Extremists are seizing control of state and national governments, imposing their views on our public schools
The elevation of ultra-conservative Republican legislators to leadership positions in the South Dakota Legislature should surprise no one in a one-party, supermajority state. However, their tendency to propose legislation that reflects the views of a small minority rather than the broader electorate is deeply concerning.
Specifically, I am referring to the influence of the white Christian nationalist movement and the quiet adoption of elements of Project 2025 — a framework developed by the unelected Heritage Foundation that outlines an extreme conservative agenda aimed at reshaping the federal government. These same ideological forces are infiltrating state legislatures, including our own, to enact measures that voters never explicitly approved.
The three most troubling proposals are:
Requiring the posting and teaching of the Ten Commandments in public schools.
Publicly funding private and homeschool education.
Replacing public school counselors with chaplains.
Our nation’s history is filled with attempts to insert religious doctrine into the public sphere. From engraving “In God We Trust” on our currency (despite biblical warnings against serving both God and Mammon) to changing our national motto during the Cold War to distinguish ourselves from “godless Communists,” these efforts have done little to unify the country under the contrived notion of a Christian nation.
Invoking God's name to justify both sides of the Civil War, fueling the Mormon Wars in an attempt to establish a theocratic state, or believing that religious slogans could defeat communism — none of these actions have brought us closer to genuine national unity or moral clarity.
Regarding the proposed posting of the Ten Commandments in schools, fundamental questions arise: Which version will be used? The original Hebrew, where scholars debate whether there are 13 or 14 distinct commandments? Or the King James English of the 17th century, which would be nearly incomprehensible to modern 10-year-olds?
Who will be responsible for teaching them — a theologian, a priest? Will educators be subject to a biblical litmus test to ensure they can teach the material without proselytizing? Will they be required to profess a particular faith tradition?
How is this not a violation of the Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from endorsing a specific religion? Is this education, or is it indoctrination?
Similarly, did South Dakotans vote for public tax dollars to subsidize private, parochial or home-school education? Regardless of the financial mechanisms used to make it appear as though public funds are not being diverted from public education, the reality is that state general funds intended for the public good will be adversely affected. Was this a decision made by the voters?
Did the electorate explicitly approve the introduction of chaplains into public schools to teach religion or serve as mental health counselors? What credentials would these chaplains have to provide such services, and what would the cost be to taxpayers? While teaching the Bible objectively in relation to art, literature, and history is reasonable, a chaplain’s primary duty is to provide spiritual guidance — traditionally from a Christian perspective.
Would a Jewish or Muslim student feel comfortable discussing personal crises with a chaplain who does not share their faith? Furthermore, if discussions about slavery and systemic racism can be restricted based on whether a student feels “threatened” or “uncomfortable,” shouldn’t students of diverse faith backgrounds be granted the same protections against unwanted religious instruction?
These proposals raise critical concerns about the separation of church and state, the fair allocation of public funds, and the fundamental rights of students to receive an education free from religious coercion. South Dakotans deserve transparency and accountability in policymaking — not the quiet imposition of an extreme ideological agenda that does not reflect the will of the majority.
John Durajczyk, a Chicagoland native, has lived and worked across the Midwest and Deep South. A Purdue University graduate and small business owner, he currently resides in Sioux Falls. A lifelong advocate of participatory democracy, he has actively served on numerous civic, political, and faith-based boards and projects throughout his career. This column first appeared on the Change Agents of South Dakota website.
Photo: A 1675 depiction of the Ten Commandments, public domain, wikimedia commons
