Teachers Saving Children® Inc. - National
Newsletter
Volume 17, Number 3
February 2007
Home |
Teachers Saving Children® Inc. - National | |
Newsletter
|
Home | |
“…let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us.”
-Hebrews 12:1c
It has been thirty-four years since the famous Supreme Court decisions of Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton. Teachers Saving Children® has been in existence for over seventeen years. Individuals who have a strong conviction regarding the Sanctity of Life have been working diligently for years, oftentimes growing weary in the cause for life. Yet, Scripture very clearly teaches us the principle of perseverance in doing with is right.
Does perseverance really bring about positive change? First of all, we must remember that we are servants in the Potter’s Hands. And as His servants we plant and water the seeds of truth through our actions and words. It is God who changes hearts. And sometimes that is a tough principle to remember, especially when we do not see instant change.
Secondly, there are signs that our perseverance is bringing positive results. The weekend of January 26-28, I attended the NEA Mid-Atlantic Regional Leadership Conference in Wilmington Delaware. On at least two different occasions, the Lord opened the door for me to have an opportunity to dialogue one-on-one with leadership from my state affiliate.
The first dialogue took place when I attended an evening dinner with educators from my region. Part-way through the dinner, the leader sitting next to me began asking me some questions about the Resolutions hearing. Through the course of that conversation, this leader shared that we [the conservatives] were working through the correct procedures in presenting our concerns. In addition, this leader shared that although some individuals are very concerned about our involvement, various leaders realize that we are members and have the right to express our concerns regarding various issues.
Another dialogue took place while I was waiting at the airport for my return flight home. This dialogue lasted about an hour. Again, I was encouraged by this leader to continue expressing the concerns of conservative members through the procedures that are provided for us as delegates and members. We had an excellent dialogue about several issues concerning policy and procedures. And I felt that my comments were well received.
Perseverance does bring positive results, especially when we are doing what is right according to the principles clearly presented in the Word of God. Let us continue to persevere and ever be faithful in speaking the truth about life on behalf of the precious little ones who need us to speak for them.
We are still in need of approximately $450 before we can officially process the application for the exhibit space. The application is due March 15, 2007. Please consider financially assisting Teachers Saving Children® in sharing the truth about “The Wonder of Life.”
Note: Please make checks payable to “TSC Inc. – National”. Please carefully note how the amount given is to be designated (NEA Exhibit) so that the contribution will be appropriately allocated.
In 1988, when the Lord placed me as a teacher into the public school system, I KNEW that I would encounter issues that would go against my beliefs as a Christian, but I also knew that if the Lord had wanted me to teach in a belief-friendly zone, He would have directed me to a job in a Christian school. My ministry was to give love and acceptance to children, help them understand what we adults find important for them to learn in school, help them reach those learning goals, and allow for Christian children in my classes some freedom to be themselves, too. I joined the NEA because it seemed expected of me – seemed to be a good investment of my money for the legal insurance aspect – and, other than a 2 year stint as our building representative, I have never been politically active or had many questions about our union.
The 2007 March for Life was my first time for attending that event. I have ALWAYS believed in the cause, but never felt led before to go and make a public stand. This year was different. I knew I was to go and, believing one should do what the Lord wants, I signed up with others from my church. We planned on going to the Family Research Council first, then exploring a few of the Washington DC tourist attractions before attending the rally and march. However, sightseeing was not quite what the Lord had planned for this nonpolitical teacher.
Connie Bancroft also began the day’s events at the Family Research Council. When I noticed she had a tote bag with the NEA logo, I asked if she were a teacher. Connie was not only a teacher and NEA member, she was also the Executive Director of the organization Teachers Saving Children® Inc., and I was invited to join others going to the NEA building to speak with the union officials about the Pro-Choice position of the NEA. I was quite surprised that NEA, which I expected to be child-centered, represents the ultimate denial of a child’s rights. That seems SO illogical! I expected non-Christian tolerance for various lifestyles and beliefs, but not a tolerance for the death of children. I went with the group to the NEA building.
 |
NEA Secretary-Treasurer Lily Eskelsen, Judy Bruns, Ruth Boyatt, and Crystal Collins |
For me, my viewpoint on Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice certainly has not changed, and I will continue to pray for a change in laws. As far as my viewpoint concerning NEA – I have a question: Does the Pro-Choice position actually reflect the wishes of the majority of those the NEA represents? If so, maybe I, too, need to explore ways to opt out of the union. If not, I would like to know how we can make it clear to those who have been elected to represent us that Pro-Choice should NOT be a position of the NEA.
Editor’s Note: Crystal Collins is currently in her 19th year of teaching at United Local Elementary School in Columbiana OH. She currently teaches third grade, but began as a Special Education teacher serving 5 years in an SLD resource room and 6 years in a third grade inclusion classroom.
On January 10, 2007, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in the consolidated cases: Davenport v. Washington Education Association (WEA) and Washington v. WEA. Many say these are within the top three cases of the year. For many teachers such as my self, this just may be the case of a lifetime. My dreams as a teacher fulfilling ideals of my profession were dashed many years ago when I realized I would not be included within the top echelon of my profession because of my political beliefs. Along with many teachers across America, I have worked very hard my entire career to bring equity to teachers. I was honored to attend the Supreme Court hearings. In the stroke of a pen, the unusual decision of Justice Ireland, reversing the Washington State decision in the spring of 2006, diminished individual rights of “free speech” for teachers who are already “silenced” and overpowered by the structure of the union.
The importance of this case, however, is not necessarily solely the free speech rights of teachers. It is much, much more. When free speech rights are diminished by the supreme law of the land for any segment of society, it diminishes the free speech rights of all Americans. The hope of our society hinges much upon the decision to be made by the Supreme Court in 2007 in the Washington State cases versus WEA union.
In the spring of 2006, Justice Ireland, in a landmark reversal decision, declared the rights of the union as more important than the free speech rights of individual teachers, thereby, diminishing the Constitutional rights of all Americans.
Effectively, the decision was the union’s “burden” to keep paperwork of a teacher’s decision regarding how one’s union dues were spent on politics was “balanced” to be more important for society than the individual rights of a teacher’s choice in how one’s union dues are spent in politics; basically, silencing, or greatly diminishing one’s democratic voice, if you disagree with union leaders.
In other words, as a teacher, if you disagree with the union leaders, you pay for the opponent’s voice in the political arena. This goes against all principles of fairness, equality, and democracy. There are numerous landmark cases supporting the rights of individuals, which give us hope the Supreme Court will decide favoring the rights of individuals.
Justice Ireland’s interpretation of the "balancing" of the "Dissenters may not silence the majority by the creation of too heavy an administrative burden," does not consider the alternative that is closer to "the reality."
Using the same basis Justice Ireland used in the 14th Amendment as the right to join others by association (political view), an alternative and better conclusion would be the "the minority views of union leaders may not silence the majority view of millions of powerless teachers and union members” across the nation who are coerced and intimidated into forced dues against their will in order to keep their jobs and keep the peace on campuses and work sites across the nation.
"Freedom to associate" is a two way street. Justice Ireland’s presumption can easily be rebutted by statistics, surveys, and factual reports and analysis concluding in fact that a majority of teachers across the nation are conservative and moderate in political views; therefore, these teachers do not agree with the "extreme left, liberal" views, issues, and positions taken by the National Education Association, NEA (WEA is an affiliate). Factual reports support this conclusion.
For example, for the last twenty years, NEA has spent 94-96% of its union political funds on liberal and Democrat issues and candidates, as well as funding lobbyists and political PACs and organizations that support liberal causes. Many of the unions activities have not been made public until recently enacted laws have required disclosure of union expenditures. Many of the union procedures and expenditures diminish the "voice" and the fair participation of moderate and conservative teachers in a democratic process touted by the unions as their hallmark. Reports have given rise to concerns of “soft money” expenditures.
In effect, teachers’ rights of democracy are "harmed and greatly diminished" by the overpowering affect of the unions. Several contributory factors cause this "violation and infringement" of teachers’ First Amendment and Fourteenths Amendment rights in the reverse position that Justice Ireland concludes.
Often times, while working in the political arena, teachers come against the “double whammy” power of the union,… our own money defeating our own choice in politics.
The burden of administrative processes to obtain "affirmative authorization" is very low. Currently, unions use an existing structural hierarchy that facilitates a timely turn-around of paperwork. The unions have a mailbag system that works independently from the post office. The state level union leadership can distribute mailers to every single teacher in the state within two days at minimal cost. This occurs several times every year for union business.
To state the "affirmative authorization" process is an "undue burden" upon the unions is ludicrous upon its face. The fact is, the "undue burden" rests upon the "individual teacher," who has to take several hours to learn who and where to find out about "opting-out," fill out burdensome paperwork, hampered by lack of "information readily available" to members within each district. All this only after they "may find out by happenstance, about the possibility of opting-out." Teachers are very busy working 50-60 hours a week, taking required professional coursework, and often raising a family. Unions have successfully used the terms "education friendly candidates" and "what’s best for the children," for the last thirty years; assuring teachers they can be trusted with minimal accountability, while often doing business as the union leaders wish, without consideration of teachers’ point of view.
Compounding this process is the fact "opting-out" is not a secret process, and there are almost always repercussions for a teacher who chooses to "opt-out." Not only is a teachers’ voice diminished; additionally, a teachers’ "coerced dues" are used in support of political ideas and principles of which they disagree.
As a teacher of over thirty years, I am hopeful the Supreme Court will uphold "freedom-of-speech," “freedom-of-association,” and unfettered opportunity to practice "Democracy with integrity" for all Americans.
In a dissenting argument, Judge Sanders wrote, "If the state can grant unions the right to collect dues from members and non-members, then surely it can regulate how the union collects those dues...it can require affirmative authorization."
I would like to see the decision to require "affirmative authorization" for all members and non-members." Not facilitating discrimination and infringement," but affirming “free-speech,” and "freedom-of-association" of a teacher’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights guaranteed by the Constitution. A basic and foundational principle of the Constitution is that it guarantees "individual rights," not "union rights." I would like to see the "free choice of association of a teacher,” in support of a teacher’s right to hold one’s own ideological and political views without fear of "harm." I would like to see the Supreme Court "affirm the right" to teach in an "ideologically-free work environment;" free from hostility, coercion, and intimidation, that can "harm" the educational climate of schools across America today. The decision is expected by summer of 2007.
Editor’s Note: Diane Lenning is a retired educator having taught 33 years with 20+ years of public school teaching including Santiago High School in Garden Grove CA. She taught History, English, and Science. Currently, she is pursuing a law degree.
|
Home |