Posted on 02/24/2007 4:17:13 AM PST by Man50D
A federal judge in Massachusetts has ordered the "gay" agenda taught to Christians who attend a public school in Massachusetts, finding that they need the teachings to be "engaged and productive citizens."
U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf yesterday dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by David Parker, ordering that it is reasonable, indeed there is an obligation, for public schools to teach young children to accept and endorse homosexuality.
Wolf essentially adopted the reasoning in a brief submitted by a number of homosexual-advocacy groups, who said "the rights of religious freedom and parental control over the upbringing of children … would undermine teaching and learning…"
David and Tonia Parker and Joseph and Robin Wirthlin, who have children of school age in Lexington, Mass., brought the lawsuit. They alleged district officials and staff at Estabrook Elementary School violated state law and civil rights by indoctrinating their children about a lifestyle they, as Christians, teach is immoral.
"Wolf's ruling is every parent's nightmare. It goes to extraordinary lengths to legitimize and reinforce the 'right' (and even the duty) of schools to normalize homosexual behavior to even the youngest of children," said a statement from the pro-family group Mass Resistance.
It also is making available background information about the lengthy dispute.
"In the ruling, Wolf makes the absurd claim that normalizing homosexuality to young children is 'reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy.' According to Wolf, this means teaching 'diversity' which includes 'differences in sexual orientation.'
"In addition, Wolf makes the odious statement that the Parkers' only options are (1) send their kids to a private school, (2) home-school their kids, or (3) elect a majority of people to the School Committee who agree with them. Can you imagine a federal judge in the Civil Rights era telling blacks the same thing – that if they can't be served at a lunch counter they should just start their own restaurant, or elect a city council to pass laws that reflect the U.S. Constitution?" the organization said.
Lawyers for the families said they already had planned an appeal of the judge's opinion.
But Wolf's claims followed very closely the reasoning submitted earlier in a brief by Human Rights Campaign, the ACLU, Massachusetts Teachers Association, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders and other advocates for the "gay" agenda.
Earlier, Mass Resistance President Brian Camenker had wondered why such national groups were "so interested in a parent's right to decide what moral issues are taught to his children by adults in elementary schools, especially regarding
"They must see David Parker's case as quite a threat to their ability to push their message on children," he had said. His organization has posted information about the judge's ruling on the Internet for readers to review
But the judge concluded that even allowing Christians to withdraw their children from classes or portions of classes where the religious beliefs were being violated wasn't a reasonable expectation.
"An exodus from class when issues of homosexuality or same-sex marriage are to be discussed could send the message that gays, lesbians, and the children of same-sex parents are inferior and, therefore, have a damaging effect on those students," he opined.
"Under the Constitution public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy," the judge wrote. "Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. It is increasingly evident that our diversity includes differences in sexual orientation."
And, he said, since history "includes instances of … official discrimination against gays and lesbians … it is reasonable for public educators to teach elementary school students … different sexual orientations."
If they disagree, "the Parkers and Wirthlins may send their children to a private school …[or] may also educate their children at home," the judge said.
Parker was arrested and jailed in Lexington in April 2005 over his request – and the school's refusal – to notify him when adults discuss homosexuality or transgenderism with his 6-year-old kindergartner. That despite a state law requiring such notification.
The incident made news around the nation and even Gov. Mitt Romney agreed with Parker.
However, in April 2006 the same school presented the book "King and King," about homosexual romances and marriage, to second-graders and again refused to provide notification.
Parker and other parents followed with the federal civil rights lawsuit, alleging school officials were refusing to follow state law.
Just days later, David Parker's son, Jacob, was beaten up at Estabrook Elementary, officials said. MassResistance said a group of 8-10 kids surrounded him and took him out of sight of "patrolling aides," then pummeled and beat him.
"The state must fight 'discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation' in ways that 'do not perpetuate stereotypes,'" the lawyers for the school district had argued at an earlier motions hearing. They also explained to the judge that, in their opinion, parents have no right to control what ideas the school presents to elementary schoolchildren.
"David Parker's dilemma … threatens the parental rights and religious freedom of every Massachusetts parent, and indirectly every parent in America," said John Haskins of the Parents' Rights Coalition.
"As the Lexington schools themselves are arguing, the state's right to force pro-homosexuality indoctrination on other people's children arises directly from former Gov. Mitt Romney's nakedly false and unconstitutional declaration that homosexual marriage is now legal."
Haskins said when the Massachusetts state Supreme Court demanded homosexual marriages in the state, it didn't have the constitutional or legal authority to order the governor to act or to order the Legislature to make any changes, and the creation of same-sex marriages in Massachusetts actually was accomplished by executive order from Romney.
Well, I'm shocked, anyone else???
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1790384/posts
ACLU ex-president charged in child-porn case
'And, he said, since history "includes instances of … official discrimination against gays and lesbians … it is reasonable for public educators to teach elementary school students … different sexual orientations." '
If we are going to follow such convoluted reasoning, why stop at teaching six year olds about men who like to have sex with each other? How about we teach them about the other aberrations they are likely to encounter in their lifetimes - prostitution, the pros and cons of oral and anal sex, transvestitism, fetishism, Sadomasochism and bondage, kiddie porn/child molesters/NAMBLA, etc.? Of course I am being ridiculous, but so was this asinine excuse for a "judge". Shame on MA, and Mitt Romney can flat out forget about getting my vote for ANYTHING. Sheesh.
This fight has been going for awhile, now, maybe with a new supreme court the tide will turn a little bit.
Here's is a little Scalia on gays and culture wars.
When the Court takes sides in the culture wars, it tends to be with the knights rather than the villeins-and more specifically with the Templars, reflecting the views and values of the lawyer class from which the Court's Members are drawn. How that class feels about homosexuality will be evident to anyone who wishes to interview job applicants at virtually any of the Nation's law schools. The interviewer may refuse to offer a job because the applicant is a Republican; because he is an adulterer; because he went to the wrong *653 prep school or belongs to the wrong country club; because he eats snails; because he is a womanizer; because she wears real-animal fur; or even because he hates the Chicago Cubs. But if the interviewer should wish not to be an associate or partner of an applicant because he disapproves of the applicant's homosexuality, then he will have violated the pledge which the Association of American Law Schools requires all its member schools to exact from job interviewers: “assurance of the employer's willingness” to hire homosexuals. Bylaws of the Association of American Law Schools, Inc. § 6-4(b); Executive Committee Regulations of the Association of American Law Schools § 6.19, in 1995 Handbook, Association of American Law Schools. This law-school view of what “prejudices” must be stamped out may be contrasted with the more plebeian attitudes that apparently still prevail in the United States Congress, which has been unresponsive to repeated attempts to extend to homosexuals the protections of federal civil rights laws, and which took the pains to exclude them specifically from the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
* * *
Romer v. Evans 517 U.S. 620, 653, 116 S.Ct. 1620,**1633 - 1637 (U.S.Colo.,1996)
In the long run, such rulings only accelerate the move to private schools.
Not so much.....other than MSM has totally ignored this story!
This is why Christ wanted churches to be set up as independent entities that answered to God, not to a higher manmade organization. When you have that setup, it becomes political.
Attend independent churches (not nondenominational), then you will see less of that. But, unfortunately, Christians, just like any other group of people, tend to become cliquish in their superiority.
Cross posting:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1790407/posts
U.S. court upholds same-sex teaching to children
Romans 1:21-31
1:21 Because, though they knew God, they did not glorify him as God, nor were they thankful; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
1:23 And exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling corruptible man, and birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.
1:24 Therefore God gave them up, through the lusts of their own hearts, to sexual impurity, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves:
1:25 Because they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
1:26 For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women exchanged natural relations for that which is against nature:
1:27 And likewise the men, leaving their natural relations with woman, burned in their lust toward one another; men with men doing that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
1:28 And as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper.
1:29 They were filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malevolence; whisperers,
1:30 Slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
1:31 Without understanding, untrustworthy, without natural affection, unmerciful:
Not all Baptist churches are that way. I attend a real friendly medium-sized SBC. It's got a bit of a old time feel to it and I like it.
http://congregationalmethodist.net/churches.htm
I want to thank all of you for your caring responses.
I'm glad you didn't jump on me and that somehow you saw that I take my faith very seriously and can't stand the thought that I'd be sucked into doing that which is not WWJD.
Bless you all! ((( hugs ))) Frou
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Click FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search for a list of all related articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
As a former Mass resident, I don't see this happening.
Just wait until the Sharia crowd gets a load of this...
Just wait until the Sharia crowd gets a load of this...
Considering that they need 6 teachers to teach 1st grade here, I'm not sure that they know how...
False. A homogeneous, cultural identity has been the strength and hallmark of this nation until several decades ago. Immigrants willingly and eagerly became Americans by assimilating in every way. Now, that practice is considered "bigoted hatred."
All the school administration need do is ignore the physical assaults by the purveyors of perversion and they can have both.
It has been done before with different issues and 'protected' groups, this is no different. The school employees can always fall back on the 'protected group' status to excuse the inexcusable, a ready-made cop-out.
Anyone's child's best defense is the deep understanding that their child can come to them with their problems, regardless of what is said by whom in the school. Then, it is up to the parents to act.
Well, I pray every day that we will somehow be able to afford Catholic school tuition starting next year. We aren't really the right personalities to home school or that would be an option. Fortunately, none of the radical homosex stuff seems to have made its way into our local public schools, in the event that private school is not forthcoming.
I don't understand how condoning homosexuality helps us be productive.
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.