Hot on HuffPost Parents:
Melina Bellows: Why Being a Mom is the Coolest Job Ever
-
Bruce Reyes-Chow: The Importance of Making Memories With Our Children
Court supports school's diversity curriculum
Filed under: Gay Parenting, Alcohol & Drugs, Media, Day Care & Education, That's Entertainment
There is some good and bad news coming from a circuit Court of Appeals in Massachusetts. First, the bad news: it appears I can't complain about my son bringing home a book called "Angel Hide and Seek" when we don't believe in angels. Now the good news: parents cannot force schools to exclude books from their curriculum because of their beliefs (or lack thereof.) As one lawyer explained it, "the courts have rightfully found that parents can't control which books are used in school just because they are in conflict with their personal religious beliefs."The case involved a pair of families that objected to their children being exposed to books that acknowledge or promote tolerance of lesbian and gay families. The books in question included the well-known "Who's in a Family" which presents many different family configurations and "King and King" which tells the tale of two princes who fall in love and get married (remember that gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts). The parents felt that they should have been informed in advance of the subject matter and been given the chance to pull their kids out of class. The judges, however, disagreed:
The mere fact that a child is exposed on occasion in public school to a concept offensive to a parent's religious belief does not inhibit the parent from instructing the child differently. A parent whose 'child is exposed to sensitive topics or information [at school] remains free to discuss these matters and to place them in the family's moral or religious context, or to supplement the information with more appropriate materials.' . . . There is no free exercise right to be free from any reference in public elementary schools to the existence of families in which the parents are of different gender combinations.
The fact is that LGBT families do exist, whether or not these parents like it. It is up to the schools to teach the facts; the parents are free to help their children interpret those facts however they like.
via Mombian
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
Helping Other Family Members to Cope with a Suicide Loss
Learn how you can help other family members to cope with a suicide loss.
-
Parents Sue School For Allowing Son to Be Openly Gay
Sex is both at the core and the edge of the family life. In an era when the conceptual and political transformation of the family is most palpable on a global scale, often generating impassioned debates among those wedded or even indifferent to "the family values," this panel seeks to explore family formations through their deepest open secrets: sex, sexuality and sexual practices.
-
Back To School Tips - Cures for Back to School Jitters
Here to help make things run a little smoother is Gay Norton, senior editor of Family Circle Magazine.
-
Belgian Authorities Offer Condolences to Families of Bus Victims
In Belgium, parents arrive at a local school, desperate to find out if their child was among the victims of a bus crash that killed 28 people, mostly children. Patrick Hoogmartens, the Bishop of Hasselt spoke with several of the parents. The children were on an annual ski trip to Switzerland when their bus skidded into the side of a tunnel, killing at least 22 children, a teacher and several others. Belgian Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo offered his condolences to the families.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 2 of 2)
2-12-2008 @ 3:19PM
pbhj said...You do know that at present it's impossible to have two dads. The kid has one Dad with male sexual partner.
Biology is what it is.
2-11-2008 @ 4:05PM
W. H. Heydt said...The Bible, Koran, Torah, and every other religous work you can name certainly have a legitimate place in schools. Collectively, they can be used in a comparative religion class.
When Prof. Fontenrose taught a mythology course at UCB many years ago, one of the texts used was Genesis, and he proceeded to show the multiple, conflicting creation stories contained in it. That, of course, was a university course, not first grade, but the principles remain. If you wish to protect your scriptures from actual analysis in front of the next generation, it's the believers that will want the books kept out of the schools, not the free thinkers that have a problem with taking a close look at them.
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 4:57PM
SKL said...You have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to books for young children. This is not about "telling the bare facts." Here's a fact that I bet you don't want your first-grader being taught: "Once upon a time there was a little girl named Penny whose daddy put his penis in her vagina a couple times a week. When Penny was a good girl for Daddy, Penny got ice cream." About 50% of women have been sexually molested or raped while growing up, often by "trusted" family members. This is a fact. So, if someone decides to write a kids' book about this and it's proposed to be included in the first grade curriculum, would you draw the line there? If so, why?
I agree with the poster who said there is NO NEED for a young child to be informed of gay marriage. There is plenty of time for that. Save it for an age when there is actually a chance that their own parents might have broached the subject and they can maturely consider the views of their parents, the authors, etc.
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 7:15PM
roger.sinasohn said...Where did you get your statistics? According to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network, "One in six American women are victims of sexual assault"(1) which is definitely less than 50% (albeit way to many).
In any case, there is a big difference between your example (which is something one hopes a child never encounters) and a family with two parents of the same sex (which they almost certainly will encounter). Further, the former is something that would terrify the child; the latter is not something to be scared of (even if you don't approve).
Personally, if I had never talked to my kids about LGBT families, they would have met their friend and his two dads and just had a grand old time and not cared (or even probably noticed) that he had two dads. So perhaps there isn't a need -- unless, of course, homosexuality is something you want to make sure they're opposed to before they ever get a chance to see for themselves how innocuous it really is.
(1) http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html?gclid=COX46p6rvZECFRwEIwodVl4sOQ
2-11-2008 @ 7:43PM
SKL said...OK, wait a minute. One minute you are saying that this isn't about telling kids gay couples are OK, and the next minute you say it's appropriate because we need to be telling all kids that it's OK.
Let's go with your statistic just for fun. I didn't make up the 50%, but maybe the definitions of sexual molestation used in the two studies were different. So, OK, still, even in San Francisco, and certainly in most of the US, the incidence of child sexual abuse is a lot higher than the incidence of kids who have two same-sex parents. So while we might wish our kids never encounter it, it's more likely they will encounter that than a same-sex marriage, which, by the way, lots of people also wish their kids never see.
Then, you jump to a conclusion that young children will judge same-sex couples unless parents tell them in advance that they are OK. Where do you get that idea? I remember various same-sex households which I now realize were homosexual households, which I never judged as a kid; indeed, some of them were homes I very much enjoyed visiting. It would never occur to me to think that there was something icky about a two men or two women in a household - with or without a kid - unless some adult took me aside and started telling me to notice it and think about it. This, of course, never happened because my parents didn't consider it necessary to point out the "relationship" between the men / women living together in my environment.
Finally, I don't get your argument that the one about sex would terrify a child - other than a child to whom this had happened. How would the child know it was painful or otherwise uncomfortable? If sex is so scary, why are you usually in favor of teaching about sex at an early age? Regardless of whether the "daddy pedophile" book would be frightening or not, the real reason why it wouldn't be allowed to be read to young children is that nearly all parents would not want their kids thinking that was OK. Similarly, there is a significant percentage of parents who don't want their kids thinking homosexuality or same-sex marriage or homosexual parenting is OK. But, while the liberals agree with the former, they disagree with the latter. So in truth, this is not about just presenting the facts, but presenting selected opinions that many, if not most, parents do not consider age-appropriate for a young child.
2-11-2008 @ 11:20PM
SKL said...Roger, I misread the third paragraph of your reply to my first post. Upon re-reading, it appears you and I actually agree on that particular point.
2-11-2008 @ 11:49PM
roger.sinasohn said...I didn't think you made up the 50% number, but it did seem amazingly high. Even the 1 in 6 number that RAINN quoted includes women who were assaulted as adults, not just as children. Even so, while children may be more likely to come in contact with a woman who has been abused, I imagine it's less likely that they'll know it.
Actually, my point was that young children simply *won't* judge. They'll just play. They might notice that a kid has two moms or two dads, and might even ask about it, but they won't care any more about that than they would that another kid has only one parent or that they live with their grandparents or anything else. My point was that children need to be taught to hate; it doesn't come naturally to them.
You're right -- perhaps a kid wouldn't find a book about a pedophile father frightening. Still, there is a huge difference between what an adult might do to a child and what two adults might do with each other. It scares me that so many people can't see that difference. It's like that attendant at a public restroom I ran into recently -- he seemed to think that my three-year-old daughter going in the men's room was equivalent to me going in the women's. It's not the same because a three-year-old is not an adult. Likewise, a relationship between an adult and a child is proscribed because the child doesn't understand the situation whereas what two adults do is up to them, because they are adults.
2-18-2008 @ 4:39PM
Uly said...Why is there no need for a child to know about marriage? Don't they have other students in their class, some of whom have married parents? (And yes, I'm dropping the adjective for a reason.)
2-18-2008 @ 9:42PM
SKL said...Uly, I don't think they need to teach about marriage in primary school. All kids need to be taught is that we need to respect each and every human being we come in contact with. Their parents should be teaching this, and their teachers should be reinforcing it.
Personally I am not sending my kids to primary school to learn about adult relationships, but about how to read, write, calculate, present, reason, gather information, and work effectively with their peers.
Information about the diversity of families is available in each child's environment. As we all know, children are sponges and by age 5 or 6 have no need to be told what is going on around them. Once they get to school, within days, they have figured out all of their classmates' family structures, at an age too young for spontaneous prejudice. As for what may be going on far away, they have no need to know that, unless they are about to be kidnaped and whisked away to a very different environment. It can wait, just like they can wait to learn about burqas and polygamy and female circumcision and child marriages and incest.
I remember the social studies lesson from my first day of first grade. The first page of my SS text had a photo of a six-year-old boy trying to use baby stuff such as a toddler pool, tricycle, etc., and the lesson was to talk about how we're not babies any more and we hopefully have left all that behind and adopted school-child preferences. At that moment (at age 5) I decided that "social studies" was a lame subject targeted at people who have zero reasoning skills. It seems some things still haven't changed 36 years later.
2-11-2008 @ 6:46PM
the goddess anna said...I fear that I might regret posting a comment on this subject, but it's something that affects me daily. I have mentioned here before that my mother is a lesbian, and that I grew up in a gay family. I still don't have the intricate details of my conception, only that it was natural and a bid to get back into the family will. My situation was far from ideal, having been abused, mentally neglected, and bullied from a very young age.
I would like to point out here that I am against gays/lesbians having children. I'm not religious (I worship no one or no thing), though I am bias based on my childhood (and a few others whom I've talked to). They can have civil partnerships, whatever, but I think that marraige is something reserved for hetero couples only (based on tradition).
I want to be the one that explains these things to my kids when my husband and I believe they're ready. My daughter starts kindergarden in the fall, and I know that she has hundreds of other things to be thinking about other than 'alternative families.' I would like to reserve the right to take my children out of class if the material being presented is not academic or not something I feel my children should be exposed to at that time.
That brings me to a point: Why diversity? Why not, instead of pointing out how people have a thousand different forms of family, point out to kids what binds us together? Don't focus on Jane's lesbian mom, or Kyle's polgamous dad, focus on how they live in the same town, or both like banana splits. Maybe if the kids learn that we're pretty similiar when it all boils down, they won't be so focused on the little differences. /end idealism here
Of course, I know better, and I know that many liberals want to remind us of our differences, and how the evil, straight, white old man has been keeping us down. If we disagree with diversity training, no matter why, we're bigots and intolerant. Oh well.
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 9:48PM
Nyx said..."If we disagree with diversity training, no matter why, we're bigots and intolerant."
Quite right. Although I understand quite a few who can't grasp the concept will then snipe back at this, saying that "we lack tolerance of the intolerant", possibly hoping to haul people right down with them into an infinite logical loop.
If you want to teach your kids that someone is evil not because of what they say or the actions they perform, but because they exist in the world, then yes - you're going to wear the label of "bigot".
Unlike you, though, I've based this on your actions - not on something involuntary, but on a choice that you've made.
2-11-2008 @ 7:19PM
SKL said...This is off-topic, but since it's being discussed anyhow, here goes. I think not teaching about the Bible and giving kids free access to it, even in public schools, is about as stupid as not doing the same with the dictionary. There are so many aspects of American life, laws, history, geography, idioms, vocabulary, etc., etc., that are based on Bible scriptures. So what if you don't believe every statement in the Bible; allowing your kids to be ignorant of it will limit the depth of their knowledge in so many areas. I feel sorry for kids whose parents think they are doing them a favor by keeping them ignorant of this basic building block of our culture.
Reply
2-11-2008 @ 7:54PM
the goddess anna said...I agree with you on this one. We have a few different versions of the Bible in our house, and I would have no problem with the kids paging through one. I've found myself consulting the KJV when reading books, as there are many references to Biblical scripture that I just don't know (and learning them puts the book in better context).
Part of my acceptance of the Bible is that I know our Western culture is steeped in Christianity (and Judism, to a lesser extent), and to seperate the religion from the culture is an ecercise in futility.
2-12-2008 @ 12:19AM
SKL said...Roger, I don't think you understood my statistic. I have read that 50% of women were molested WHEN THEY WERE CHILDREN. In other words, the incidence of little girls having adults do sexual things to them, up to and including rape, is quite high. (It's probably true for boys too, though I don't know that statistic.) I believe the 50% statistic - it might even be low - because when I think about myself and people who are/have been close enough to tell me if such a thing happened, I can say I was molested (though not raped) by at least two men, and at least one other tried before I got away; one of the girls I played with daily while growing up was raped repeatedly by her uncle; all of the kids (male and female) in the home of a very close relative were raped repeatedly by their father; my brother was molested by at least two adults that I know of (one male and one female); and I could go on. And I don't come from some shady kind of background, and neither do all these people. This is simply a reality, a fact, an extremely unforunate aspect of America's "family diversity." No, it is not necessary for young children to hear about the full extent of America's family diversity in the first grade. As another person posted, it would be a lot more helpful to talk to kids about the things we all have in common. We all desire and deserve to be loved and accepted. Isn't this the whole point? But it gets lost when we go on and on about the details of what "we all" includes.
Reply
2-12-2008 @ 6:20PM
the goddess anna said...Nyx, I don't think gays and lesbians are evil, thankyouverymuch, nor do I think they're evil for having families - just misguided.
And I proudly wear the label 'bigot' for believing diversity training is bunk - to me, that's a step up from 'liberal.'
Reply
2-13-2008 @ 10:52AM
Katie said...Wow! I can't believe how homophobic, bigoted, and moronic some of the readers of this blog are.
It saddens me that I cannot find a children's book, or even the words, to explain to my daughter that there are people in this world who are selfish, who are cruel, and who are too stupid to understand lifestyles other than their own. Who think that it is okay to discriminate against other people based on pretty much anything.
I think what makes me the saddest of all is that you idiots have children, and are going to try and pass on your selfish beliefs to the next generation.
Why can't you just let people live their lives, love who they love, and stop trying to impose your hate on other people.
Reply
2-13-2008 @ 6:48PM
the goddess anna said...Prove that any of us are imposing our 'hate' on other people. Please do.
I'm so glad your kids will be so 'well adjusted.' My kids love their Babbi, I love my mother, and she understands and respects how I feel about homosexuals having children. I understand and respect her lifestyle (since she's not about to have any more kids).
We cannot deny the biological process that produces children (male with female); it's like that for a reason, people. That's not hate, it's science.
2-16-2008 @ 5:22PM
AJ said...Haha I MUST agree with you robert.sinasohn!
I don't see a problem with teaching children, even in first grade, about homosexuality. Honestly, why is it so hush-hush in the first place? What can we possibly be telling telling them by exposing them to the truth. Has anyone ever thought of this being the start of a revolution? Of starting a generation of acceptance and love? Why do we obess over this? This is retrogressing us back to a time of racism. Look, kids are going to learn of it one way or the other. Now would you rather them learn it as wrong and immoral, or part of life and acceptable.
And as for religous teachings, history is far to much a broad subject to cover the teachings of the Bible spicificly. I don't mind sacred writtings in the library...as long as it's a diversity...meaning more then just the Bible. When you brake it down, all the sacred scrpitures were derived from the same teachings of mortality, love, and accepting everyone. Tell me how God can forgive and love one who has taken another's life, but cannot accept a homosexual docter?
Same with the sex ed. "issue". With the media today, we cannot just expect kids to be innocent and naive. Might as well teach them how to at least protect themselves.
Reply