Judge Says Schools can Teach Sexual Orientation

[Other_Eric]

Do the parents have a choice? Can they home school, meaning are they capable of doing the job? Can they afford private school if not? Public school parents have no rights to object to or change curricula? If so, when did public schools cease to be a public concern?

Perhaps more importantly, how is having a “gay day” even close to being an educational objective for elementary school students?

– Mark L. Chance.

Are parents capable of homeschooling? I tend to think most are since the ability to properly educate a child should form a large part of the prudential consideration involved in the decision to have one in the first place. The affordability of private schools is one that may be nicely handled by school vouchers, which I support. Parents do indeed have the right to have their local school’s curriculum changed. That is what the voting booth is for. Once Christians cease to empower the courts by giving to them to authority to solve every little grievance and start supporting candidates who respect family values, “gay days” will be a thing of the past.

 

[ElizabethAnne]

Do the parents have a choice? Can they home school, meaning are they capable of doing the job? Can they afford private school if not? Public school parents have no rights to object to or change curricula? If so, when did public schools cease to be a public concern?

Perhaps more importantly, how is having a “gay day” even close to being an educational objective for elementary school students?

– Mark L. Chance.

As someone who lives in MA, I can say I have closely followed this story, and there is nothing about a “gay day” in it. Parker’s son brought home a book called “What’s in a Family” that goes through different types of families. One “type” is a female couple. With the other child involved in the lawsuit, the teacher read “King and King” to the class. The book is about a prince who searches for a princess to marry but something is “not quite right” about any of them. He ends up marrying another prince, and the story ends with them kissing.

The problem here is that these books are not about sex. They are about sexual orientation, surely, and they are definitely problematic! But they do not deal with sex directly and for that reason, the school is not legally bound to notify parents (which is precisely what the Parkers want).

God bless.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

The problem is that this Judge has gone against Federal Law that has been settled a long time ago. From the ACLJ link I posted earlier:

While parents may have little direct say about what ends up in public school curricula, federal law has given parents clear rights to exempt their children from experimental or values-related classes that depart from academics. The Hatch Amendment (passed in 1984) was designed to reinforce parental control of their children’s education. Based on the Hatch Amendment, parents may have their child excluded from experimental programs.

The Hatch Amendment, also known as the Pupil Rights Amendment, says parents have the right to inspect all instructional material, including that used in experimental or testing programs. Unless parental consent is given, no student shall be required to submit to any kind of test designed to reveal information concerning political affiliations, potentially embarrassing psychological problems, sexual behavior and attitudes, illegal and anti-social behavior, critical appraisals of family relationships, legally privileged relationships (such as those with a minister or doctor), and income.

What this judge ruled violates this and can be consider an “activist decision”. He is saying these parents right end at the school door.

 

[mlchance]

Are parents capable of homeschooling? I tend to think most are…

Do you have evidence for this assertion? That point aside, I wasn’t talking about parents, but about the particular parents in this particular case.

The affordability of private schools is one that may be nicely handled by school vouchers, which I support.

Good. Me too. Does MA have vouchers?

Parents do indeed have the right to have their local school’s curriculum changed. That is what the voting booth is for.

I’ve been voting for quite a while, and I’ve never once been allowed to vote about curriculum issues in public schools.

Once Christians cease to empower the courts by giving to them to authority to solve every little grievance and start supporting candidates who respect family values, “gay days” will be a thing of the past.

But, until then, the courts are just given carte blanche do whatever they want? All hail our black-robed masters?

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Other_Eric]

Do you have evidence for this assertion? That point aside, I wasn’t talking about parents, but about the particular parents in this particular case.

Good. Me too. Does MA have vouchers?

I’ve been voting for quite a while, and I’ve never once been allowed to vote about curriculum issues in public schools.

But, until then, the courts are just given carte blanche do whatever they want? All hail our black-robed masters?

– Mark L. Chance.

I am not interested in debating the prejudiced notion, advocated by some at the New York Times, that Christians tend to have more children than they can reasonably handle. I prefer the charitable method of believing that parents are capable of meeting all of the needs of the children that they choose to bring into the world. I therefore maintain my belief that most parents are capable of homeschooling.

Are the parents involved in the instant case some that are themselves capable of homeschooling? I would think that they are. That they have filed a federal lawsuit at all tends to imply that they have both knowledge and means, both of which could be used towards either a homeschool course or an education at some private institution.

As far as I know, Massachusetts does not have vouchers. This, however, is irrelevant, as it does not exempt parents from their God-given responsibility to be the primary director’s of their child’s education. This is an opportunity for parents such as the Parkers and the Wirthlins to organize a petition to have the voucher question put on the ballot for 2008. In the meantime, their primary responsibility remains the welfare of their children. This must take priority over whatever difficulties may be involved in either homeschooling or private education.

Until such time as the courts will recognize their own limits, a measure of personal responsibility is called for on the part of parents to keep their children from environments that are going to be hostile to their spiritual formation. Prudence dictates that if one of those environments is a public school, that one keep one’s children out of it.

 

[Wolseley]

"Thank you for your ruling, Yer Honor; the people appreciate yer (name removed by moderator)ut.

Anything you’d like to say before we close court for the day?"

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[vern_humphrey]

Do the parents have a choice? Can they home school, meaning are they capable of doing the job? Can they afford private school if not? Public school parents have no rights to object to or change curricula? If so, when did public schools cease to be a public concern?

When we decided the government would own the means of production (the schools), hire and fire the teachers, and students would be assigned by district, not by parental choice.

There used to be a TV ad where a customer brings a rancid fish back to a Russian fish monger. And the surly clerk says, “No refund!”

Does that remind you of our public school system?

Perhaps more importantly, how is having a “gay day” even close to being an educational objective for elementary school students?

– Mark L. Chance.

It isn’t an educational objective. It’s a political objective.

 

[gam197]

originally posted by ElizabethAnne
As someone who lives in MA, I can say I have closely followed this story, and there is nothing about a “gay day” in it.

I added “gay day” because I remember an earlier case in MA I believe where a father of a large family went after the school for having pictures of “gay couples” posted in the lobby in his elementary school during an event. I looked for it on the internet but wasn’t able to find the story.

The case involves two families.

 

[ElizabethAnne]

I added “gay day” because I remember an earlier case in MA I believe where a father of a large family went after the school for having pictures of “gay couples” posted in the lobby in his elementary school during an event. I looked for it on the internet but wasn’t able to find the story.

The case involves two families.

If you reread my post, I said the case involves two families. 1. The Parkers whose son brought home “What’s in a Family.” 2. The Wirthlins (whose names I did not mention in the previous post) whose child’s teacher read “King and King” to the class.

There are no pictures of gay couples hanging in the elementary school. Additionally, “gay day” is usually refers to all kinds of sexually explicit material being handed out to high schoolers. I don’t want anyone to have the misconception that sexually explicit material was handed out to elementary students in this particular court case.

 

[gam197]

originally posted by ElizabethAnne
Additionally, “gay day” is usually refers to all kinds of sexually explicit material being handed out to high schoolers.

Even 15 years ago when they had two gay men come to the Junior high and speak to the class on HIV, I still considered it to be “gay day”. You are right “gay day” had evolved to mean so much more.

 

[Protestant101]

In addition it is Sexual Abuse of the children involved and should be prosecuted as such.

This I whole-heartedly agree with. Well said.

 

[mamanicky]

mlchance:

…there is the very real issue of viewpoint discrimination and the simple common sense idea that second graders don’t need to be taught anything about sex, let alone anything about sodomy.

Who’s teaching them about sex? That’s not really what this is about. Kids are being taught that there are all different kinds of people and all different kinds of families. How do you propose to exclude your kids from learning about homosexuals when little Aidan has two mommies? Homosexuals are a part of our society, as are murderers, bakery owners, and Australians (how absurd!)

The point is that these kids are going to encounter homosexuals at some point in their lives and should treat them with Christian dignity (without hatred and prejudice). It’s the golden rule, people. As far as educating your children on homosexuals being called to chastity, etc… that’s religion and isn’t taught in public schools… you are free to teach them that aspect when they are old enough.

This isn’t something you can’t ignore and it’ll go away… I know by 4th grade we were calling each other “faggot” and “homo” without really knowing what it meant… schools are just trying to educate kids on being respectful to all persons, regardless of who they are and what they think. Isn’t that the Christian thing to do?

 

[mamanicky]

WanderAimlessly:

While parents may have little direct say about what ends up in public school curricula, federal law has given parents clear rights to exempt their children from experimental or values-related classes that depart from academics. The Hatch Amendment (passed in 1984) was designed to reinforce parental control of their children’s education. Based on the Hatch Amendment, parents may have their child excluded from experimental programs.

The Hatch Amendment, also known as the Pupil Rights Amendment, says parents have the right to inspect all instructional material, including that used in experimental or testing programs. Unless parental consent is given, no student shall be required to submit to any kind of test designed to reveal information concerning political affiliations, potentially embarrassing psychological problems, sexual behavior and attitudes, illegal and anti-social behavior, critical appraisals of family relationships, legally privileged relationships (such as those with a minister or doctor), and income.

This merely states that students cannot be tested in a manner to reveal their religious, political, etc. affiliations. Also, a problem arises in that you are assuming that the focus on this theme is not academic. Just because teachers explain that there are all different kinds of families, doesn’t mean that they are straying from academics.

Teaching children about society and diversity are very much academic and an integral part of them understanding the world around them. I am opposed to the idea of a “gay day” just as much as I am opposed to “African-American History Month.” I am not prejudiced, on the contrary, these should be normal things integrated into the curriculum and not singled out (which often casts a tone of inferiority on the group). I don’t think there is anything wrong with kids understanding that sometimes people are different, but they are still human and worthy of love.

It is the parent’s job to educate their children on the religious perspective.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Who’s teaching them about sex? That’s not really what this is about. Kids are being taught that there are all different kinds of people and all different kinds of families. How do you propose to exclude your kids from learning about homosexuals when little Aidan has two mommies? Homosexuals are a part of our society, as are murderers, bakery owners, and Australians (how absurd!)

The point is that these kids are going to encounter homosexuals at some point in their lives and should treat them with Christian dignity (without hatred and prejudice). It’s the golden rule, people. As far as educating your children on homosexuals being called to chastity, etc… that’s religion and isn’t taught in public schools… you are free to teach them that aspect when they are old enough.

This isn’t something you can’t ignore and it’ll go away… I know by 4th grade we were calling each other “faggot” and “homo” without really knowing what it meant… schools are just trying to educate kids on being respectful to all persons, regardless of who they are and what they think. Isn’t that the Christian thing to do?

It is the parents choice as to when and how their child is told about adult decisions on living styles.

And yes all persons need to be treated with human dignity, that includes those of us that are Catholic Christians or for that matter any Christian. Our views are just as valid as those that are shown

 

[boppaid]

It is the parents choice as to when and how their child is told about adult decisions on living styles.

I disagree. Little Bobby may be sitting next to your son in the first grade, and he may have two Mommies. This is the way of the world today, and you can’t ignore it. I think children should be taught tolerance in school…especially because it doesn’t seem it is being taught in a lot of homes.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I disagree. Little Bobby may be sitting next to your son in the first grade, and he may have two Mommies. This is the way of the world today, and you can’t ignore it. I think children should be taught tolerance in school…especially because it doesn’t seem it is being taught in a lot of homes.

If you are going to assume the authority normally reserved to the parent, are you also going to assume her parental responsibilities?

 

[fix]

Who’s teaching them about sex? That’s not really what this is about. Kids are being taught that there are all different kinds of people and all different kinds of families. How do you propose to exclude your kids from learning about homosexuals when little Aidan has two mommies? Homosexuals are a part of our society, as are murderers, bakery owners, and Australians (how absurd!)

The point is that these kids are going to encounter homosexuals at some point in their lives and should treat them with Christian dignity (without hatred and prejudice). It’s the golden rule, people. As far as educating your children on homosexuals being called to chastity, etc… that’s religion and isn’t taught in public schools… you are free to teach them that aspect when they are old enough.

The Gay apologists claim allowing adoption and unions would not effect authentic families. We see right here that is false.

We do not need public schools teaching any more propagnada than they already teach. Do you think there will be some objective way of relating these things to children in a public school setting without imparting some PC agenda?

 

[KathleenElsie]

Boppaid the government does not have our permission to indoctrinate our children. They do not have that right unless we as parents give it to them and we decided as a family to “just say no”.

We homeschool and are members of two homeschooling groups. We decided long ago (prior to 1975) that the public schools were not a place we wanted our children to learn about “life” and “morals”. Our children are now homeschooling. God gave us the children to raise not the government.

 

[boppaid]

If you are going to assume the authority normally reserved to the parent, are you also going to assume her parental responsibilities?

I’m not sure what you mean. I responded to:

Originally Posted by KathleenElsie
It is the parents choice as to when and how their child is told about adult decisions on living styles.

I’m not assuming any authority by saying that a classmate of her child’s may have two moms. It is important children are taught sensativity for this reason alone, if nothing else.

 

[boppaid]

Boppaid the government does not have our permission to indoctrinate our children. They do not have that right unless we as parents give it to them and we decided as a family to “just say no”.

We homeschool and are members of two homeschooling groups. We decided long ago (prior to 1975) that the public schools were not a place we wanted our children to learn about “life” and “morals”. Our children are now homeschooling. God gave us the children to raise not the government.

It’s probably a good idea that you homeschool if you don’t want your children “indoctrinated” with classmates who have homosexual parents. I’m talking about those who choose public schools, though. They cannot control if Johnny has two moms. And I do believe schools have rights to do sensativity training…especially if they feel certain children in their schools are discrimated again. Parents can of course opt out of this sesativity training, but I’m sure their child will still get the gist of it.

And for those who want to put our kids in a bubble and pretend homosexual families don’t exist, what do you do when your child enters the real world with these types of families? Obviously, they will some day.