Judge orders 'gay' agenda taught to Christian children
Pastor Dale Morgan
Judge orders 'gay' agenda taught to Christian children*
Rules kids need teachings to be 'engaged and productive citizens'
Posted: February 24, 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.
Parker was arrested and jailed in Lexington in April 2005 over his
request – and the school's refusal – to notify him when adults discuss
homosexuality or transgenderism with his 6-year-old kindergartner. That
despite a state law requiring such notification.
The incident made news around the nation and even Gov. Mitt Romney
agreed with Parker.
However, in April 2006 the same school presented the book "King and
King," about homosexual romances and marriage, to second-graders and
again refused to provide notification.
Parker and other parents followed with the federal civil rights lawsuit,
alleging school officials were refusing to follow state law.
David Parker's son brought home the book 'Who's in a Family?' in
school's 'Diversity Book Bag' (Image: Article 8 Alliance)
Just days later, David Parker's son, Jacob, was beaten up at Estabrook
Elementary, officials said. MassResistance said a group of 8-10 kids
surrounded him and took him out of sight of "patrolling aides," then
pummeled and beat him.
"The state must fight 'discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation' in ways that 'do not perpetuate stereotypes,'" the lawyers
for the school district had argued at an earlier motions hearing. They
also explained to the judge that, in their opinion, parents have no
right to control what ideas the school presents to elementary
schoolchildren.
"David Parker's dilemma … threatens the parental rights and religious
freedom of every Massachusetts parent, and indirectly every parent in
America," said John Haskins of the Parents' Rights Coalition.
"As the Lexington schools themselves are arguing, the state's right to
force pro-homosexuality indoctrination on other people's children arises
directly from former Gov. Mitt Romney's nakedly false and
unconstitutional declaration that homosexual marriage is now legal."
Haskins said when the Massachusetts state Supreme Court demanded
homosexual marriages in the state, it didn't have the constitutional or
legal authority to order the governor to act or to order the Legislature
to make any changes, and the creation of same-sex marriages in
Massachusetts actually was accomplished by executive order from Romney.