A public school district board’s decision to teach homosexuality is innate and anal sex is just an alternative will be challenged in court after officials in Maryland refused to address concerns raised by parents.
Officials with the Thomas More Law Center told WND the issues are too important to ignore.
The curriculum, developed in-house by the Montgomery County Board of Education, not only is inaccurate, but it could expose children to life-threatening diseases by failing to provide sufficient warnings about alternative sexual behaviors, according to Edward L. White III, trial counsel with the Law Center who is handling the case.
“This curriculum is full of factual inaccuracies and runs counter to sound educational policy,” he said. “It should not be taught in the public school.”
White said parents also should be alarmed by the teaching of “sexual variations.”
“The students are introduced to anal sex, which has a much higher risk rate of [various] infections,” he said. “It’s endangering the lives of students.”
“It’s not the school system that’s going to be taking care of them,” said White. “It falls on parents, because the school did not do its job.”
Several local organizations protested to the local board and then the state education board. They asked that the material at least include a warning about anal sex that was issued by the Office of the Surgeon General and the National Institutes of Health, but their requests were denied.
That leaves the program material, “the result of pressure by homosexual advocacy groups,” subject to a legal challenge, the Law Center said.
A notice of appeal already has been filed, and the briefs will follow soon, said the officials from the center. They will be assisted by Maryland attorney John R. Garza, who already is involved in the dispute.
“I’m impressed with the principled and steadfast opposition by these pro-family groups to this outrageously hedonistic and life-threatening sexuality curriculum,” said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel for the center. “The Law Center will do everything we can to assist them in their fight.”
The pro-family groups had raised objections to the material on several issues, including the teaching that homosexuality is “innate,” even though that’s an unproven theory. They said it also teaches students anal sex is just another option without warning about the increased HIV/AIDS risk, and it labels as “homophobic” children who hold traditional religious or moral beliefs about homosexuality. It also teaches transgenderism is just another “orientation,” even though that has been classified as a mental disorder.
The Law Center says its aim is to defend and promote the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation and related activities.
White said the door was left wide open for a challenge.
“One of the issues is that they didn’t follow the proper state procedures in passing this curriculum and also that this curriculum runs contrary to what is required through the state code,” White said.
“The most stunning thing [is] there is no great outcry about these programs. People just kind of accept it and move along. They don’t have to,” White said. “Their children should be the most important thing.”
WND earlier reported that the Maryland Board of Education had rejected an appeal regarding the curriculum, and Regina Griggs, executive director of PFOX, said the lessons would leave sound education doctrine “turned on its head.”
“The MBOE has taken the preposterous position that questioning children can now be taught that they are ‘born that way’ until science proves otherwise ‘with a preponderance of evidence,'” she said.
“Millions of dollars and three decades of research have failed to prove that homosexuality is innate or that change is not possible,” said Griggs.
Montgomery County parents have been battling their local school board over the addition of the promotional lessons for homosexuality since 2004, when they won a delay in the courts after the school board announced plans to impose the curriculum.
The state board admitted there would be differing viewpoints on the description of homosexuality as innate, but that didn’t matter in its decision-making process.
The new lessons are intended for eighth-graders, and will focus on “respecting” differences. They adopt the language and points of emphasis employed by promoters of homosexuality.
Tenth-graders will be taught about making announcements that they are homosexual and how to use a condom.
WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators have promoted a homosexual lifestyle to children.
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 used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.
That drew vehement objections from several educators, 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 in which 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.