©iStockphoto.com/Johanna Goodyear
On a January morning in Montgomery
County, Maryland, some Latter-day Saint women put aside
their regular routines for the day to stand for truth and
fairness in a uncomfortable, public discussion on a controversial
new sex ed curriculum for 8th and 10th grade students.
The county school board
planned to discuss and vote on the new lesson plans that
day in front of a room full of people, cable television
viewers and several major media organizations because Montgomery
County borders the nation's capital.
Later that evening, many of
these full-time mothers were on television news reports
as the few voices who opposed a curriculum based more on
political correctness than medical science and moral values.
The next morning their faces, their comments and their handmade
signs were in major news publications like the Washington
Post and the Washington Times.
These LDS women weren't looking
for media attention for themselves. They were earnestly
seeking to warn school officials and the public on the health
risks and glaring bias that were pushing their way into
sex ed classes in their county.
Though the spotlight currently
is on Maryland,
this issue will certainly arise in schools — including yours
— across the nation as school boards are pushed to adopt
curricula that present homosexuality as a natural and morally
correct lifestyle — to the exclusion of all other perspectives.
This means young children will be in classrooms where any
other viewpoint will not be tolerated, admitted or discussed.
Even if a child could be opted
out of this kind of course, this trend means the rising
generation will be indoctrinated to believe that homosexuality
is just another form of sexuality — worthy of consideration
and experimentation without any understanding of the increased
health risks and dangers associated with this lifestyle.
The new sex ed lessons were
intended to be a compromise after an earlier legal battle.
In 2005, parents brought a lawsuit against the Montgomery
Board of Education for passing a curriculum that presented
homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle in the classroom.
In May of that year, U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams
Jr. issued a 10-day restraining order on the curriculum
for violating religious freedom and for viewpoint discrimination.
In response to the ruling,
the superintendent scrapped the curriculum and the committee
who wrote it. After more than a year of work,
the newly formed Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
submitted the revised lesson plans to the Board of Education.
The sex ed lessons consist
of two 45-minute classes in grade eight called "Respect
for Differences in Human Sexuality." These lessons
are designed to teach tolerance, empathy and respect
for sexual variations, including homosexuality and transgenderism.
The three classes in grade 10 expound upon these topics
and include a condom usage video.
LDS Women Stand United
in the Culture Wars
Although the LDS women who
attended the school board meeting wore different "hats,"
they were completely united in their stand that public schools
are institutions of education — not indoctrination.
They believed if the school board insisted upon delving
into highly sensitive and controversial subject matter then
that curriculum needed to express differing viewpoints,
be medically accurate and teach the consequences.
Of course tolerance, empathy and respect are important —
but not at the expense of fairness, sound medical and social
science data and freedom of speech.
Michelle
Turner, RoseMarie Briggs and Martha Schaerr came to the
highly publicized school board meeting as leaders.
Teressa Wallace, Valerie Dickey, MaryAnn Parsons and Kari
Marshall came as concerned parents holding small signs expressing
their opinions.
RoseMarie Briggs, Family Leader Network executive
director, is in the center. The person on right is Michelle
Turner, director of Citizens for Responsible Curriculum.
Michelle Turner attended the
school board meeting as president of a grassroots organization
called Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC).
CRC does not oppose health curriculum about homosexuality
as long as it is presented in an age-appropriate, medically
accurate and fair manner.
CRC and another organization
called Parents and Friends of Gays and Ex-Gays (PFOX) were
the plaintiffs in the 2005 lawsuit against the school system.
When the controversial curriculum was originally approved
in the fall of 2004, Turner made several attempts to speak
with school officials. When the concerns of CRC and
a petition signed by 4,000 citizens were ignored, CRC had
no alternative but to file legal charges.
In response to the new curriculum,
CRC stated, "Montgomery
County’s reworked sex ed curriculum
is still filled with sexual material that many of the county’s
parents would find objectionable." According
to CRC, nowhere in the curriculum is sex placed
within the context of marriage, and the new sections
on sexual orientation fail to discuss the increased risk
of sexually transmitted disease inherent in homosexual sex.
At
the school board meeting Turner testified "Once
again, we are looking at a curriculum that seeks to introduce
young children to acts and lifestyles that are proven medically
to be hazardous to one's health, both physically and emotionally."
She
had earlier submitted a minority report where she wrote,
“Permeating the entire curriculum and the CAC recommendations
are the themes that homosexuality and transgenderism are
normal, natural, unchangeable and healthy conditions requiring
only acceptance, understanding and, indeed, empathy and
respect from students. Totally absent is any consideration
or mention of opposing viewpoints concerning moral objections
and medical risks associated with these conditions, or even
the possibility that changing one’s sexual orientation may
be possible. Missing also is any recognition of the possibility
of some students having beliefs and viewpoints contrary
to those favored in the curriculum, much less to express
those beliefs and viewpoints.
“The curriculum
further violates required viewpoint neutrality by exclusively
advocating and presenting only the one dogma of moral approval
of homosexuality and cross-dressing. School policy forbids
students from mentioning beliefs contrary to this dogma.”
One
member of the curriculum advisory committee said, "We
must remember this is a health class, not a political agenda.
Don't kick the children around like a...political football."
RoseMarie
Briggs, executive director of Family Leader Network, told
reporters that, “If schools insist on teaching about
homosexual behavior they should include all the facts and
teach all the consequences. We are alarmed that
the Citizens Advisory Committee rejected a letter by 270
physicians who urged the committee to include a warning
on condom use by the U.S Surgeon General in the 10th grade
lesson plan and the condom demonstration video. Former
U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Koop, stated ‘‘Condoms provide
some protection, but anal intercourse is simply too dangerous
to practice.”
Briggs also pointed out that
overall the curriculum fails to teach consequences both
positive and negative. Her picture and the following
quote were in the Washington Times, "We are disappointed
that the curriculum fails to teach the positive consequences
of marriage." Click here to read the entire article. http://www.washingtontimes.com/metro/20070109-113745-5638r.htm
Some
Family Leader members held handmade signs that got the attention
of reporters. The Washington Post, the
largest newspaper in the nation's capital, reported that "About
15 opponents of the curriculum appeared at the board meeting,
carrying signs that read, ‘Children's health before political
agendas’ and ‘Not viewpoint neutral.’” Click here
to read the entire article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901707.html
Family Leader member MaryAnn
Parsons approached the superintendent of schools after the
vote and asked him what provisions were available for teachers
who are religiously and morally opposed to teaching this
new curriculum. He responded that was something they
would have to think about and discuss.
Biased Curriculum Presented
as Fair
The Montgomery County school board unanimously
approved the new lesson plans and praised the writing committee,
though opponents had demonstrated several inaccuracies and
deficiencies in the curriculum that they believe promotes
a dangerous practice. One board member said, ‘‘I believe
this is a thorough, thoughtful, medically appropriate, age-appropriate
curriculum, and I am very proud of it. During the
meeting the board also approved an addition to the curriculum
requiring teachers to tell students that ‘‘sexual
orientation is innate and a complex part of one’s personality.”
Turner responded by saying ‘‘I’d like to know their
medical data that proves homosexuality is innate.”
Prior to the vote, Turner
and representatives from PFOX pointed out to the school
board that nowhere in the curriculum is there any mention
of people who change their sexual orientation from homosexual
to heterosexual. Below are direct quotes
from the lesson plans. For more information go to
CRC's website at http://www.mcpscurriculum.com/
The curriculum advisory committee
also rejected the warnings of Dr. Dean Byrd, a respected
clinical psychologist and former president of National Association
of Research and Therapy of Homosexuals http://www.narth.com Dr. Byrd said, “There are two great dangers posed by these
two health lesson plans. First and perhaps foremost is that
the lessons encourage self-labeling. Research is very
conclusive in this area: the risk of suicide decreases
by 20 percent for each year that a young person delays homosexual
or bisexual self-labeling (Remafidi et al, 1991)...The
second major danger is the stark omission of health risks
associated with homosexual practices, particularly during
adolescence (American Journal of Public Health, June, 2003).”
Become a School Board
Monitor in Your Area
Family Leader Network is looking
for people to be school board monitors. A monitor
is someone who is aware of what controversial issues are
being taught or introduced in schools, especially in sex
education classes. A monitor stays informed using
school websites and news reports and attends school board
meetings as necessary. Family Leader Network has access
to top legal and medial experts to review controversial
curriculum and help concerned parents express their views.
If you would like to join us
in protecting school children from biased and medically
dangerous curriculum, please email RoseMarie Briggs at rkbriggs@verizon.net
Helpful Resources
Respect
and the Facts: How to Have Both in the Sexual Orientation
Debate” is a booklet that provides another perspective
concerning sexual orientation. The booklet is a response
to "Just the Facts About Sexual Orientation and Youth."
The "Just the Facts..." booklet is published by
the National Education Association and has been sent to
most public schools in the nation.
The authors of Respect the
Facts believe the "Just the Facts..." booklet
presents only one perspective on an issue that requires
balance. Educators need to consider the need for balance
in light of the Citizens for Responsible Curriculum et v.
Montgomery County Maryland Public Schools federal court
decision. Click here for the Respect and the Facts
website http://www.respectandthefacts.com/
and click here for a printable copy of Sexual Orientation
& Public Schools: A Balanced Approach http://www.drthrockmorton.com/respect
andthefacts/documents/sexualorientation.pdf
The Legal Liability Associated
with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools:
An assessment of the risks and liabilities associated
with policies and programs that normalize homosexual behavior
in public schools by Citizens for Community Values http://www.ccv.org/images/Legal_
\Liability_of_Homosexuality_Education-Natl.pdf
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services 4Parents.gov click here http://www.4parents.gov/
