Pro-homosexuality curriculum in Md. schools blocked by fed. judge

[The Straight Story]

Pro-homosexuality curriculum in Md. schools blocked by fed. judge, citing anti-faith bias
May 6, 2005
By Michael Foust

GREENBELT, Md. (BP)--Handing pro-family groups a major victory, a federal judge May 5 blocked a controversial sex-education program from going into effect at a large Maryland public school system, saying it took sides in the debate over homosexuality by painting conservative Christians as "unenlightened" and "misguided."

U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams Jr. issued a temporary restraining order against the Montgomery County Public Schools sex-ed curriculum, which was scheduled to be tested in six schools -- three high schools and three middle schools -- beginning May 9. Montgomery County is the most populous county in Maryland. In light of the ruling, the school system superintendent said he was suspending the pilot program.

Two conservative groups -- Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays -- had been fighting the curriculum for months. A religious liberties group, Liberty Counsel, filed a lawsuit on behalf of the groups.

The curriculum -- aimed at eighth- and 10th-graders -- claims that Jesus "said absolutely nothing at all about homosexuality" and that being homosexual is similar to being left-handed. It notes that some Baptist churches once defended racial segregation, implying that conservative Baptists today are on the wrong side of history. It also says that future generations likely will view today's traditional beliefs on homosexuality with "astonishment" and that "religion has often been misused to justify hatred and oppression."

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=20739

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. gee, the curriculum was telling the truth

about Jesus and the Southern Baptist Church (which broke apart the Baptist church of the time because they supported slavery). I'm sure the fundies will use this as an example of "persecution"-anything that tells the truth.

[noamnety]

2. Their headline is poor

That's not "pro-homosexuality", it's just not anti. It's neutral, in a live and let live kind of way.

If they started advising people to only engage in homosexual behavior to protect themselves against unwanted pregancies, now that pharmacists are refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control, THAT would be pro-homosexuality.

And frankly, I would understand it if they did that. Finding out a kid is gay used to be the sort of thing a parent would be upset about, but more and more I think we'll find parents being relieved, given the way the fundies are starting to restrict our ability to make our own decisions about birth control.

[megatherium]

3. This is why we need to get rid of the filibuster,

so the Senate can vote on our liberal judicial nominees, to stop these conservative judges from legislating from the bench.


:sarcasm:

[JerseygirlCT]

4. Who writes this shit?

Sorry, but I'm so tired of seeing bigotry called "pro-family". As if pro-homosexual rights and pro-family are opposed.

Makes me crazy!

[Zhade]

5. "BP News"? What is this crap?

Are you agreeing with this swill?

[The Straight Story]

6. I read tons of news sites

From unclesam ones (http://www.google.com/unclesam) to usnpl.com (listing of papers in US) to religious news to africa news.

I just post things I find of interest to myself and to the liberal community. Keeping up with that those you oppose is the best way to stay informed IMHO on the issues we care about.

[Zhade]

7. That's NOT a news site.

But yeah, sorry I jumped you, I'm edgy today. My apologies for my unfair conclusion.

[The Straight Story]

8. NP, but in a weird way it is a news site

It gives us new information on a regular basis from a group we do not share the same views with and allows us an insight into thoughts, plans, and what they are looking for as important to their cause.

I prefer posting news from sites I don't agree with - get that crap out in the open here, debunk it, and let's hope enough lurkers from places that take sites like that one to heart will start to see the light.

[NMMNG]

9. The curriculum was not "pro homosexual"

It was simply anti-bigot and pro-truth.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. I'm afraid I'm going to stick my neck out

And say that I think the judge was right. I don't think it's the place of schools to actively attack a religion, even one I disagree with. The references to baptists supporting racial discrimination and to religion often being used to justify hatred and oppression should be removed, at a minimum.

I think everything it says is true, but I don't think that's sufficient to justify putting it in a school curriculum. Schools should limit their teaching on moral issues to things that an overwhelming majority of the population agrees on, I think. The fact that in this case the school was weighing in on my side doesn't make it right.

I do not want schools to be allowed to teach children that my moral principals are wrong and that someone else's are right. I do not think I can consistantly argue for this if I am trying to justify them being allowed to teach that my principals are right and someone else's are wrong.

[kwassa]

11. From a real news source

and there are several more articles in the Post besides this one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/06/AR2005050601648_pf.html

Montgomery Blindsided Over Sex-Ed
Program Backers Blame Conservative Movement

By Lori Aratani and Daniel de Vise
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, May 7, 2005; A01

Maryland's largest school system has become a battleground over what students should be taught about sex and a symbol, some supporters of the new curriculum said, of the increasing influence the conservative movement is hoping to play in public school classrooms.

Five months after the Montgomery County Board of Education approved a new approach to teaching students about homosexuality and condom use, a federal judge put a 10-day hold on implementation of the program, which allowed teachers to initiate discussions with eighth-graders about homosexuality and included a video for 10th-graders on how to put on a condom.

School Superintendent Jerry D. Weast announced he was suspending the program, which was set to begin at six county schools this week.

The move was cheered by two groups that sued to block the program: Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays. The groups have said they are eager to work with the school system on a new version of the curriculum.

But others in the community said they are fearful that the school system is retreating from its efforts to teach students about the dangers of unprotected sex and the importance of tolerance for those of different sexual orientations.

This was a fight that few expected would break out in what many view as a progressive, liberal-leaning county.

"It looks like we're in Kansas after all. I'm appalled. I'm appalled," said Charlotte Fremaux, a parent leader at Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School, one of six campuses that was to be a pilot site for the sex-ed lessons. "Next, they'll be challenging evolution."

But those who have followed the battle over sex education over the years said people should not have been surprised.

"It's not an anomaly to have these conflicts break out in liberal, well-to-do school districts," said Janice Irvine, a sociology professor at the University of Massachusetts and author of a book that traces the history of sex education. "In those districts, folks are often shocked, but really it only takes a handful of parents to start what can become a bitter and quite divisive campaign."

(more in the article)