|
Gay Family Oriented Book Controversy
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Parents sue over book about gay family
Parents claim school district violates their right to teach morals
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- Ever since her 5-year-old brought home a book from kindergarten that depicted a gay family, Tonia Parker has felt that her parenting has been under attack in the only state that allows same-sex marriage.
She and her husband, David, did not want to discuss sexual orientation yet with their son, and were shocked that the book was included in a "diversity book bag" last year.
David Parker subsequently got arrested for refusing to leave a Lexington school after officials refused to meet his demand that he be notified when homosexuality was discussed in his son's class.
Now the Parkers and another couple have sued the school district in federal court, claiming Lexington officials violated their parental rights to teach morals to their own children.
The way they and other opponents of gay marriage see it, the 2003 ruling that cleared the way for same-sex weddings has emboldened gay rights advocates in the state of Massachusetts to push their views in schools and ignore those who feel homosexuality is immoral.
"In many parts of the United States, we could have presented our concerns and our objections, and it wouldn't have been a problem," Tonia Parker said.
Glenn Koocher, executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, said there is no pro-gay campaign in the schools, just isolated cases exaggerated by anti-gay marriage activists who suffer from "narcissistic activist personality disorder."
Carisa Cunningham, spokeswoman for the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said school curriculums have not changed, just the reaction to them by gay marriage opponents. "Maybe the impact of the law is that it has made people much more defensive and much more afraid," she said.
In Massachusetts, like most of the nation, there is no official education policy on when or how to discuss homosexuality in the classroom.
"It's done purposely to make sure local school boards reflect the values of the local district," said Martha Kempner, a spokeswoman for the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.
Just 10 U.S. states have laws that deal with teaching sexual orientation, two of which require some teaching of it and eight of which put restrictions on how it's presented, according to New York-based SIECUS.
Massachusetts guidelines say only that teachers should define the different sexual orientations by the fifth grade. Each school district decides how to do that, and in the past year, Lexington has emerged as the center of debate.
Officials there say that since same-sex marriage is part of life in Massachusetts, it comes up naturally and that it's impossible to notify parents every time the issue is discussed.
"It certainly strengthens the argument that we need to teach about gay marriage because it's more of a reality for our kids," said Paul Ash, superintendent of schools in Lexington. "The children see married, gay couples."
An "opt out" provision in state law requires parental notification and the chance to remove their kids from the classroom if the curriculum "primarily involves human sexual education or human sexuality issues." But same-sex marriage comes up in current events classes and other forums where it's not the primary focus and, educators say, not subject to the "opt out" law.
Kris Mineau of the Massachusetts Family Institute, which opposes gay marriage, says educators are using the perceived loophole to bypass parents. Since the marriages began in May 2004, his organization has compiled about 20 reports from media and parents in towns from Medford to Newton that highlight what his group feels is inappropriate teaching of homosexuality.
Among recent incidents: Parents Joseph and Robin Wirthlin joined the Parkers in the federal suit after a second grade teacher in Lexington read to her class the fairy tale "King and King," which tells the story of two princes falling in love.
Last April, a sexually explicit pamphlet aimed at helping gay men avoid sexually transmitted diseases was distributed at a Brookline High School conference on gay and lesbian issues. School officials said the booklet was mistakenly displayed.
Brian Camenker of the Article 8 Alliance, which opposes gay marriage, said there's been a striking change in tone by gay marriage proponents since marriages started.
"It's like you're dealing with people from Mars, people who feel they're so superior they can use your child's mind as a sandbox for their own personal ideologies," he said.
But Eliza Byard of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network said gay families exist everywhere -- the only thing different about Massachusetts is that same-sex marriage makes it much harder to push them aside. Public schools must acknowledge gay families, she said, even if it upsets parents who believe same-sex relationships are immoral.
"One of the basic realities of American life," she said, "is that all of us have to deal with beliefs we disagree with." |
Source
What do you guys think? I think this same argument would have happened years ago (and still today if it were PC) with a book about an interracial family. I've never read the book, so I don't know the contents, but it doesn't seem like it's promoting gay marriages. It's just another example of wanting to sweep a topic that parent's aren't comfortable dealing with under the rug. When you know that your child reads this book and you disagree with it, you sit him/her down and explain why you disagree with the book.
| quote: | | "It's like you're dealing with people from Mars, people who feel they're so superior they can use your child's mind as a sandbox for their own personal ideologies," he said. |
The irony of this is just laughable. Talk about the pot and the kettle. People like him have no problem instilling personal ideologies in children, so long as they agree with them. He probably feels that there's a war on Christianity now, too. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| josh4 |
In this case I think the parents have a case. They should be able to determine when and how their children learn about such topics. The school doesn't have the right to refuse them that with their own children.
In my school system, when children went through sex education parents were notified and given the option to have their children excluded. I don't see how this is any different. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
In my school system, when children went through sex education parents were notified and given the option to have their children excluded. I don't see how this is any different. |
This isn't sex ed. It's like social studies for kindergarteners and in Massachusetts, married gay couples are a part of society. |
|
|
| josh4 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
This isn't sex ed. It's like social studies for kindergarteners and in Massachusetts, married gay couples are a part of society. |
Thats irrelevant. Evolution is apart of history & science but if parents want to opt their children out of its teachings they should be allowed to. This isn't about sexual orientation, this is about the parents having final say over the state on how their children are raised.
I'd like to think if I was a parent I wouldn't have the school tell me I had no say in what material my child is exposed to. |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
Thats irrelevant. Evolution is apart of history & science but if parents want to opt their children out of its teachings they should be allowed to. This isn't about sexual orientation, this is about the parents having final say over the state on how their children are raised.
I'd like to think if I was a parent I wouldn't have the school tell me I had no say in what material my child is exposed to. |
So you think that it is ok for parents to raise their kids believing that there is no such thing as sexual intercourse (for instance)? How about parents that raise their kids to believe that nazism is the only viable ideology? What about parents that raise their kids to only speak Zulu - should their kids be excused from English classes in school? Should the teachers always address them in Zulu? Should the teachers not tell the nazi kids about other points of view? |
|
|
| josh4 |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
So you think that it is ok for parents to raise their kids believing that there is no such thing as sexual intercourse (for instance)? |
If they want to, its their children.
| quote: | | How about parents that raise their kids to believe that nazism is the only viable ideology? |
In a free society everyone is free to believe whatever they want or it is not free.
| quote: | | What about parents that raise their kids to only speak Zulu - should their kids be excused from English classes in school? |
As long as their children live up to the federal and state standards of education then they can do what they want. As far as I know there is not an official language of the United States and no requirement to learn English.
| quote: | | Should the teachers always address them in Zulu? |
No that would be ridiculous.
| quote: | | Should the teachers not tell the nazi kids about other points of view? |
The teachers should follow the curriculum and if the nazi kids want to be excused from it then they should be allowed to be. |
|
|
| skot_e |
Same thing happened in Oz a few years ago with a TV show called playschool. It is on the govt broadcast station and aimed at 'developing' kids eg 3-4yrs. They had a story where a kid was talking about her 2 mums. i tell ya, the churchies kicked up a real stink, and were outraged that the taxpayer was funding such 'rubbish'.
it's a part of society and should be included without issue, but the churchies won't accept it. I do however in the book case agree with the parents that they should be able to have some input on their childrens education. At least with the TV, they can change the channel, with the book they could return it too I suppose.
There is a real fine line on this topic, and I can see both sides.
Not a real convincing arguement from me huh? |
|
|
| Spacey Orange |
| Since when do parents have the "rights to teach morals to their own children." :conf: |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spacey Orange
Since when do parents have the "rights to teach morals to their own children." :conf: |
right around the same time they are forced to choose a legal name. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spacey Orange
Since when do parents have the "rights to teach morals to their own children." :conf: |
Agreed; the morals in this country are so ed up that parents should almost be denied the right to teach their masked ignorance and hatred unto their children. |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
So you think that it is ok for parents to raise their kids believing that there is no such thing as sexual intercourse |
What a idiotic statement. At 5 years old a child is not emotionally capable of understanding homosexuality, let alone hetrosexuality. I have a little niece and nephew and can tell you that a child, at that age, can not grasp what is between their legs - forget sex. |
|
|
| skot_e |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
I have a little niece and nephew and can tell you that a child, at that age, can not grasp what is between their legs - forget sex. |
While this is a fair statement, the case above is a book about a gay family, not a sexual relationship, the difference being same sex parents, not parents having sex.
The brochure about sexual relationships was given to high school kids, and reality is they know what's what. |
|
|
|
|
