the thriving of millions of women worldwide.

As a high school coach, Schuler would often tell her girls how fortunate they were to have opportunities that she never dreamed of. When she arrived in Lyman in 1976, there was no girls’ basketball program. Three years later, they were state champs. Next Evanston High School called her number and, by 1982, their girls were playing for the state title.

Schuler has coached both boys’ and girls’ teams in her long career. She reflected on how they are different. Coaching the boys, “was more challenging than the girls, in some ways. But, in some ways, it was easier.” Physical differences were only part of the equation, temperament and team dynamics also differed from boys to girls.

Since her retirement from teaching and coaching, she has watched with growing concern as biological males have intruded into female sports. Lia Thomas of U. Penn is only the latest headline. After three years of swimming as a male and ranking #462, Will Thomas now competes as Lia, and dominates the pool.

Lia Thomas

The NCAA, as well as the U.S. Olympic Committee, has standards for hormone levels, Schuler admits, “but still, it doesn’t change the physical composition of a person. You can’t change their height, the size of their heart and their lungs, their bone density, the size of their hands and feet. Even if they suppress the hormones, it’s an unfair advantage; it’s a totally unfair advantage!”

The unfairness is not only a distant problem. Wyoming’s High School Activities Association currently allows biological males to participate on female sports teams. Female athletes in Wyoming are sitting on the bench while males take the field.

WHSAA Commissioner Ron Laird says, “We feel that our policy has worked.” Maybe it works for him, but coaches, teammates, opposing teams, parents and fans beg to differ. How does this policy work to keep girls safe from bone-crushing collisions? How does it work in overnight hotel accommodations, locker rooms— and a host of other unforeseen complications?

Local schools that want to be responsive to stakeholders and responsible protectors of girls open themselves to legal harassment. WHSAA policy leaves them high and dry. Schuler has introduced legislation to fill that gap.

SF0051 “Fairness in women’s sports act” would restore safeguards against sex discrimination that were signed into law 50 years ago. By protecting women’s sports from the intrusion of biological males, it restores the level playing field that has helped countless women to thrive.

Schuler, 400m finish,
Regional Intermountain, Provo, Utah

“I’ve got a granddaughter coming up,” Schuler offered, “and I don’t want her to have to deal with these issues. So, I am fighting for her and for all these little gals and young women and college women in Wyoming. I’m their advocate.” It’s just the right thing to do.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, February 11, 2022; and in the Cowboy State Daily.

Lincoln at the Springfield Lyceum

Few beyond the most devoted historians are conversant with Abraham Lincoln’s “Lyceum address.” But many have heard its most famous passage. There he prophesied that America will never be invaded by a foreign power. “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

“The Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois” met in the tumultuous years before the civil war to consider how the Republic might be preserved. Several things are noteworthy, here. First, more than two decades before the outbreak of war, these men saw storm clouds gathering. Second, they were not the gentry, but the young family men. Third, they prepared not by honing their combat skills, but by considering First Principles.

We should look to their example. During our own tumultuous times, it is an act of love and good citizenship for young leaders of every Wyoming community to call their countrymen together and look toward the future. I will write more about this in the near future.

We possess the richest land, the soundest constitutions, and an explicit awareness of our place “under God.” These we have not built, but have inherited from the labor of our forebears. To pass them to our children, we must, first, work to preserve them.

On that January night in 1838, Lincoln was invited to address, “The perpetuation of our political institutions.” It was only eight days after an Illinois jury had acquitted the murderers of Elijah Lovejoy, a newspaper editor. 

Years of lawlessness in the federal government had spilled over into state and local governments. Corrupt officials at every level ran roughshod over the rule of law. Open murderers were given a pass while the harshest of penalties were meted out in minor cases.

As an example of the latter, Francis McIntosh was arrested on April 28, 1836. He was a freeman employed on a riverboat recently docked in St. Louis, Missouri. While minding his own business, two police officers chasing a third man ordered McIntosh to join the chase. When he declined, they arrested him for “interfering in an apprehension” and informed him that he would spend the next five years in prison.

This set off a chain of events that, eventually, led to a mob dragging McIntosh out of the city, chaining him to a tree, and burning him alive. The grand jury, convened two weeks later, refused to indict his murders. To make matters worse, Judge Luke Lawless falsely told the jury that an abolitionist newspaperman, Elijah Lovejoy, had colluded with McIntosh.

For the next 18 months, mobs canceled Lovejoy. First, they destroyed his printing press and two subsequent replacements. Finally, they gunned down Lovejoy himself as he tried to protect his third replacement press. On January 19, 1938, the mob was put on trial but found not guilty.

Examples of such corruption of government institutions and its resultant vigilantism could be found across the United States. It was the poison fruit ripening on the diseased vine of slavery. Manifest injustice, defended and tolerated, must produce antisocial fruit. This is as true in our day as in Lincoln’s.

Young Lincoln drew out three consequences of this downward spiral. First, he noted that whenever vigilantism circumvents the rule of law, it will inevitably punish and murder the innocent, worsening the stench of injustice. Eventually, that injustice will rebound to sweep up the original vigilantes themselves.

Second, criminals and would-be criminals will learn from the example of mobs that get away with arson, assault and murder. Those without self-restraint are only restrained by the dread of punishment. When they learn by example that they might escape punishment, they will become “absolutely unrestrained.”

The outbreak of general mayhem unleashed by the evils of corrupt governments and mob justice will, finally, have its most terrible effect of all. Good folk, “seeing their property destroyed; their families insulted, and their lives endangered; their persons injured; and seeing nothing in prospect that forebodes a change for the better; become tired of, and disgusted with, a Government that offers them no protection.” 

Kenosha, Wisconsin - August 24, 2020

When good citizens reach that stage, there is no one left to defend the Republic. The solution that Lincoln prescribe is personal. “Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor.”

Lincoln’s Lyceum speech is worth reading in total. Let it be heard in a hundred Lyceums across our state. 

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, February 4, 2022, and in the Cowboy State Daily, February 3, 2022.

Stand with Päivi Räsänen against censorship

Päivi Räsänen

In recent months, Wyoming’s public discourse has crackled with accusations and counter-accusations of “censorship.” My own name has been invoked in the Letters to the Editor on more than one occasion. While I take no pleasure in being the center of controversy, it is gratifying to see the awakening of a frank and civil discussion about First Amendment principles and the realities of censorship. 

There is legitimate censorship and there is illegitimate censorship. Civil discourse requires that we know the difference. Flinging out the word “censorship” to silence ideological opponents debases public discourse. 

Social taboos, state laws, and institutional rules all have legitimate reasons to exclude certain words and subjects. Public servants—such as teachers, coaches, and elected officials—are rightly called out for using vile invective against students on the field, or colleagues on the floor. This is proper censorship. Children, likewise, should be turned away from the box office of an R-rated, or X-rated movie. This is proper censorship.

Such cases should be distinguished from improper censorship. Examples of this also abound in news media, on social media, in schools, and in the halls of government. Viewpoint discrimination on the editorial page, shadow banning in social media, exclusion of the Bible from the classroom and hate-speech laws are all examples of illegitimate censorship.

Legitimate censorship builds a better society. Illegitimate censorship leads to barbarism. Looking outside of our immediate context can illumine this distinction. Common to the most murderous regimes of the 19th and 20th centuries is the censorship of religious speech. Totalitarians require such censorship because religions tend to teach loyalties that are above the nation (“one nation under God.”) Religions also appeal to unchangeable ethics rooted in principles beyond the current regime.

As prelude to World War II, Europe’s state churches were, one-by-one, censored by the regime. This did not happen without dissent. Nazis first silenced the state church’s opposition to anti-semitism by lavishing favors on clergy. Those who continued to speak the truth, were de-platformed, imprisoned and murdered. Only after the historic doctrine of the state church was replaced by so-called “German Christianity,” did the real evil begin.

The Nazi project, for instance, did not use Lutheranism to murder millions. It silenced Lutheranism in order to weaponize its hollow-out institution. That’s why it should concern the entire world when long-accepted Christian doctrines suddenly become the object of censorship. And this is happening both in America and abroad--in both subtle and overt ways.

Last Monday, Jan. 24, 2022, a diminutive woman, named Päivi Räsänen, stood before a tribunal in Helsinki, Finland to face formal charges. Dr. Räsänen is a family physician who was elected as a Member of Parliament. Later, she rose to be the interior minister of Finland (2011-2015). Her education, public-mindedness, and popularity with the Finnish people cannot be questioned. Now, if convicted, she faces two years in prison and up to €10,000 ($11,300) in fines. 

While several charges were leveled by the Finnish prosecutor general, the most alarming, from a censorship point of view, is the charge that she criticized the leadership of Finland’s state church by tweeting a photograph of the state church’s own Bible opened to Romans 1:24-27. 

The state does not take issue with words that she wrote, but with the words of the Bible itself. This demonstrates, from the outset, that it is not a charge that hinges on “interpretation.” Rather, the state church of Finland admits that the uninterpreted words of the Bible are themselves offensive to the state. 

Räsänen, herself, understands that this blatant censorship is an attempt to outlaw any principle or any god who stands over the Finnish government. Would that there were more people like her who stood for the Christian doctrine that the Nazis wanted to silence! We cannot stand in judgment of societies that were overcome by lies and murder if we are unwilling to stand in support of those willing to stand for life and truth today.

Today, Finland’s prosecutor general is seeking to censor the quiet and kind voice of Dr. Räsänen. She teaches us all how a good citizen should respond: “Now it is time to speak. Because the more we are silent, the narrower the space for freedom of speech and religion grows. If I’m convicted, I think that the worst consequence would not be the fine against me, or even the prison sentence, it would be the censorship.”

While Päivi Räsänen stands against totalitarian tendencies across the pond, let us follow her brave example in opposing illegitimate censorship wherever it may raise its totalitarian head.

* A previous version of this article inaccurately described Päivi as the wife of Bishop Pohjola who has also been charged by the prosecutor general.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, January 28, 2022.

National School Choice Week in Wyoming

Photo by Kimberly Farmer on Unsplash

National School Choice Week is a charitable and non-partisan effort to raise awareness of effective K-12 education options. This year, it runs from January 23-29. According to its website, “Every child is unique, and all children learn differently. Some children might succeed at the neighborhood public school, while others might fit in better at a charter, magnet, online, private or home learning environment.”

Education is important to Wyoming. Our constitution requires that the legislature “provide for the establishment and maintenance of a complete and uniform system of public instruction embracing free elementary schools of every needed kind and grade” (Art. 7, Sec. 1). 

While much attention is focused on Wyoming’s 48 school districts and their 364 schools, we would do well to give greater attention to “schools of every needed kind and grade.” Children would benefit from greater choices. And budgetary difficulties could be eased by the competition that additional options provide.

One way of providing school choice is the “charter school.” These are publicly funded and publicly regulated but, unlike neighborhood schools, they must compete for students. When parental choice, rather than lines on a map, determine the student body, a school is more responsive to parental expectations and input. 

There are only five charter schools in Wyoming, concentrated in Cheyenne, Laramie, and Riverton. While these have proven helpful, many parents—and entire regions of the state are frozen out of this beneficial choice. Magnet schools have more direct oversight from the county school boards, but are otherwise similar. However, there are zero magnet schools in Wyoming.

Online learning is another way of empowering school choice. It provides computer-based learning modules that parents and students can use in the privacy of the home. This allows parents to be much more involved in monitoring curriculum and tutoring for success. It can also serve to mitigate some of the most toxic social dynamics of the school environment.

While the legislature seeks to expand school choice to benefit the public, it should not overlook the important role that private schools can play. Education is more than about reading, writing and arithmetic. Education is about morality. Under the heading of Education, Wyoming’s Constitution specifies that it is the “Duty of [the] legislature to protect and promote health and morality of people.” This is “essential… to the peace and permanence of the state” (Art. 7, Sec. 20).

All education is inherently religious. But the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the state from setting up one religion over another, and the Free Exercise Clause prohibits the state from regulating a religious school. State educators, in the best case, are reluctant to speak of God at all. In the worst cases, they may denigrate God before impressionable students. Either way, the constitutional and essential duty to promote morality is hobbled.

Therefore, Wyoming’s 30 private schools are better situated to serve the public in this capacity than anything that the state can do directly. They can freely speak of God who, according to the Declaration of Independence, creates all men equal. Homeschooling, too, allows open discussion of God in the classroom. Moreover, it boasts the longest history, and the greatest parental involvement of any other sort of school choice. 

Churches unable to establish a private school can still serve parents by enhancing educational choice. They can offer their buildings as a space for homeschoolers to gather and enlist non-parent volunteers for assistance. Such creative initiatives can encourage parents who are otherwise intimidated at the prospect of homeschooling. Cooperative learning environments like these can utilize the expertise of young parents and retirees who have much to offer to the next generation.

Legislative support for private schools and homeschools is tricky but should not be neglected. Money is power. Tax dollars taken from parents and given exclusively to schools that they have not chosen violates the spirit of the First Amendment. Every dollar given to a school that never mentions God is a tacit Establishment of a godless religion. And every dollar taken from parents who want a religious education for their children inhibits the freedom to exercise their religion.

The courts are beginning to see this inequity and to remedy the injustice. In a 2020 landmark case, the Supreme Court (Espinoza v. Montana) effectively struck down “Blaine Amendments.” These laws restrict education funding to religious schools and unconstitutionally discriminate against certain religions. Since Wyoming’s own Constitution contains one of these provisions (Art. 7, Sec. 12), our legislature should rethink funding models accordingly.

National School Choice Week is an opportunity to have a serious conversation about Wyoming’s Constitutional commitments to education. Parents wrote and ratified the Constitution for their children. Expanding educational choices will uphold Wyoming’s constitution and strengthen the state by strengthening the family. 

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, January 21, 2022.

Pandora’s Box and the Innocence of Minors

Pandora's Box, Sebastian Becker

Before there was “Crosby, Stills, and Nash,” Stephen Stills and Neil Young spent two years in a band called “Buffalo Springfield,” which released three albums and one smash hit. Exactly 55 years ago, “For What It’s Worth” was on its way to a No. 7 peak on Billboard’s hot 100 list.

“There’s something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear.” This iconic song became the anthem of Vietnam war-protests. But when it was first performed on Thanksgiving Day, 1966, Kent State was four years in the future. Stills was talking about the Sunset Strip Riots.

Pandora’s Box, a nightclub that catered to teenage partiers, was about to be bulldozed. On November 12, 1966, teens staged a sit-in that turned violent. Stills witnessed it on his way to a gig, and the song was born. Later, he mused, “Riot is a ridiculous name, it was a funeral for Pandora’s Box. But it looked like a revolution.”

That, I think, is why the song is so famous. It captured a feeling in the air. While revolutionary events are in process, few contemporaries notice. Stills did, and his words beckon us to do the same.

Buffalo Springfield

There is, indeed, something happening today. Pandora’s Box has been opened and has unleashed war upon us. In the fog of that war, it is difficult to know exactly “what it is.” But our moment screams for everybody to “look what’s going down.” If we don’t, we will fall under the same harsh judgment that we pronounce on others. 

Consider past cultures that failed to understand their own times and to stand against massive evils that we now see with 20/20 hindsight. How could the denizens of France not predict that a Reign of Terror would result from murdering priests and kings? Why didn’t more Russians stand against the murderous Bolsheviks who were gaining power? That mistake cost 100 million lives over the next 70 years. What devilry gripped the cultured, Bach-loving Germans? They allowed a madman to turn their industry and efficiency into a murder machine.

While Stills thought the Sunset Strip Riots were hardly riots at all, he couldn’t shake the sense that “something’s happening here.” They were more than another salvo in the Sexual Revolution. They crossed a new and significant line. On that night, the Sexual Revolution enveloped minor children.

The sit-in remained a peaceful protest until the stroke of 10 o’clock. At that time, the LAPD was tasked with enforcing the city’s curfew on minors. The people of Los Angeles had passed an ordinance to protect the innocence of children younger than 18. Push came to shove, and the Sunset Strip Riots were born.

The opening salvos of the Sexual Revolution were attacks on marriage. Its philosophical leaders, going back to Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) and Percy Shelley (1792-1822), were intent on destroying the sacred bond between husband and wife. Divorce, fornication, and adultery were means toward that end. 

But as the Revolution advanced, the crosshairs shifted to the children. “Free Love” was never the ultimate goal. It has always been a means toward an end. The goal is the breakdown of the family. Once the marriage vow is obliterated, the battle must shift to the natural bond between parent and child. While that remains, family bonds still have precedence.

Maybe Stills knew this consciously—maybe, only subconsciously. But children were the focus of his haunting refrain, “I think it’s time we stop, children. What’s that sound? Everybody, look what's going down.” Whether Stills intended this, or not, Carl S. Trueman painstakingly documents the sexualization of children in his new book, “The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self.”

This book is a must-read for parents and policy makers who are interested in the health and well-being of children. It helps to explain how the innocence of children came under attack through the militantly atheist philosophy of people like Shelly. It, further, documents how Sigmund Freud deliberately sexualized every aspect of childhood development—from breast-feeding to potty-training.

It is precisely at this point that school boards and library associations come into the picture. Statutes protecting minor children obligate state actors to respect parental rights. But these statutes hinder the agenda to dissolve the natural family and replace it with the state. 

Those who tell you that the arguments over objectionable books and curricula are about “free speech,” or about “access to information,” are either deceived, or deceiving. The fact remains that statutory age restrictions on sexual consent (statutory rape) and access to sexual content (e.g. Restricted films) are legal recognition of parental rights. Violation of these laws violate parental rights. Nobody has the right to interfere in the sacred relationship between parents and their own children.

Will we, as a lawful society, respect parents who guard the innocence of minors? Will we help them maintain their sole authority to educate their own children in family formation and emotional health?

Or, will we undermine parental rights and give ever more power to teachers’ unions and library associations to indoctrinate our children in the philosophical thought-stream that brought us the French Revolution, the Bolsheviks, and the Hitler Youth? 

According to legend, Pandora’s Box contains war. The nightclub that circumvented parental rights and brought the sexual revolution to minor children could not have been more appropriately named.

Also published in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, January 14, 2022, the Cowboy State Daily, January 13, 2022, and the American Thinker.