Posted on 10/20/2005 9:48:30 AM PDT by Crackingham
Lexington, Mass. — David and Tonia Parker are asking their neighbors in this liberal town for one consideration: Tolerance. The Parkers believe homosexuality is immoral. So they were appalled when their son brought a picture book home from kindergarten that showed families with same-sex parents. To ensure his "spiritual safety," they demanded the right to pull him out of class whenever homosexuality was discussed. To deny them that right, they say, would be intolerant of their faith.
School administrators offer a different take on tolerance. They say it's their job to expose children to the world's diversity. Supt. Paul B. Ash refuses to whisk the Parkers' son away if a classmate with same-sex parents brings a family photo for show-and-tell, or a lesbian couple volunteers at the Halloween party.
Similar debates have roiled communities across the nation as conservative parents challenge classes, books and after-school activities that they say promote a one-sided view of homosexuality as normal. They have notched victories in several states. But the dispute here has gone further than most.
David Parker has been banned from school property. Ash has been flooded with hate mail from across the country. There have been protests and counter-protests; the local newspaper received so many letters, many condemning the Parkers as bigots that the editor stopped printing them. Ash talks of the school's obligation "to be more than tolerant" to children and parents of all backgrounds. Parker asks: Where's the tolerance for him?
"Real respect, real tolerance, is not pushing your beliefs on other people," Parker said. "What people do in their bedroom, that's their business. What they tell my children in school about these subjects — that's my business."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Exactly, by this point in its run, Will and Grace should have had Will or Jack or one of their boyfriends covered with purple sores and oozing lesions, screaming from dementia in his apartment late one night about going blind from AIDS.
Maybe not funny, but it would be a show about gays.
Maybe a certain other AG by the name of Gonzalez should step in.
>>>I guess to some, I am rather hateful person, but I feel I'm being honest with my daughter.>>>
I don't think that makes you a hateful person. As a matter of fact, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said teaching that there is a thing called homosexuality, but also teaching the error of that lifestyle. But pretending it doesn't exist doesn't do anything IMO. Show them the problem in it and they will figure out the rest.
Sadly, my oldest daughter discovered homosexuality while standing in the checkout stand and saw her idol at the time, Brittney "Slut" Spears tonguing Madonna. Now try explaining THAT. She was 8. On her very own, she threw out all of her Brittney Spears stuff, visibly disgusted with her and that was no influence of mine. I was proud she didn't go along with the 'cool' by still liking BS even after her crapola behavior.
That's not the case in Kentucky. Here relatives of teachers, administrators and/or any employees of the school system are not allowed to run for the school board.
Personally, I have always thought that was a bad idea. I grew up in a VERY rural area where the schools were the largest employer in the county. It was hard to find anyone decent that was not connected to the school system in some way.
That is quite a broad brush statement. What if the religious teaching makes sense or is infact the true best option? Does one throw ot the baby with the bath water -the innocence of the child with the religious teaching?
I thought you were Catholic so was surprised to see your position on this -maybe I am confusued as to your religion -regardless, -in this discussion (not quite a debate since I do not think one side of this issue is even debatable on FR) is much assumption and innuendo and very little specifics put forth regarding this issue -ideaology seeking utopia is one thing, reality executing a plan is another. My position on this topic is the same as the Catholic Church teaches. If you would like to get specific read what I post and comment as to points you agree or disagree:
Catholic teaching on the subject:The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality - Guidelines for Education within the Family
Four Principles Regarding Information about Sexuality65. 1. Each child is a unique and unrepeatable person and must receive individualized formation. Since parents know, understand and love each of their children in their uniqueness, they are in the best position to decide what the appropriate time is for providing a variety of information, according to their children's physical and spiritual growth. No one can take this capacity for discernment away from conscientious parents.
66. Each child's process of maturation as a person is different. Therefore, the most intimate aspects, whether biological or emotional, should be communicated in a personalized dialogue. In their dialogue with each child, with love and trust, parents communicate something about their own self-giving which makes them capable of giving witness to aspects of the emotional dimension of sexuality that could not be transmitted in other ways.
67. Experience shows that this dialogue works out better when the parent who communicates the biological, emotional, moral and spiritual information is of the same sex as the child or young person. Being aware of the role, emotions and problems of their own sex, mothers have a special bond with their daughters, and fathers with their sons. This natural bond should be respected. Therefore, parents who are alone will have to act with great sensitivity when speaking with a child of the opposite sex, and they may choose to entrust communicating the most intimate details to a trustworthy person of the same sex as the child. Through this collaboration of a subsidiary nature, parents can take advantage of expert, well-formed educators in the school or parish community, or from Catholic associations.
68. 2. The moral dimension must always be part of their explanations. Parents should stress that Christians are called to live the gift of sexuality according to the plan of God who is Love, i.e., in the context of marriage or of consecrated virginity and also celibacy. They must insist on the positive value of chastity and its capacity to generate true love for other persons. This is the most radical and important moral aspect of chastity. Only a person who knows how to be chaste will know how to love in marriage or in virginity.
69. From the earliest age, parents may observe the beginning of instinctive genital activity in their child. It should not be considered repressive to correct such habits gently that could become sinful later, and, when necessary, to teach modesty as the child grows. It is always important to justify the judgement of morally rejecting certain attitudes contrary to the dignity of the person and chastity on adequate, valid and convincing grounds, both at the level of reason and faith, hence in a positive framework with a high concept of personal dignity. Many parental admonitions are merely reproofs or recommendations which the children perceive more as the result of fear of certain social consequences, or related to one's public reputation, rather than arising out of a love that seeks their true good. "I exhort you to correct, with the greatest commitment, the vices and passions that assail us in every age. For if in some stage of our life we sail on, deprecating the values of virtue and thereby suffer continuous shipwreck, we risk arriving in port devoid of all spiritual charge".
70. 3. Formation in chastity and timely information regarding sexuality must be provided in the broadest context of education for love. It is not sufficient, therefore, to provide information about sex together with objective moral principles. Constant help is also required for the growth of children's spiritual life, so that the biological development and impulses they begin to experience will always be accompanied by a growing love of God, the Creator and Redeemer, and an ever greater awareness of the dignity of each human person and his or her body. In the light of the mystery of Christ and the Church, parents can illustrate the positive values of human sexuality in the context of the person's original vocation to love and the universal call to holiness.
71. Therefore, in talks with children, suitable advice should always be given regarding how to grow in the love of God and one's neighbour, and how to overcome any difficulties: "These means are: discipline of the senses and the mind, watchfulness and prudence in avoiding occasions of sin, the observance of modesty, moderation in recreation, wholesome pursuits, assiduous prayer and frequent reception of the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist. Young people especially should foster devotion to the Immaculate Mother of God".
72. To teach children how to evaluate the environments they frequent with a critical sense and true autonomy, as well as to accustom them to detachment in using the mass media, parents should always present positive models and suitable ways of using their vital energies, the meaning of friendship and solidarity in the overall area of society and of the Church.
When deviant tendencies and attitudes are present, which require great prudence and caution so as to recognize and evaluate situations properly, parents should also have recourse to specialists with solid scientific and moral formation in order to identify the causes over and above the symptoms, and help the subjects to overcome difficulties in a serious and clear way. Pedagogic action should be directed more to the causes rather than to directly repressing the phenomenon, and, if necessary, they should seek the help of qualified persons, such as doctors, educational experts and psychologists with an upright Christian sensitivity.
73. The objective of the parents' educational task is to pass on to their children the conviction that chastity in one's state in life is possible and that chastity brings joy. Joy springs from an awareness of maturation and harmony in one's emotional life, a gift of God and a gift of love that makes self-giving possible in the framework of one's vocation. Man is in fact the only creature on earth whom God wanted for its own sake, and "man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself". "Christ gave laws for everyone...I do not prohibit you from marrying, nor am I against your enjoying yourself. I only want you to do this with temperance, without indecency, guilt and sin. I do not make a law that you should flee to the mountains and deserts, rather that you should be good, modest and chaste, as you live in the midst of the cities".
74. God's help is never lacking if each person makes the necessary commitment to respond to his grace. In helping, forming and respecting their children's conscience, parents should see that they receive the sacraments with awareness, guiding them by their own example. If children and young people experience the effects of God's grace and mercy in the sacraments, they will be capable of living chastity well, as a gift of God, for his glory and in order to love him and other people. Necessary and supernaturally effective help is provided by the Sacrament of Reconciliation, especially if a regular confessor is available. Although it does not necessarily coincide with the role of confessor, spiritual guidance or direction is a valuable aid in progressively enlightening the stages of growth and as moral support.
Reading well-chosen and recommended books of formation is also of great help both in offering a wider and deeper formation and in providing examples and testimonies of virtue.
75. Once the objectives of the information to be provided have been identified, the time and ways must be specified, starting from childhood.
4. Parents should provide this information with great delicacy, but clearly and at the appropriate time. Parents are well aware that their children must be treated in a personalized way, according to the personal conditions of their physiological and psychological development, and taking into due consideration the cultural environment of life and the adolescent's daily experience. In order to evaluate properly what they should say to each child, it is very important that parents first of all seek light from the Lord in prayer and that they discuss this together so that their words will be neither too explicit nor too vague. Giving too many details to children is counterproductive. But delaying the first information for too long is imprudent, because every human person has natural curiosity in this regard and, sooner or later, everyone begins to ask themselves questions, especially in cultures where too much can be seen, even in public.
76. In general, the first sexual information to be given to a small child does not deal with genital sexuality, but rather with pregnancy and the birth of a brother or sister. The child's natural curiosity is stimulated, for example, when it sees the signs of pregnancy in its mother and experiences waiting for a baby. Parents can take advantage of this happy experience in order to communicate some simple facts about pregnancy, but always in the deepest context of wonder at the creative work of God, who wants the new life he has given to be cared for in the mother's body, near her heart.
Here's a couple of points to consider, plainly put.
1. Is there any such thing as right and wrong? Are some actions and the promotion of same inherently wrong? Are there some actions and promotion of which that are inherently beneficial?
2. If so, who gets to decide? Does the strongest, loudest, most well-funded and well-connected group get to make the rules about right and wrong?
3. Since all monotheist religions (and some that aren't like Buddhism) share the same basic morality, should these religiously based morals inform public policy? If not, why not? If not, what will subsitute for these basic moral guidelines?
4. If society rejects these moral guidelines, then by ommission other morals will be the standard. Who gets to decide which moral world view should be promoted by law?
5. To claim that the government can be morally neutral is either a conscious deception or severely muddled emotion masquerading as rational thought.
6. The new tactic of the ACLU and its ilk is to make the claim that the simple NON-promotion of immorality is an abridgment of the First Amendment. How convoluted and vicious is this?
I do not remember if it was you ar scripter that was inteterested in cataloging information like this?
Well written!
We did criminalize it. An activist court that we want changed, decriminalized it.
>>>How endearing your comments about some on FR -it is quite a paradox -you tolerate homosexuality yet not opposition to homosexuality? Reminds me of the liberal position...>>>
Hmmm. You indicate that I tolerate homosexuality. And you know this how? Because I laugh at people who foam at the mouth at it? I just accept this world we are in, doesn't mean I like it, just accept. I also accept herion, crack, ice junkies too. I just don't go out of my way to raise my blood pressure because there are stupid people in the world.
Now how about you? Since you state so matter of factly that I "tolerate homosexuality", can I state that you are a rabid foam at the mouth anti-homosexual activist?
I understand not liking it. I don't understand actively campaigning against others behavior. That part I don't get and that doesn't make me any less conservative.
Simply put -then butt out rather than actively campaigning in support of the homosexual agenda here on FR.
To tolerate is to accept -you go one step further and demand others accept your acceptance or failure to oppose.
Your general broadbrush ad hominem attack was noted AND now is your specific attack directed at myself... Your support of the homosexual agenda by among other tactics attempting to demonize those who oppose the homosexualization of society will eventually get you banned from FR...
Well now this is interesting. My 10 year old attends a Montessorri school which is within our public school system. We just had a need to communicate with the principal some concerns over what an art teacher had been telling the class.
When asked if she thought the president is racist, the teacher replied "sometimes I think so." She also opined that Katrina relief would have been quicker if more victims were white, and the president would not be at war if it were his own children being sent to fight.
The wife and I agree that there are benefits to exposing our children to a wide variety of individuals throughout their school life because they will certainly meet up with all sorts post graduation. This is why we choose public schools. When things like this happen, we make some noise.
The principle spoke with the teacher. The teacher claimed that there was some "discussion" on these topics which was "student led" and she made an effort to "draw out a variety of view points." B.S. I suppose I could take some encouragemnt from the fact that the teacher felt the need to white wash her stupid comments. It shows that she is aware of out of line she is.
We will keep a close eye on it and speak up when need be. I just don't see the benefit of surrendering public schools to the liberal, america-hating, homo-loving, abortion celebrating, hippy leftovers. I don't see the benefit of surrounding our children with clones of themselves in a private school. In fact, I don't much enjoy discussing politics and civics with those who agree with me. There is nothing to learn... or teach.
"So how about a picture book that shows other diverse sexual practices? Would that be ok, too?"
Excellent question. In the Bible (dare I say that word?), condemnation of homosexuality is in the verses between incest and beastiality. If homosexuality is so wonderful, then I guess schools should be promoting the other two lifestyles.
Come on, you know as well as I do that the liberals couldn't give a rat's mangy @$$ about "the will of the public". That is why they use teachers and judges to promote their agenda.
You've been deceived Sandbar. Just as the word 'gay' has nothing to do with homosexual acts, neither does the word 'tolerate' equate to 'virtue'. To tolerate something, as with unnatural sex acts means that rather than throwing homosexuals off of buildings, one tolerates, as in tolerating someone who has 'slipped and fallen." But one NEVER promotes the fallen behavior as though it were viruous, which it definitely is not.
This is covered under the Hatch amendment.
" That is quite a broad brush statement. What if the religious teaching makes sense or is in fact the true best option? Does one throw ot the baby with the bath water"
Of course not. Murder is a good example. We can have zero tolerance for violence but not because the bible says Thou shalt not kill (meaning murder)but because violence interferes with education and harms the students.
"I thought you were Catholic so was surprised to see your position on this -maybe I am confused as to your religion"
My family is Primitive Baptist on side and Southern Baptist on the Other. My family attended a Methodist church once they moved to Atlanta but I was never really personally a Christian until I was 18 and attended a revival and had a personal experience with God.
And for the record, I don't think any of the stuff we are discussing should be taught in public grammar or middle schools.
But I don't believe we should ban things from public schools based on religious beliefs. I favor elimination of all government sponsored diversity training, not just as it relates to homosexuality.
That said. Outside of public school I don't feel any more animosity toward gay people than I do to any other sinner.
There is an awful lot of selective bible quoting going on. People will focus on the verse about homosexuality and then pretend the rest of the book isn't relevent.
"This is covered under the Hatch amendment."
Have you read the Hatch amendment in its entirety? He seriously over-reached - it would cripple discussion in the class room.. The prohibition against discussing income wo0uld likely be used to exclude capitalism. The prohibition against discussing illegal acts would limit much of history and the things we can learn there.
I'm not sure what this line means but I can think about how it could be misused.
" Critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships"
The great irony is that there is nothing in it that would limit discussion of same sex households - they couldn't discuss the sexual aspects but books like Heather has two mommies doesn't go into sex anyway. In fact it would prevent teachers from being critical of same sex households if there was even one child from a gay family in the class.
The far better solution is to drop non-academic subjects from public schools.
"You are wrong, yes. Go to www.article8.org, where you will find that very answer, as told to the superintendent. The law in MA most certainly allow for parents to opt out of discussions and teaching materials. Which is what Ash was told, he however, is taking the matter into his own hands, against the law."
I don't see on that site, where it says what the law actually says. Newspaper reports have said that it is discussions of sex that you can opt out of. I hope to goodness they are even teaching sex to kindergardeners.
But again, I favor banning all diversity training from public schools although I don't see how you can stretch diversity to mean sex ed. Nor do i see how you can say that talking about who lives together in a family to be sex either.
That would be a horrible precedent because it would define the mention of any traditional family to be sex.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.