[Red Boots]

However, in the appeals court's opinion, this doesn't mean the children were being indoctrinated with anything. "Even assuming there is a continuum along which an intent to influence could become an attempt to indoctrinate, however, this case is firmly on the influence-toward-tolerance end. There is no evidence of systemic indoctrination. There is no allegation that Joey was asked to affirm gay marriage. Requiring a student to read a particular book is generally not coercive of free exercise rights."

Why can't they read the Bible then ?

[manc]

Because their is an agenda in Massachusetts, I know I lived there for a bit but fortunatly I escaped along with my family.
Now my kids can actually be taught history geography etc instead of being indoctrinated

[cinnathepoet]

Yes. I’d like to see them use this logic with a pro-smoking story. See how far that gets. It’s not indoctrination. They aren’t asked to sign a yes to smoking pledge.

[ecomcon]

Why can’t they read the Bible then ?

---

Well that’s different, of course.

“...Requiring a student to read a particular book is generally not coercive of free exercise rights.”

See how they’ve got “generally” in there? This way, they can censor whatever they want.

[agrace]

Excellent point.