Glad MCPS is getting sued

[Anonymous]

One of the books they are complaining about has a boy who is transgender and his older brother says "That doesn't make sense." and the mom says "Not everything has to make sense. This is about love."

I wonder what they would think if the book was about religious tolerance, and someone said something like "Someone dying and then coming back to life--that doesn't make sense." And the person responded "Not everything has to make sense. You can love that person even if their religion doesn't make sense to you." It's pretty much exactly the same point -- other people's stuff doesn't have to make sense to you, but you can still love them or treat them with respect and kindness even when their stuff doesn't make sense to you.

This is such a stupid waste of everyone's money. Kids that age read a book every day in class. If one book out of 180 is about gay rights, it won't turn them gay or even make them "sex positive." It might make them less likely to say something mean to the kid next to him who has two dads, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

LGBTQ "sexual norms" like getting married. Or existing.

In any case, if you're saying that MCPS is excluding Muslim people by including LGBTQ people, that's just factually incorrect. How do I know this? Because there are Muslim people who are LGBTQ (or LGBTQ people who are Muslim, whichever way around you want to have it). "Pride Puppy!" is not an anti-Muslim book, or an anti-Christian book, or an anti-anybody book, except maybe anti- people who don't like rainbows or puppies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

I'm going to the church of the spaghetti monster and stupidity greatly offends me. I think we should have it banned. Does anyone want to join me in the class action against stupidity?

1. Get your church recognized as a church

2. File a lawsuit and try your luck

1. That is a church

2. They are both very litigious and very successful in their litigation.

Then may the best church win.

HOw about we keep religion out of schools altogether? Instill those values at home if you wish, but I don't care what religious sensibilities the curriculum is offending.

That's nice. Your opinion doesn't decide. A judge, in a court of law, does.

Didn't they already decide to separate church and state a long time ago though? Where would I have seen that....? Oh yeah, the constitution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

LGBTQ "sexual norms" like getting married. Or existing.

In any case, if you're saying that MCPS is excluding Muslim people by including LGBTQ people, that's just factually incorrect. How do I know this? Because there are Muslim people who are LGBTQ (or LGBTQ people who are Muslim, whichever way around you want to have it). "Pride Puppy!" is not an anti-Muslim book, or an anti-Christian book, or an anti-anybody book, except maybe anti- people who don't like rainbows or puppies.

MCPS is excluding Muslim people because they are forcing material on them that offends them, makes them uncomfortable, and violates their religious beliefs. It's really that simple so I don't know why you don't get it.

Read the lawsuit. I think the parents suing explain their stance quite well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

I'm going to the church of the spaghetti monster and stupidity greatly offends me. I think we should have it banned. Does anyone want to join me in the class action against stupidity?

1. Get your church recognized as a church

2. File a lawsuit and try your luck

1. That is a church

2. They are both very litigious and very successful in their litigation.

The Satanic Temple too.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like everybody should just send an individualized curriculum to school for their kid.

Homeschool your kid OP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see that many posters don't know the books in question or the nature of the lawsuit.

Do yourself a favor and read up so you can educate yourself on the matter instead of running with half-baked information: https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20230524130022/Complaint-in-Mahmoud-v.-McKnight.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

What about a religion that believes that segregation is God ordained? Those exist, but we've never had a system that let people opt out of learning about Martin Luther King.

Which religion and have those parents organized to voice complaints about MLK in the curriculum or racial integration in schools? I'll wait.

The various Creativity movement churches (World Church of the Creator and similar). I don't think they've ever organized for that (I imagine most of them home school), but if the rule is "you get to opt out of anything that violates your religious beliefs," they count.

[Anonymous]

As a Catholic, it drives me NUTS when Catholics want to blur the lines between church and state. Hey, all, remember we did that? And what did it get us? The inquisition and the reformation -- not our best moments. And then it got flipped, and got us Henry VIII burning us at the stake and stealing our land...so not great for us that way either. Separation of church and state is a great idea for governments, but it's an even better idea for religions! I hate it when religious people forget that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

LGBTQ "sexual norms" like getting married. Or existing.

In any case, if you're saying that MCPS is excluding Muslim people by including LGBTQ people, that's just factually incorrect. How do I know this? Because there are Muslim people who are LGBTQ (or LGBTQ people who are Muslim, whichever way around you want to have it). "Pride Puppy!" is not an anti-Muslim book, or an anti-Christian book, or an anti-anybody book, except maybe anti- people who don't like rainbows or puppies.

MCPS is excluding Muslim people because they are forcing material on them that offends them, makes them uncomfortable, and violates their religious beliefs. It's really that simple so I don't know why you don't get it.

Read the lawsuit. I think the parents suing explain their stance quite well.

Who cares!!!!! Keep your religion at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

I'm going to the church of the spaghetti monster and stupidity greatly offends me. I think we should have it banned. Does anyone want to join me in the class action against stupidity?

1. Get your church recognized as a church

2. File a lawsuit and try your luck

1. That is a church

2. They are both very litigious and very successful in their litigation.

Then may the best church win.

HOw about we keep religion out of schools altogether? Instill those values at home if you wish, but I don't care what religious sensibilities the curriculum is offending.

That's nice. Your opinion doesn't decide. A judge, in a court of law, does.

Didn't they already decide to separate church and state a long time ago though? Where would I have seen that....? Oh yeah, the constitution.

Your understanding of the Constitution stinks.

Separation of Church and State means the government doesn't have an official religion. Freedom of Religion ensures that people cannot be COMPELLED to do things that violate their faith.

Perfect example of this is standing for the pledge of allegiance: Which schools were forced to not compel students to do for First Amendment reasons in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette.

Reciting the pledge of allegiance is a long tradition in U.S. schools. It’s also a long tradition for some students to stay silent or sit during the pledge, as a way of expressing their political or religious beliefs. Somewhat more recently, student athletes have held silent protests while the national anthem plays at high school and college football games. Teachers, coaches, and administrators regularly try to punish these students, but they have to answer to the First Amendment and the constitutional right to freedom of expression in public schools.

Silence and Sitting Count as Speech
As far back as 1943, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that requiring all public school students to recite the pledge of allegiance was a violation of their First Amendment rights, because free speech includes the right not to speak against your beliefs (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)). And as the Court made clear more than 20 years later, public schools must also respect students right to express their opinions through actions (known as “symbolic speech”), as long as they aren’t being too disruptive. (Learn more about when schools may limit students' free speech rights.)

The Supreme Court hasn’t directly addressed the issue of students refusing to stand for the pledge or the national anthem—clear examples of symbolic speech. But federal appellate courts have agreed that public schools may not force students to stand during the pledge. And just as public schools (including colleges and universities) shouldn’t punish students for exercising their First Amendment rights, they also shouldn’t withhold privileges—like participation in school sports or attending school games—for the same actions.

So again, there's precedent for letting students opt out of school experiences or curriculum that violate their faith. MCPS is on shaky ground, in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

LGBTQ "sexual norms" like getting married. Or existing.

In any case, if you're saying that MCPS is excluding Muslim people by including LGBTQ people, that's just factually incorrect. How do I know this? Because there are Muslim people who are LGBTQ (or LGBTQ people who are Muslim, whichever way around you want to have it). "Pride Puppy!" is not an anti-Muslim book, or an anti-Christian book, or an anti-anybody book, except maybe anti- people who don't like rainbows or puppies.

MCPS is excluding Muslim people because they are forcing material on them that offends them, makes them uncomfortable, and violates their religious beliefs. It's really that simple so I don't know why you don't get it.

Read the lawsuit. I think the parents suing explain their stance quite well.

It doesn't violate their religious beliefs to hear that gay people exist (and that they get married or have parades). It may violate their religion for them to engage in same-sex sexual activities, or to fund such activities, or to marry a person of the same sex. But no one is requiring their kids to do that. It's not like they are being required to eat bacon at school, or required to kiss someone of the same sex, or required to do tequila shots, or anything else that might actually violate their religion. It's really that simple, so I don't know why you don't get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

What about a religion that believes that segregation is God ordained? Those exist, but we've never had a system that let people opt out of learning about Martin Luther King.

Which religion and have those parents organized to voice complaints about MLK in the curriculum or racial integration in schools? I'll wait.

The various Creativity movement churches (World Church of the Creator and similar). I don't think they've ever organized for that (I imagine most of them home school), but if the rule is "you get to opt out of anything that violates your religious beliefs," they count.

If they care about that position that much, those groups are welcome to organize, petition and lobby for that stance. This is a free country. They're allowed to do that. Just like these Muslim parents are too.

[Anonymous]

The complaint is so poorly written. I hope they lose but MCPS doesn't seem to be very skilled at litigation. Keep your religion out of public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some of these books are problematic and I can understand why parents want to opt-out. I think MCPS has a good chance of losing based on freedom of religion grounds.

My daughter was forced to read a Boy Named Penelope and we don't agree with the viewpoints expressed in that book. I think it's dangerous for MCPS to take a stance on gender theory. None of this stuff is settled and we are very much in the throes of a societal debate about it, so people acting like people who disagree are neanderthals are wrong. There's lots of room for shades of gray here, but the activists won't allow it.

I think they are opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students. The religious right doesn't get to decide for everyone any more and they are having a hissy fit about it.

They are not opting for the inclusivity of ALL of their students because Muslim parents are TELLING you these books and teachings about LGBTQ sexual norms and family structures VIOLATE their faith. They're not the only ones who this applies to.

You can't say you're inclusive for all when a significant chunk of students, who are Muslim or more conservative Christian, tell you this violates their faith. You're choosing to offend some to please others. And that's fine. But that's NOT inclusive and is the opposite of that.

LGBTQ "sexual norms" like getting married. Or existing.

In any case, if you're saying that MCPS is excluding Muslim people by including LGBTQ people, that's just factually incorrect. How do I know this? Because there are Muslim people who are LGBTQ (or LGBTQ people who are Muslim, whichever way around you want to have it). "Pride Puppy!" is not an anti-Muslim book, or an anti-Christian book, or an anti-anybody book, except maybe anti- people who don't like rainbows or puppies.

MCPS is excluding Muslim people because they are forcing material on them that offends them, makes them uncomfortable, and violates their religious beliefs. It's really that simple so I don't know why you don't get it.

Read the lawsuit. I think the parents suing explain their stance quite well.

It doesn't violate their religious beliefs to hear that gay people exist (and that they get married or have parades). It may violate their religion for them to engage in same-sex sexual activities, or to fund such activities, or to marry a person of the same sex. But no one is requiring their kids to do that. It's not like they are being required to eat bacon at school, or required to kiss someone of the same sex, or required to do tequila shots, or anything else that might actually violate their religion. It's really that simple, so I don't know why you don't get it.

The books don't just say, "Hey, gay people exist." They advocate and push for specific viewpoints on gender and sexuality in a one-sided way.

It would be fair if the book was about the SPECTRUM of sexuality and gender and included all viewpoints, but it doesn't.