Saturday, February 24, 2007

Judge rules kids stay for lessons contrary to religious beliefs

This action should be entitled for what it is:

A judge has mandated children remain for school lessons contrary to personal religious beliefs

How this will in any way pass a Constitutional review is beyond me. Even if one doesn't belong to a particular religion, individuals have the inalienable right to hold personal religious beliefs.

Government is not supposed to intrude on your individual "religious" rights.

To make an individual under the legal age of consent sit in a classroom to be "taught" something contrary to a personal religious belief has to be an intrusion on that individual's person right.

Where is the ACLU on this one?

What if you hold a personal belief that it is wrong to kill a sick elderly person requesting to die? What a state legislature passes legislation that makes assisted suicide legal? Then what if the state school system determines it's okay to teach the process of assisted suicide?

What if you hold a religious belief it is wrong to abort your unborn child? What if the state school system determines as part of its safe-sex program that it's okay to teach abortion? Should a minor-age child be forced to sit through a class that specifically teaches abortion is legal and here's how you can have one?

Curriculum of a school matters. Better find out what your school board directors adopt as such for elementary, junior-high, and high schools.

This goes the other way, too. A state school should not be teaching specific religious beliefs, say a belief in Jesus Christ.

This ruling is contrary to the foundation of our country, by the way, the country was not founded as a democracy as the judge states.

The United States is a republic... representative government, and the rule of law apply.

Judge orders 'gay' agenda taught to Christian children
Rules kids need teachings to be 'engaged and productive citizens'
Posted: February 24, 2007
By Bob Unruh
© 2007

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 homosexuality."

"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.

Federal judge Mark Wolf dismisses David Parker’s civil rights lawsuit.
Outrageous ruling goes further -- reinforces right of schools to teach homosexuality without parents’ consent or choice to opt-out

This bizarre ruling is every parent's nightmare. But more than that, it's a complete abandonment of right and wrong, civil rights, or even common sense. It's hard to imagine a person sworn to uphold the law could write this. How bad is it? Read on.

Excerpts from ruling by Federal Judge Mark Wolf, with analysis:

No comments: