Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how forcing Muslim families to let their children read books normalizing gay families as a condition of access to a public education is "welcoming" or "holding hands." It's distinctly hostile to them, basically secular imperialism of religious households.

That’s just it. MCPS ran headlong into actual diversity and tried to crush it. So much for inclusion and tolerance.

This is Popper’s paradox.

You don’t have to be tolerant of intolerance. As a matter of fact, you shouldn’t be.

Now, maybe something isn’t age appropriate, that’s a different story, but it isn’t intolerant to refuse to accept accept bigotry.

The parents weren't being bigoted. You can't just label everything bigotry.

NP. I'm not labeling everything. I'm labeling this. Becuase it is bigotry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how forcing Muslim families to let their children read books normalizing gay families as a condition of access to a public education is "welcoming" or "holding hands." It's distinctly hostile to them, basically secular imperialism of religious households.

That’s just it. MCPS ran headlong into actual diversity and tried to crush it. So much for inclusion and tolerance.

I'm not tolerant of bigotry and that should not be catered to in PUBLIC schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will be a short post, I just need to vent. The MoCo ruling was a slap in the face to the public education system. First with vouchers then with this, MAGA is attempting to destroy public schooling in America. I honestly feel hopeless about this. Is there anything I can do besides give up?

No, it was not a slap in the face to the school system.

It was a victory for parent rights. Why should children have to be exposed to concepts that are not age appropriate? What is wrong with allowing parents to opt their kids out of such instruction?

“Concepts that are not age appropriate” like marriage and families? Because most kids will be exposed to those concepts pretty early…

Yes, but in a more subversive way. Tbf, if my first grader had to read a book focusing on a marriage between a man and woman, I wouldn't be comfortable with that, either.

You mean like every happily ever after after fairy tale?

Can you name a fairy tale where the primary activity is a wedding? That's like grooming children to be child brides.

How many stories have you read where in the end a gay couple is happily married? Even if the rest of the story is about working as a housekeeper to a household of men, working as a housekeeper to a mean family, getting exited about going to a party, getting kissed by a man while unconscious, getting saved by a man while trapped in a tower, etc, etc.
Don't be dense. Children are plied with stories of women needing to be saved and having a happy marriage to men as the end all be all. Being read a couple of stories about happy gay couples and trans kids - who exist as classmates and their families - is not going to cause irreparable harm, as much as Alito wants you to believe.

That is the dominant value system in the US and the world. The public schools do not have a right to try to reshape the values of the youth against their parents protest.

Do you not understand that you are trying to implement the same "settler colonialism" that you also rail against? Traditional cultures have a right to persist.

The law in the US doesn’t give a hoot about your “values” a gay marriage is legally equal to your own. I don’t live in the rest of the world.

Enjoy opting out. Additional things will be opted out for your child. I hope your values are worth their isolation.

The premise being that all that matters when deciding what to teach children is that it be "legally equivalent" to things that students also know about. Hoo boy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how forcing Muslim families to let their children read books normalizing gay families as a condition of access to a public education is "welcoming" or "holding hands." It's distinctly hostile to them, basically secular imperialism of religious households.

That’s just it. MCPS ran headlong into actual diversity and tried to crush it. So much for inclusion and tolerance.

This is Popper’s paradox.

You don’t have to be tolerant of intolerance. As a matter of fact, you shouldn’t be.

Now, maybe something isn’t age appropriate, that’s a different story, but it isn’t intolerant to refuse to accept accept bigotry.

The parents weren't being bigoted. You can't just label everything bigotry.

Anonymous wrote:MCPS was dumb to fight it.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how forcing Muslim families to let their children read books normalizing gay families as a condition of access to a public education is "welcoming" or "holding hands." It's distinctly hostile to them, basically secular imperialism of religious households.

That’s just it. MCPS ran headlong into actual diversity and tried to crush it. So much for inclusion and tolerance.

This is Popper’s paradox.

You don’t have to be tolerant of intolerance. As a matter of fact, you shouldn’t be.

Now, maybe something isn’t age appropriate, that’s a different story, but it isn’t intolerant to refuse to accept accept bigotry.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Honest question here because I am well versed in the law as it relates to this decision. Does this mean that a Holocaust-denying familiy can opt their high school student out of a history class unit on the Holocaust? As a former HS history teacher, this frightens me. A lot. What do we do with that student over the several weeks of study of this topic? It is not one book or a one-day lesson plan.

I guess they go to study hall and read military history books about WWII???

What about evolution? That's another one where families may want to opt out.

This will turn into a logistical nightmare for the schools and teachers. [/quote]
Yes, you are right. Sotomayor's dissent is along these lines. It is puzzling that in the past, religious parents have failed when they tried to use free exercise as an excuse to get their kids opted out of classes that taught evolutionary theory, that taught about women who have achieved success outside the home, and that read stories about wizards and imaginary animals. But with this massive expansion of Yoder, there is a good chance that parents can choose to have their kids opt out of a lot of instruction based on religious beliefs.[/quote]
And yes, it will be a logistical nightmare, especially for teachers of younger children who need direct supervision during opt outs.[/quote]

If you don't use books that are offensive to the values of a wide swath of Americans, you won't experience logistical nightmares.[b] Let's be realistic, no one sued over stories about successful women. You've made that up as a strawman. [/b]They sued over stories celebrating transgenderism and gay marriage, concepts that remain controversial. At some point, you have to accept that Muslims, conservative Christians, etc have a right to exist. [/quote]

I agree with your bottom line, but this exact issue actually did come up during oral argument. The attorney for the plaintiffs argued that families who espouse traditional gender roles would have a right to opt their children out of lessons or materials involving, for example, Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Sandra Day O'Connor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will be a short post, I just need to vent. The MoCo ruling was a slap in the face to the public education system. First with vouchers then with this, MAGA is attempting to destroy public schooling in America. I honestly feel hopeless about this. Is there anything I can do besides give up?

No, it was not a slap in the face to the school system.

It was a victory for parent rights. Why should children have to be exposed to concepts that are not age appropriate? What is wrong with allowing parents to opt their kids out of such instruction?

“Concepts that are not age appropriate” like marriage and families? Because most kids will be exposed to those concepts pretty early…

Yes, but in a more subversive way. Tbf, if my first grader had to read a book focusing on a marriage between a man and woman, I wouldn't be comfortable with that, either.

You mean like every happily ever after after fairy tale?

Can you name a fairy tale where the primary activity is a wedding? That's like grooming children to be child brides.

How many stories have you read where in the end a gay couple is happily married? Even if the rest of the story is about working as a housekeeper to a household of men, working as a housekeeper to a mean family, getting exited about going to a party, getting kissed by a man while unconscious, getting saved by a man while trapped in a tower, etc, etc.
Don't be dense. Children are plied with stories of women needing to be saved and having a happy marriage to men as the end all be all. Being read a couple of stories about happy gay couples and trans kids - who exist as classmates and their families - is not going to cause irreparable harm, as much as Alito wants you to believe.

Is Cinderella taught in schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will be a short post, I just need to vent. The MoCo ruling was a slap in the face to the public education system. First with vouchers then with this, MAGA is attempting to destroy public schooling in America. I honestly feel hopeless about this. Is there anything I can do besides give up?

No, it was not a slap in the face to the school system.

It was a victory for parent rights. Why should children have to be exposed to concepts that are not age appropriate? What is wrong with allowing parents to opt their kids out of such instruction?

“Concepts that are not age appropriate” like marriage and families? Because most kids will be exposed to those concepts pretty early…

So is where they teach about marriage to six year old children.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how forcing Muslim families to let their children read books normalizing gay families as a condition of access to a public education is "welcoming" or "holding hands." It's distinctly hostile to them, basically secular imperialism of religious households.

That’s just it. MCPS ran headlong into actual diversity and tried to crush it. So much for inclusion and tolerance.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Honest question here because I am well versed in the law as it relates to this decision. Does this mean that a Holocaust-denying familiy can opt their high school student out of a history class unit on the Holocaust? As a former HS history teacher, this frightens me. A lot. What do we do with that student over the several weeks of study of this topic? It is not one book or a one-day lesson plan.

I guess they go to study hall and read military history books about WWII???

What about evolution? That's another one where families may want to opt out.

This will turn into a logistical nightmare for the schools and teachers. [/quote]
Yes, you are right. Sotomayor's dissent is along these lines. It is puzzling that in the past, religious parents have failed when they tried to use free exercise as an excuse to get their kids opted out of classes that taught evolutionary theory, that taught about women who have achieved success outside the home, and that read stories about wizards and imaginary animals. But with this massive expansion of Yoder, there is a good chance that parents can choose to have their kids opt out of a lot of instruction based on religious beliefs.[/quote]
And yes, it will be a logistical nightmare, especially for teachers of younger children who need direct supervision during opt outs.[/quote]

If you don't use books that are offensive to the values of a wide swath of Americans, you won't experience logistical nightmares. Let's be realistic, no one sued over stories about successful women. You've made that up as a strawman. They sued over stories celebrating transgenderism and gay marriage, concepts that remain controversial. At some point, you have to accept that Muslims, conservative Christians, etc have a right to exist.

Anonymous wrote:Honest question here because I am well versed in the law as it relates to this decision. Does this mean that a Holocaust-denying familiy can opt their high school student out of a history class unit on the Holocaust? As a former HS history teacher, this frightens me. A lot. What do we do with that student over the several weeks of study of this topic? It is not one book or a one-day lesson plan.

I guess they go to study hall and read military history books about WWII???

What about evolution? That's another one where families may want to opt out.

This will turn into a logistical nightmare for the schools and teachers.

Can’t wait till they find out about the Loving ruling….they’ll opt out of that day of class for “traditional values” too right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will be a short post, I just need to vent. The MoCo ruling was a slap in the face to the public education system. First with vouchers then with this, MAGA is attempting to destroy public schooling in America. I honestly feel hopeless about this. Is there anything I can do besides give up?

No, it was not a slap in the face to the school system.

It was a victory for parent rights. Why should children have to be exposed to concepts that are not age appropriate? What is wrong with allowing parents to opt their kids out of such instruction?

“Concepts that are not age appropriate” like marriage and families? Because most kids will be exposed to those concepts pretty early…

Yes, but in a more subversive way. Tbf, if my first grader had to read a book focusing on a marriage between a man and woman, I wouldn't be comfortable with that, either.

You mean like every happily ever after after fairy tale?

Can you name a fairy tale where the primary activity is a wedding? That's like grooming children to be child brides.

How many stories have you read where in the end a gay couple is happily married? Even if the rest of the story is about working as a housekeeper to a household of men, working as a housekeeper to a mean family, getting exited about going to a party, getting kissed by a man while unconscious, getting saved by a man while trapped in a tower, etc, etc.
Don't be dense. Children are plied with stories of women needing to be saved and having a happy marriage to men as the end all be all. Being read a couple of stories about happy gay couples and trans kids - who exist as classmates and their families - is not going to cause irreparable harm, as much as Alito wants you to believe.

That is the dominant value system in the US and the world. The public schools do not have a right to try to reshape the values of the youth against their parents protest.

Do you not understand that you are trying to implement the same "settler colonialism" that you also rail against? Traditional cultures have a right to persist.

The law in the US doesn’t give a hoot about your “values” a gay marriage is legally equal to your own. I don’t live in the rest of the world.

Enjoy opting out. Additional things will be opted out for your child. I hope your values are worth their isolation.

Here is a common sense review of the books in question. Bottom line - their themes are too complex and not suitable for little kids. These books are written by adults with adult themes and being marketed to children.

https://youtu.be/i9QrFv9me00?si=_1bRKwJfzU-9cOT6

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will be a short post, I just need to vent. The MoCo ruling was a slap in the face to the public education system. First with vouchers then with this, MAGA is attempting to destroy public schooling in America. I honestly feel hopeless about this. Is there anything I can do besides give up?

No, it was not a slap in the face to the school system.

It was a victory for parent rights. Why should children have to be exposed to concepts that are not age appropriate? What is wrong with allowing parents to opt their kids out of such instruction?

“Concepts that are not age appropriate” like marriage and families? Because most kids will be exposed to those concepts pretty early…

Yes, but in a more subversive way. Tbf, if my first grader had to read a book focusing on a marriage between a man and woman, I wouldn't be comfortable with that, either.

You mean like every happily ever after after fairy tale?

Can you name a fairy tale where the primary activity is a wedding? That's like grooming children to be child brides.

Hah- like all the Disney movies the goal of the heroine is to be sweet and beautiful enough to get married- Cinderella, sleeping beauty, little mermaid.

Sure they were when I went to school. Those are books and fairy tales and yes, they are still taught in school.

CKLA one of the major curriculums used in this area has the following unit Grade 1:

Students are introduced to fairy tales that have been favorites for generations, including “Sleeping Beauty,” “Rumpelstiltskin,” “The Frog Prince,” “Hansel and Gretel,” and “Jack and the Beanstalk.” Students learn about the Brothers Grimm, identify common elements of fairy tales, consider problems and solutions, make interpretations, and compare and contrast different tales.

https://www.coreknowledge.org/free-resource/ckla-domain-09-fairy-tales/