Keep Sexual and Gender Advocacy Out of Indiana Classrooms

Ask a candidate to support this during the upcoming election cycle.

The Hoosier Enquirer weighs in as the new school year begins

Indiana schools exist to educate children—not to promote sexual identities, political causes or contested theories about gender.

As students return to Hoosier classrooms, the Hoosier Enquirer has a straightforward message: remove the Pride flags from classrooms already, or be fired. Do you agree!

Is this just not common sense? While public school teacher hiring policies in the United States are governed by federal and state nondiscrimination laws, which prohibit employment decisions based on a teacher's sexual orientation or gender identity. So do children. You need to stand up to the lobotomized left and demand public policy protect children by not letting them get LBGTQ+ activists as teachers. Ask your candidates to take a stand and make changes in the future.

Public classrooms are not personal advocacy spaces. Teachers should concentrate on reading, writing, mathematics, science, history and civics. Except for legally authorized health or biological instruction delivered with required parental notice or consent, sexual subject matter does not belong in K–12 classrooms. That standard should apply consistently, whether the message concerns heterosexuality, homosexuality or gender identity.

President Donald Trump’s January 2025 executive order on “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” directs federal agencies to identify federal funding that supports what the administration calls “gender ideology” or “discriminatory equity ideology.” It also directs officials to pursue appropriate action when existing law has been violated.

Trump’s order on “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” establishes a federal executive-branch policy recognizing two sexes, male and female. Other orders address women’s athletics and medical interventions involving minors.

Indiana has taken related action. Gov. Mike Braun’s Executive Order 25-14 directs executive-branch agencies to replace DEI programs with “Merit, Excellence and Innovation.” Executive Order 25-35 addresses protections for women and girls in education and athletics. Executive Order 25-36 recognizes the biological distinction between males and females and directs state agencies not to use public funds to promote what it defines as gender ideology. The orders are available through the governor’s official executive-order index.

These orders establish government policies and enforcement priorities. They do not, by themselves, turn every objectionable classroom display or discussion into a crime. Only legislatures enact criminal offenses, and any allegation that a teacher acted illegally must identify the applicable statute and supporting evidence.

Indiana law already criminalizes conduct including child solicitation, child seduction, sexual misconduct with a minor and distributing unlawful material to children. Schools should report credible evidence of such conduct immediately. Investigators—not social-media rumors or political slogans—must determine whether the evidence satisfies a criminal statute.

Schools must also recognize that inappropriate conduct need not be criminal before it violates professional standards. Employees should not initiate unauthorized conversations with students about sexual identity, introduce sexual material outside an approved curriculum, encourage children to conceal identity-related or sexual communications from their parents, or use classrooms to advertise personal political and social causes.

That includes classroom flags and displays. Indiana school boards should adopt a clear, viewpoint-neutral policy limiting official classroom flags to the United States flag and Indiana state flag, along with temporary displays directly required by an approved curriculum. The rule should apply to every political and social movement rather than forcing administrators to decide which causes deserve classroom wall space.

Employees who violate the policy should receive written notice and a reasonable opportunity to comply. Continued refusal should result in discipline under established procedures. Any suspension or termination must follow Indiana law, employment contracts and constitutional due-process requirements. A lawful and carefully administered policy will be more durable than an automatic dismissal rule that invites preventable litigation.

Indiana Should Close Any Genuine Grooming Gaps

Indiana lawmakers should also examine whether current law adequately addresses deliberate grooming that occurs before an adult touches a child.

Teachers and other school employees should not be permitted to exploit their authority by initiating sexually charged communications, requesting sexual images, moving conversations to secret or disappearing-message accounts, encouraging students to hide inappropriate communications from parents, or deliberately cultivating private relationships for future sexual exploitation.

When performed with sexual or exploitative intent, such conduct should carry serious employment consequences and, where appropriate, criminal penalties. Schools and law enforcement should not have to wait for physical contact before intervening to protect a child.

Any new anti-grooming statute must nevertheless be written precisely. It should require proof of sexual content, exploitative intent or deliberate preparation for sexual abuse. It should cover electronic messages, attempted conduct and requests for secrecy while protecting legitimate academic communications, abuse reporting, student-safety interventions and legally authorized health instruction.

The statute must target conduct rather than identity. Merely acknowledging that gay or transgender people exist is not proof of grooming. An overbroad law would invite constitutional challenges, weaken legitimate child-protection efforts and give actual predators an opportunity to portray prosecution as political persecution.

Before creating a new offense, legislators should compare any proposal with Indiana’s existing laws covering solicitation, seduction, sexual misconduct and harmful material. New legislation should close identifiable gaps rather than duplicate crimes already on the books.

Schools need not wait for the General Assembly to establish stronger professional boundaries. District policies should prohibit employees from initiating unauthorized sexual or romantic discussions with students, communicating through undisclosed personal accounts, using disappearing-message applications for private student conversations, requesting secrecy from parents or maintaining an inappropriate relationship outside legitimate school activities.

Suspected violations should trigger a prompt and impartial investigation. Credible evidence of criminal conduct must be reported to law enforcement. Administrative discipline should follow established procedures, with student safety as the first priority.

Parents—not government employees—hold primary responsibility for conversations with their children about sexuality and contested questions of identity. Schools should remain transparent, provide access to instructional materials and obtain parental consent whenever the law requires it.

As the school year begins, Indiana should reset its expectations: teach academics, respect parents, remove advocacy flags, enforce neutral classroom policies, establish firm communication boundaries and prosecute genuine predatory conduct when supported by evidence.

The proper rule is straightforward: keep sexual and gender advocacy out of classrooms, of Me not e in Indiana, protect children before misconduct escalates, and tell Hoosiers honestly what the law does—and does not—say.

Teachers deserve to know how to protect children from the crazies in their schools who seek to indoctrinate or manipulate —that is bully children to think this conduct is acceptable and the norm. Rainbows are okay and belong to children—they are minors—but pride flags can destroy their futures.