Parents? Group Prevails: Montgomery County Pulls Sex-Ed Curriculum for This Year 5/6/2005
By Pamela P. Wong
Judge issues restraining order in response to lawsuit arguing religious discrimination.
Determined parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, prevailed Thursday when a federal judge ordered a delay in the pilot program for a new sex-education curriculum for the state?s largest school district.
Montgomery County Public Schools Superintendent Jerry Weast announced later in the day that the program would be withdrawn for the remainder of the school year.
Liberty Counsel filed the lawsuit on behalf of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC) and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), arguing that the curriculum violated the First Amendment because it did not present religion objectively.
PFOX provided all of the approved resources and the rejected ex-gay resources to the court, which proved crucial to the ruling.
?One look at the materials and it?s obvious that they promote homosexuality as normal and healthy,? said Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America?s Culture & Family Institute, who has worked with CRC and PFOX to oppose the program. ?What?s more, they indicate that liberal denominations that support homosexuality convey the only legitimate religious view on this topic. They have no regard for the ex-gays, the people who have overcome homosexuality.?
Knight, who is on the PFOX board of directors, also said, ?Given the extraordinary controversy generated by this program, the superintendent did the right thing by shelving it for the rest of the year. It?s too bad the School Board ignored parents? concerns to the point where it had to wind up in court.?
Parents also expressed concern in a public rally that the curriculum, including a notorious condom video, didn?t present the full facts on health risks associated with homosexual behavior and overstates the effectiveness of condoms in preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Attorney Erik Stanley of Liberty Counsel told the court that the curriculum equates ?homophobia? with some religious believers and criticizes ?fundamentalists? and ?evangelicals,? and that it denigrates those who believe it is possible to change one?s ?sexual orientation.?
?The government has no business putting its stamp or endorsement on one religious group over another,? Stanley argued.
The attorney for the Maryland Board of Education countered that if parents didn?t approve of the curriculum, they could withhold permission for their children to participate and have them given an ?alternative assignment.?
?The school system has taken a neutral, nonjudgmental approach,? she said.
However, U.S. District Court Judge Alexander Williams Jr. disagreed. He commented on specific curriculum materials that he described as ?not neutral but seem to be tilted toward a particular view.?
He acknowledged the importance of this case as ?Montgomery County is the largest school system in the state and a pacesetter.?
CRC President Michelle Turner, who has five children in Montgomery County schools, said after the ruling that she hoped the School Board and superintendent would now be willing to work with the parents. Officials had repeatedly refused to meet with them, even after they submitted 4,000 signatures opposing the program.
This is quite possibly the first time a court has ruled in favor of ex-gays. Judge Williams? opinion noted that the curriculum contains biased statements against them, including that ?[t]rying to change one's sexual response to straight or gay is usually unsuccessful.?
"The School Board can follow its own stated goal of diminishing ?sexual orientation? discrimination by starting with the ex-gay community," said Regina Griggs, executive director of PFOX.
Pamela Wong, CWA?s director of publications, is a CRC parent. Her three children attend Montgomery County Public Schools.
Parents? Group Prevails: Montgomery County Pulls Sex-Ed Curriculum for This Year
Parents support public schools with their tax dollars and should have a say in what their children are being taught.
Yet in this case, even though parents submitted a petition with 4,000 names which opposed the program, the school board arrogantly refused to even meet with them to discuss their concerns.
With no other option left, a law suit was filed against the county.
On the merits of the case, the judge issued a restaring order forcing Montgomery County to pull the sex-ed course arguing that the curiculum materials are "not neutral but seem to be tilted toward a particular view."
Score one for parental rights.
It's good to see concerned parents push back against the destructive policies of the left and prevail!
By Pamela P. Wong
Judge issues restraining order in response to lawsuit arguing religious discrimination.
Determined parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, prevailed Thursday when a federal judge ordered a delay in the pilot program for a new sex-education curriculum for the state?s largest school district.
Montgomery County Public Schools Superintendent Jerry Weast announced later in the day that the program would be withdrawn for the remainder of the school year.
Liberty Counsel filed the lawsuit on behalf of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC) and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), arguing that the curriculum violated the First Amendment because it did not present religion objectively.
PFOX provided all of the approved resources and the rejected ex-gay resources to the court, which proved crucial to the ruling.
?One look at the materials and it?s obvious that they promote homosexuality as normal and healthy,? said Robert Knight, director of Concerned Women for America?s Culture & Family Institute, who has worked with CRC and PFOX to oppose the program. ?What?s more, they indicate that liberal denominations that support homosexuality convey the only legitimate religious view on this topic. They have no regard for the ex-gays, the people who have overcome homosexuality.?
Knight, who is on the PFOX board of directors, also said, ?Given the extraordinary controversy generated by this program, the superintendent did the right thing by shelving it for the rest of the year. It?s too bad the School Board ignored parents? concerns to the point where it had to wind up in court.?
Parents also expressed concern in a public rally that the curriculum, including a notorious condom video, didn?t present the full facts on health risks associated with homosexual behavior and overstates the effectiveness of condoms in preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Attorney Erik Stanley of Liberty Counsel told the court that the curriculum equates ?homophobia? with some religious believers and criticizes ?fundamentalists? and ?evangelicals,? and that it denigrates those who believe it is possible to change one?s ?sexual orientation.?
?The government has no business putting its stamp or endorsement on one religious group over another,? Stanley argued.
The attorney for the Maryland Board of Education countered that if parents didn?t approve of the curriculum, they could withhold permission for their children to participate and have them given an ?alternative assignment.?
?The school system has taken a neutral, nonjudgmental approach,? she said.
However, U.S. District Court Judge Alexander Williams Jr. disagreed. He commented on specific curriculum materials that he described as ?not neutral but seem to be tilted toward a particular view.?
He acknowledged the importance of this case as ?Montgomery County is the largest school system in the state and a pacesetter.?
CRC President Michelle Turner, who has five children in Montgomery County schools, said after the ruling that she hoped the School Board and superintendent would now be willing to work with the parents. Officials had repeatedly refused to meet with them, even after they submitted 4,000 signatures opposing the program.
This is quite possibly the first time a court has ruled in favor of ex-gays. Judge Williams? opinion noted that the curriculum contains biased statements against them, including that ?[t]rying to change one's sexual response to straight or gay is usually unsuccessful.?
"The School Board can follow its own stated goal of diminishing ?sexual orientation? discrimination by starting with the ex-gay community," said Regina Griggs, executive director of PFOX.
Pamela Wong, CWA?s director of publications, is a CRC parent. Her three children attend Montgomery County Public Schools.
Parents? Group Prevails: Montgomery County Pulls Sex-Ed Curriculum for This Year
Parents support public schools with their tax dollars and should have a say in what their children are being taught.
Yet in this case, even though parents submitted a petition with 4,000 names which opposed the program, the school board arrogantly refused to even meet with them to discuss their concerns.
With no other option left, a law suit was filed against the county.
On the merits of the case, the judge issued a restaring order forcing Montgomery County to pull the sex-ed course arguing that the curiculum materials are "not neutral but seem to be tilted toward a particular view."
Score one for parental rights.
It's good to see concerned parents push back against the destructive policies of the left and prevail!
