|
|
|||||
|
Judge orders 'gay' agenda taught to Christian children Rules kids need teachings to be 'engaged and productive citizens'
February 24, 2007
WorldNetDaily.com
A federal judge in Massachusetts has ordered the "gay"
agenda taught to Christians who attend a public school
in Massachusetts, finding that they need the teachings
to be "engaged and productive citizens."
U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf yesterday
dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by
David Parker, ordering that it is reasonable,
indeed there is an obligation, for public
schools to teach young children to accept and
endorse homosexuality.
Wolf essentially adopted the reasoning
in a brief submitted by a number of
homosexual-advocacy groups, who said
"the rights of religious freedom and
parental control over the upbringing of
children
would undermine teaching and
learning
"
David and Tonia Parker and
Joseph and Robin Wirthlin, who
have children of school age in
Lexington, Mass., brought the
lawsuit. They alleged district
officials and staff at
Estabrook Elementary School
violated state law and civil
rights by indoctrinating their
children about a lifestyle they,
as Christians, teach is immoral.
"Wolf's ruling is every
parent's nightmare. It
goes to extraordinary
lengths to legitimize
and reinforce the
'right' (and even the
duty) of schools to
normalize homosexual
behavior to even the
youngest of children,"
said a statement from
the pro-family group
Mass Resistance.
It also
is making available
background
information about
the lengthy dispute.
"In the
ruling, Wolf
makes the
absurd claim
that
normalizing
homosexuality
to young
children is
'reasonably
related to
the goals of
preparing
students to
become
engaged and
productive
citizens in
our
democracy.'
According to
Wolf, this
means
teaching
'diversity'
which
includes
'differences
in sexual
orientation.'
"In
addition,
Wolf
makes
the
odious
statement
that
the
Parkers'
only
options
are
(1)
send
their
kids
to a
private
school,
(2)
home-school
their
kids,
or
(3)
elect
a
majority
of
people
to
the
School
Committee
who
agree
with
them.
Can
you
imagine
a
federal
judge
in
the
Civil
Rights
era
telling
blacks
the
same
thing
that
if
they
can't
be
served
at a
lunch
counter
they
should
just
start
their
own
restaurant,
or
elect
a
city
council
to
pass
laws
that
reflect
the
U.S.
Constitution?"
the
organization
said.
Lawyers for the families said they already had planned an appeal of the judge's opinion.
But Wolf's claims followed very closely the reasoning submitted earlier in a brief by Human Rights Campaign, the ACLU, Massachusetts Teachers Association, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders and other advocates for the "gay" agenda.
Earlier, Mass Resistance President Brian Camenker had wondered why such national groups were "so interested in a parent's right to decide what moral issues are taught to his children by adults in elementary schools, especially regarding homosexuality."
"They must see David Parker's case as quite a threat to their ability to push their message on children," he had said. His organization has posted information about the judge's ruling on the Internet for readers to review.
But the judge concluded that even allowing Christians to withdraw their children from classes or portions of classes where the religious beliefs were being violated wasn't a reasonable expectation.
"An exodus from class when issues of homosexuality or same-sex marriage are to be discussed could send the message that gays, lesbians, and the children of same-sex parents are inferior and, therefore, have a damaging effect on those students," he opined.
"Under the Constitution 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," the judge wrote. "Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. It is increasingly evident that our diversity includes differences in sexual orientation."
And, he said, since history "includes instances of
official discrimination against gays and lesbians
it is reasonable for public educators to teach elementary school students
different sexual orientations."
If they disagree, "the Parkers and Wirthlins may send their children to a private school
[or] may also educate their children at home," the judge said.
Parker was arrested and jailed in Lexington in April 2005 over his request and the school's refusal to notify him when adults discuss homosexuality or transgenderism with his 6-year-old kindergartner. That despite a state law requiring such notification.
The incident made news around the nation and even Gov. Mitt Romney agreed with Parker.
However, in April 2006 the same school presented the book "King and King," about homosexual romances and marriage, to second-graders and again refused to provide notification.
Parker and other parents followed with the federal civil rights lawsuit, alleging school officials were refusing to follow state law.
Just days later, David Parker's son, Jacob, was beaten up at Estabrook Elementary, officials said. MassResistance said a group of 8-10 kids surrounded him and took him out of sight of "patrolling aides," then pummeled and beat him.
"The state must fight 'discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation' in ways that 'do not perpetuate stereotypes,'" the lawyers for the school district had argued at an earlier motions hearing. They also explained to the judge that, in their opinion, parents have no right to control what ideas the school presents to elementary schoolchildren.
"David Parker's dilemma
threatens the parental rights and religious freedom of every Massachusetts parent, and indirectly every parent in America," said John Haskins of the Parents' Rights Coalition.
"As the Lexington schools themselves are arguing, 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."
Haskins said when the Massachusetts state Supreme Court demanded homosexual marriages in the state, it didn't have the constitutional or legal authority to order the governor to act or to order the Legislature to make any changes, and the creation of same-sex marriages in Massachusetts actually was accomplished by executive order from Romney.
|
|||||
| Back | |||||