Federal Court Rules Maryland Parents Cannot Opt Children Out of LGBT Lessons

The Iowa Standard ^ | 05/20/2024 | Family Research Council

[Jan_Sobieski]

Despite national attention and thousands of protesting parents, a federal court is refusing to allow parents to opt their children out of LGBT courses in school. The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided on Wednesday that Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) in Maryland does not have to allow parents to opt their children out of LGBT-themed lessons. Judge G. Steven Agee, a George W. Bush appointee, claimed that the parents seeking to opt their children out of the lessons in question did not provide sufficient evidence to justify a preliminary injunction.

In March of last year, MCPS added nearly two dozen “LGBTQ+ inclusive texts” to the pre-K through 8th grade curriculum. According to a lawsuit filed in May, parents were told that “no notice will be given” of when LGBT-themed lessons will be taught and that “no opt-outs [will be] tolerated because [students] must learn to be more ‘LGBTQ-Inclusive.’” The federal lawsuit was brought by a group of Christian and Muslim parents who wished to remove their children from LGBT-themed lessons on religious grounds. Over 1,000 parents — including Catholic, Ethiopian Orthodox, evangelical, Muslim, and Jewish parents — attended a subsequent MCPS board meeting to protest the decision to rescind parental opt-outs.

Then, in August, Biden-appointed U.S. District Court judge Deborah Boardman ruled against Maryland parents, claiming that mandatory LGBT lessons do not constitute a religious liberty infringement. She wrote that reading books about transgenderism, drag queens, and bondage fetishes to children as young as three “is not indoctrination” and does not “directly or indirectly” coerce children into activity “that violates their religious beliefs.” Instead, she suggested that concerned parents — who, according to the policy Boardman sanctioned, have no notice of when these lessons are being taught — discuss the lessons with their children at home after school...

[Trumpisourlastchance]

The US has rejected God and embraced Satan. It is done.

[GailA]

Oh yes they can. HOME SCHOOL.

[NetAddicted]

UK is banning sex ed for kids under age 10. Those Muslims let the government know they did not want this.

[Dead Corpse]

“What you allow, will continue.”

[NetAddicted]

I read article about that, but article didn’t say about parental opt-out over 10 year olds.

[BobL]

I’m going by recollection...but not 100% sure.

[fwdude]

Catholic schools are the WORST!!! Many of them are more liberal than even public schools.

[fwdude]

The US has rejected God and embraced Satan. It is done.

Yes. And this happened much longer ago than most people realize.

[unlearner]

LGBT + abortion is now the official religion of the US government. Dissent is not allowed.

[Sam Gamgee]

So what is next? Are police sent to their home is decide to keep their child home that day? Are we really living in China?

[Gritty]

We’ll soon see if Maryland has run out of horsewhips.

[Lou Foxwell]

The Eastern Shore of MD functions as an independent state, not guided by the Woke Annapolis and PG CO luminaries.

[Elsie]

...a federal court is refusing to allow parents to opt their children...

Drop ALL the kids off at the courts house.

[Elsie]

Homeschooling is the only answer.

'Judges' being abducted by extraterrestrials might be a pretty good answer.

[AppyPappy]

Unless they are Muslims

[Elsie]

I’ll bet you a dollar the Muslim family will be accommodated.

That's because a Muslim will actually DO something about it, instead of whining online.

[Elsie]

This Judge doesn’t understand about planting the seeds of thoughts into little kids.

The hell they don't!

[Elsie]

... in the process of OUTLAWING this crap for kids under 10...

Yeah!

Let's wait until they are ELEVEN!!!

[Elsie]

SpelChunk changed shoot into sue once again.

[Svartalfiar]

Deborah Boardman ruled against Maryland parents, claiming that mandatory LGBT lessons do not constitute a religious liberty infringement. She wrote that reading books about transgenderism, drag queens, and bondage fetishes to children as young as three “is not indoctrination” and does not “directly or indirectly” coerce children into activity “that violates their religious beliefs.”

While I can see their arguments for "transgenders" or transvestites, as those aren't explicitly sex-oriented, how do they possibly justify bondage-related anything? That's not page-appropriate in any circumstances under 18!