Pay closer attention to curriculum (Commentary anti- David Parker)

Lexington Minuteman ^ | August 18, 2005 | Jonathan Quint

[lexfreedom]

Quint: Pay closer attention to curriculum By Jonathan Quint/ Guest Commentary Thursday, August 18, 2005

Ostensibly, David Parker's arrest is about choice ("This is about choice ... about the proper relationship between parents and the government," said [Parker's legal counsel, Jeffrey Denner). But the fact of the matter is that this is about same-sex marriage.

David Parker has an issue with his son's kindergarten class. Parker "contests the schools are interfering with the choice of parents to educate their children as they see fit," because the school sent home a diversity bag that included a book about different types of families. But a close look at the school system's published curriculum overview for kindergarten clearly states that one of the benchmarks for social studies for a kindergarten student is to be able to identify "two ways in which his/her family is the same as and two ways different from other families" (lps.lexingtonma.org/curriculum/kindergarten.html). This book clearly supports the published curriculum because it helps students learn about the different types of families that exist in our society, which in turn helps them determine ways in which their family might be the same or different from other families.

Furthermore, the Lexington Public Schools Curriculum overview (lps.lexingtonma.org/curriculum/kindergarten.html#whatiskg) goes on to state "a major component of the kindergarten program is to promote positive attitudes and social responsibility." In furtherance of this: ... themes are used to expose and teach all of the curriculum areas. ... Facets of reading, math, spelling, language arts, social studies, science, physical education, music, and art are represented in the tasks, projects, and assignments found every day in a kindergarten class.

Looking more closely at the Benchmarks for Social Studies, a kindergarten student:

Identifies three things about him/herself;

Identifies two ways in which his/her family is the same as and two ways different from other families;

Participates in the voting process from selecting an issue to discussing the results in the classroom;

Names three classroom rules;

Locates the commonly used areas in the classroom and school building;

Names two events that happened in the past (before today) and two current events in his/her life;

Names three people, other than the teacher, who work in the school and identifies the work they do;

Recognizes globes and maps as representations of real places;

Names three occupations in the community and identifies the work associated with each.

As you can see, much more than reading, writing and arithmetic are being taught in the public schools, including kindergarten - and most people would agree this is right and proper.

But the only issue in this broad and far-reaching program that causes such angst and concern is a book that showed a same-sex couple alongside a number of other marriages. It did not show any sexuality, or mention sexuality. It simply included a same-sex couple alongside other couples. Same-sex couples exist in our society. To deny this is to do a disservice to the students. And the school brings this fact to light in the context of its curriculum - which seems age appropriate.

This debate is clearly not about choice because the Parkers had the choice of reading the curriculum and deciding for themselves if they wanted their child to learn what the Lexington Public School System had offered to teach. And if the debate is over same-sex marriage, let us say so and debate that issue, in a rational and civilized manner.

Neil Tassel, also on Parker's legal team admits "there's no question they [Article 8 Alliance] share some overlap in view point." A visit to the Article 8 Alliance Web site (article8.org) makes it pretty clear the purpose of the organization is to ban same-sex marriage.

The two rationales I most often hear in defense of banning same sex-marriage are that the Bible says its wrong and that marriage is a sacred vow as defined to be between a man and a woman.

I am not an expert on the Bible, but I do know the Bible condones a lot of actions and behaviors that our society does not. For example, in the First Book of Samuel, the Lord orders Saul to punish the Amalekites and "spare no one; put them all to death, men and women, children and babes in arms (1 Samuel 15)." Surely this would not be looked upon favorably today.

As to the second defense, it seems to me that if marriage is a sacred institution, it should be illegal to break that institution once it has been established. A logical first step in defending marriage therefore seems to me to pass legislation making divorce illegal. This must be done before outlawing same-sex marriage because this more than any other step protects the sacred institution.

I offer this as a middle ground to those who favor and oppose gay marriage: Focus on what you have in common - the sanctity of marriage - and work together to outlaw the dissolution of that sacred institution.

Jonathan Quint lives on Lincoln Street.

[lexfreedom]

This debate is clearly not about choice because the Parkers had the choice of reading the curriculum and deciding for themselves if they wanted their child to learn what the Lexington Public School System had offered to teach.

This is precisely what the Parkers did -- they decided that they didn't want the Lexington Schools teaching their kids about homosexual "families", but the school, in violation of Massachusetts Law, refused their requests to excuse their kindergartner from such topics.

I am not an expert on the Bible, but I do know the Bible condones a lot of actions and behaviors that our society does not. For example, in the First Book of Samuel, the Lord orders Saul to punish the Amalekites and "spare no one; put them all to death, men and women, children and babes in arms (1 Samuel 15)." Surely this would not be looked upon favorably today.

What in the world is this?? Claiming not to be an expert, he then goes on to pontificate. Can you imagine a secular leftist taking one verse out of the Koran and condemning Muslims?? Of course, this citation could be considered anti-semitic since it's Old Testament -- is he claiming that Jews condone killing because the Bible documents this regarding the Amalekites?

This is the kind of illogic that prevails in Lexington.

Support the Parkers! Visit:

www.davidparkerfund.org

support Parental Rights!

[metmom]

A bad (read: sexually explicit, esp. at the 7th grade level) health cirriculum forced down our former community's throat by the school board (which was not SUPPOSED to have the authority to choose cirriculum), is one of the major reasons we decided to homeschool. Maybe it's where I live but we really don't see too many same sex couples. I've met one that I know of for sure.