Court Upholds School’s Decision To Teach Homosexuality To Elementary Students

• February 25, 2007

This is so ridiculous.

BOSTON (Reuters) – A federal judge in Boston has dismissed a suit by two families who wanted to stop a Massachusetts town and its public school system from teaching their children about gay marriage, court documents show.
The families last year filed the suit asserting that the reading of a gay-themed book and handing out to elementary school students of other children’s books that discussed homosexuality without first notifying parents was a violation of their religious rights.
Federal Judge Mark Wolf ruled on Friday that public schools are “entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy.”
“Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. It is increasingly evident that our diversity includes differences in sexual orientation,” he said.

I don’t disagree with this judge. I don’t really have a problem with public schools addressing homosexuality and gay marriage. I have a problem, though, with them addressing it in elementary school. With eight-, nine- and ten-year-olds. Many of who may not have had the subject of sex broken to them by their parents yet.
It really is rather presumptuous for these public school teachers to take it upon themselves to broach such a delicate, controversial subject on their own. And also to assume that, if they didn’t broach it, the parents themselves wouldn’t bring it up. What happened to the days when school teachers taught math, science, reading, and writing and left the other stuff to parents? Why do so many people think this sort of curriculum choice belongs in our schools?
Regardless, this is exactly the sort of thing school vouchers would solve. School crossing the line and teaching your kid about things you find morally offensive? Or things that should wait until they’re a little older? Take your kids to a different school.

Tags: Education, Politics, The Loony Left

dave

Why do you think the schools teaching our kids about homosexuality as a good thing, IS a good thing?

I don’t care whether it’s good or bad, I care whether it’s constitutional or unconstitutional. Because that’s what these judges did; had they reached their decision based on their person views regarding homosexuality, that would be a case of judicial activism–you know, the thing your Party’s opposed to.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

~~Public school?~~ Indoctrination Center.
NotAmused

Actually, my Party is me.

I don’t care whether it’s good or bad, I care whether it’s constitutional or unconstitutional.

If that is the case, this merely becomes a point of law to you. You have no real personal interst in this, so why bother speaking to us about it?

The constitution defends our personal rights; What WE wish for our lives. If a government is regulating what the future generation will consider it’s rights, opinions, etc, by the opinions of a MINORITY, HOW is this constitutional?
Neiman

From the article: “The state’s right to force pro-homosexuality indoctrination on other people’s children arises directly from former Gov. Mitt Romney’s nakedly false and unconstitutional declaration that homosexual marriage is now legal.”

Everyone should read this article, because this decision is designed to force one of two responses: 1. If the child stays in public school, the parents no longer have any voice in what values they are taught and the school becomes a secular humanist religious movement. 2. The parents will have to remove their children from public school, while still paying taxes as if the school was incurring costs for the student, and then they still pay for private school or home schooling.

The problems is further exacerbated by the fact that. A. The government wants an increased role in what moral values private schools teach. B. The government is increasingly cracking down on home schooling and demanding they too include secular humanist values in what is taught at home.
Neiman

Move_Zig: Your comment reminded that I had never distinquished myself during basic training, but when we had Pugil Stick training they matched me a against a bigger guy I hated; I went absolutely bug nuts, beat the hell out of him, tore off his helmet and started hitting him with my fists; and I was tempted to take on a few others while I was in the mood, when I heard my Drill Instructor telling another D.I. “That’s my Right Guide, he’s a mean sonofabitch when you get him mad!” It was a compliment!

Of course I am a mellow old man now, but then I overcame fear with going insane first and not stopping until my opponent couldn’t move any longer. Why? I don’t enjoy getting hit, so I believe in hitting first, use overhwelming force and keep hitting until I am sure the bastard cannot and will not be able to hit me back.
http://remote-world.com/ jSpin

Dave, my Bible tells me to bring up my children in the fear and admonition of the Lord, teaching them what is right. That put the (religious) onus on me for the education of my children. My “religious belief is that I am responsible for their education – all of it. That they were a gift from God and do not belong to the State. You may disagree with us on that but it is what we believe. If this country tells me that the gov’t OWNS my children, then it is wrong – I will obey God firs, even if I have to go somewhere else. Until then, we will try to keep this country on the path it started: individual rights come first!
Neiman

Dave: The problem as I see it is that all lower education and educational standards should NEVER be a matter for the federal government to regulate. Further, I see no justification for a Department of Education as again, education is not a federal issue. 1. The states should not be able to force any educational standards upon their citizens unless those citizens grant them such authority. 2. The local communities should have a direct voice in every issue directly related to reading, writing, mathematics, basic science and history; and the states and/or federal governmnet should never be allowed to impose secular/moral values on individual school districts.

To my way of thinking, the only role for any states to have a depertment of education is to provide assistance in directing state tax money to the school districts and to assist the local communities in their needs for educational materials and other forms of support.
http://remote-world.com/ jSpin

You got it Neiman. Those of us who home school are getting somewhat nervous. I've been thinking that maybe, before it is undoable, we should get together and all move to a South American country, molding it into what the US used to be. Am I advocating we take over a nation? Well, I guess I am. Sometimes you just have to shake the dust off your feet and leave, and perhaps we could be 'agents of change' for GOOD somewhere south of the equator. I really hate to be pessimistic, but hey, sometimes it gets to me…
dave

The families last year filed the suit asserting that the reading of a gay-themed book and handing out to elementary school students of other children's books that discussed homosexuality without first notifying parents was a violation of their religious rights.

Thank goodness we had Originalist judges on the bench… it requires a tortured reading of the first amendment to agree with these parents.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

Those of us who home school are getting somewhat nervous. I've been thinking that maybe, before it is undoable, we should get together and all move to a South American country, molding it into what the US used to be.

JSpin,

Why head out to some Third World country? America needs you here.

Besides, Nieman will remember from pugil training:

[Order] Retreat!

[Response] Stand and fight, Sir!

Reform and regroup, check out the Free State Project
http://Array Neiman

jSpin: We are getting to a place where Freedom loving people must think about a mass exodus or armed rebellion?

"Wen in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." The Declaration of Independence

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

I cannot see the elite, professional ruling class (Congress, Executive Branch, Judiciary) ever again respecting the rights of the governed to liberty, aside from that allowed by the state. There will not be a voluntary return to a government of the people. So, the question is: What must we do to force the ruling elite to return this nation to a true Republic?
dave

jspin:

Until then, we will try to keep this country on the path it started: individual rights come first!

Like the "right" to have your children not hear about homosexuality in school? Was that one included in the mysyteriouos 6 1/2 amendment?
http://remote-world.com/ jSpin

Roger that, Neiman, Move.

Dave, Children must be protected from things that potentially may hurt them, say wild animals for instance, until they can stand on their own. Are you telling me that I have no right to protect my children against things that I am absolutely convinced will hurt them? Are you saying that the State has those rights? Are you saying YOU have those rights? I will fight you to my last drop of blood on this issue. And I will also defend YOUR right to raise your children in YOUR belief system. I have 6 children. How many do you have? Or are you without children and don't even understand the question?
Obviously you haven't read or understood the constitution and its provisions for individual liberty. You have me pissed off, sir!
Dave

The woman filing this lawsuit says that having a teacher tell her kid about homosexuality violates their freedom of religion. Had the Court agreed, this would have been among the most blatant examples of "activist judging" we've ever seen. Of course, you can continue pretending otherwise, but it'll get old in a hurry.
NotAmused

Dave, I have a question;

Why do you think the schools teaching our kids about homosexuality as a good thing, IS a good thing?

Of course it violate our freedom of religion. jSpin is quite correct in saying that what we teach our children is our business. For example, how would you react to your children, or future children, being placed in a singularly christian school?
Neiman

Dave: I must say that based on your posts, you are certainly not interested in original intent, because the evidence therein is massive in its support of the Christian faith:

1. Freedom of religious worship and that must include freedom to prevent the state from indoctrinating our children in the religion of secular humanism, is what the First Amendment addresses. The Founding Father's wanted the state out of the business of religion, while not wanting in any manner to keep religion out of the affairs of state and the public square. So, if you really believed in original intent, you would have to agree that neither the federal government or any state has the right to indoctrinate our children in the articles of faith of the religion of secular humanism. Forcing Christian children to be indoctrinated by the state in homosexuality and/or preventing the parents from knowing when their children might be so exposed, is clearly unconstitutional. Further, if these parents decide to take their children to a private Christian school or home school them, then the state has no right to interfere in the curriculum taught by those parents or to charge them tax money to support public schools that do not benefit their children and that teach values contrary to those held by those parents.

2. In the Northwest Ordinace, having therein the requirements for statehood; it said that the U.S. encouraged the Christian Bible to be taught in every school for the teaching of good morals and citizenship. All of our Founding Father's, even so-called deists, were not only generally supportive of the Christian faith, in the early decades of our country the Federal and states governments provided direct financial support for Christian endeavors.

3. This judge DID apply his own unconstitutional beliefs in this decision; as he truthfully could not find any support within the Constitution.

The Left have succeeded to a great degree in enshrining Justice Hugo Black's wholly unconstitutional revision/amendment of the Constitution into our lives, absent any appeals to precedent or any documents from our Founding Father's. Why? Because they were non existent in support of his anti-Christian, judicial activism. The one letter from Thomas Jefferson that KKK Member Hugo Black used was taken completely out of context, he knew it and sadly the damnable Warren Court supported that errant decision.

So, if you don't believe in God and even if you hate people that believe in Christ you have every right, what you do not have any right to do is revise the Constitution to meet your secular humanist agenda.
NotAmused

Thanks Neiman. One thing I and the rest of my generation seem to have a problem with is making ourselves heard in a logical and thorough manner.

Or even thinking in a logical manner.

Most of that has to do with all of us not really caring. It didn't seem important in our multiple choice tests that could be passed mainly by guessing.

Whether or not anyone believes in god or not, the basis for right or wrong, which is the basis for law, is logic. Common sense. 1+1=2, not "1+1= -2.3mil, because I choose the curriculum."
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2007/02/26/market-education-could-end-the-cu Andrew Coulson

Rob,

Good observation that a free market approach to education can avoid this kind of unnecessary and socially divisive conflict. It's a solution my Cato Institute colleagues and I are doing our best to promote. I've linked you here: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2007/02/26/market-…
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Thanks Andrew, for the kind words and the link.

Now if we could just get the bureaucrats in the schools to give back some of their control over education and allow some parental choice.
spamlinksweredeleted

I agree whit teaching homosexuality to students, even to an elementary level. Why? Because in this way they can judge by themselves if they want to accept that or not. Usually people tend to be distant of such things and have bad conclusions. I myself am not against homosexuality, but i don't sustain it ether.
I say no!!

I don't think that this law should be passed!!! I don't think this should happen….!!!

This possible law is OBSURED….children go to school to learn the BASIC things …to read..to write…to learn how to do math…. and to learn the history of this country!!
These teachings are SUPPOSED to teach our children THE BASICS so that they'll grow up to be functional adults…(ya know…READ an application …fill out the application by WRITING their demographics on the application(FOR A JOB)ADD,SUBTRACT, DIVIDE..(to balance the check book… or to figure out percentages for financing a MORTGAGE…!!!)

BUT teaching OUR CHILDREN about homosexuality….WHAT category is that supposed to fall under????
Whatever they choose to be WHEN THEY GROW UP….is what they choose…(face it…no matter what you instill in your kids…they're gonna do what they wanna do)…

I DO NOT AGREE W/ HOMOSEXUALITY BEHAVIOR…NOR DO I HATE HOMOSEXUALS…but I don't believe that it's right for this to be taught in schools……

WHAT IS THIS STATE/COUNTRY COMING TO???????
Our children can't pray TO GOD in school(as a whole) because not every family in school is Christian…or belives in GOD…..so WHY IS IT that… CONNECTICUT LEGISLATURE is trying to FORCE HOMOSEXUALITY BELIEFS on OUR CHILDREN???????(NOT THAT GOD SHOULD EVEN BE PUT IN THE SAME CATEGORY AS HOMOSEXUALITY)…….

The point I'm trying to make is….. WHY SHUN ONE AND MAKE THE OTHER A LAW???

NOT EVERY FAMILY AGREES W/ HOMOSEXUALITY!!!!!!
THAT'S SOOO DOUBLE STANDARD!!!
Pingback: To what extent should schools teach tolerance? | Rbinf's Blog
Samsparks58

If I were a parent in Massuchuseets ITS TIME TO GO TO WAR I MEAN A bLOODBATH THIS WILL NOT STAND SIN. SAM SPARKS
Samsparks58

If I were a parent in Massuchuseets ITS TIME TO GO TO WAR I MEAN A bLOODBATH THIS WILL NOT STAND SIN. SAM SPARKS

SayAnythingBlog.com

Court Upholds School’s Decision To Teach Homosexuality To Elementary Students

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments