Posted on 08/26/2023 9:32:37 PM PDT by Morgana
A federal court has ruled that a group of interfaith parents have no proof that a school district violated their right to free expression by removing an option to opt their students out of lessons teaching LGBT ideology that conflicts with their religious values.
Parents from Muslim, Christian and Jewish backgrounds sued to restore their right to shield their children from content deemed offensive and pushing sexual indoctrination after the Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) enacted a no-opt-out policy. Books that the parents object to for pre-K through fifth grades as part of an LGBT curriculum include Pride Puppy and Uncle Bob’s Wedding.
Parents who protested these materials said they were not seeking to ban the LGBT books. Instead, they wanted to have the right to decide whether or not to allow their children to be exposed to such content.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman rejected the parents’ motion for a preliminary injunction to restore the opt-out option as the court case continues. The judge argued that the parents “have not shown that [the school district’s] use of the storybooks crosses the line from permissible influence to potentially impermissible indoctrination.”
“The evidence suggests that, generally, MCPS teachers will occasionally read one of the handful of books, lead discussions and ask questions about the characters, and respond to questions and comments in ways that encourage tolerance for different views and lifestyles,” the judge wrote. “That is not indoctrination.”
In a statement shared with The Christian Post, Becket, a nonprofit law firm that filed a federal lawsuit on the parents’ behalf in May, said the parents plan to ask a federal appeals court to protect their parental rights and religious freedom.
“Parents know and love their children best; that’s why all kids deserve to have their parents help them understand issues like gender identity and sexuality,” Eric Baxter, vice president and senior counsel for the Becket, told CP. “The school board’s decision to cut parents out of these discussions flies in the face of parental freedom, childhood innocence, and basic human decency.”
“The court’s decision is an assault on children’s right to be guided by their parents on complex and sensitive issues regarding human sexuality,” he continued. “The School Board should let kids be kids and let parents decide how and when to best educate their own children consistent with their religious beliefs.”
While the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was not involved in the litigation, the group provided evidence, including a memorandum from elementary school principals voicing objections to the school district’s position.
CAIR’s Maryland Director, Zainab Chaudry, said in a Thursday statement provided to CP that the organization’s campaign to protect the rights of parents and children in the district remains “undeterred.” Chaudry stressed that the group will continue advocating on behalf of parents who do not want their children exposed to topics typically reserved for sex education courses and that conflict with their faith.
"Until the opt-out option is restored, we plan to pursue every available legal means on behalf of families to protect their rights, including but not limited to new targeted legal action, continued interfaith rallies and the release of additional internal MCPS documents,” Chaudry stated.
In response to an inquiry from CP, MCPS directed the outlet to a press release it issued Thursday reacting to the ruling, affirming its commitment to "cultivating an inclusive and welcoming learning environment" for all students and families.
"We also will continue to adhere to our responsibility to include instructional materials that reflect the diversity of the local and global community by exploring the aspirations, issues, and achievements of women and men, people with disabilities, people from diverse racial, ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds, as well as those of diverse gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation," the statement declared.
According to the judge’s ruling, the school decided to introduce the no-opt-out policy in March following a meeting with a small group of principals, with the school board feeling that the growing number of opt-out requests disrupted the classroom environment.
The school board members claimed they were concerned about the high number of student absenteeism and the perceived impracticality of managing a large number of opt-outs. In addition, the school board purportedly believed that allowing students to opt out would expose other students and families to “social stigma” if they felt the LGBT-themed books represented their lifestyle.
In an interview earlier this month with CP, Baxter explained that Maryland law requires schools to allow parents to opt their children out of lessons on family life and human sexuality if they feel the material is inappropriate. The school, however, argued that the requirement applies to health classes only.
“The law says any family life and human sexuality objectives,” Baxter said. “And there's no question that the objective is to promote a specific ideology of gender and sexuality.”
hI cannot remember the FIRST TIME I SCREAMED TO PARENTS TO PLEASE GET YOUR CHILDREN OUT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
I am going to go back over my posts to see exactly when that happened.
Just say FUMCPS. Problem solved.
This is when you start calling out judges and teachers by name and publicly accuse them of child porn offenses. School is starting up shortly, protest in front of the schools with the offender names displayed for all to see. Make it personal and public.
Or... you can play by the rules and continue to bend over for those who have no rules.
Maryland
“The school board members claimed they were concerned about the high number of student absenteeism and the perceived impracticality of managing a large number of opt-outs.”
So, they ‘opted’ for the easy way out of what they perceived as their own predicament?
So interfering with parental rights to raise their children as they see fit now takes a backseat to the comfort and orderliness desired by the ‘educators’?
Disgutsting...
My parents saw it when they were in high school over 50 years ago. That's why I was homeschooled.
Among my acquaintances are numerous people in their 20's and 30's, raised by devout Catholics (devout, as in regular church attendance and involvement). The parents were confident that by the teen years, the kids were on the right path, so they sent them out with the armor of God, to public high school and to college. The results were disastrous. Promiscuity, broken families, alcohol, "alternative life styles," gender blurring, smoking, piercings and tats, abortion, and of course voting Democrat or not at all. Much like nearly everyone I know between 15 and 30 years of age.
I no longer pussyfoot around about it: anyone who sends their child to public school is complicit in the cultural suicide of America, and is thus an accessory to its destruction.
If you remotely love your childred, remove them from public schools today. Find a way or make a way.
Don’t spout that “Oh, we live in a great district” crap.
Montgomery County is considered one of those “great” districts
Freedom, as a word, can be elusive. Add a preposition or two and it becomes "liberty."
Freedom from government. Freedom from indoctrination. Freedom of religion. Freedom of speech.
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman is just another part of the Biden curse we are living with.
Until school tax money follows the child, this woke nonsense will continue to escalate. Why would they care what you do if they’re getting paid regards.
I spell "Sodomy" with a capital letter because it is not just a sexual practice but a religion.
Indeed the official religion of the ruling class.
Please see my post#18
What if a child in one of these propaganda classes has been raised in a sound Christian home and “discusses” the issues of the sodomites in the most negative terms imaginable? I wonder what will happen to the child.
“Tolerance for different views” only ever goes in one direction in these cases.
They’re call “intoleristas.”
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.