Unregulated Private and Home Schooling

So what are taxpayers getting for their forced support of private religious education? The tail wags the dog.

First of all, only about 9% to 10% of K–12 students in the United States attend private schools. Not surprisingly, this is about the same percentage of the U.S. population who adhere to Christian Nationalism. Ironically, for those students, one of the greatest threats to their well-being is the high rate of exposure to child sex abuse. A close second is the likelihood that private school and homeschool students will face religious indoctrination but won’t learn the full scope of modern science or a variety of other mainstream information—which is, clearly, the point. Also, their education will be offered by employees who are not required to be certified to teach.

Recent legal decisions have led to an expansion of this spread of insufficient education among the nation’s youth. Data is not available for private schools prior to 1961, but after that year a total of 18,374 private schools appear on the record. Numbers of private schools increased to 35,895 by 2001 and dropped to about 29,730 today. As of the 2021-22 school year, private school enrollment amounted to roughly 4.7 million students, a percentage that has remained relatively stable in recent years, though it varies significantly by region (highest in the Northeast) and by state (from 2% in Wyoming/Utah to 20% in DC). As stated in a 2025 report by Douglas Harris and Gabriel Olivier of Tulane University:

Vouchers have already increased private school enrollment in participating states by 3-4%. While this might seem small, the authors identify seven reasons why the effects will likely grow substantially over time. This means that the funds are going to families who already send their children to private schools and who generally have above-average incomes. The enrollment increases so far are concentrated in schools with low initial enrollments and Protestant religious schools. This suggests that interest in private schools may be driven by religion rather than other factors like academics. Some of the voucher funds have also gone to private schools themselves. In response to the program, private schools have raised their tuition rates by 5-10%. The rising popularity of these programs has sparked both interest and controversy, with critics focusing on the possible negative impact on public education funding and rising private school tuition costs. These results suggest some of those effects are starting to arise. [1]

Trimming education to suit the goals of religion is harmful not only to the students, but society as a whole. Science denial, for example, leads to situations such as the current resistance to vaccination. An estimated 232,000 to 270,000 adult COVID-19 deaths in the United States were specifically linked to a lack of vaccination during the primary pandemic periods through 2022. In 2025, under Trump’s anti-vax Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert Kennedy Jr., three fatalities were linked to a massive nationwide measles outbreak primarily affecting unvaccinated communities. Nationwide, the year saw a near-record surge of over 2,200 cases, and as of mid-May 2026, the outbreak has already seen over 1,890 cases. Historically, before a vaccine was introduced in 1963, the U.S. recorded 3 million to 4 million cases and roughly 500 deaths every year. Following decades of a highly successful vaccination campaign, the disease was declared eliminated in 2000.

Science denial is frequently tied to religious intolerance and a lack of religious diversity. Closed, insular communities or populations with low religious diversity often experience echo chambers that make them less likely to accept external or contradictory ideas. The most prominent clashes occur when scientific explanations for the origins of life and the universe (such as the Big Bang theory and biological evolution) conflict with literal interpretations of creation stories.

Consider, for example, Afghanistan, where the Taliban’s strict interpretation of Sharia law means any deviation from or rejection of Islam is strictly forbidden and can result in severe consequences, including the death penalty. Under Sharia law applied by Iranian courts, leaving Islam is considered apostasy, which is a capital offense punishable by death.

Predictable Results of Religious Denial of Science

Climate Change

Public health is not the only arena where science denial threatens the nation’s welfare. Denying or heavily downplaying the reality of human-driven and irreversible climate change delays urgent global regulatory action. Failing to act on environmental science exacerbates extreme weather, droughts, and loss of biodiversity, destroying homes, crops, and infrastructure.

In the current administration, under the influence of Project 2025 and its Christian Nationalist authors, the modern environmental movement is framed as an anti-Christian ideology that worships nature over human dominion. They view global ecological distress as a fulfillment of prophecy rather than a crisis to be solved. Many within this movement doubt or reject the scientific consensus that climate change is primarily driven by human activity, often attributing environmental changes to natural, divinely ordained cycles.

Despite these denials by group largely adverse to scientific findings, earth’s global surface temperature has risen by approximately 2.3 degrees Fahrenheit compared to pre-industrial levels (1850-1900). The planet is currently warming at a rate of nearly 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit every five years. Both 2024 and 2025 were among the hottest years on record, with global averages consistently running more than 2.1° F to 2.6° F above the pre-industrial baseline. Land areas are warming much faster than the oceans, having spiked by over 4° F since the late 19th century.

Warmer air holds more moisture causing major storms to drop significantly heavier rainfall. Long-term average temperatures are higher, resulting in longer, more frequent heatwaves and extended droughts that amplify wildfire seasons in drier regions. Current U.S. events exacerbated by global warming include record-shattering spring heatwaves, intensifying wildfire seasons across Southern states, and the accelerating arrival of a strong El Niño pattern causing high-tide flooding.

Permanent Human Harm

Negative personal consequences of incomplete education often stem from indoctrination, shame, and fear-based frameworks that impact personal development. Shame and fear are key tools of conservative religions, fear of God’s wrath and punishment, fear of change from traditional lifestyles, fear of being shamed by the religious community. Authoritarian religious systems often equate questioning with a moral failure. This can create chronic anxiety around independent decision-making and result in an overall lower tolerance for ambiguity and scientific inquiry.

To understand just one example of the failure of religious education to teach children necessary life skills, consider a student who misbehaved was taken to the office where his misdeed was identified as an act of Satan. Three adults including a teacher and an administrator then “prayed” over that child, exhorting Satan to leave him. The lesson learned by that child was that Satan, not the child, was responsible for the misbehavior.[2]

When a child grows up believing that the cause of his adult misbehavior (child molestation, for example) is not his fault but rather the fault of an external force named Satan, he is less likely to develop a sense of personal responsibility, agency, and internal moral reasoning.

Sexual Abuse

In a study of 3,952 male sex offenders, 93% of the perpetrators described themselves as “religious,” with a large portion belonging to Christian denominations. The study was by Abel & Harlow (2001), published in The Stop Child Molestation Book: What Ordinary People Can Do In Their Everyday Lives To Save Three Million Children (published by Xlibris). It is important to note that this statistic (93%) specifically refers to the self-reported, subjective description of the 3,952 offenders in that specific sample and does not imply that 93% of all religious people are offenders but rather highlights a pattern where offenders adopt a religious identity.

Similar research from Eshuys and Smallbone (2006) suggests that sex offenders who maintain strong, continued involvement with religious institutions (described as “stayers”) may actually have more sexual offense convictions, more victims, and younger victims than other offenders. Sex offenders may use religious involvement to gain credibility or to manage a positive self-image, which can make it difficult for churches to identify them, as described in studies of offenders’ cognitive distortions.

A 2019 investigation (covering approx. 1998–2018) found that nearly 400 Southern Baptist leaders and volunteers (including pastors, youth pastors, and staff) were charged with or convicted of sexual abuse. Investigations, such as one from 2025, show a rising trend of reported cases across Protestant, Evangelical, and “Mega Churches,” with hundreds of cases reported in recent years. [3]

Research indicates that religious institutions are a significant context for abuse, with one analysis finding that religious organizations account for roughly 30% of child sexual abuse claims in insurance databases. In 2025, nearly 200 Christian leaders—including pastors, youth group leaders, priests, and Christian school employees—were accused of child sexual abuse. In July 2025 alone, 34 church leaders and Christian school employees were arrested, pleaded guilty, or were sentenced to prison for child sex crimes. From July 2023 to June 2024, 902 allegations of child sexual abuse involving clergy were reported across 195 Catholic dioceses in the U.S.

It’s hardly surprising that sex offenders growing up within the doctrines of Christianity would see children as a ‘safe’ target for their perverse desires. Mostly men, the predators consider themselves the ‘kings’ of their domain where they are the authority. Everything belongs to them, especially young girls, part of their rationale for supporting an early-teen marriage age. If they happen to be tempted to violate a child, all they have to do is pray and ask forgiveness because Satan was responsible for tempting them. [4]

Proponents of teaching this concept of Satanic responsibility often see it as protecting children by encouraging spiritual vigilance, prayer, and “covering children with the Blood of Jesus” to counteract negative influences. They may argue that it helps children understand that there is a battle for their future and helps them rely on spiritual protection.

Modern mainstream child protection and psychological advice regarding behavioral problems emphasize the need for nurturing, clear behavioral consequences, and helping children understand their own emotions rather than attributing them to supernatural forces. Yet in 33 states, clergy are exempt from any laws requiring professionals such as teachers, physicians and psychotherapists to report information about alleged child sexual abuse to police or child welfare officials if the church deems the information privileged.[5] So far, Texas, Florida and Louisiana have passed laws allowing volunteer chaplains to perform as school counselors.

Teacher Certification

One primary concern with private schools and homeschooling is that neither requires licensed teachers. Teacher licensing or certification means that the teacher has shown that he/she possesses the essential knowledge, skills, and accepted professional ethics to effectively educate and support students. Elements required for such credentials usually involve:

A bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution
Completion of an approved teacher preparation program
Pass standardized tests, such as the Praxis exams
Undergo a criminal background check
Hands-on classroom experience through a practicum or a student teaching placement

Various types of certification include appropriate college degrees relevant to the grade level and subject matter of specialization, as previously shown. Additionally, license requirements include passing Praxis exams and background checks. Applicants must also complete professional development in topics like child maltreatment and suicide prevention.

None of these skills are required for teachers hired by private schools nor do these skills commonly exist for parents teaching at home. Yes, some of these skills may be held by non-certified teachers hired by private schools. Documented results of hiring uncertified teachers span significant learning loss, higher educator turnover, and specialized skill deficits.

Finally, authoritarian religious systems often equate questioning with a moral failure. This can create chronic anxiety in students around independent decision-making and result in an overall lower tolerance for ambiguity and scientific inquiry. Adults raised in environments which prohibited religious questioning often struggle with decision-making, critical thinking, and self-worth. Conditioned to associate doubt with sin or moral failure, they may experience guilt or identity confusion when eventually exposed to secular ideas or if they attempt to leave the faith.

Discrimination

Private voucher schools can discriminate against students with disabilities, often lacking specialized services like special education and can increase racial and economic segregation, favoring wealthier families who can afford to pay the tuition difference beyond the voucher amount. Not including students with disabilities in private school data creates an inaccurate, “polished” picture of academic success while masking the exclusion of these students, who are often forced out or denied enrollment. This lack of data hides the high cost of tuition, lack of legal protections (like IDEA), and lower enrollment rates of special needs students compared to public schools.

In tailoring the school environment, such policies teach students that such discrimination is not only acceptable, but preferred. Exclusionary practices create insulated environments, leaving the student body ill-equipped for the realities of a diverse society. By isolating students from their disabled and minority peers, these schools foster echo chambers that can stunt empathy, limit cultural competency, and perpetuate systemic societal inequality.

Approximately 38% of homeschooled students identified as having special education needs, making disability-related concerns a significant driver of some homeschooling. Roughly 21% of parents specifically cite a child’s special needs or health concerns as a primary reason for leaving traditional schooling.

The primary reason for private school growths in the 20^th century United States was race. In the South alone, enrollment exploded by more than 250,000 students between 1950 and 1958. By 1965, the region boasted nearly one million private school students. This growth was largely catalyzed by Southern state legislatures which passed hundreds of laws attempting to evade desegregation, frequently by funneling public tax dollars, grants, and “tuition vouchers” directly to newly formed, segregated private schools. Outside of the heavily Catholic-populated areas, Protestant and evangelical Christian schools experienced a tremendous growth rate of 627% during the same era as white families sought alternative ways to keep their children in predominantly white learning environments.

The rapid, state-backed growth of these all-white private academies was eventually restricted by federal courts. A landmark 1971 federal ruling (Coit v. Green) stripped segregated private schools of their tax-exempt status, making it more difficult to subsidize them without penalty. While explicit discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin is strictly prohibited for schools receiving federal funds and violates IRS rules on tax-exempt status, studies have found that “covert” or systemic barriers (such as legacy preferences, opaque testing requirements, and cultural biases in interviews) disproportionately exclude students of color.

Nevertheless, private schools that are religious institutions (the vast majority) can require statements of faith and adherence to a specific denomination or theological ideology in order to be granted membership. Reflecting their roots in racial segregation, about 43% of private schools are “virtually segregated,” meaning the student body is composed of 90 percent or more White students.

Embedded Illusion of Superiority

Fundamentally, students who attend private schools or who are homeschooled will absorb the fact that they are separate from the rest of their school-aged peers and in many cases of religious instruction, ‘better.’ Research has indicated that private education can perpetuate a “segregated elite,” creating a “sense of superiority” where graduates see themselves in a higher position on the ladder of life. Without intentional efforts to socialize in diverse settings, some homeschooled children can develop an “otherness” or “adversarial mentality” toward their conventionally-schooled peers, according to advocates for responsible homeschooling. Home educators may unintentionally encourage their children to look down on children who attend public school by making disparaging remarks about public schools or about the behavior of public school children they encounter on field trips or in other contexts.

An Epidemic of Homeschool

As of early 2026, approximately 3.4% to nearly 6% of K-12 students in the United States are homeschooled, representing a significant, lasting increase from pre-pandemic levels of around 2.5%-3%. While some data sources indicate roughly 4 million children are currently homeschooled, homeschooling rates vary, with some states seeing over 20% year-over-year growth, according to an analysis from Johns Hopkins University. As claimed by the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI), which is heavily associated with, and rooted in, conservative Christian, religious perspectives, a demographically wide variety of people homeschool. While it is true that since the COVID pandemic more types of families choose to homeschool, conservative Christians still have a significant influence on the homeschooling movement. As stated by the late Christian Nationalist Charlie Kirk, “Homeschool your kids and they’ll be wiser, more purposeful, battle-ready, and less corrupted by the system.”

But what system? What battle?

Christian Nationalism perceives much of modern society the corrupt ‘enemy’ against which adherents must be ‘battle ready.’ This attitude and the systems it reflects are hardly in keeping with the vision of our Founding Fathers or the societal fairness enshrined in our Constitution. Christian nationalists believe the U.S. was founded as a white Christian nation and that the government should actively “preserve” this identity by basing laws on their interpretation of Christian values. They often advocate for merging Christian and American identities, promoting policies like school prayer, restricting LGBTQ+ rights, and declaring the U.S. a Christian nation.

As clearly stated in the First Amendment, religious freedom includes two complementary protections: the right to religious belief and expression and a guarantee that the government neither prefers religion over non-religion nor favors one particular faith over others. These dual protections are supposed to work hand in hand, allowing religious liberty to thrive and safeguarding both religion and government from the influences of the other.

In simpler terms, each of us are Constitutionally-guaranteed the right to follow our own spiritual path. In contrast, Christian Nationalism strives to force every American to follow their specific spiritual path. Both private schools and homeschooling with religious intent fail to teach this key element of our national history or the historical reasons for it.

Left to their own prejudices, parents may choose to homeschool their children in the hopes that those children will learn only what the parents deem worthy. Those parents themselves may have been homeschooled, further narrowing the range of knowledge taught. Homeschooling in America often falls short by placing a time burden on parents, creating potential gaps in academic socialization, and lacking standardized oversight to ensure educational quality. It can lead to reduced college attendance rates compared to traditional schooling and may isolate children from diverse social experiences.

In many states, minimal regulations for homeschooling mean no standardized testing, curriculum requirements, or monitoring of educational progress, which can lead to educational neglect and/or severe learning gaps. Parents often teach subjects they are not certified in, potentially limiting the depth of instruction in specialized areas like high school sciences or advanced mathematics. Also, homeschool families often lack access to school resources, such as laboratories, sports programs, or specialized special education services. These gaps, combined with the difficulty of monitoring the academic progress of children outside the public school system, create significant drawbacks for the children and, consequently, to America as a democracy.

In some ways, homeschooling American youth is little different from sending them to private schools, largely differing only in the emphasis on a particular religious belief system and the opportunities for socialization and group identity available in a school setting. Private schools often lack the socioeconomic and racial diversity of public schools. This can limit students’ exposure to a wider range of backgrounds and perspectives, which is a direct threat to a nation made up of multicultural immigrants.

Negative results associated with religious-based private or home school education stem from insular environments, limited oversight, and curricula prioritizing ideology over scientific or critical thinking. Key concerns aside from social isolation include academic gaps, potential for abuse, and the development of prejudice. Homeschooled or privately schooled children in religious settings may be “socially awkward” due to limited interaction with peers from different backgrounds, religions, or viewpoints. They are often kept in a “bubble” that prevents them from developing skills needed to navigate a pluralistic society.

Some religious curricula intentionally exclude or undermine scientific concepts such as evolution, favoring creationism. In cases of extreme religious homeschooling, children may not be taught basic modern science or the full scope of history, leaving them unprepared for higher education or technical jobs. For example, young people may grow up believing that the earth is only 6,000 years old, or that humans co-existed with dinosaurs. The emphasis on dogmatic “truth” can discourage critical inquiry, intellectual curiosity, and engagement with opposing views. This can result in a “bubble mentality,” where students have difficulty engaging with mainstream scientific, historical, or political viewpoints.

Because homeschooled children experience minimal contact with mandated reporters (teachers, school counselors), homeschooling can hide physical, emotional, or sexual abuse. Authoritarian, fundamentalist interpretations of faith can sometimes be used to justify harsh discipline. Some programs are designed to train children to be “soldiers for Christ” rather than critical thinkers. This can include promoting “purity culture” and patriarchal views that can lead to the forced subservience of girls. Children raised in strict ideological environments may experience trauma, especially if they struggle with their faith or do not conform to strict gender roles.

Child marriage is any formal marriage or informal union between a child under age 18 and an adult or another child. It is a fundamental human rights violation that disproportionately affects girls, disrupting education, limiting future opportunities, and exposing them to increased risks of violence, abuse, and health complications from early pregnancy. Between 2000 and 2018, nearly 300,000 minors were married in the U.S., often driven by religious beliefs regarding premarital sex, pregnancy, or cultural tradition.

The youngest females legally married in the U.S. in recent decades were 10 years old. Public records and data from the nonprofit organization Unchained at Last identified three 10-year-old girls who were legally married to adult men (aged 24, 25, and 31) in Tennessee in 2001. Other documented cases include young females aged 11, 12, and 13.[6] Demographic studies highlight that Mormons and conservative Protestants have the highest rates of early and adolescent marriage.

Groups that emphasize extreme patriarchal authority or isolation from mainstream society have sometimes been scrutinized. This includes the Quiverfull Movement which emphasizes traditional gender roles and large families to ensure the preservation and expansion of the Christian faith. Critics and former members have noted that in some extreme cases, these dynamics can lead to pressure for early marriage. An example of the Quiverfull Movement unfolded in the televised series, “19 Kids and Counting,” which ran from 2008 to 2015 featuring Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar of Springdale, Arkansas, married at ages 19 and 17 respectively. While Michelle’s family was non-religious, Jim Bob attended Shiloh Christian School. Proud of their religious affiliation as Independent Baptist Christians and adherence to the non-denominational Institute in Basic Life Principles organization (aka IBLP and Advanced Training Institute), they used a homeschooling program run by Christian minister Bill Gothard.[7]

In 2015, sexual abuse committed by their oldest son, Joshua Duggar, against his sisters as well as their acquaintances, came to light soon after the statute of limitations expired for the crimes he committed in the early 2000s when he was 14–15 years old. In 2021, he was arrested for possession of child pornography. According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Joshua James Duggar, 33, repeatedly downloaded and viewed images and videos depicting the sexual abuse of children, including images of prepubescent children and depictions of sadistic abuse. He was sentenced to 12 years and 7 months in federal prison. [8]

Next oldest son, Joseph Duggar, father of four children, was arrested in 2026 and charged with several counts of unlawful sexual activity with a minor. The charges relate to an incident in 2020 when he allegedly molested an unnamed girl, then nine years old, while in the state of Florida.[9] Additionally, he and his wife, Kendra Duggar, are facing separate pending charges in Arkansas for child endangerment and false imprisonment after a home inspection when locks were found “on the exterior of the doors.” As of this writing, neither has yet been sentenced.

One might wonder where these young men learned such behavior. The family followed the beliefs of IBLP which teaches a strict patriarchal system known as “umbrellas of authority,” where men are ordained as the supreme authority in the home and church, men like Gothard. Gender norms that associate manhood with heterosexual prowess and with access to, and control over, the bodies of women, girls, boys, and individuals of all gender identities contribute to male perpetration of sexual exploitation. Sexual abuse is, fundamentally, an act of power, not just sexual gratification. Central to these processes is the strict regulation of women and girls’ sexual lives and the simultaneous hyper-sexualization of their bodies from an early age.

A study by researchers from Oxford University (UK) and the Karolinska Institute (Sweden) used statistical methods to analyze data on all 21,566 men convicted of sexual offences in Sweden between 1973 and 2009. They found that having a brother convicted of a sexual offence led to five times the risk of a man being convicted of a sexual offence compared to a man whose brother had not been convicted of this type of crime. Meanwhile, being a father of a man convicted of a sexual offence led to almost four times the risk of the father being convicted of a sexual offense. Large-scale, nationwide research—such as a major longitudinal study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology—found that having a biological brother who is a sex offender significantly increases the likelihood of an individual also engaging in similar offenses.

The study estimated that around 40% to 50% of this familial aggregation is linked to inherited genetic traits that affect impulse control, neurodevelopment, and atypical sexual interest. Brothers share the same household and are exposed to the same family dynamics, which can sometimes include severe dysfunction, trauma, or the normalization of inappropriate sexual boundaries. Research also emphasizes non-shared environmental factors—unique, individual experiences that differ between brothers, such as childhood abuse, early trauma, peer influences, or individual psychological development. These unique factors interact with a person’s genetic vulnerabilities to shape their behavior.[10]

Michelle Duggar obeyed her husband, giving him use of her body to produce children in 1988, 1990 (twins), 1991, 1992 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 (twins), 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, and 2009, with a final pregnancy in 2011 when she was 45 years old and which resulted in a dead fetus in her second trimester. After this doctors warned against further pregnancies as extremely high-risk due to her age, history of preeclampsia, and potential for uterine rupture. Nevertheless, in 2014, at age 47, Michelle and Jim Bob visited high-risk specialist Dr. Paul Wendel to assess their chances for more children. While he helped them analyze the risks—including a 5% chance of conception and a 20-25% chance of a child with Down syndrome—they stated they would welcome more children if “God saw fit.”

Not to say that extremist Protestants have a corner on the pedophile market. The landmark John Jay Report found that in the United States between 1950 and 2002, 4,392 Catholic clerics (roughly 4% of priests in active ministry during that period) faced credible allegations involving 10,667 victims. Recent independent state investigations have uncovered even more, such as an Illinois Attorney General report that identified 1,997 victims over the same historical period.

While outwardly decrying abuse, extreme religiosity may breed it. In a sample of first-year students at a southern U.S. university, researchers found ‘significant relationships between religiosity and victims of child sexual abuse by both relatives and non-relatives. Persons sexually abused by a relative were much more likely to be affiliated with fundamental Protestant religions.’ [11] A 2006 study of religiosity among Australian men incarcerated for serious sex offenses discovered that those who maintained religious involvement from childhood to adulthood had more sexual offense convictions, more victims, and younger victims than other groups, including atheists. Among Jewish men in an Israeli prison, ‘religious Jews … were more likely to be in for sex crimes,’ according to other research. [12]

Instilling Prejudices and Ignorance

Certain religious educational materials have been accused of promoting Christian Nationalism and a one-sided view of history that can encourage white supremacy or discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals. Some graduates report a lack of “clarity of goals” and “feelings of helplessness” in navigating life’s problems compared to those with conventional schooling, potentially due to the high level of control and decision-making by parents. This type of authoritarian rule by parents (as well as private school teachers) can precondition young people to seek authoritarian political leaders, finding a certain type of comfort in a rigid set of life rules enforced by strongmen. One of many studies, cited below, finds this association:

…[W]hat we find here is that educated white Americans are always more sorted into different parties on the basis of authoritarianism, but the largest increase in authoritarian sorting has really occurred among the less educated. And we find that that is because, or we argue that that is because the signals that are put out there about the differences between the parties, the cultural differences between the parties have become so much stronger that even those who are less attentive are picking up on them. So we also show that authoritarianism increasingly constrains Americans’ belief systems. So it’s not just partisanship and voting, it’s their belief systems.

… [T]he white majority in this country is somewhat unique in that authoritarians within this majority are also motivated to seek to protect the dominant status of the white in group against the, quote, unquote, “danger” posed by inroads made by minorities. …[O]ne thing we find with respect to partisanship in particular is that all other things being equal, white Republicans do tend to show more anti-democratic attitudes. …in a variety of places, is that authoritarianism is associated with higher levels of what you might call generalized prejudice, dislike of groups that are seen as marginal, deviant or in any way different from the norm. [13]

To summarize, religious homeschool and private school education often teach young people to seek authoritarian leadership while failing to provide the comprehensive education needed for the students to succeed in life. Many of these programs are racist and discriminate against females; a disproportionate number of the teachers or other figures of authority in such settings may be sexual abusers. Religious homeschool and private schools can bestow a sense of superiority on students while inculcating the idea that any misbehavior is not the person’s responsibility but rather the work of the Devil. Students are taught to be “battle ready” against those who don’t believe the same religious doctrine.[14]

The ultimate failure of inadequate education is the systemic disempowerment of individuals and the erosion of societal progress, leading to a self-perpetuating cycle of poverty, social inequality, and lost potential. It is not merely the failure to pass tests, but the failure to learn critical thinking, adaptability, and the capability to engage in modern life. These handicaps then lead to further need to embrace authoritarianism and, for females, the inherent risks of abuse in settings of male control.

[1] Harris, Douglas N.; Olivier, Gabriel. “The Effects of Universal School Vouchers on Private School Tuition and Enrollment: A National Analysis,” National Center for Research on Education Access and Choice (REACH), September 11, 2025. https://reachcentered.org/publications/the-effects-of-universal-school-vouchers-on-private-school-tuition-and-enrollment-a-national-analysis

[2] More details about this particular episode is found in https://denelecampbell.com/tag/growing-gods-kingdom/

[3] Eshuys and Smallbone research was featured in studies such as “Religious Affiliations Among Adult Sexual Offenders,” published in the journal Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment.

[4] Data from the U.S. Department of Justice indicates that female perpetrators are involved in roughly 1% to 8% of arrests and recorded offenses, depending on the severity of the crime. Criminological studies (such as research published in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law) demonstrate that female offenders tend to commit offenses in domestic settings.

[5] Dearen, Jason; Rezendes, Michael. “Churches defend sex abuse loophole,” PBS, Sep 28, 2022. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/ churches-defend-sex-abuse-reporting-loophole

[6] See https://www.statista.com/chart/11848/americas-youngest-child-brides-grooms/

[7] Not surprisingly, Bill Gothard has been the subject of multiple civil lawsuits and widespread abuse allegations. In 2014, Gothard resigned from IBLP after an internal investigation revealed he acted inappropriately with women after allegations came from dozens of women who detailed sexual harassment and, in some cases, molestation. Over a dozen women filed civil lawsuits against Gothard and IBLP, alleging sexual assault, harassment, and intentional cover-ups. These lawsuits were voluntarily dismissed or dismissed in 2018 due to expired statutes of limitations, though plaintiffs cited emotional toll and the threat of countersuits as factors in abandoning the 2015 case. A high-profile civil lawsuit filed in Texas against IBLP remains active. In 2025, the Texas Supreme Court ruled against Gothard’s and IBLP’s attempts to dismiss the case under the Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine. The lawsuit alleges IBLP’s patriarchal teachings and structure created conditions enabling abuse.

[8] For more details, see https://denelecampbell.com/2021/05/01/evangelical-christian-perversion/

[9] “Making the Connections: Harmful Masculine Norms and Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation,” Equimundo, Nov 29, 2019. https://www.equimundo.org/making-the-connections-harmful-masculine-norms-and-child-sexual-abuse-and-exploitation/

[10] “Sex offending: genes more important than family environment,” Department of Psychiatry, Oxford University, April 9, 2015. https://www.psych.ox.ac.uk/news/sex-offending-genes-more-important-than-family-environment

[11] Levine, Judith. “Yes, Blame Christian Fundamentalism for Atlanta Murders,” The Intercept, Mar 23, 2021. https://theintercept.com/2021/ 03/23/atlanta-shooting-sex-addiction-religion-morality/

[12] Fitzgibbons R, O’Leary D Mrs. Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Clergy. Linacre Q. 2011 Aug;78(3):252-273. doi: 10.1179/002436311 803888276. Epub 2011 Aug 1. PMID: 30082948; PMCID: PMC6026962. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6026962/

[13] Grossman, Matt. “How authoritarian parenting attitudes explain our political divides,” Niskanen Center, Jan 21, 2026

[14] Ephesians 6:10–20 says God has given believers His impenetrable armor, designed so that every believer can stand firm against Satan’s attacks. But to walk in victory, followers must first recognize “the battle,” and then they must prepare for it.

This is the 5th chapter in the booklet New Puritans and the U. S. Peerage: The Willful Destruction of Public Education

Why the Puritan Agenda Must Not Prevail

The Founding Fathers’ collective vision of education in a democratic republic reflected their profound understanding of education’s essential role in ensuring the sustainability and robustness of the new nation. We were fortunate that the wealthy early leadership of the nation—Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, and George Washington—shared a common conviction: that education was indispensable for self-government and the preservation of liberty. Jefferson and Madison insisted on the widespread diffusion of knowledge as foundational to liberty. They were acutely aware that an ignorant populace could be easily manipulated, that education was the bulwark against tyranny and mob rule.

Today in the United States, secular education is seen as a threat to religious belief by about ten percent of the population, which to a thinking person would hint at a problem with their religious beliefs. But it seems this small portion of the population instead sees the outlier status of their beliefs as a badge of honor, somehow proving they are right and everyone else is wrong. Yet while most Christian extremists rely on the science behind cell phones, modern medicine, and public health standards governing water and air quality, they suffer cognitive dissonance between their religious mythology and the realities of scientific advancement. The fear of new information is so deeply ingrained that these religionists cannot escape it. This is the kind of ‘knowledge’ and ‘faith’ that Christian extremists seek to embed in the minds of their children, and not just theirs.

The intention is to force institutional ignorance onto the entire nation. For our own good, of course. Because otherwise their loving God will condemn us all to burn in hell for eternity.

We’ve seen this before, as elaborated in the first chapter, times when religious power brokers forced a population to adhere to specific doctrines and if refused, initiated imprisonment, torture, and death for the “infidels.” Christian Nationalist ideas of proper acceptance of authority are rooted in a belief that God holds supreme authority and has delegated power to specific earthly institutions—primarily the church, family, and state—to maintain order and enforce a Christian social hierarchy.

Adherents believe that specific leaders are chosen by God to “save the country,” as demonstrated by their continuing support of presidents such as Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George Bush, and now Donald Trump. A significant segment of Christian Nationalists and their supporters believe that Trump is a divinely ordained leader sent to save the United States, viewing him as a “warrior for Christ” tasked with restoring America to its perceived Christian roots. Because such leaders are seen as advancing a divine plan, supporters can overlook their breaches of democratic rules or norms as well as their personal immorality and perfidiousness, believing such actions are necessary to uphold a rightly ordered society.

It follows then that control over education and tax support for schools teaching these theories are a primary objective. But that was not the vision of the Founding Fathers or the visionary early 19^th century government in establishing tax-support public schools. Fortunately, as science and other fields of study have advanced over the last 250 years, religious power over learning has diminished.

Leading us to this point has been the “common school,” established in the 1830s and 1840s in the new United States, comparable to today’s standardized public school. Considered the father of American education, Horace Mann envisioned common schools as institutions that were free and open to all students. In his role as Secretary of the Massachusetts State Board of Education (1837–1848), he established teacher training schools, improved school infrastructure, and raised educational standards. [1] He wanted those teachers to teach standardized curricula that instilled students with civic values. Catholic and other parochial schools in particular objected to Mann’s belief that schools should not adhere to any specific Christian sect, an argument that continues to the present day.

An obvious drawback of religious schools that is often overlooked is the inevitable assumption of such schools and their adherents that their beliefs are the only truth, that anything other than specific Christian dogma is a lie. Denial of science is the best example of this prejudice as scientific discoveries have slowly dismantled much of the institutionalized mythology enshrined by religion. As myth becomes ingrained in students of religious schools, their beliefs serve as a wedge between the people practicing that belief system and the needs of a nation to move forward in all areas such as advancing industry and the economy with new inventions based on new scientific discoveries and the acceptance of facts about human life previously not understood.

For the 68% of Americans who do not adhere or sympathize with the strict religious views of Christian extremists, the fundamentals of accepted education typically aligns with secular, pluralistic, and science-backed academic standards. These standards prioritize critical thinking and inclusivity rather than religious doctrine or rigid ideological frameworks. In fact, of the approximate 32% of Americans counted as Christian Nationalists, the actual adherents are only 11% while another 21% are considered sympathizers.[2]

The question of funding public schools boils down to what we expect our educational tax dollars to accomplish. Programs which teach narrow and exclusive religious doctrine are by definition not meant to support a cooperative relationship among persons of various cultural and religious backgrounds, but rather to hold up one belief system as the only truth. This becomes an impetus for authoritarian overreach and ultimately war, as history has long shown us.

While historically this conflict in the U.S. has been decided in favor of the constitutional standard not to mix church and state, the most compelling factor in the present day argument is that we all pay taxes and the majority of Americans do not agree that taxes should support the extreme Christian agenda. Tax support violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause by compelling taxpayers to fund the teaching of religious doctrines, essentially creating a government-sanctioned religion.

The slow but determined creep of Christian Nationalism shows every intention of overturning this Constitutional mandate. The camel’s nose is well under the edge of the tent. A 2024 investigation by The Washington Post found billions in tax dollars now pay tuition at private, mostly religious schools. For example, Florida’s voucher program is expected to exceed $3 billion, with over 80% of funds going to religious schools. Ohio is projected to spend nearly $1 billion, with 91% of voucher users attending religious institutions. Hundreds of thousands of students use these programs. The rise in funding is attributed to the expansion of voucher programs in Republican-led states, which now allow more or all families to qualify, shifting from programs once aimed only at low-income students.

Reduced funding for public education leads to layoffs, larger class sizes, and reduced individualized attention for students. Schools that serve the vast majority of students are forced to cut essential services, including arts, music, athletic programs, and after-school programming. There is less money for modern technology, up-to-date textbooks, and lab equipment. Meanwhile, private schools receiving public funds can exclude students based on religion, academic performance, disability, or sexual orientation, narrowing the educational options for those students. Vouchers can deepen racial and socioeconomic segregation by subsidizing tuition at private schools that often lack the diversity of public schools. Continued siphoning of funds can result in the closure of neighborhood public schools, particularly in rural areas where the school is a central community institution.

Long term erosion of financial support for public education puts the entire nation at risk, not only from prejudicial curricula in religious classrooms, but also from the inevitable schism between people educated in stringently oppositional systems. In a nation that has long pursued unity despite our different origins and beliefs, such divisive practices are a form of violence against the existing government.

The Supreme Court has said the Establishment Clause forbids, among other things, financial support of religious activity. Subsequent cases challenging the longstanding interpretation of the First Amendment have brought us to the Espinoza vs. Montana case, allowing tax dollars to flow to the parents/students of religious schools. This is by far not established law. While Espinoza reaffirmed that governments may not discriminate against beneficiaries solely on the basis of their religious character, it left open the possibility that governments might still be able to bar beneficiaries that would put public funds to religious uses.

The U.S. majority has become increasingly aware of the conflict between a religious agenda and our multicultural society. The percentage of Americans who say religion is “very important” has dropped from over 88%-95% in the 1960s to 47% in 2025. The latest Religious Landscape Study, fielded over seven months in 2023-24, finds that only 62% of U.S. adults identify as Christians. That is a decline of nine percentage points since 2014 and a 16-point drop since 2007. Within Christianity, 19% are Catholic, 3% are Mormon, Orthodox, Jehovah’s Witness, and other, and 42% are Protestant divided into Evangelical (23%), Mainline (14%),[3] and Historically Black Protestant (5%).

Projections indicate that by 2070, Christians could shrink from 64% (2020) to between 35% and 54% of Americans, while “Nones” (no religion) rise from 30% to over 50% in some scenarios. This shift drives religious zealots to push a movement which seeks to assert “dominion” over societal institutions, including government, education, and media, believing that Christian moral values should dictate law.

Growing concern within the U.S. public is slowly building into a response to Christian Nationalism, Dominionism, Christian Reconstructionism, and the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) including tracking by civil rights organizations, legal challenges, and theological counter-movements from within Christianity. These initiatives aim to counter the rising influence of these new Puritan groups. Organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) are actively documenting the spread of Dominionism,[4] profiling key leaders in the New Apostolic Reformation, and tracking associated hate groups. (This is directly connected to the Trump Administration’s May 2026 lawsuit against the SPLC in an effort to intimidate all civil rights organizations from speaking out and doing their work.)[5]

Scholars and progressive faith leaders are working to produce public-facing biblical interpretations that contradict Dominionist, coercive, and authoritarian interpretations of Scripture. Efforts are underway to inform the public and Christians about the anti-democratic nature of white Christian Nationalism and Dominionism to “inoculate” them against its appeal. The ACLU of North Dakota and other organizations actively fight against initiatives promoted by Dominionists, such as forcing religious prayer into public schools, banning books, and promoting anti-LGBTQ+ policies. Organizations like American Atheists oppose lobbying efforts to pass laws that violate the separation of church and state, such as those permitting discrimination under the guise of religious freedom. Researchers such as Dr. Matthew D. Taylor are working to expose the ties between modern charismatic prophets and the political, antidemocratic, and “spiritual warfare” approaches used to influence elections.

Defenders of the United States Constitution emphasize the importance of religious pluralism and the separation of church and state, arguing that Christian supremacy rejects these principles. Organized efforts underway to combat Christian supremacy include

A grassroots movement launched by the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty (BJC). It unites Christians across the theological spectrum to speak out against the merging of Christian and American identities.
Interfaith Alliance: A national, pro-democracy organization that mobilizes diverse faith communities to challenge Christian nationalism, protect civil rights, and uphold religious pluralism.
State Ecumenical Groups: Various regional faith networks, such as the Wisconsin Council of Churches, that host educational campaigns, study groups, and sermons to counter nationalist theology.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State: A leading organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional wall separating church and state. They actively litigate cases and advocate against policies that advance white Christian nationalism.
Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF): A prominent secular organization working to defend the constitutional principle of separation of church and state, frequently challenging religious favoritism in the public and political spheres.
Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC): Monitors far-right and extremist movements. The SPLC identifies and exposes the ideologies and groups—including Christian supremacist and Dominionist networks—that threaten democratic institutions.
Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI): While not an activist group, PRRI conducts rigorous data-driven research and polling on Christian nationalism. Their work tracks the demographics and organizations that resist these movements.

These efforts fight against the adoption of “biblical authoritarianism” and the idea that Christians are mandated to take over societal institutions.

[1] Little, Becky. “Who Invented Public School in America,” History, Sept 10, 2025. https://www.history.com/articles/public-school-america-horace-mann

[2] More than half of U.S. Republicans are either adherents (20%) or sympathizers (33%).

[3] a group of historically established, traditional Protestant denominations in North America, often associated with a theologically liberal, progressive, or moderate approach to Christianity

[4] Dominionism (or Dominion Theology) is the religious belief that Christians are divinely mandated to take control of secular political and cultural institutions to establish the Kingdom of God on Earth. It is smaller and more fringe than broad Christian nationalism, but it holds disproportionate sway in certain fundamentalist, charismatic, and Pentecostal factions. While closely related, Dominionism and Christian Nationalism differ in their ultimate goals, theological roots, and how they view the relationship between religion, government, and the end of the world. Apparently neither group is familiar with the writings attributed to John in 18:36 where Jesus clarifies the nature of his realm: “My kingdom is not of this world.”

[5] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/21/trump-administration-sues-southern-poverty-law-center-on-fraud-charges

This is the 4th chapter in the booklet New Puritans and the U. S. Peerage: The Willful Destruction of Public Education

The Education Problem: Bigger than the New Puritans

In 1975, Congress passed a law that mandated mainstreaming students with disabilities. The majority of funding for such programs was never enacted, leaving schools crippled with lower student achievement, increased teacher turnover, and wider educational equity gaps, particularly impacting low-income and minority students. These well-intentioned programs have led to overcrowded classrooms, reduced access to specialized services (such as special education), and fewer extracurricular opportunities, hindering long-term student success and limiting workforce readiness.

The inevitable subsequent shortcomings of education opened the door to other assaults. In the lack of adequate funding, schools frequently cut arts, music, advanced placement courses, and crucial special education, behavioral intervention, and occupational therapy services, most of which offset the likelihood of substance abuse and are key for some students’ success in life. Opportunities are increasingly lost for the social bonding which occurs for participants in school extracurriculars like band or debate to form important relationships that can extend throughout lifetimes. [1]

When Congress passed a broad law on educating children with disabilities in 1975, it agreed to kick in federal dollars to help cover the excess costs of meeting students’ individual education needs. In the time since, federal funding for what’s now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has consistently fallen short of the target included in the law, leaving state and local officials on the hook. Education groups, who call that shortfall an unfulfilled promise, have long campaigned for “fully funding” IDEA, which underpins services for nearly 7 million students with disabilities. More federal funding for IDEA, which gets $13.6 billion in the current budget, would help special education programs, they say, but it would also more broadly affect all students as schools would no longer have to pull as much from their general education budgets to meet the law’s mandates.

The failure of Congress in 1975 has meant fifty subsequent years of underfunded public education in the United States. Despite some improvements and recoveries, experts note that student achievements have not consistently regained the levels reached in the mid-1960s, while international rankings for math and science have dropped in more recent decades.[2] This educational decline has served as a convenient back door which religionists began using as a justification (along with civil rights legislation forcing school integration and other factors) to put children in private schools.

Currently, according to the Congressional Research Service, funding is at less than 12 percent, and the IDEA shortfall in the 2024-2025 school year nationwide was $38.66 billion. A bipartisan bill currently in Congress, the IDEA Full Funding Act, would fully fund the IDEA programs. By forcing the federal government to meet its obligation of funding 40% of special education costs, local districts could free up their general budgets—currently used to fill the special education funding gap—to support regular education initiatives.

As a result of this deficiency and along with the obsessive intentions of the new Puritans, even greater burden now falls upon public schools as private and religious school vouchers allow those schools to deny admission to special education students. Only about 58.7% of all private schools in the U.S. enroll at least one student with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or a formally identified disability. While overall enrollment is lower in Catholic schools, they have higher inclusion rates, with 72.7% to 83.8% serving students with disabilities. This means that only about 1.4% of total students in private schools have formally identified disabilities, although studies suggest a higher 6-9% of students may actually have needs.

This funding gap causes inadequate disability services in public schools. Ironically, as more funding is diverted from public schools via vouchers, schools have even fewer resources to serve students with disabilities, accelerating the demand for school choice and further diminishing public education resources.

Exacerbating this problem is a continuing increase in the number of handicapped students. The number of students with disabilities served under federal programs has roughly doubled since the mid-1970s, growing from approximately 3.6 million in 1976-77 to over 7.5 million by 2022-23. Students with disabilities now account for 15% of total public school enrollment, up from 8.3% in 1976, dramatically increasing the financial burden on public schools. This rise is driven by increased diagnoses of ADHD, autism, and severe anxiety (especially post-pandemic), coupled with reduced stigma, better screening, and greater awareness of legal rights for accommodations.

In classrooms where students with disabilities lack a dedicated personal attendant, responsibility for bathroom and feeding needs falls on school-provided staff, typically special education teachers, para-educators (TAs), or classroom aides. These services are legally mandated under a student’s IEP (Individualized Education Program) or 504 Plan to ensure participation in the least restrictive environment, but are often not provided but to inadequate funding.

As a result, classroom teachers have been forced to step away from teaching the rest of the class to personally attend key tasks including toileting support, feeding, dressing, hygiene (such as nose wiping, menstrual care), and mobility assistance like transfers or repositioning. This care often includes behavior management, medication supervision, and facilitating meal times. Ideally, such duties would fall to paraprofessionals trained and hired to provide such care, but lack of school funds often leaves these duties up to classroom teachers who are not only not trained for such efforts, but also not able to accommodate the needs of the rest of their students.

No wonder teachers are leaving the profession. Data indicates that 51% of classroom teachers feel ill-equipped to implement required IEP services, and high turnover exists due to excessive workloads in special education. One elementary teacher stated that by the time she had tended one student’s temper tantrums and assaults on other students plus feeding and bathroom duties in her first grade class, she had almost no time left to actually teach the other 23 students in her classroom.[3]

That unfunded mandate continues to echo through much of the failure cited today in justification for school vouchers. No one can claim that promoters of IDEA foresaw the lack of funding perpetuated by Congress or the long term role that failure would have in the promotion of school vouchers, but in hindsight the facts are clear: the compromise of public education quality due to the underfunded mandate of IDEA contributed significantly to a rising call for school vouchers.

Adding Insult to Injury

Eliminating the federal department overseeing education is just one of several recent attacks on U.S. public education. As recently as 20 years ago, the United States was ranked No.1 in high school and college education. Sadly, by 2025, in the World Top 20 Project’s Final Rankings of 201 nations’ education systems, the list of best twenty educated countries for 2025 does not include the United States. The U.S. education system generally ranks in the middle to lower tier of developed nations for K-12, particularly struggling in mathematics while performing better in science and reading. According to 2022 PISA data, the U.S. ranked 34th in math, 16th in science, and 9th in reading among 81 education systems, though it remains a global leader in higher education.[4]

Although funding is a critical criterion for the system, American students are also falling behind due to a combination of pandemic-era learning disruptions, increased technology distractions, a deepening teacher shortage, and systemic inequality. Scores in reading and math dropped to historic lows following 2020, with declines continuing due to, in part, reduced student focus, weak accountability, and declining mental health. While remote learning during COVID-19 accelerated losses, student performance in math and reading was already declining since roughly 2013. Heavy use of smartphones and social media is linked to reduced attention spans and lower academic engagement. A 30% drop in teacher enrollment (2010–2019) and low salary growth have made it harder to fill positions.

The U.S. system leaves behind low-performing students more than other developed nations, with significant achievement gaps linked to school funding and location. Schools are facing lower standards and fewer consequences for poor performance compared to previous decades. In 2022–2023, schools reported that roughly half of their students were behind grade level. Many students arrive at college underprepared, leading to high drop-out rates and debt, as schools struggle to align with modern workforce demands. Experts suggest focusing on tutoring, intensive learning recovery, and addressing student mental health.

But that’s hardly enough. American schools face severe faculty shortages, largely due to high turnover rates and a shrinking pipeline of new teachers. Key causes include stagnant, low salaries relative to the cost of living, heavy workloads, declining professional prestige, and intense political scrutiny. These factors drive roughly 40% of new teachers to leave the profession within five years. To gain and maintain sufficient faculty, U.S. schools need competitive compensation, improved retention through mentorship, and broadened hiring criteria—such as valuing professional experience alongside terminal degrees.

Lack of respect for educators is most obvious in the approach to curriculum and teaching methods. Teachers in U.S. public schools often lack a voice in curriculum due to top-down mandates from state and district leaders, high-stakes testing pressures, and increasing political interference. Curricula and textbooks are frequently chosen by politicians and administrators to meet standardized goals or as sold by companies, forcing teachers to follow rigid plans rather than exercising their professional expertise to meet the needs of their students.

Evidence suggests U.S. education rankings and student achievement would likely improve if teachers had greater control over curriculum, textbooks, and school operations. Schools with high teacher leadership in school policy and curriculum development can see student proficiency scores in math and reading increase by at least 10 percentile points.

Teachers are the only persons in the entire educational system certified to have the necessary tools to actually educate. Specialized coursework educates prospective teachers in educational psychology, child development, curriculum planning, assessment methods, classroom management, and technology integration, alongside supervised student teaching. Their college educations for secondary education provide knowledge of history, mathematics, science (biology, chemistry, or physics), social studies, and English and language arts, and depending on their major field of study, experience with arts, music, foreign language, or physical education. Students preparing to teach at the elementary level focus on reading development, foundational math, science, and social studies.

Policymakers, politicians, and district leaders often prioritize compliance over teacher expertise, leaving educators restricted in what they can teach. Many educators self-censor their curriculum choices due to fear of backlash over political or social issues, knowing they lack support from administration if complaints arise. School leadership and state governments often impose curricula rather than collaborating with classroom experts, reducing teachers to implementers rather than creators. Also, the obsession with high-stakes testing encourages, or requires, teachers to follow a rigid script that ensures covering tested materials. In an Alice-in-Wonderland twist, potential backlash is itself a symptom of failed education among the voting public.

A love of learning significantly helps people later in life by protecting against cognitive decline, fostering adaptability, and increasing fulfillment in retirement. It boosts mental health by creating new neural pathways, reduces risks of dementia, and provides a sense of purpose. Lifelong learners maintain better social connections and professional relevance. A love of learning fosters critical thinking and curiosity, and empowers citizens to analyze complex issues rather than blindly following narratives, directly strengthening democracy. Educated individuals are more likely to participate in political processes, stay informed, and tolerate diverse viewpoints, reducing polarization.

Individuals with a love of learning often have higher education levels, which strongly correlates with increased voter turnout, political discussion, and civic engagement. Education teaches citizens to gather empirical evidence and analyze political issues rather than merely accepting rhetoric. A committed, curious citizenry is essential for identifying misinformation, especially as AI makes fabricated media harder to detect which, in turn, leads to the kind of political chaos currently occurring in the United States.

Teachers can and do foster a love of learning by cultivating curiosity, building safe environments, and modeling passion for their subjects. Teachers inspire this through student-centered learning, rather than just lecturing, which transforms students into active participants. Yet in a 2003 survey, only 24% of teachers identified “inspiring a love of learning” as the most important part of good teaching. While almost all teachers value curiosity, studies indicate that only a minority consistently implement high-level curiosity-promoting behaviors, with one study finding that only about 60% provide general opportunities to think or participate.

A group of University of California, Berkeley researchers found that when young children were shown exactly how to do something, they subsequently engaged in less exploration on their own than those who had received no explicit direction. Likewise, enthusiasm about reading—a key predictor of proficiency—tends to be lower when children are subjected to systematic phonics-based instruction rather than a literature-based approach, as Dominic Wyse and Charlotte Hacking explain in their new book The Balancing Act. Math teacher and research mathematician Paul Lockhart, meanwhile, wryly described the conventional curriculum in his field as “a proven cure for curiosity”—also an apt epithet for worksheets.[5]

Research also shows a sharp decline in curiosity as students get older, often due to school practices.[6]

This isn’t a failure of teachers, who often struggle to encourage student curiosity in the quagmire of rigid, test-driven school structures, packed curricula, and a focus on compliance over exploration. Structural constraints like inflexible schedules and standardized testing force teachers to prioritize efficiency over organic, student-led inquiry, which requires time to explore. Further, many teacher training programs prioritize classroom management and content delivery over teaching storytelling, curiosity hooks, or how to spark wonder.

Decreasing educational outcomes in the U.S. diminish long-term economic growth by reducing workforce productivity, lowering lifetime earnings, and increasing public expenditures on social services. A less skilled workforce slows innovation and global competitiveness, with gaps in achievement potentially causing trillions in lost GDP. These declines fuel social inequality, as students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are disproportionately affected, hindering social mobility. Long-term consequences include increased income inequality, higher crime rates, and strained public resources.

Perhaps more importantly, these shortcomings significantly alter the political landscape by driving educational realignment, widening the partisan divide, and potentially lowering overall voter turnout. Voters without college degrees increasingly favor the Republican Party, while college graduates lean Democratic, shifting party platforms and strengthening political polarization.

This political alignment resulting from diminished educational success is without question a driving principle behind Trump’s aggressive attack on the nation’s flagship universities.[7]

The Trump administration has gutted scientific research funding in the United States to punish ‘liberal’ universities and threatened research institutions with sanctions. …Universities are now afraid to collaborate with any other country. Private industry has not stepped up to fund basic research. Science and technology are collapsing in America and we are steadily falling behind the rest of the world. China, Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom have all maintained robust scientific research programs. Trump’s failure to understand the value of scientific knowledge is creating a Sputnik-like technology deficit in the U.S. that will be extremely difficult to overcome.

As reported in October 2025, the Trump administration sent schools a 10-point memo titled “Compact for Excellence in Higher Education.” Largely rejected, the compact would limit international student enrollment, force universities to share student information with the federal government, enforce the adoption of a specific definition of gender and threaten affinity spaces, and take action against actors that “punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas.”

Enter the Heritage Foundation

Project 2025, a policy blueprint authored primarily by The Heritage Foundation, envisions a nation without a department of education. Currently more than 50 high-level officials and approximately 70 percent of the Cabinet have documented ties to the Heritage Foundation and the groups allied behind the Project 2025 agenda. The goal is to install a “4-pillar” plan to restructure the executive branch, focusing on conservative, and often right-wing, ideals. The project explicitly targets for removal or avoidance several ideologies and policies it deems anti-conservative, “woke,” or contrary to its vision of American society. A review of this “blueprint” reveals an absolute denial of science that puts human existence at risk.

The main ideas, policies, and ideologies to be avoided or eliminated by Project 2025 include: [8]

The project treats “gender ideology” and “transgender ideology” as “social contagions” to be removed from public life, education, and government. It calls for outlawing transgender rights, ending protections for trans people in the military, and equating “transgender ideology” with pornography. Yet science has confirmed that gender identity exists on a spectrum, an unavoidable physical condition set in the womb including being born appearing female but have a 5-alpha reductase deficiency and grow a penis at age 12.

Such conditions of gender dysphoria often remain hidden until adolescence when hormones rise to manifest their genetic directives. What a tragedy for young people with one of these conditions who may be forced to suffer a condition becoming increasingly obvious as they move through adolescence. Medical treatments can mitigate the advancing crisis, but those represented by the Heritage Foundation (and others ignorant of science) would deny the existence of their conditions, creating not only a physical crisis but also emotional and psychological trauma. Needless to say, such a crisis severely undercuts a young person’s ability to gain an effective education.

Another hidden tragedy in this ignorance of science is that it embeds hypocrisy into religious thinking. Modern science has discovered not only the cause of such genetic factors, but also hormonal means of helping these people gain greater equilibrium in their conditions. In a rational consideration, to deny both the medical diagnosis as well as an effective treatment for gender dysphoria would also deny diagnosis and treatment for a myriad of other medical conditions: cancer, for example, or tuberculosis, epilepsy, or diabetes, all of which were considered total mysteries, frequently believed caused by divine punishment or demonic possession. What other conditions and treatments would the new Puritans discard from our society?

Whether or not a person identifies as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (or Questioning) (LGBTQ) also falls into the science denialism of Christian Nationalists. As typical of religious extremists, other people’s private activities, in particular their sexual relationships, form a primary target for authoritarian control. Yet despite wishes to the contrary, sexual identity is not a matter of choice or ‘perversion.’

Genetics play a role in a person’s sexual identity, but it is highly complex. Hundreds of genetic variants can predispose a person to same-sex behavior, meaning DNA alone cannot predict a person’s sexuality. Scientists believe that conditions in the womb significantly influence sexual orientation. Factors such as fetal exposure to varying levels of sex hormones (like androgens) during critical periods of brain development and maternal immune responses during pregnancy help wire attraction before birth.

Separately, the environment can influence how genes work without changing the DNA sequence itself, a process called “epigenetics.” Some theories suggest epigenetic “switches” are passed down across generations and act to protect parents from hormonal extremes in the womb, which can subsequently influence brain development and attraction in their offspring.

The reality of science should serve to deny religionists the ability to blame matters of gender and identity as a sinful choice. It should eliminate any idea of forcing such persons into conversion therapy, either private practice or facilities operating under the scientifically debunked premise that LGBTQ+ identities are a mental illness, defect, or choice and using harmful practices such as faith-based boot camps or church-operated programs that use prayer, isolation, and guilt to “cure” same-sex attraction along with extreme measures including physical labor, emotional abuse, and deprivation.

Another Puritan initiative seeks to purge DEI programs, race-conscious admissions, and “wokeism” from federal agencies, the military, and educational institutions, labeling them “managerialist left-wing race and gender ideology.” These include Critical Race Theory, calling for the removal of critical race theory from public schools and federal funding for programs that teach it. CRT is an academic and legal framework, developed in the 1970s and 80s that examines how racism is systemic and embedded in legal systems and societal institutions, rather than just a product of individual prejudice. Denialism by religionists does not erase the reality of prejudice in cultural traditions driving racism and other harmful discriminations.
Project 2025 also calls for eliminating all references to climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The policy seeks to stop the “war on oil and natural gas,” leaving young people without the knowledge of how to address the warming of our climate.
Project 2025 advocates for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education, returning control of education to states, and promoting school choice over public schools. It aims to remove “pornography” and “woke propaganda” from school libraries, often targeting books with LGBTQ+ content, and seeks to move the nation away from what it considers “leftist” and “woke” ideologies, focusing instead on a “biblically-based,” traditional, and nationalistic approach to American governance and society.

Despite the new Puritan efforts, every thinking person knows that public education must embrace the truths revealed by modern science, bestowing upon our coming generations the insights and understanding necessary to motivate participation in our democracy. Above all, secular education must ensure the survival of our Constitution in its original intent, that religion remains utterly separate from the operations of our government.

[1] Blad, Evie. “Why the Fed Still Falls Short on Special Education Funding,” Education Week, Jan 10, 2020. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/ why-the-feds-still-fall-short-on-special-education-funding/2020/01

[2] For a more detailed overview, see Shimabukuro, Jim. “The Decline of U.S. Public Education Began in 1967,” Educational Technology & Change, Feb 13, 2026. https://etcjournal.com/2026/02/13/the-decline-of-u-s-public-education-began-in-1967/

[3] Author’s personal correspondence with the teacher

[4] New Jersey Minority Educational Development (NJMED) organization. Each country’s ranking is based on five educational levels: early-childhood enrollment rates, Elementary Math, Science and Reading scores, Middle-School Math, Science and Reading scores, High School Graduation rates, and College Graduation rates. https://worldtop20.org/worldbesteducationsystem/

[5] Kohn, Alfie. “All Learning, No Questioning: How Schools Smother Curiosity,” Education Week, Sept. 23, 2024. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-all-learning-no-questioning-how-schools-smother-curiosity/2024/09

[6] Regarding student curiosity as part of classroom outcomes, see Jirout JJ, Zumbrunn S, Evans NS, Vitiello VE. Development and Testing of the Curiosity in Classrooms Framework and Coding Protocol. Front Psychol. 2022 Apr 7;13:875161. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.875161. PMID: 35465531; PMCID: PMC9022842.

[7] Soeder, Daniel J. “Science, Technology, and Society Discussion Corner,” Facebook, Dec 1, 2025. https://www.facebook.com/groups/ScienceTechnologyAndSocietyDiscussionCorner/posts/10173237402565008/

[8] See, for example, Boucher FJO, Chinnah TI. Gender Dysphoria: A Review Investigating the Relationship Between Genetic Influences and Brain Development. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2020 Aug 5;11:89-99. doi: 10.2147/AHMT.S259168. PMID: 32801984; PMCID: PMC7415463. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7415463/

This post is from Chapter 3, New Puritans and the U.S. Peerage: The Willful Destruction of Public Education

Education Is A National Priority

Throughout our national history, conflict over education has erupted with tiring regularity. Soon after the Revolution, common schools were designed by Protestant elites to foster “Americanization,” but they used the King James Bible and Protestant curriculum. Irish Catholic immigrants in New York and Philadelphia resisted what they saw as forced indoctrination and demanded public funds for their own schools. These tensions led to riots in Philadelphia in 1844, where Catholic homes and churches were burned. This conflict cemented the shift towards non-sectarian public schools, although they often retained a general Protestant character.

Many citizens, particularly wealthier ones, were reluctant to pay taxes for other people’s children to be educated. Some workers resisted the invasiveness of compulsory education, as it kept children out of the workforce, forcing some towns to temporarily abandon or reduce public school efforts, such as in Beverly, Massachusetts, in 1860.[1] Child labor was highly widespread in the U.S. during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with over 1.75 million children aged 15 and under (roughly 18% of the workforce) reported as working in 1910. Children as young as 3 or 4 were sometimes used for small, specialized tasks, while 5 to 8-year-olds were frequently employed in hazardous textile mills, mines, and factories. Child labor was finally curbed by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.[2]

Before the Civil War, most Southern states passed laws making it illegal to teach enslaved people to read or write out of fear that they would read abolitionist literature, such as David Walker’s Appeal, and communicate, fueling organized uprisings like Nat Turner’s Rebellion of 1831. Also, literate enslaved people could read maps, forge travel passes, or write passes for themselves to escape to free states, a method used by many to escape bondage. Slaveholders believed an illiterate, ignorant enslaved person was easier to manage and obey, whereas literacy made them “disconsolate and unhappy” in their captivity. And literacy challenged the white supremacist justification that Black people were inherently inferior, unintelligent, or “less than human.”

Even in northern states, black children were largely denied access to public schools, often being forced into segregated, inferior schools, leading to early school desegregation battles, such as Roberts v. City of Boston in the 1840s. The “Slave Bible”—formally titled Select Parts of the Holy Bible for the use of the Negro Slaves—was used in the 19th-century United States, particularly in the South, though it was primarily produced in London in 1807 for British Caribbean colonies. It was a heavily redacted version of the Bible created to promote obedience and prevent slave revolts, with 90% of the Old Testament and 50% of the New Testament removed.

Following the Civil War, southern schoolhouses became battlegrounds to teach the “Lost Cause” narrative—a false interpretation of history that portrayed slavery in a positive light and argued the war was over states’ rights, not slavery. School officials strictly monitored textbooks to ensure they did not challenge Confederate interpretations of history. This led through coming decades to culminate in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) in which the Supreme Court ruled that separate schools were “inherently unequal.” Decades of “massive resistance” from Southern states ensued. In the 1970s, court-ordered busing forced integration in schools resulting in violent protests, most notably in Boston in 1974, and contributed to “white flight” to suburban schools. In response to integration orders, numerous private, segregated religious schools were established, particularly in the South, to circumvent desegregation.

Concurrently, the Scopes “Monkey” Trial in 1925 was a landmark confrontation between traditionalists (conservatives) and modernists (progressives), focusing on a Tennessee law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in public schools, effectively curbing the teaching of science for several decades.

School prayer remains a hot topic for both religionists as well as those defending the Constitution, with two lawsuits serving to define the subject. Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) declared that state-sponsored Bible reading and prayer in public schools were unconstitutional, fueling long-term debates over the secularization of public education. The fact is that public school children have always been able to pray when and wherever they pleased. What upsets religionists is that children in public schools cannot be led in prayer by adults—not teachers, not parents, not the principal. The desire to inculcate all children through prayer voicing religious doctrine drives this falsehood.

The later part of the century was marked by “curriculum wars” over the inclusion of diverse, non-European perspectives in history and literature curricula, which opponents claimed was a political attack on traditional national identity. Like the prayer argument, the textbook/curriculum battles continue unabated today, with most book content decided by heavily-conservative boards. [3]

“Given the high concentration of students in Texas and California, textbook makers know…they need to create books that are going to be approved by those large states.” said Dr. Max Altman, director of research and policy at the Southern Education Foundation. Altman said that requests for changes and outright rejections based on the inclusion of certain concepts are what make California, Florida and Texas so influential.

“This small group of people who approve textbooks within a couple of states have a very, very large effect on what students across the bottom of the United States and really across the country as a whole are able to learn,” he said.

[This 2022 article reports that] …[i]n April, the Florida Department of Education initially rejected 41% of all K-12 mathematics textbooks submitted for state adoption approval — the most in Florida’s history. The dismissal of the 54 textbooks — including 71% of K-5 math materials — stems from several claims: references to Critical Race Theory (CRT), inclusions of Common Core and “unsolicited” inclusions of Social Emotional Learning.

The public push to provide evidential examples of the above reasons for rejection made national headlines, as the state’s Department of Education did not initially release any specifics. Later, it published four visual examples from the rejected textbooks.

Experts suggest that overseeing public school curricula in a small number of highly populated states has an outsized influence on what children are learning throughout the country. Because publishers often create uniform national editions, major state adoption boards, particularly in Texas (conservative-leaning) and California (liberal-leaning), exert outsized influence on nationwide content. Texas, one of the largest purchasers of textbooks, often pushes to emphasize “positive aspects” of American history, de-emphasize the role of slavery, increase the influence of Christianity, and promote gun rights. Conservative, evangelical, or religious viewpoints have often driven content to prioritize patriotism and limit topics like climate science or critical race theory.

California often pushes for inclusive, multicultural narratives, ensuring that textbooks feature stories of LGBTQ+ individuals, marginalized groups, and a more critical view of historical events. Due to this, publishers often create different regional versions or compromise by including, for instance, both more critical and more patriotic interpretations of events, creating a “whitewashed” or highly contentious final product.

Textbook selection and other elements of public schools are the task of school boards, both local and state level. While curricula are determined by state boards of education, there are no educational standards required of state board members. Eligibility for state boards of education typically requires candidates to be residents of the state, registered voters, and often residents of the specific district they aim to represent.

Not requiring a college degree for state boards of education is part of a broader, bipartisan shift towards skills-based governance and a move away from formal credential requirements, which are increasingly seen as unnecessary barriers to entry. While education policymakers need expertise, proponents of this shift argue that a degree is not a guarantee of competence, effective leadership, or relevant experience.

On the other hand, without a deep background in subject matter and education policy, board members may rely on ideological rather than research-based solutions to solve problems like low student achievement, leading to increased political polarization in schools. Members may struggle to evaluate curriculum standards, assessment tools, and learning theories, potentially leading to decisions that do not align with evidence-based practices. More concerning is that without the experience of the wide array of college coursework, members may focus on short-term political issues or “quick fixes” rather than the long-term, systemic changes needed to improve student outcomes.

State boards typically adopt standards (e.g., in reading, math) that outline skills students must master, hopefully informed by state law, national benchmarks, and expert input. State-level entities create frameworks, which may act as official requirements or recommended guidelines for local curriculum. State laws often mandate specific topics (e.g., specific subjects, or in some cases, restricting approaches) that schools must adopt. The degree of control varies by state; some states have highly centralized, mandatory curriculum lists, while others allow local districts greater flexibility. Boards often adopt standards at public meetings, occasionally with guidance from curriculum committees and teacher panels.

Local level textbook adoption policy leaves decisions to a local education agency (i.e. school district). State level textbook adoption policy leaves decisions to a state agency (i.e. state board of education) California has a statewide adoption policy at the elementary level. Secondary textbooks are chosen by local governing boards. The state of Hawaii comprises a single school district.
**Map: Emily Schmidt, APM Research Lab Source: Education Commission of the States**

Curricula

There are no federally mandated national education standards in the United States, as education is primarily managed by states and local districts. However, the nation utilizes voluntary, state-led standards like the Common Core State Standards, adopted in June 2010 by most states to ensure consistent math and English learning goals. Not adopting the standards are Alaska, Nebraska, Texas, Virginia, and Oklahoma. The reasons for common standards for curricula include the obvious, that children of a family moving from one state to another meet the same basic education as at their previous location. Also obvious is the need for all Americans to share the same understanding of national history, the operations of government, and fundamentals of reading, writing, and mathematics, as well as science.

School boards and districts have been empowered to make curriculum decisions in order to prepare future citizens. State constitutions require the operation of systems of education, and we elect school boards to make important decisions for community schools, including those related to materials and instruction. In some cases, parents object to these decisions, arguing that their constitutional rights have been violated. For example, in the [2008] federal appeals case of Parker v. Hurley, parents objected to their children being presented with books depicting diverse families, including families with parents of the same gender. The district refused to grant the children an exemption from the instruction. The parents argued that the refusal of an exemption amounted to an infringement on their constitutional rights as parents and their free exercise of religion rights under the First Amendment. The court disagreed, citing a long line of cases establishing that while parents have a constitutional right to raise their children, there is no right to direct how a public school teaches those children. [4]

The New Puritans at Work

The overarching religious education agenda is not a single project but rather a continuous political tug-of-war for the control of educational narratives. The division between these two fundamentals of education has led, in part, to today’s division in American society.

We can identify the ways that the Puritan ethic drives Christian Nationalism. The Puritans sought to build a “city on a hill” defined by severe piety, communal surveillance, and strict adherence to moral codes, rather than by religious freedom. Christian Nationalists interpret the “city on a hill” phrase, derived from John Winthrop’s 1630 sermon,[5] as a divine mandate that the United States is a uniquely ordained, Christian nation meant to act as a moral, religious beacon to the world. This vision, often championed by President Ronald Reagan, blends national identity with biblical prophecy, suggesting America holds a special, providential covenant to embody Christian principles enforced by the government.

Puritan men held public office, imposing religious law to govern social and legal life. Only adult male church members (“the elect”) could vote in elections and participate in town government. Laws were based on Old Testament teachings. Today, many within the Christian Nationalist movement believe that men are specifically ordained by God to lead in government, politics, and the public sphere. This ideology is rooted in a belief in “biblical patriarchy” or complementarianism, which argues that God established distinct roles for men and women, where men are designed to lead and protect while women are called to support and submit.

Puritan leaders were intolerant of dissenting religious views, which were seen as dangerous to the community’s mission. Christian Nationalists generally believe that America was founded as a Christian nation and that its laws and public life should reflect Christian, specifically Protestant, values. Other religions are viewed as subordinate, threats to national identity, or demonic, with many proponents supporting the restriction of non-Christian practices.

Puritan households were strictly hierarchical, with the father as the head. Women were viewed as “helpmeets” for their husbands with fewer rights, though they held significant responsibility in managing the home, raising children, and tending the gardens. Likewise, many proponents of Christian Nationalism believe that women should prioritize staying at home, focusing on raising children and submitting to their husbands’ leadership.

During the early Puritan period, the “Old Deluder Law” required every town of fifty or more families to pay for a teacher, and they founded Harvard College in 1636 for training ministers. They believed in the active presence of the devil and witches, leading to the Salem witch trials in 1692, which occurred when religious political control was waning. Christian Nationalists view public education as a vital, yet currently hostile, battlefield for the nation’s cultural and spiritual direction. They generally aim to dismantle the traditional secular public school system by promoting school choice vouchers to fund private religious education, instilling conservative Christian values, banning certain books, and reversing LGBTQ+ inclusion.

The Trump administration (2017-2021 and 2025-2028) has adopted key elements of the Christian Nationalist agenda by prioritizing policies that blur the line between church and state, fostering religious exemptions for conservative Christians, and appointing individuals aligned with this ideology to high-ranking positions. Trump has appointed conservative Christian judges, including three Supreme Court justices (Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett), who have delivered rulings expanding religious exemptions. They joined John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both appointed by evangelical adherent George W. Bush; Clarence Thomas, the sixth conservative on the nine-member court, was appointed by Bush’s father, George H. W. Bush.

At the prompting of his Christian Nationalist backers, Trump initiatives aim to review federal actions for “anti-Christian” sentiment and protect “religious freedom,” defined by Christian nationalists not as the separation of church and state, but as the right to embed a specific, conservative Christian worldview into government, law, and public life including the use of taxpayer dollars in support of religious education and eliminating government support for advancing educational effectiveness.

Based on 2026 budget proposals and actions, we see that the Trump administration has sought to cut or eliminate over $8.5 billion in K-12 education programs and $2.7 billion in higher education, while targeting programs like TRIO (outreach and student services initiatives funded by the U.S. Department of Education to help low-income, first-generation college students, and individuals with disabilities succeed in education, ranging from middle school through adult education), GEAR UP (a federal discretionary grant program designed to increase the number of low-income, underserved, or first-generation students who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education), and Federal Work-Study for elimination or massive reductions. (Initiated in 1964, the program provides part-time jobs for undergraduate and graduate students with financial need, allowing them to earn money for education expenses.)

The Trump administration’s cuts to K-12 education focus on slashing, consolidating, or eliminating programs like after-school, summer, and mental health grants. More than 760 in-progress grants, worth over $2 billion, were discontinued in 2025, including cuts to college prep ($300m+), civics ($35m), and racial integration ($26m). Other cuts target teacher training ($2.2 billion) and English learner services ($890 million). The administration also proposed the “Make Education Great Again” block grant, which would overhaul K-12 education by consolidating federal funding, cut federal oversight, and shift control to states. It prioritizes school choice, patriotic education, and literacy/math, while reducing the Department of Education’s role. This would cut existing program funding by 70%.

Trump’s cuts aren’t the first to take the U.S. educational efforts backwards despite extensive research showing the benefits of programs now being eliminated. This has been an ongoing effort by Christian Nationalists over the last fifty years. During the 1980s, Ronald Reagan campaigned on abolishing the Department of Education, with his 1981 budget reducing spending and consolidating grants.

This despite findings on the effectiveness of public education funding showing that increased spending per pupil yields significant social returns, especially in high-poverty districts. State cutbacks to K–12 spending, the rise of voucher programs, and Trump’s attacks on the federal Department of Education threaten to rob the majority of U.S. children of an adequate education.[6] The vast majority of our youth (90%) are in our public school system. Approximately 49-50 million K-12 students attend public schools in the U.S., while roughly 4.7 to 5.5 million (9%-11%) students are enrolled in private schools, based on 2021-2022 data.

Despite Trump’s claim that such cuts are necessary to reduce the outrageous federal deficit, the numbers prove him wrong. The U.S. national debt increased by approximately $1.78 trillion to $2.25 trillion since January 2025, pushing the total gross national debt past $38 trillion. The debt stood at roughly $36.22 trillion around Jan. 20, 2025, and reached $38 trillion by late October 2025. By March/April 2026, total debt crossed $39 trillion.

As for national security and a sound economy, inadequate education is a root cause of significant social issues, primarily driving cycles of poverty, high unemployment rates, and increased crime. It limits economic mobility, reduces workforce productivity, and fosters gender inequality, while also contributing to poor health outcomes, political instability, and social unrest.

Finally, in studies comparing the racial and ethnic composition of charter schools to public schools, researchers generally find that charter schools preserve or intensify racial and economic segregation, and/or facilitate white flight from public schools. Furthermore, studies that compare individual students’ demographic characteristics to the schools they are leaving (public schools) and the schools they are switching to (charter schools) generally demonstrate that students “leave more diverse public schools and enroll in less diverse charter schools.”[7]

Hardly the path toward a unified nation.

[1] Vinovskis, Maris A. “The Politics of Educational Reform in Nineteenth-Century Massachusetts: The Controversy Over the Beverly High School in 1860. Final Report,” Institute of Education Sciences, Aug 15, 1980. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED200495

[2] Indiana, Iowa, West Virginia, Idaho, and Arkansas have passed legislation loosening these protections, with Arkansas eliminating work permits and age verification requirements for children under sixteen.

[3] Schmidt, Emily. “Required Readings: How Textbook Adoption in 3 States Influences The Nation’s K-12 Population,” APM Research Lab, June 2, 2022. https://www.apmresearchlab.org/10x-textbook-adoption

[4] Paige, Mark. “Constitution vs. Curriculum,” Resource Hub, National Association of Elementary School Principals, Mar 14, 2022. https://www.naesp.org/resource/constitution-vs-curriculum/

[5] See https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/colliding-cultures/john-winthrop-dreams-of-a-city-on-a-hill-1630/

[6] Wething, Hilary, Bivens, Josh. U.S. Investment in Public Education Is At Risk,” Economic Policy Institute, Aug 21, 2025. https://www.epi.org/publication/u-s-investment-in-public-education-is-at-risk-vouchers-state-budget-austerity-and-federal-attacks-on-the-department-of-education-threaten-childrens-futures

[7] “School segregation in the United States,” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_segregation_in_the_United_States

This material is Chapter 2 of New Puritans and the U.S. Peerage: The Willful Destruction of Public Education

History of Church as State

Why devote tax dollars to teach children to read? Why do they need to understand how numbers work? What do we benefit from learning about our history, the past 250 years of this nation, the past millennia of human existence? Why not let churches provide education?

Why? Because a review of the past warns us of where religious government can lead. Colonists sailing to these shores in the early 1600s taught reading to support religion, a purpose that continued through the mid-19th century. Warring among themselves over which doctrine would be in control, Protestant-Catholic conflicts were driven by intense religious prejudice, political fears of loyalty to the Pope, and imperial wars against France and Spain. While Maryland was founded as a Catholic refuge, Protestants often took control, passing anti-Catholic laws. Maryland’s 1649 Toleration Act, providing freedom, was twice overturned by Puritans. In 1654, Puritan forces overthrew the proprietary government, outlawing Catholicism. Later, in 1689, “Protestant Associators” led by John Coode defeated Maryland’s Catholic proprietarial government, leading to the prohibition of public Catholic worship and the loss of their political rights.

Needless to say, religious violence didn’t start with American colonists. As far back as you care to examine European history, you find religious wars. The Crusades (11th–13th centuries) were launched by Western European Christians, sanctioned by the Pope, primarily to reclaim the Holy Land (Jerusalem) from Muslim rule, assist the Byzantine Empire against the Seljuk Turks, and reunite Christendom. Total deaths are estimated between two to six million. While exact breakdowns are impossible due to limited records, contemporary estimates suggest hundreds of thousands of Muslims died, while Christian losses included roughly one to two million Europeans.

Perhaps most horrific of these bloody religious wars were the years of the so-called Spanish Inquisition (1478–1834) which used systematic, often bureaucratic, methods to enforce Catholic orthodoxy including secret interrogations, psychological coercion, property confiscation, and calculated torture to extract confessions. Common torture methods included waterboarding, the rack, and pulley-based limb dislocating to force confessions which led to public auto-da-fé ceremonies and executions. Roughly 150,000 people, with an estimated 3,000–5,000 burned alive, were caught up in this religious insanity. As a global power, Spain engaged in religious wars against Protestantism, including conflicts with England, culminating in the 1588 Spanish Armada.

These actions were driven by Spain’s determination to create a uniformly Catholic society. Sound familiar?

Other similar conflicts included:

The Wars of the Three Kingdoms (1639–1653): A series of armed conflicts, including the Bishops’ Wars, the English Civil War (1642–1651), and the Irish Confederate Wars. This involved Anglicans (Royalists/Cavaliers) fighting Puritans (Parliamentarians/Roundheads), who were often allied with Scottish Presbyterians, against a backdrop of Catholic uprising in Ireland.
The English Civil War: A fundamental conflict between Anglicans (supporters of King Charles I) and Puritans (supporters of Parliament), leading to over 100,000 battle deaths and thousands more non-combat deaths.
Cromwellian Conquest of Ireland (1649–1653): Part of the wider civil war, aimed primarily at Catholic forces.
The Glorious Revolution (1688–1689) and Williamite War: A shift in power from Catholic King James II to Protestant forces (Anglicans and others), featuring battles between Anglicans and Catholics, particularly in Ireland.
Persecution of Quakers: Quakers were not an army but faced severe persecution from Puritans in New England (1656–1661) and both Anglicans and Puritans in England.

Other European religious wars included the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) resulting in 4.5 to 8 million deaths, while the French Wars of Religion (1562–1598) caused 2 to 4 million deaths.

The period after “discovery” of the New World featured the slaughter of millions of indigenous people. Upon arriving on these lands, still thriving with wildlife and virgin forests despite 40,000+ years of indigenous settlement, Europeans viewed these peoples as inferior and un-Christian, a view which justified brutal violence. Estimates suggest that roughly 55 to 56 million native people died in the Americas due to European colonization between 1492 and the early 1600s. This mass mortality, known as the “Great Dying,” represented about 90% of the indigenous population and was primarily caused by introduced diseases, alongside warfare, forced labor (slavery), and societal collapse.

Based on a 1493 papal decree, Christian explorers believed they had the right to claim land belonging to non-Christians, often viewing themselves as bringing civilization and God to “pagan populations.”

One wonders, what would Jesus do?

Religious conflicts in colonial America were widespread, characterized by Puritan persecution of Quakers and Baptists in New England, anti-Catholic laws in Maryland, and violence against dissenting evangelicals by Anglican authorities in the South. Conflicts also occurred between “Old Light” traditionalists and “New Light” revivalists during the Great Awakening. Puritans in Massachusetts Bay exiled dissenters like Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson, and hanged four Quakers between 1659 and 1661.

Intermingled among these loving brothers and sisters in Christ were the witch hunts driven by Puritan beliefs and fear of the devil, culminating in the 1692–1693 Salem witch trials, which saw 19 people hanged, one pressed to death,[1] and over 200 accused. While Salem is most famous, over 100 cases occurred across New England and Virginia between 1626 and 1730, including a significant 1662 panic in Hartford, Connecticut.

You’ll notice that in all that violent turmoil, it was the Puritans who were the most intolerant, the most determined to force everyone to their chosen faith. The Puritans believed they had a divine mandate to establish a “Holy Commonwealth” that would influence all areas of life, including public morality, law, and social behavior. This strongly parallels the Catholic crown’s effort to create a uniformly Catholic society across Europe.

Nothing could be closer to this four-hundred year old depraved mindset than the present-day reality of the Christian Nationalists’ ongoing determination to force their beliefs on everyone else, that “God has called Christians to exercise dominion over all areas of American society.” They seek secure political power, social dominance, and the implementation of policies based on their religious worldview.

Small wonder that by 1776, the Founding Fathers emphasized the importance of separating the powers of the church and the function of government in writing the new nation’s fundamental governing document and its First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

In the same line of thinking, founders like Thomas Jefferson and later reformers argued that a republic could not survive on ignorance. They viewed tax-supported public education as an insurance premium paid for by the wealthy to ensure political stability, create good citizens, and prevent social unrest. Nativism, driven by fears that newcomers would steal jobs, lower wages, threaten national identity, bring crime, and fail to assimilate particularly targeted Catholicism in the 19th century and non-northern European immigrants later. As immigration increased, particularly in the mid-19th century, public schools were viewed as a mechanism for assimilating children from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds into a shared “American” culture.

Education’s role today is all that and more, critical to our role as citizens of a nation meant to be governed by the people. We are tasked with self-governance as well as developing our moral character, intellectual growth, science-based literacy, and academic proficiency. Few would argue that most modern employment would be possible without these skills.

The chaos permeating United States society today is a primary outcome of our compromised educational system. It’s only going to get worse as budget cuts further undermine school operations and digital media becomes more permeated by artificial intelligence. But the greatest threat is the insidious creep of religious indoctrination, a largely unrecognized form of subversion which demands tax dollars in support of religious teachings in specific opposition to the Founding Fathers’ intent.

These efforts have simmered through our nation’s history, but only in the last fifty years have they made strides in overthrowing our constitutional foundations. We truly face a crisis.

[1] “Pressing” was a method where victims were laid down with heavy weights placed on their bodies, causing breathing to become impossible as ribs fractured, lungs collapsed, and internal organs failed over several hours or days. This happened to Giles Corey, an 81-year-old farmer.

It Is Past Time to Legalize Drugs–ALL OF THEM.

Laws against drug use do not stop drug use or abuse, as clearly evidenced by the continuing rise of substance abuse and overdose deaths over the last sixty years despite the so-called “drug war.” We spend nearly a trillion dollars a year supporting draconian laws and their enforcement, but that only exacerbates conditions which lead individuals to substance abuse. Current drug policy feeds a system of violence by funneling drug traffic to underground markets which in turn finance gangs and cartels. This violence escalates as community law enforcement shifts toward militarized weaponry and strategies, which leads to violations of individual, constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

The following discussion uses existing research and statistics to show that the drug war has failed in a wide array of human needs as well as public policy. We show what changes would useful in eliminating this destructive approach and how we can improve American lives and the society as a whole.

$6 — buy and share! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0H9T53KMC

Artificial Intelligence: A Pandora’s Box

With the onslaught of massive data centers heating up the climate and burning precious resources, we stand on the threshold of a new age ruled by a handful of Big Tech leaders. Risk analysts view AI’s threat as a 10 to 100 times greater risk than current social media due to its capacity for permanence and existential risk to our mental health, democratic discourse, and social cohesion. The core difference in predicted magnitude levels lies in the potential for complete, irreversible ruin. This booklet explores the many arenas where such ruin could play out.

Each of us needs to understand the full scope of AI’s promise and threat. Only $6. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0H7XHKVVY

New Puritans and the U.S. Peerage: The Willful Destruction of Public Education

Like the slow spread of a fatal disease, certain interest groups within the United States have been working to undermine the nation’s education system. Their goal, as so clearly outlined in the 900 pages of Project 2025, is to change our democratic republic into plutocratic theocracy. Ruling from the top, the wealthiest citizens (U.S. Peerage) will enjoy virtually no restrictions on their profits or the damage caused by their industries, while ruling from the bottom, the Christian Nationalists and other religious extremists (New Puritans) will ensure the population lives by Christian rules.

This is not a theory. This is the fact of the current situation as recent Supreme Court decisions have opened the door for unregulated homeschooling and religious private schools to receive our tax dollars in support of their operations. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution’s First Amendment, which specifically prohibits any government support for any religion.

This workaround has been steadily advancing since colonial days but has increased significantly since the 1940s when the “Red Scare” brought a fresh level of religious fanaticism to the public arena. The result? Today, billions of our tax dollars flow into religious school coffers while public schools suffer for inadequate funding even though 90% of K-12 students attend public schools. Perhaps more damaging than the financial costs are the lessons learned under religious instruction: that the Earth is only 6,000 years old; that vaccinations are harmful; that men are superior to women. These are the seeds of a modern nation’s destruction.

Grab your copy, only $6. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0H3NW358F

New Puritans

This is not a theory. This is the fact of the current situation as recent Supreme Court decisions have opened the door for unregulated homeschooling and students at religious private schools to receive our tax dollars in support of their operations. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution’s First Amendment, which specifically prohibits any government support for any religion.

This workaround has been steadily advancing since colonial days but has increased significantly since the 1940s when the “Red Scare” brought a fresh level of religious fanaticism to the public arena. The result? Today, billions of our tax dollars flow into religious school instruction while public schools suffer from inadequate funding even though 90% of K-12 students attend public schools. Perhaps more damaging than the financial costs are the lessons learned under religious instruction: that the Earth is only 6,000 years old; that vaccinations are harmful; that men are superior to women. These are the seeds of a modern nation’s destruction.

91 page booklet $6 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0H3NW358F

Table of Contents

Preface

History of Church as State

Education Is A National Priority

The Education Problem: Bigger than the New Puritans

Why the Puritan Agenda Must Not Prevail

Unregulated Private and Home Schooling

The Arkansas Situation

Christian Nationalism’s Goal: Overturn the Constitutional Separation of Church and State

In Conclusion

Afterword

MAGA

“Confederate dead Miller Farm, Antietam Battlefield, September 19, 1862,” House Divided: The Civil War Research Engine at Dickinson College, https://hd.housedivided.dickinson.edu/index.php/node/32956.

What will happen to them, these lovers of Trump, the men and women who act as if he is the next risen Christ, or at least the best man possible to lead the United States of America? Who even now cling to their fantasy in the face of his utter perfidy—starting a war, abandoning the American economy, exposed as a defiler of children. What will happen when the inexorable turn of the wheels of justice—or perhaps death—finally finally grind him into the ground? Will they weep? Yes. Will their anger grow exponentially to the point of ignition? Yes.

When the inevitable happens—and yes, I believe in the Constitution and our system of laws which have steered this nation through war and despair for over 200 years—when Trump is finally held accountable for all his lies and frauds and empty promises that continue to spill from his deteriorating mind, mouthed in nonsensical phrases and welcomed with open arms into the aisles of churches and homes of the True Believers, I believe that the witnesses and the attorneys and the juries and judges will do their duty, that he will be convicted of his crimes against the people and the nation, that he will at some point have to face the truth about himself.

Nothing could be more terrifying for a man like Trump than to face the truth, that his life was wasted in harming his fellow man, that he was a liar, thief, an adulterer and a rapist, that he could produce nothing of value in this world. That he had every advantage and he squandered that gift in his ignorance, in his greed and desperation for his life to have some meaning but never did.

What will these people do who hold him up before themselves and now will find him cast down into the depths of human failure, deceit, corruption? When the proof of his amoral guilt opens their eyes with blinding light, will they refuse to believe the truth? Will they take up arms and storm the courthouses and prison, or stand in line to honor his corpse, cry out demanding a new day still grasping for that promise, that fable of his greatness?

They believed. They tied their lifeboats to his ship, that great phantasm of belief that he was the strong man, the savior of our times, that their lives could be made meaningful and fruitful under his leadership, that their hatreds and prejudices would be vindicated. As the seas toss and roll, tossing his ship into wreckage, will their lives also capsize, splinter into driftwood to drift back to the littered beaches over the coming months and years?

Somewhere deep inside, most of the True Believers sense the truth, that Trump is a fool, an emperor without clothes. They know in that secret room of themselves that they have followed a lie. But for many of them, the truth is too painful, too terrifying, and their solution is to justify war, believe they will emerge triumphant in a new white Christian America led by God Almighty with Trump seated on His right hand.

These are the fantasies of those who have never understood their purpose in life. They mouth the words of the Bible without comprehending their personal duty to act on those words. They labor under the belief that their primary duty is to follow a person like Trump because he says what they want to hear, that they are the chosen ones. In their glorious imaginings of redeeming the nation, the radical right imagines the fight as taking down the figureheads of ‘liberal’ democracy without realizing the liberal agenda aligns with the teachings of Christ.

Will justice for Trump open the door to insight, even epiphany, for his True Believers? Will they be able to accept the truth of his malfeasance or the rectitude of the courts’ judgements? Some will. Some already have. But many will not, reliant on media that supports their viewpoint, reinforcing their perception of Trump. Many of them align with his fight against “the system” over specific policy successes or moral scrutinies and focus on the broader, long-term impact they expect from his policies. We probably should feel compassion for their loss of a dream, of a self-made parody of a god who misled them, made promises he couldn’t keep, presented himself in a fictional persona simply to aggrandize himself no matter the price to be paid.

The private, personal cost will be great for those True Believers unable to let go of the fantasy, that they alone stood by a true hero. They will not be treated kindly by history.

The greater cost to the rest of us, and to our nation, is incalculable.