The Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland has accomplished what science and medicine have been unable to confirm, simply declaring in its newly approved school curriculum for children that some babies are born homosexual.
Activists are appealing the decision, and former homosexuals are claiming discrimination due to the decision by the school board to pilot a controversial new sex education curriculum – against the advice of hundreds of practicing physicians in the county.
Developed by its own staff, the educational materials were given a test run in six schools in the county district at the 8th and 10th grade levels. Now they are supposed to be implemented in all schools soon.
But since its decision on Jan. 9, the school board has drawn a barrage of criticism.
A strong opponent of the curriculum is Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, a non-profit Maryland-based group formed in response to the board’s decision. According to its website, the group believes in the parental right to have “ultimate authority to guide the moral direction of their children without interference by an increasingly activist public school system.”
Another organization leading the charge against the curriculum, “Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays,” recently released a statement that, “According to the American Psychiatric Association, there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological cause for homosexuality. But now the Montgomery County Board of Education has done what science and medicine could not do by declaring in its newly approved curriculum that homosexuality is ‘innate’ or inborn.”
Unit 8:2 of the new 8th grade textbook includes a definition of innate from the 2006 edition of the Merriam Webster’s Dictionary as meaning “determined by factors present in an individual from birth.” The curriculum then instructs teachers to “Say to students, ‘Sexual orientation is innate and a complex part of one’s personality.”
But the same text contradicts itself later when asking, “What causes sexual orientation? Almost certainly there is no single reason why some people are homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual. According to the American Psychological Association, sexual orientation results from an interaction of cognitive, environmental, and biological factors.”
Parents and doctors object to the text as inaccurate, unscientific and discriminatory. The board received an objection to the material signed by more than 270 practicing physicians in Montgomery County, stating the information in the curriculum was inaccurate and possibly dangerous to students on the grounds that it did not disclose health risks associated with minority sexual behavior.
The board did not return a WND message requesting comment.
PFOX lodged its complaints on the basis that the newly approved curriculum discriminates against ex-gays and, according to PFOX representative Peter Sprigg, it “fails to tell the students that specific sexual acts can be far more harmful to them than other sexual acts … it fails to tell students that some individuals experience a change in sexual orientation in the course of their lives.”
Legal issues are also involved. According to PFOX Executive Director Regina Griggs, “The board’s own policy states that citizen advisory committees are required by Maryland law in order ‘to ensure that local school boards will be informed by a variety of opinions from citizens.’ The school board placed a PFOX representative on the committee in order to receive viewpoints from all segments of the community, yet our input to the board is continually blocked by gay activist groups and others who serve on this committee and deny equality for ex-gays. The committee has failed to serve its purpose.”
WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators have been shown to be promoting a homosexual lifestyle to children.
Just a week earlier, WND reported California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, under whose supervision hundreds of thousands of children are being educated, has used his state position and taxpayer-funded stationery to praise a “gay” pride event that has been used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.
That drew vehement objections from several, including Priscilla Schreiber, the president of the Grossmont Unified High School District governing board.
“I am outraged that a person in this high-ranking elected position would advocate an event where diversity is not just being celebrated but where pornography and indecent exposure is being perpetrated on the young and innocent children of our communities,” she said.
WND also covered the issue when officials in Boulder, Colo., held a seminar for students where they were told to “have sex,” including same-sex experiences, and “take drugs.”
Another school event promoted homosexuality to students while banning parents, and at still another, WND reported school officials ordered their 14-year-old freshman class into a “gay” indoctrination seminar after having them sign a confidentiality agreement promising not to tell their parents.
Naomi Laine is an editorial assistant for WND