Angry Parents Suing California Schools Over Mandatory Gay-Friendly Classes


#1

Angry Parents Suing California Schools Over Mandatory Gay-Friendly Classes

** A lawsuit in California that was filed last month by angry parents who object to a gay-friendly curriculum they say is being foisted on kindergartners could well become a test case for schools around the country.**
Parents in the Alameda Unified School District were refused the right to excuse their kids from classes that would teach all kids in the district’s elementary schools about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender alternative families.

more…


#2

"The move toward the new classes began two years ago, when teachers noticed that even kindergarten students were using derogatory words about sexuality, such as “fag.”

Children have called each other names since the beginning of time IMHO. If we are going to change policy for this I believe we need to talk about weight, height, hair color etc…

Some people just take things way too far. Kindergarten is no place to be talking about sexuality issues unless it’s a virtuas class to help stem abuse.

Joe


#3

Gay friendly?

Perhaps the motivation behind such classes is to attempt to reduce bullying of other school children who might be gay or are being raised by gay parents.


#4

I have a number of gay friends and I don’t know any who felt that they were “gay” until puberty. Some, definitely not all, didn’t fit the standard gender roles in that the boys might have played with “dolls” more than sports but with all the superhero “dolls” today that isn’t a sign of anything. Another was an Eagle Scout and didn’t really understanding what he was feeling until late HS. We need to let children be children and quit trying to force them into our debates until they really need to be a part of them.

I’m sorry, there is no need to bring this up in Kindergarten. Jr High, sure thing, High School, most definitely but not elementary school.


#5

*Hi apromisemade–I think if that is what the class is intended for, I’m not against that…I think that anti bullying ‘classes’ are good…but, I have also read mixed things about this, that these classes might also be intended to teach kids that ‘being gay is like anything other lifestyle.’ I don’t think that teachers should be going down that path…it is not moral lifestyle, and teachers should stay away from tackling these moral types of issues. I think the problem I have mainly with this, is not the content, but that the parents can’t opt their kids out of the class…so our government is now forcing kids to have to sit through lectures that basically condone homosexuality? To me, that is where parental rights are being violated. I received a form last week, as my kids ventured back to school, stating that I could opt them out of classes that talk about sex, birth control, abstinence, etc. I don’t plan to opt them out, they know Church teachings on sex, but I wrote on the form that I want a notice sent home alerting me to when/if the classes are to be taught.

So, at least I have the OPTION of opting my kids out if I choose…it’s crazy that in this case, the parents are being denied that right. :confused: (I read another thread on here that speaks to that, but in this article I didn’t notice that the parents can’t opt their kids out, so maybe I’m thinking of the other thread)

Either way–Wish I could say I’m surprised…I’m really not.*


#6

I find it disturbing that parents are not “allowed” to excuse their children if the would like to from such a program.


#7

This whole thing sounds like a violation of 1st amendment rights to me.


#8

The direction of public schools today is a scary one in my opinion. We teach our children well about Catholicism and the evils around us. But that is not enough. Once our kids go off to public school they can undermine what we have done and in effect create further possibilities for our children to be led astray.

I understand why so many parents today are opting to home school… even Catholic schools are failing our children.


#9

As an elementary school teacher I think this is highly inappropriate. We constantly talk to the kids about bullying, mean words, etc. I don’t want to be the one to teach your kids about sex. I want the parents to. You wouldn’t ask your science teacher to teach French, why are we asking kindergarten teachers to teach sex ed? And really if you are addressing homosexuality, bisexuality and transgender, you pretty much have to touch on sexuality. I say continue working on the bullying thing (zero tolerance regardless of the word, situation, etc) and leave the sex ed to parents or at least an upper grade.


#10

To be honest, I am not sure why many Catholics are picking and choosing sins to get upset about. I definitely agree that the parents should be able to opt out of their child being exposed to the information. But, the school seemed to be protecting the vulnerable, not being necessarily any more “gay-friendly” than any liberal environment in this country. In the article it said that for the younger children they are focusing on the harms of teasing (how can that be negative??) and it isn’t until the fifth grade that they deal with sexual orientation. I don’t believe in people living a gay lifestyle, but I am teaching my children to treat them as nicely as they are expected to treat everyone else. If I caught my child calling another child names because of one of their parent’s decision, I would be furious and they would be in big, big trouble. I wouldn’t be so concerned about the parent’s sins as I would be about my own child’s. Whatever you may think about homosexuality and non traditional families, no one who considers themselves a Christian should ever even think of taking it out on their children or allow their children to do so either.


#11

Have you seen the textbooks, the storytime stuff? It is much more than protecting the children from bullying. It is pure indoctrinization.

You can teach against bullying against anyone without having to promote a certain act.


#12

Wasn’t sure what you meant by this, can you clarify who was choosing one sin over another and what sin they were choosing? If you meant choosing the name calling over the homosexuality, I don’t think anyone has suggested that name calling is okay. I think everyone on this thread has mentioned that any name calling is unacceptable. Other than that I don’t know what other sin anyone has refered to.

Not trying to be argumentative, just that this part of your post didn’t make sense to me.


#13

Back in the day, kids called each other fags whether they were or not and some of them didn’t even know what the word meant, other than it was an insult. Who on this board has never been bullied or been called a name? Not that it is right to call names, but I don’t think this is something you will prevent. It will go on.


#14

All of your examples are being used in public schools. Public schools are not meant to teach a child Catholic principles. It isn’t the school’s job to raise Catholic children, but to educate them and to be fair to different religions and lifestyles. In the US, each person is allowed to choose their religion and when you become a parent, you are the one responsible for your child’s religious education, not anyone else. In the article that was specifically mentioned, it talked a lot more about “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans-gendered alternative families” not about being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered. At the daycare I work at, there is one family who is raising three foster children and working on adopting them. They are a lesbian couple. While I don’t think living a lesbian lifestyle is morally right, its not my place to judge them and it isn’t my place to teach my children to judge them either. At my daughter’s ages ( 1 1/2 and 3 1/2) they don’t need to know that we believe the parents are living a sinful lifestyle. They just need to know that the two children have two moms instead of a mom and a dad and that it doesn’t make the children any different than they are. I teach my daughters that we believe in Catholic doctrines and that they are expected to follow them, but there are a lot of people in this world that aren’t Catholic and don’t live that way. My children are expected to respect them and their customs, whether we believe in them or not. Jesus was nice to people and protected people whom were living in ways he knew was wrong, why would I teach my children that they are more entitled to judge others than Jesus?


#15

Catholics are upset about ALL Sins. Sorry :smiley:


#16

Oh, I meant that the school decided to go this route because children as young as kindergartners were teasing, bullying, and discriminating against children whose parents chose an alternative lifestyle. That is not a Christian way to act and as a parent, I would be much more concerned with how my child was acting and on protecting the children who are going to school than on judging the parent’s lifestyle choices. The parents aren’t going to school with my child telling them about their sex life, the parents aren’t teaching my children about religion or morals, so I don’t see how it is my place to judge them.

I agree that the parents of the children should be able to opt out of these programs. I thought parents had to be able to opt out of anything taught in school that went against their beliefs. I am just pointing out that in this case, it is a public school that obviously is serving a community with many children coming from alternative households. It is the schools job to protect all the children, and explaining a little about different types of families is something they feel is necessary because of how the students are acting. If all the parents were doing their job and teaching Christian charity and teaching their children respect, it wouldn’t be necessary.


#17

If there were no sinful acts a lot of this would not be happening. Sooner or later the public schools will be apologists for all bad behaviors. Not good.

All they need to do is teach the children to love the sinner.


#18

If there were no sinful acts a lot of this would not be happening. Sooner or later the public schools will be apologists for all bad behaviors. Not good.

All they need to do is teach the children to love the sinner.

Like I said before… all this is happening in public schools. Public schools are schools that are public and open to all students, not schools in charge of teaching religious principles to the students. The parents need to teach the children to love the sinner, the schools need to educate and protect. Most Christians believe that homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgender is morally wrong. People who aren’t Christians don’t. It doesn’t make sense to expect people who don’t follow your religion to live according to its doctrines or to see their behavior as bad.


#19

Well then in public school we should be able to teach what I believe is the right way to live. Or are normal people to be discriminated against?


#20

Public school exposes the students to all different religions, cultures, wealth levels, and lifestyles. If children have good parents, it is a positive experience. It is only when parents expect others to parent for them that there are difficulties.

If a Catholic school was teaching that homosexuality is fine or that their textbooks had “politically correct” views on religion, there would be definitely be a problem. But, in a public school I don’t see how their idea has anything wrong with it besides not allowing parents to opt their children out of it. But, it does make me curious if a parent in a Catholic school that didn’t believe in a Catholic doctrine could opt their children out of learning it. I sincerely doubt it, so it is kind of ironic that Catholics are so upset about a similar situation in reverse.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.