
In a major blow to LGBTQ+ instruction in the classroom, the Supreme Court just ruled that religious parents can opt their children out of school classes when books with LGBTQ+-related storylines will be discussed.
The case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, was brought by an alliance of Christian and Muslim parents against the Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland. The parents argued that the school was exposing their children to books with LGBTQ+ themes without families' consent and in violation of their religious beliefs.
The books were freely available for students to pick up and read, and included stories on everything from a boy wearing a dress to school, to a prince who doesn’t want to marry any of the princesses in his kingdom, to the tale of a puppy getting lost in a Pride parade.

Though the school initially offered opt-outs for religious parents, this policy proved too burdensome for school administrators to handle. The opt-out options were rescinded during the 2023-2024 school year.
When parents challenged the decision, the case made its way to the nation's highest court.
There, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the district has to offer opt-outs for religious parents when LGBTQ+ subjects may be broached in the classroom.
But legal experts say the impact of this case is far-reaching, and it sets a precedent that could impact education nationwide.
What the Court Said
Essentially, the justices determined that exposing children to LGBTQ+ content in schools was a violation of their parents' religious rights.
"A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses ‘a very real threat of undermining’ the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill," wrote Justice Samuel Alito, speaking for the majority. "And a government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction."
The opinion states that the books present the LGBTQ+ community in a positive light – and that is a problem for religious parents. Alito used one of the books, “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” as an example, stating that the book’s climax, a same-sex wedding, is presented positively, which may “undermine” parents who “wish to present a different moral message to their children.”

Alito argues that parents simply want to guide the faith of their children without education undermining their religious values, and that they are not seeking to “micromanage” school curriculum.
But that’s exactly what the Court’s liberal wing says will happen.
What Does the Dissent Argue?
According to the Court’s three liberal justices, allowing children to opt-out of any lesson that conflicts with their religion would open a national floodgate that would significantly overburden schools.
“Requiring schools to provide advance notice and the chance to opt out of every lesson plan or story time that might implicate a parent’s religious beliefs will impose impossible administrative burdens on schools,” wrote Justice Sotomayor in a scathing dissent. “The harm will not be borne by educators alone: Children will suffer too. Classroom disruptions and absences may well inflict long-lasting harm on students’ learning and development.”
Sotomayor also argued that the decision itself “threatens the very essence of a public education,” which she argues is not to reinforce any particular faith value, but to be exposed to a variety of viewpoints representative of society as a whole. “The reverberations of the Court’s error will be felt, I fear, for generations.”
Back Into the Closet?
Many legal scholars agree that the judgment is so broad it could unwittingly extend far beyond the original LGBTQ+ themes that were initially objected to, and anything that may conflict with faith-based values could now require an opt-out.
That includes everything from stories featuring witches and wizards in language arts, to instructions on evolution in biology, to yoga in physical education. Even mentioning women in the workforce – which some Christian sects say is in direct conflict with the Bible – could require an opt-out option.
LGBTQ+ rights advocates fear that in an effort to avoid administrative overburdens, schools may drop LGBTQ+ content from their curriculum altogether.
"Everyone is going to object to anything now," says University of Maryland education history professor Campbell Scribner. "And why wouldn’t they?”
Critics of the ruling worry about a future where LGBTQ+ representation disappears from public spaces entirely. The author of Uncle Bobby's Wedding voiced her concerns when reacting to the court's decision:
Unless they have an Uncle Bobby of their own, children may not know he exists at all.
What do you make of the ruling? Should parents have the final say on kids and LGBTQ+ education, or is this an overreach?
83 comments
-
Parenting is hard enough these days. Parents have the final say as to what their children are exposed to and when. No board or agency or group or government has the right to challenge that. Any curriculum taught should be taught only to those that agreed upon it by pta and student body parents.
-
So you at ok with your children to be taught untruthful history, to never know the contributions made by Black citizens or Asian people.
Get educated, your stupidity looks ugly on you.
NO RELIGIOUS EXEMPTIONS! Put your kids in private, religious, charter or home school them. NOT ON THE TAXPAYER DIME.
-
White Christion history is what he wants taught not reality.
-
Your comment is wrong on so many levels. Mr. Simpson did not say anything like that.
-
He may not have said it, but that is exactly what would happen if it were left up to the community rather than the educators.
-
-
-
Totally agree, a social movement that many don't agree with should not be included in school curriculum on the tax payers dime. Why is it there in the first place? Lets be honest it is not about religion, it is about morals and the traditional family values. Not everyone looks the other way as their grade schoolers watch porn and mimic what they see on the internet. If you manage to keep your kid away from that, why should they be forced to consume these issues in school?
-
Robert, You are overstating things. What are "traditional family values" anyway? Two loving parents living in the same house? That doesn't happen in more than half the households in this country. The books are age-appropriate stories about children whose family might look a little different than yours. It may have people in it who do not look or act like your brothers and sisters. It's not about sex, nor is it porn. It's about family structures. There was similar uproar during the Jim Crow days, and even into the early 2000s when bi-racial couples were highlighted in stories, movies, TV, and on commercials. I keep saying here that if you see a couple together, married or otherwise, and the only thing you think about is how they have sex or what their genitals look like, you are the one that need help. Keeping your kid away from stories about these types of families are not going to keep them from encountering one, but it might give them an idea of what they are and how they might respond. It is not going to "turn them gay/trans or any other of the letters," nor is going to keep them from it. One day they might find someone to love for the rest of their lives. I hope and pray that you are a willing and accepting party in that relationship, no matter whether you approve or not, and for whatever reasons. Your kids deserve no less.
What are you going to say to your first grader when they ask why Johnny has two mommies, or why is Susie's mommy black and her daddy white? Kids are going to encounter these things, and part of the objective of education is to equip them to deal with it. Hiding it form them and pretending it doesn't exists only confused them.
-
And for the more than half of house holds where this has value you suggest it be destroyed. I was in second grade when another kid explained divorce to me. Went home and asked my parents this in 1967 after a 5 second pause they said that was his family, our family doesn't believe in that. I didn't have a teacher explaining the details about something my family didn't believe in. Just because others have a different life style or set (or lack of) morals doesn't mean every possibility has to be explained to minds that can't comprehend it. You mix gay issues with gender, two totally different subjects and bundle it together as a package to dump in a second graders lap. Children have no business in adult matters, let them be kids!
-
So, did you understand what divorce was after that conversation or just that your family "didn't believe in it." Therefore it didn't exist. How would you explain to your 2nd grade kid why Johnny has two mommies (or daddies) other than it is something you don't believe in? Would you rather they learn it from other kids who don't have any idea what they're talking about or someone who is trained in how to handle such questions?
-
-
-
-
I'm not reading that at all from Mr. Simpsons comment. He is simply exploring the possibility of a solution to the problem of Public Schools teaching alternative sexual lifestyles under the guise of Biological Sexual Reproduction aka "Sex Education". He seeks to include parents in some way...even the ones who are not "white". By the way, that was an ugly thing for Alexander Clark to say....
-
-
We can't have them taught to accept different values and attitudes, can we? They might even grow to understand differences in people
-
Sure learning that a social identity is real and biology is fluid. That damaging your body for life is perfectly normal. That sexual knowledge such as serious porn consumption in 4th and 5th grade won't be imitated. Either you don't have kids or don't respect the rights of other parents. Gender theory is a social disease and most people prefer not to expose children to it. It's not harmless like long hair in the 60's.
-
-
The real Solution is the Essene Gospel Of Peace!
-
Thank you. I just looked that up and will study and understand this.
-
-
-
Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these the same people who want the Christian Ten Commandments posted in every classroom in every public school? And the same people who demanded to be able to hold prayer meetings on public school property? It sounds to me that unless it's something that 'they' believe in, it's to be banned. Am I missing something here? What they're saying is that 'they' have rights, but nobody else does.
-
Exactly!
-
No, there was no demanding prayer meetings in school. A club held on school grounds is not a demand to disrupt a school schedule and if a community wants their school to have the 10 commandments, thats their right weather we like it or not. That is definitely not demanding or requiring the same to be done at all schools. I believe in Biology and Science and am also a man of faith, I have the right to teach my children certain morals and principles, which includes deciding when my youngsters are exposed to certain subjects. Kids of a certain age should ONLY be worried about being kids, not about sexual orientation or being confused about what one is or is not.
-
-
One of the better questions I’ve seen raised is: If parents can opt their kids out of LGBTQ-inclusive materials, does that mean other parents can opt out of evolution? After all, that goes against some religious beliefs too. Are we really going to forgo teaching reality in a place where kids are supposed to learn how the world works?
People need to stop equating the mention of LGBTQ people with discussions about sex. That’s not what these materials are about. When classrooms talk about “mommies and daddies,” it immediately creates a disconnect for kids with two moms or two dads. If that child brings up their family and the teacher shuts them down—because “we’re not allowed to talk about that”—the child learns that their family is something to be ashamed of. What a wonderful lesson to send a first grader.
And here’s the part no one wants to talk about: while schools are banning LGBTQ books in the name of “parental rights,” other states are requiring displays of the Ten Commandments in every classroom, or mandating that a Bible be present, or even that teachers develop lesson plans based on scripture. Where are the parental rights then? Why is one group’s religion prioritized while the rest are told to stay quiet?
Apparently, acknowledging that LGBTQ people exist is “indoctrination,” but turning classrooms into Bible studies is just “good moral values.” I’m climbing off my soap box now!
-
Keep that soapbox handy, it's gonna be needed often with current trends. Keep making that comparison and make sure that the people in the back can hear. We cannot allow favoring any specific religious values to be normalized in the USA; freedom of religious choice is the entire reason for this country's existence.
-
I think you may be overthinking it and maybe misinformed. There are NO schools other then private that are forced or required to write religious scripture based lesson plans or require the 10 commandments be present. There have been so who have voted to put up the 10 commandments but it wasn't a requirement.
-
Oklahoma public schools are now required to have a Bible in every classroom and to incorporate it into their curriculum. I’d say that’s a few more than “NO schools other than private”. I think you may be uninformed and just not know, but other religions do exist and they may do not all follow the Bible. There’s nothing wrong with offer it as an option with the classroom, but it is mandated per Ryan Walters. I highly recommend you do a little research before you make generalizations and belittle someone with different beliefs than your own.
-
-
LGBTQ vs Evolution. LGBTQ = Apples, Evolution = Oranges. One is iniquity the other is a theory, both are a lie... The existence of LGBTQ is not relevant to small school children's education. If the schoolhouse has become a place to acknowledge the existence of LGBTQ, then the schoolhouse has become a place of indoctrination.
-
James, try telling that to a first grader who has two mommies or two daddies. Or do we just ignore the fact and force the child into the closet? The question is bound to come up, and teachers need to be prepared to address it without shaming or blaming the child. What better way than a children's book that the children can relate to and is age appropriate.
-
Teachers have no place slamming or blaming the child, and no one is suggesting that. Likewise, it is not the child "in the closet" and who would be forcing them into it? The discussion simply has no place in public school. They should be referred to the school counselor and bring the parents into it. The parents are who is responsible to answer these questions. The teacher has limited time and a classroom full of kids who need to learn the alphabet.
-
Teachers are placing the child of a same-sex couple "in the closet" by saying that they can't talk about it when someone asks why that child's family looks different than theirs. Passing the buck to the school counselor does exactly what? Bring the parents in and forcing them to take time off work, only delays an answer and creates more anxiety for both the child and the parents. It can also make the child of a same sex couple, or their family a target of harassment (I've seen it happen).
Kids also need to learn how to read, and somthing about history (called "social studies" in elementary school, at least where I went to school). Parents today are too concerned with anyone correcting their children or suggesting anything about right and wrong that might be different then their own. And my response to that is, then you need to home-school your child. Thinking you can sheild your child from anything that does not meet your definition of morality is a myth, and it is not appropriate to force public schools to shield the children when there are other definitions of morality are included in the student body.
-
-
-
James, if SCOTUS says parents have the right to opt their kids out of any discussion about LGBTQ, that same ruling can then apply to any other subject. It will be another court battle.
-
-
-
LGBTQ Should not be in schools yes we are a different society these days but enough is enough don't bring this in.
-
Why not? What are you afraid of? Might your children learn that members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community are….. gasp……human beings who simply want to be allowed to live their lives just like you? WOW, that’s terrifying!
-
Then I guess they should remove LGBTQ students. And Black students and any other student that does not comport with WASP children. And while they at it they should remove Catholics, Jews, Mormons, etc. Only heterosexuals married couples could teach. The schools would be very small.
-
So blacks and Jews lack moral integrity? It's a WASP thing? You left out Latin people who are strong in family values and morals, more so than WASPs. And yes even hetero sexuality should be left out of education until late Junior high when kids minds are mature enough to process it properly. Let's discuss suicide in school and make it acceptable if you don't get what you want. Maybe removing the kids with mental identity issues to their own class like special ed in the past would solve all this. Then everyone can thrive. Kids can't multiply, lets concentrate on that and keep indoctrination of any kind including Christianity out of it.
-
-
If you truly wanted to "simply be allowed to live your life just like you" you would not be trying to be someone else, you would be getting mental help.
-
James, what you don't get is they are wanting to be themself, not what somebody else thinks they should be.
-
-
Mr. Page did question the humanity of any group. I read that the subject of LGBTQ should not be in schools. I agree with him. This is not sex education. It is an introduction to alternative sexual lifestyles, under the guise of "education", that has no place being discussed in schools with other persons children. It may be discussed with parents or with trusted persons in counseling. However, I am curious how you feel it appropriate to equate the real and historic struggle of black persons et.al. with the free-will choice to explore sexuality in one of the LGBTQIA+ ways? I am also curious as to why you equate the struggles of race relations with that of the CHOICE of sexual orientation. Are there any white children who "identify" LGBTQIA+ whatever? And, can we either argue or agree that the alphabet soup can stop at LGB...? Or, is it less about communication and more about recognition?
-
The problem you are running into is the misconception that sexual preference/orientation is a choice. It's a biological impulse informed by our genetic makeup. Sexuality and gender are much more complex than the black-white binary that's been put upon it for so long. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aat7693
-
The problem that you are running into Mr. Hunt is the misconception that sin as a result of unchecked "biological impulses" get a pass from judgement. Biological "impulses", be they physical or psychological impact drug addiction, gambling, gluttony, and this. Gender is absolutely binary. We are either Male or Female and it really is that simple.
-
-
-
-
Are we going to start banning students who happen to be left-handed next? (It was not that long ago that public schools did that.)
-
-
Good on the Supreme Court
All those books are designed to lure children to various aspects of the alphabet community.
-
Negative ghost rider. That is total BS, no one is messing with kids except youth pastors and catholic priests. If reading books determined anything about your sexuality I would be a straight Christian woman instead of a bi, transgender male, witch.
-
I wish it weren't true Tim but public school puts a kid at greater risk than in a church though both are too high. You'll find that anywhere kids are, perverts navigate thata way.
-
We are well aware of your “dislike” of the LGBTQ+ community. Check the stats, we aren’t the problem.
-
Amen, brother! I’m a lesbian witch and my son is gay. My partner and I are not the problem; check out the reality of “straight white men” and child predators… the stats are disturbing…
-
I never said gay people are the problem.
Members here come and go. I've told a thousand times that I don't care who people hook up with. It's never heard and if it is it's never believed. My conclusion is that most members here want to hate us straight white guys.
You'll find that molesters don't care what we think either and they don't care what their victims think.
Molesters go where kids are. I didn't say homosexuals do, I didn't say heterosexuals do, I said molesters do.
For the record: I hired a gay dude to be my sales manager before it was cool to hire gay dudes. I hang out and have beer with gay folk. I jam with gay folk. I let gay folk use my guitar, amp and microphone. I give had made maple whiskey (130 proof) from tree to flask to gay friends. It's a lot of work to make whiskey. It's not something you just give to anybody.
Tim, you said church is the problem and I told you otherwise, that's why you hate me. Humans are the problem.
And Paula, not only am I a straight white guy, I'm a straight white guy that drinks whiskey, sleeps under the stars rain, snow or shine, summer or winter with nothing but a fire and blanket. I'm as rugged as they make in the states and I ain't got a problem winning a pillow fight against a gay brother in a hotel in Chicago. Judge how you will, I don't care.
-
Just 2 things. First the church IS a reality big problem. The stats back it up. Second, I don’t hate anyone (except the current regime). I don’t hate you but Christians in general bother me when they push their religion pander beliefs on me and declare I’m sinning or going to hell. I want them to stop calling me a groomer and a pedo because I’m trans. LGBT books are going to lead anyone to the the alphabet groups. Honestly, it would have made my life much easier with those books and maybe someone to talk to. You’re either born a member of the LGBT community or you’re not. No one “turns” and those books might save a life. All we want is basic human rights. Right now they’re building camps for “illegals”. You think it will stop there? They are looking at ways to take away citizenship from anyone, even if you were born here and your family has been here generations. Some of us are now fighting for our lives. Don’t think you’re immune. Eventually being a straight white male won’t save you. Open your eyes.
-
-
-
So, if what you say is true, then we should abolish the public school system and make it mandatory that all children are homeschooled.
-
-
-
Rev. Michael, your knowledge of the LGBTQIA is sorely lacking, but judging from your comments, you really don’t care. What a shame. I feel very badly for you. Blessed be.
-
-
Parents are to protect their children from harm. Teaching children the LBGXYZ alphabet stuff is harmful to young minds. Parents should have the right to protect their children from that.
-
The mere mention of two dads or two moms tells a child that these people exist. It does not teach them to become that, nor does it say two men or two women are sleeping together and having sex. People need to get their minds out of the gutter.
-
-
When I was a kid growing up in Wichita Ks, I attended Public schools. I was taught a broad spectrum of subjects beside the regular reading, writing and math. The main thing I was taught was to THINK FOR MYSELF!! Let me repeat that: I was taught to THINK FOR MYSELF!! The children today are not being given an education that promotes that line of thought. Instead, they are being taught by their parents to be Intolerant Bigots and hiding it behind Religion and their Bible that they wrote!! We no longer have an education system that teaches... We instead have a system that churns out Hate, Bigotry, and discrimination one child at a time!
-
My my, we have come a long way over the years but I am not sure it has all been in the right direction. Parents should be teaching their children about these differences in sexuality at the ages they are able to understand. It seems we passed through the same problems with excepting races other than our own. Perhaps some parents might be the problem. May God Bless all his children.
-
Parents have more rights than just protecting their children from harmful material and lessons in and out of school. Indoctrination is not good or healthy for children at any age.
-
Indoctrination is defined as “the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs without question.” Religion, by its very nature, fits that definition—and in fact, examples of indoctrination often include divinity training or faith-based instruction.
But acknowledging that LGBTQ people exist, or teaching children that families come in different forms, isn’t indoctrination. It’s not promoting a belief—it’s stating a fact. It’s no more an attempt to “convert” someone than teaching that some kids have single parents or are raised by grandparents. Recognizing diversity doesn’t make a child become something they’re not. It simply teaches them not to be afraid of people who are different.
-
-
I remember when my religious parents didn’t want us learning sex education in school. They opted us out and we got sent to the library to study and do homework. I believe parents have the right to protect their children, but they also can’t force their beliefs on other parents and kids!
-
So, many question: Does this give homosexual parents the right to "opt out" books and stories about heterosexual couples? If not, why? Can white couples opt their children out of stories about interracial couples? Agan, why? If the stories are about a family, that's one thing, but they are making it about sex. If you see a married couple on TV or read about one in a book, is your first thought "what type of sex do they have? -or- is it "what is their family like?" Why should this matter whether the couple is LGBTQIA+ or not? What if it is an interfaith marriage/relationship? Choosing can take all types of forms, not just what clothes you want to wear or what the sex/gender identity. Next if I want to write a children's book about choosing whether to play football or soccer, then I suppose someone will get their knickers twisted about that too. Did "Little Red Riding Hood" push people to feed their grandparents to wolves? Come on. One more step to the complete erasure of the LGBTQIA+ communities. TQIA+ has been well on it's way since this administration took office. The rest isn't far behind.
-
Comment removed by user.
-
-
Supreme Court made the right decision. To allow a mentally ill cause in public schools would be a travesty.
-
Parents should have a say in any content they don't want their child exposed to, including religious ideation of any sort, or any sexuality material including homosexual OR heterosexual marriages, and procreation. They might look very stupid protecting their children from learning about the existence of something, but it's still their right.
-
If you really believe Yahusha is your Lord and Savior. If you believe that Elohim is your creator, then you must not go against his divine nature! This topic is an abomination! No matter how you feel you can not serve two masters! Either follow Elohim or follow the Devil! He loves you that much that he gave us a choice! Your feeling are what the devil is counting on! Blessings.
-
As a LGBT person, I understand the sentiment. But parents should be aware that many of their kids will commit suicide. If that’s what they want if their kids are LGBTQ, then they are not fit parents and have no business claiming to be Christian.
-
That sounds more like a counseling need for a small percentage or persons than a school curriculum thing for everyone.
-
-
I noticed that a lot of the posts conveniently leave out that it was both Muslim and Christian faiths that wanted opt out freedoms. Most posts only focus on Christians.
Public schools are funded by taxpayers. I wouldn't want my tax dollars funding indoctrination. We were told years ago the schools were to be secular and focus on reading, writing, science, history and physical education. Religion was banned from schools. The alternative lifestyle teachings are in fact doctrine to the LGBTQ+/😀 congregation. That group can instill those values in their children at home while Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc can instill their values at home, not in public schools.
A lot of kids struggle with the academic aspects of education but I bet they know what a pronoun is. It seems if educators put that same effort in academics as they do with social justice issues these kids would be excelling.
-
Well said.
-
Well said
-
-
-
They wouldn't be called parents if they were suppose to forfeit that resonsibility. It's time to take back the responsibility should lie and that's with the parents not the school teacher. What ever you think is right doesn't always mean that you are. The enemy never sleeps so be on guard, are he will steal your childeren. Thank you SCOTUS!!
-
There is no more corrupt entity that the Supreme Court. There agenda is the Republican agenda of white washing history and dictating that right wing extremist Christian "values" are taught. There is nothing worse that religion.
-
I would have to agree. I mean it was the Supreme Court who approved of the "3/5ths. A Man" law in 1787 giving the slave master MORE voting power. It was them who upheld locking up and confiscating property of US Japanese Citizens in 1944. It was them who upheld the Jim Crow laws in 1896. It was them who denied black men citizenship in the Dred Scott decision of 1857. It was them who upheld unlimited corporate spending in political campaigns in 2010. There is obviously much more...but, that alone speaks of the apparent corruption of man's institutions. But, somehow parents who do not want their children introduced to alternative sexual lifestyles under the guise of "Sex Education" are White, Right-wing, Republican Extremists whitewashing history. I would be willing to bet that there are some red, yellow, black, and brown persons who oppose this type of "education" also...surprisingly just like some white people do. I guess we need all those adjectives to make the point that "Religion", in general, is far worse than everything else...everything including sex trafficking, slavery, etc.
-
-
-
Of course the Supreme Court voted as they did. What did you expect?
-
BOO!!! 🌈 🌈 !!! Terrifying isn’t it?!?
-
Yes ... the insanity of it is .... but the Spirit behind it, most of all ... I would be careful talking to other peoples children about things the parents do not approve of. Right or wrong, things tend to happen when "fear" is involved...
-
-
Yes, I absolutely believe parents should have the right to opt their children out of things that conflict with their highly held beliefs and faith. I understand there is a fine line that cannot be crossed or people would be opting their children out of PE just because they're to lazy and don't like excersize, oh wait they already do that.
-
Yes, I absolutely believe parents should have the right to opt their children out of things that conflict with their highly held beliefs and faith. I understand there is a fine line that cannot be crossed or people would be opting their children out of PE just because they're to lazy and don't like excersize, oh wait they already do that.
-
there needs o be more talk on this
-
No one should be talking to other persons children about sex at all - straight or gay - without the approval of the parent. Who does that? I don't see why it is even a question.
-
These are children's books and stories for children about things children do. They aren't about sex any more than Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, or Snow White were about sex. If the parents want to isolate their children from all aspects of society then they need to send them to a parochial school or home-school them. (My humble opinion.) Children are some day going to meet a gay or trans person, and complete isolation from that can be damaging from several perspectives. The right/wrong of relationships are sadly, not the parent's choice to make. The best they can do is teach them how to make the decisions and what all to consider in doing so.
-
Elementary school is not the place to develop these relationships. That is the responsibility of the parent at home. School is for math, science, and reading...etc.
-
So, do you suggest we also keep them from reading "Little Red Riding Hood" (elder violence, causing childen to feed their grandparents to wolves")? There are heterosexual couples in Cinderella, Snow White, and other "fairy tales," so should we prohibit them too? I guess they all are gone too, because they talk about "relationships." They aren't developing these relationships in school, but learning about what makes up the society that surrounds them. That would be part of the Social Studies/History curriculum.
-
-
-
Sexual education in the classroom has always been a thing. There’s nothing wrong with representing all aspects of sexual gender and orientation, but you’re right, parents should have the right and control of what their child sees. The school should present that kind of curriculum to the parents so they can decide, but no one religion should dictate what is taught.
-
"Sex Education" is a misnomer. Biology would be the subject. It is a little obvious that people should not be talking about alternative sexual lifestyles with other people's children under the guise of Biological Sexual Reproduction...regardless their Religion. This is as much a secular matter as it is a Religious one.
-
-
-
I have read some very interesting comments on this post. Most of them come from a 'Live and let live" perspective, and some from a "Do as I say" perspective. Just some food for thought. If your child came home from catechism/bible studies class and showed you the reading material that was being used in that class, and you disagreed with the philosophy of the lesson, would you go to your minister/rabbi, etc., and "demand" that the book or lesson be banned? In reality, do any of us totally and unconditionally agree with everything that our religious faiths profess to be true? Isn't it "God's " teachings that we're given the virtue of deciphering the difference between what is good and evil, right and wrong? If that's true, then who are we to judge?
-
We are to judge for the sake of discernment rather than condemnation. We must judge a situation to determine whether we will participate in it or not.
-
-
Just tell me how you call that a blow. Are they recruiting?
-
Well it clearly states in the bible that a man should be with a woman anything else is a abomination and we want our flag back and the only thing the word pride has done for anyone is get a archangel kicked out of heaven
-
What Bible would that be Stuart? The King James version, the Koran, The teachings of Budda, The Bible according to the Mormans??? Who Clearly states that being Gay is an abomination??? Christ never said a word about being Gay... You need to stop your Hate and Bigotry Stuart and try a little empathy toward your fellow man! The greatest commandment is to " Love one another as I have Loved you "!! Start living what Christ taught us and quit blaming any shortcomings on others ... What is Sin to you, may just be a circumstance of birth to another... Peace and Love to you my brother.
-
Taking 16 percent of the population and segregating it from the rest is just the same as Jim crow laws. It was wrong then, still wrong now. Parents who don't let thier kids learn about other cultures raise ignorant bigoted children.
Excellent and well said. I was about to respond with the same but will just endorse your comment. After spending my entire existence dealing with bigotry I was hoping we could finally break that generational curse but the bigots seem intent on continuing the hate. We exist and no matter how much you keep it from your children they will find it out. And for crying out loud, no one is grooming or luring your children into the alphabet community. If books caused folks to be a part of the community, I would be a straight cisgender female with the books I had to read. Thankfully I turned out to be a happy, well rounded, bisexual, trans male witch. This has got to stop someday.