Parents File Federal Suit Over Gay Book

[davidinalameda]

http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/04/042706book.htm

Two Lexington, Massachusetts families filed a federal lawsuit Thursday alleging that their civil rights were violated when a gay-themed book was read to their children in school.

A teacher read the book King and King to second-graders at the Estabrook elementary school earlier this month as part of a lesson about weddings.

Following the reading the teacher noted that same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts and some children have two mommies and others have two daddies.

King and King is aimed at elementary school children and helps teach diversity. The book, by Linda De Haan and Stern Nijland, tells the story of Prince Bertie who searches for love through a bevy of eligible princesses before falling for Prince Lee.

:mad:

so, what's next-a racist suing because their kids didn't have to attend school on MLK Day?

[Mythsaje]

1. I think this teacher went too far, personally...

There are a LOT of parents who'd have issues with their 2nd Graders coming home with questions about same-sex marriage because of a book read by their teacher.

I think it gives a little too much ammo to the "gay agenda" arguments, personally.

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. Is it going too far if 2nd graders come home with questions...

... about straight marriage? Or interracial marriage? Or interreligious marriage?

Other than your personal "ick" factor (the very same feeling that racists have when discussing things like interracial marriage), how did the teacher go too far?

[Mythsaje]

4. What's with the "your personal 'ick' factor" line?

What did I say to indicate I even HAVE a dog in that race?

Considering how divisive this issue is, reading a story like that to a bunch of 2nd graders will INEVITABLY cause this sort of reaction from one set of parents or more. It's a no-brainer. Most parents don't want to be talking about sex with their 2nd graders in the first place, other than in the most general terms. This kind of thing throws the whole thing right in their laps and forces them to deal with it RIGHT THEN.

I might not have trouble explaining it (though I'd rather not have to explain it to a 7 year old), but a lot of parents will.

And kids aren't going to think much at all about interracial relationships unless they've already been taught racism. And religion? Like they're even going to grasp this.

But gay marriage, they're going to understand. If the overwhelming majority of the couples they know (maybe all) are different sex couples, parents are going to have a lot of 'splaining to do. And some of them are going to resent the hell out of it.

[Guy Fawkes]

11. Homosexuality isn't just about sex.

Just because someone mentions gay marriage (or relationships) doesn't mean they're talking about sex. I don't think about sex when talking about heterosexual marriages, and neither do most people. But buy equating gay marriage and relationships to sex, you make it taboo to talk about to younger children. No where in books like "King and King" is sex actually mentioned.

And besides, I don't think a seven year-old is going to be worrying about what two princes will do after they get married, aside from living happily-ever-after.

[JackBeck]

12. Exactly.

And the parent's who are suing are claiming that the teacher broke a Mass. law stating that parent's need to be informed before the students are given a sex-education lesson.

I hope they get laughed out of the courtroom.

[William769]

13. "your personal 'ick' factor" line?

:bounce:

[JackBeck]

3. Lexington has a high number of gay families.

Why should the children of these families be excluded and made to feel as outsiders?

If situations like this aren't allowed to occur in communities that are already accepting of gay families, let alone a state in which gays can legally get married, when will be the right time for you?

[Mythsaje]

6. I think the timing should be a parental choice

not something that blind-sides them like that.

[JackBeck]

8. If have some time, please read these related articles.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060425/ts_nm/rights_gays_m...

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=23077

Only two sets of parents have a problem with this. Since there is a higher number of gay parents with children in Lexington, most of these kids have already been exposed to same-sex families. And guess what? No one except these two sets of parents have a problem. And they clearly are bigots with an agenda.

[Mythsaje]

9. If it's not unusual in that community

these parents would have to deal with it sooner or later whether they like it or not. And I'm sure they have an agenda, but I think they can fairly make the argument that they're not paying their share of taxes so their children can be taught something in opposition to their "values" in the public schools.

Now we might not agree with those alleged "values" but, on the other hand, we'd strongly object to other things being taught OUR children in opposition to what WE think is right. "Abortion is murder," for example. I think we'd get pretty irritated if our 2nd graders came home with THAT meme in their brains.

[JackBeck]

10. The "values" argument has already been tried.

It it has been failing in court when it comes to the "intelligent design" debate.

This lawsuit has no merit because the teacher did not break any laws. I'll be laughing at them when they lose.

[Brian_Expat]

14. Nope, it's not the same

They didn't teach that "gay is good" or "gay is bad," which would be the equivalent to "abortion is murder."

They simply noted that "gay is." In other words, gay people exist.

And gay marriage is a legal, demographic and political reality in Massachusetts. There are married couples all over the place now -- claiming that this is "a sensitive issue that parents should have to bring up themselves" strikes me as a bit silly, really. Gays are in the mainstream these days, it's the two pairs of parents who aren't.

[JackBeck]

5. Seems to me these people are the ones with an "agenda".

"Both parents involved in the suit are members of an organization pressing for an amendment to the Massachusetts constitution that would ban same-sex marriage."

[Mythsaje]

7. Not surprising...n/t