Wall Street Journal on Gender Storytime in Montgomery County

[Anonymous]

I recall MCPS having one month , entire one month, for this LGBTQ etc. They have gone nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has gone overboard with the LGBTQ stuff. My middle school-aged daughter commented once that she felt they were trying to turn the kids gay. I'm being 100% real here.

It grooming , plain and simple.

You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Not only did MCPS push this, members of the County Council wrote letters in support of it (and are now running trying to keep their jobs or get promoted to County Executive). This will cost MoCo millions and yet the council will just pass it along to us taxpayers. They need to be fired as well!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has gone overboard with the LGBTQ stuff. My middle school-aged daughter commented once that she felt they were trying to turn the kids gay. I'm being 100% real here.

It grooming , plain and simple.

You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Fine, it’s indoctrination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has gone overboard with the LGBTQ stuff. My middle school-aged daughter commented once that she felt they were trying to turn the kids gay. I'm being 100% real here.

It grooming , plain and simple.

You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Fine, it’s indoctrination.

Forced indoctrination. DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only did MCPS push this, members of the County Council wrote letters in support of it (and are now running trying to keep their jobs or get promoted to County Executive). This will cost MoCo millions and yet the council will just pass it along to us taxpayers. They need to be fired as well!

They are evil, evil, evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has gone overboard with the LGBTQ stuff. My middle school-aged daughter commented once that she felt they were trying to turn the kids gay. I'm being 100% real here.

It grooming , plain and simple.

It does feel like grooming. In MS, we had a homeroom teacher who would not let the boys use he/him and it had to be something else. My kid just refused to do the assignments and she'd mark him absent when he was there. I spoke to her and the principal and they refused to change the absences. She also pressed them to change their names to nicknames. That really pissed me off as there is a huge significance to the name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is anyone’s religious conviction harmed by learning about other people’s circumstances? Might shaky faith.

People are very sensitive about what gets taught to very young children. It’s not hard to understand.

Then take your kid to private school. It isn’t a cooperative.

Kids are learning to be accepting of the kid next to them. People feel really uncomfortable about that and it is sad and close-minded. But that’s religion.

Nope, our kids have just as much a right to a public education as yours. If we can’t come to an agreement then we can leave it to the courts to decide.

Where is the budget to help with everything being opted out of?

Where do we vote on the entirety of the curriculum?

How about let’s leave the controversial topics out of elementary. Then you don’t have to worry about opt outs.

Even MCPS principals were warning against the changes. That should have been a red flag.

[Anonymous]

I wish this thread could separate bad teachers from the question of inclusive books. MCPS is a super diverse population and it decided to use books for the library, story time where kids could see kids and families that look like their own. Since LGBTQ families exist in MCPS they include books that include LGBTQ characters just as they include characters such as divorced parents, Jewish kids, Muslim kids, Black kids, adopted kids, disabled kids and so on. Sex is not shown. The idea is books should feature characters who are not just white, Christian, from married straight families etc…Allowing opt out of seeing books that include lgbtq characters since this is against your religion sets terrible president. If parents can opt out of exposure to books that are not in line with their religion, then it is not just books with LGBTQ characters who could be seen as something parents want their kids not to see. That said, MCPS should have done a better job selecting books to avoid triggering parents, especially in elementary school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only did MCPS push this, members of the County Council wrote letters in support of it (and are now running trying to keep their jobs or get promoted to County Executive). This will cost MoCo millions and yet the council will just pass it along to us taxpayers. They need to be fired as well!

No the opt out will cost millions.

You guys just make things up constantly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish this thread could separate bad teachers from the question of inclusive books. MCPS is a super diverse population and it decided to use books for the library, story time where kids could see kids and families that look like their own. Since LGBTQ families exist in MCPS they include books that include LGBTQ characters just as they include characters such as divorced parents, Jewish kids, Muslim kids, Black kids, adopted kids, disabled kids and so on. Sex is not shown. The idea is books should feature characters who are not just white, Christian, from married straight families etc…Allowing opt out of seeing books that include lgbtq characters since this is against your religion sets terrible president. If parents can opt out of exposure to books that are not in line with their religion, then it is not just books with LGBTQ characters who could be seen as something parents want their kids not to see. That said, MCPS should have done a better job selecting books to avoid triggering parents, especially in elementary school.

Trust that the parents would have been upset regardless. Bc it is just discomfort with trans kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not only did MCPS push this, members of the County Council wrote letters in support of it (and are now running trying to keep their jobs or get promoted to County Executive). This will cost MoCo millions and yet the council will just pass it along to us taxpayers. They need to be fired as well!

No the opt out will cost millions.

You guys just make things up constantly.

Show us your data/citation that the opt out alone will cost millions. MCPS had it before- did it cost them millions then?

[Anonymous]

A cbs news article I read about the oral argument today contained this anecdote. Anyone know what board member it’s referring to who made these statements that the justices highlighted?

From the article…”The families also said that at least one member of the board demonstrated religious hostility toward them, claiming they likened them to ‘white supremacists’ and ‘xenophobes.’ Justice Neil Gorsuch repeatedly raised the comments, and asked Shoenfeld if they ‘suggest a hostility toward religion.’ Shoenfeld said the remarks were taken out of context but acknowledged they were ‘intemperate.’”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A cbs news article I read about the oral argument today contained this anecdote. Anyone know what board member it’s referring to who made these statements that the justices highlighted?

From the article…”The families also said that at least one member of the board demonstrated religious hostility toward them, claiming they likened them to ‘white supremacists’ and ‘xenophobes.’ Justice Neil Gorsuch repeatedly raised the comments, and asked Shoenfeld if they ‘suggest a hostility toward religion.’ Shoenfeld said the remarks were taken out of context but acknowledged they were ‘intemperate.’”

That was referring to comments by Kristin Mink, who is a county council member, not a BOE member.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A cbs news article I read about the oral argument today contained this anecdote. Anyone know what board member it’s referring to who made these statements that the justices highlighted?

From the article…”The families also said that at least one member of the board demonstrated religious hostility toward them, claiming they likened them to ‘white supremacists’ and ‘xenophobes.’ Justice Neil Gorsuch repeatedly raised the comments, and asked Shoenfeld if they ‘suggest a hostility toward religion.’ Shoenfeld said the remarks were taken out of context but acknowledged they were ‘intemperate.’”

It was Lynne Harris. She failed to be re-elected to the board.