Posted on 11/07/2005 9:00:26 AM PST by magisterium
Disgusting.
Add this to the top ten list of reasons we homeschool!
Here's another from Louisiana....
http://2theadvocate.com/stories/110405/new_bakermiddle001.shtml
another thought....you have the right to murder your child in utero but dont even think about having any say so in their education....liberal ideas never cease to amaze me.
Most people are too tired, or too self-absorbed, or too dumbed-down themselves, or think any attempt to take the republic back will be an exercise in futility. Like I said in the posting of this thread: though I still barely suppose I may be wrong, I strongly suspect that "It's over." The national reaction to this, or lack of reaction, will be very instructive.
In summary, we hold that there is no free-standing fundamental right of parents “to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex in accordance with their personal and religious values and beliefs” and that the asserted right is not encompassed by any other fundamental right.
Remember Hitler Youth programs? I guess not since failed socialist history is not taught in public schools.
The court ignored the fact that the consent form never mentioned anything about sex. The court gave the gubmint a free pass to deliberately deceive parentsIt sounds like the PRA was followed to the letter. Both sides appear to be to blame. The schools should have provided more information, the parents should have requested it or refused to sign.
-Eric
If parents don't have the right to determine what's appropraite material for their own children in public schools, then property taxes should be no more, as the last vestage of "property tax rationale" has now been abrogated.
If the 9th Circuit still want's "public" schools, then they should also have abolished property taxes, and made only those parents who send their kids to such schools pay for their education. That would be only fair.
Even before this ruling, the whole issue of property tax was a sticking point for me, being single with no children. Why should I have to pay for someone elses' kid's schooling? And substandard schooling at that!
ping
A violation of that statute was not alleged in the complaint, would be my guess. Either the statute as not violated, the attorney filing the complaint didn't know of the statute, or the statute doesn't provide a private right of legal action.
(b) Limits on survey, analysis, or evaluationsBest I can tell, the survey was not mandatory. That is, no student was required, as part of any applicable program, to submit to a survey, analysis, or evaluation. Participation was voluntary, and contingent on the parent signing a consent form. The parents consented to the survey without knowing its contents.
No student shall be required, as part of any applicable program, to submit to a survey, analysis, or evaluation that reveals information concerning--
(1) political affiliations or beliefs of the student or the student's parent;
(2) mental or psychological problems of the student or the student's family;
(3) sex behavior or attitudes; ...
I'd have to dig a bit further to figure out if the statute creates any right of private action by a parent or student; or if the statute operates only between the federal funding authority and the offending school district.
One more reason to get the feds out of the public education business.
Wouldn't this kill Michael Newdow's whole argument?
When I was fighting this crap at my daughter's California school while she was a Kindergartner, I went to the school district and read through ALL the health curriculum, which is generally where you find all the sex ed garbage. It was not "fun," but I'm glad I did this. Also, parents need to know that EDUCATORS ARE ALLOWED to bring in OUTSIDE MATERIAL to supplement the CURRICULUM. Parents have a right to view that material, as well.
Agreed. The particulars of this case has been greatly distorted in most of the editorials and subsequent posts that have appeared here.
Most of the editorials only mention that a consent form was mailed to parents in passing, if at all.
It is embarrassing to conservatives that we often read ignorant or inaccurate information and then go off into a tirade. I'm used to these things from Michael Moore, but we should do better.
Note that this whole thing was started by the school's mental health counselor. Seems to me that various types of youth counselors in schools, churches and civic agencies are filled with perverts. If I offend any of these "Dedicated" professionals who are only doing it for the children, STFU!
Its hard for me to disagree with the Court's statement. The Court is saying that it will not expand the "privacy right" and due process clause to include a new right to control your child's sex education. Wouldn't any other conclusion be activist? Wouldn't it be an endoresement of the "right to privacy" nonsense and the ridiculous expansion of the due process clause?
My problem with the 9th Circus is that they are activist about everything EXCEPT when the requested activism would help a Christian or conservative cause.
I agree that there is a conspiracy against home-schooling, but the Legislature is the place to address this. If this doesn't work, leave the state.
Grammar school exists to teach kids the basics - the "Three R's." It has been coopted over the last 30-40 years in an attempt (mostly successful) to append all sorts of social, sexual and (im)moral "instruction" to American youth that is directly counter to the wishes and values of parents.
Parents, NOT the state, are the primary educators of their children. That's simply the natural law in practice. The fact that many parents abdicate this responsibility is immaterial here. Millions still do not. Even where they do, that is due mostly to their own laziness and the instilling of moral relativism in their OWN education.
We're not talking about the crank "flat-earther" who objects to universally acknowledged geography curricula. We're talking about moral and religious principles being contermanded by the very same state that has already BANNED direct expression of religious principles in the political forum. These topics are properly within the sphere of parental upbringing, not state tutelage.
The state has long since banned student-initiated reference to religious principles in political and educational discourse, thus instilling a prejudice and/or shamefaced disavowal of such principles in these students. That's bad enough. Now, we have the state saying that parents "cannot" control the basic moral worldview of their children, even in a cultural moral vacuum already engineeered, in large measure, by the state! This is simply an outrage.
A return to proper subject matter is what's really needed. Let's lose all of these peripheral subjects that have nothing to do with a traditional primary and secondary school education. If only for the practical considerations! Kids can't read, write, spell and figure because most of their school day seems caught up in all of this extraneous nonsense.
In the meantime, what ever happened to the idea that parents can at least "opt out" their children in scuh situations?
I know what you're getting at, but this is how information about children is gathered. I've heard many conservative and religious activists quote statistics from these types of studies all the time.
The school system sent out a consent form. The school also stopped the surveys once parents complained. The parents sued anyway.
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.