just tell your children that when these types of subjects come up, to get up, and tell the teacher they are going down to the Front Office and sit there till that part of class is finished and to call them when it's over. see how they like that...
Posted on 09/01/2006 4:05:39 PM PDT by ChessMan
Court rules schools, not parents, control sex subjects
By MARYLEE SHRIDER, Contributing columnist | Friday, Sep 1 2006 2:15 PM
Last Updated: Friday, Sep 1 2006 2:15 PM
Honestly, the nerve of some people.
Like that group of parents in nearby Palmdale who believe that they, not the California school system, are the ultimate moral authority when it comes to their kids.
These parents were stunned to discover otherwise five years ago when they learned their children, ages seven to 10, had participated in a Mesquite Elementary School survey that included questions of an explicit sexual nature.
Outraged, they turned to the state’s legal system, where their case made its way to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The court’s ruling? No harm, no foul — the role of parent doesn’t include an inherent or constitutional right to control what their kids are taught in public school, not even when it comes to sex.
“Schools cannot be expected to accommodate the personal, moral or religious concerns of every parent,” wrote Judge Stephen Reinhardt in the court’s November decision to reject the parent’s suit.
Apparently little is sacred to Reinhardt, who is probably best known for his ruling against the Pledge of Allegiance.
Now, the Palmdale parents hope to take their case to an even higher authority. On Monday, their legal counsel filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court.
Their attorney, Mathew Staver of the Florida-based Liberty Counsel, calls the Ninth Court’s decision “the most severe blow against family rights I’ve ever seen.” “No parent would ever assume they have no right to object to any instruction, but that’s in fact what happens under this court decision,” he said.
The Palmdale parents aren’t a bunch of uptight, purse-lipped prudes. They’re not protesting the family life curriculum generally taught in sixth, seventh and eight-grade public-school classes throughout California, including Bakersfield.
The survey the parents had the audacity to challenge includes sex-related questions on how frequently the children thought about “touching my private parts too much,” “touching other people’s private parts,” and “Getting scared or upset when I think about sex.”
Permission letters asking parents to allow students to participate in a confidential mental health survey had been sent home, but those letters made no mention of the sexually explicit questions.
When the parents learned from their children the details of the survey, conducted by a volunteer mental health counselor, they were furious, though Roger Gallizzi, interim superintendent of the Palmdale School District, said the survey was a mistake.
“She (the counselor) showed the survey to us and we asked that those 10 questions be removed and she didn’t do it,” Gallizzi said. “It only got out to 10 children before it was caught.”
Gallizzi said the district doesn’t “see the court’s ruling as a victory,” though Staver said the district “resisted” any admittance to wrongdoing until public opposition forced the issue.
Whatever. The fallout from all this is a court decision that does “not quarrel with the parents’ right to inform and advise their children about the subject of sex as they see fit,” but concludes that “parents are possessed of no constitutional right to prevent the public schools from providing information on that subject to their students in any forum or manner they select.”
In other words, parents, when your kids are at school, the state knows best and may teach pretty much whatever it likes without the bother of pesky legal challenges from meddlesome parents.
Nosy parents may still examine class curriculum, observe in the classroom and meet with teachers. They may also opt their children out of certain classes.
But the final word on their child’s education, sexual and otherwise says the Ninth Circuit Court, belongs to the state.
Marylee Shrider’s column appears Tuesdays and Saturdays. For comments or questions please contact her at mshrider@bakersfield.com. or leave a voicemail at 395-7474.
reason #n^100 for people to take up their lawful duty as active citizens in their communities, including their school boards.
A big AMEN to that.
Public schools are evil. Get out.
Kalifornia Socialistika Republik. Socialism at it's finest.
Separation of school and state BUMP!
this would be news if the ninth circus ruled otherwise.
Totaly unconstitutional, but no lawyer will ever take the cause because all lawyers just love these leftist rules. If I can change diapers, I can raise my kids with a clean and safe consciousness. Enough said.
But the final word on their child’s education, sexual and otherwise says the Ninth Circuit Court, belongs to the state.
))))))))))
We will see about that>
Sue the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for child support.
Or take all the kids in CA and put them on the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals doorstep.
Reinhardt based his holding on Amendment 99, "Parental Rights are Subservient to the State." His ruling will go down in flames at SCOTUS.
just tell your children that when these types of subjects come up, to get up, and tell the teacher they are going down to the Front Office and sit there till that part of class is finished and to call them when it's over. see how they like that...
I would like to check the source, but it a member-only site.
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
I found a signon on bugmenot.com that worked.
userid otisarglebargle
password otisarglebargle
One has to wonder if some of these sick judges actually believe they own your kids, or rather they wish they owned your kids. And often more to the point, remember there is nothing to preclude an unknown pedophile from being a judge deriving sick pleasure from such rulings.
so now that Gov Ahnold signe the homosexuality must be taught as positive in schools, does this case trump that law since homosexuality is only about 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.