The Anti-Racism bill which recently passed the WV Senate and is currently being considered by the WV House of Delegates has generated some opposition. On 6 March 2022, Christopher Kinsler, publisher and editor of The Martinsburg Journal, wrote a heated column against it, though he did not specify many concrete objections. The bill, SB 498, does several things:
- Bases biological sex on reproductive biology and genetics at birth. It also defines ethnic group and race.
- Prohibits schools from teaching that one biological sex, ethnic group, or race, is morally or intellectually superior to another.
- Prohibits schools from teaching that “an individual, by virtue of the individual’s race, ethnicity, or biological sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;”
- Prohibits schools from teaching that “an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of the individual’s race, ethnicity, or biological sex;”
- Prohibits schools from teaching that “an individual’s moral character is determined by the individual’s race, ethnicity, or biological sex;”
- Prohibits schools from teaching that “an individual, by virtue of the individual’s race, ethnicity, or biological sex, bears responsibility for actions committed by other members of the same race, ethnic group, or biological sex;”
- Prohibits schools from teaching that “an individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of the individual’s race, ethnicity, or biological sex;”
- Prohibits schools from teaching that “Academic achievement, meritocracy, or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist or were created by members of a particular race, ethnic group, or biological sex to oppress members of another race, ethnic group, or biological sex.”
The bill specifically allows the exercise of the First Amendment and the discussion of pertinent history. It provides a pathway for people who wish to complain, and a method for tracking complaints.
Long ago, a teacher said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Would those who oppose this bill want to be discriminated against, treated unfairly, blamed for things that they never did, reproached as immoral, or told that their efforts at excellence are racist or sexist? Would they want their children taught such things? Would they want to know if their children were taught such things? Wouldn’t they want some mechanism to challenge the curriculum if they wished?
Education is a partnership between the student, the parents, the teachers, and the greater community. It would be refreshing to hear reasonable arguments about issues rather than uninformed judgements and ad hominem attacks. SB 498 is a common-sense measure to oppose some of the logically fractured, morally suspect, and divisive thinking coming out of liberal academia, the craven media, and the Democratic party today.
