Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Except the kids being opted out are the ones that need to know it’s ok and normal to be gay or be part of a gay family.

Not the school’s role.

What are you so frightened of?

If your kid is gay, transgender, reading or not reading a book is not going to change anything about his or her sexual preferences.

OTOH. That book and a sense of acceptance might save him or her from suicide.

Haven't self identification or being GPBT massively increased in recent years?

https://news.gallup.com/poll/611864/lgbtq-identification.aspx#:~:text=The%20figure%20increased%20to%204.5,included%20in%20the%20LGBTQ%2B%20estimate.

There's a huge generational divide. It's an interesting question if the rate was always really the same or as it has become more socially acceptable more people have shifted their orientation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

It quickly becomes chaos. Opt kids out of evolution in biology, books in English, topics in history.

Evolution is the only example here that has happened and it has a scientific basis to it. This is value instruction and not fact based.

Do you know what the full title of Darwin's book is?

If you didn't you might not want to talk about it in polite company

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is just the start of the next four years eroding the long-fought rights of LGBT people. What’s next? We’re only allowed to talk about the achievements of straight white men? Oh, wait.

How is this impacting their long-fought rights? What about my rights? This would be a win-win for everyone.

Seriously? You can't figure that out?

Nope, that’s why I’m asking. I have the right to keep my elementary age kid away from this garbage.

What garbage? The fact 2 women marry?

I oppose the indoctrination of all sorts of beliefs using the schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Do they just want to pretend an entire group of people don't exist?

No child in the US today will escape the knowledge that the LGBTQ+ community exists. It doesn’t need to be taught in schools.

Why exactly? Is it less important to know about the assassination of Harvey Milk than that of MLK Jr. just because one was fighting for gay rights and the other for the rights of Black Americans?

Yes, which one had a greater effect on society? The answer is obvious since his holiday is this Monday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Do they just want to pretend an entire group of people don't exist?

No child in the US today will escape the knowledge that the LGBTQ+ community exists. It doesn’t need to be taught in schools.

Do you realize how dumb that sounds? Everyone knows, but we shouldn't have books with "them" in it or acknowledge them in any way in schools? Why not? What are you afraid of?

When I walk into my kids schools, I see celebrations of everyone who doesn't look like them.l and my kids aren't white either.

In the USA everyone knows that the GLBT community exists, it's just that they have outsized celebrations and affirmations than any other community.

Liberal educators have destroyed our public schools as centers of learning and instead turned them into liberal indoctrination centers. It’s sick that they are exposing kindergartners to this “Pride Puppy” gay propaganda book. We all pay taxes to fund public schools. The least parents should be offered is not having their children exposed to content and learning material that they find offensive and against their beliefs. I believe that the a Supreme Court will find in favor of these parents. This school district is violating their religious beliefs by mandating their children b exposed to content that violates their religion. I hope this is the start of the offense LGBTQ, critical race theory and other offensive liberal ideologies being phased out of public learning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP have you read this lawsuit in its entirety?

I have they will lose .

It is the worst written lawsuit. The lawyers on the side of the religious zealots should lose their license because of how bad they wrote their side.

It is religious garbage. Worse than that they want add religious indoctrination into public schools.

Well of course it is! It's written by religious ignoramuses MAGA dorks. Not intellectuals.

You never saw the protests did you?

It was largely immigrant communities, the types that MAGA isn't a fan of.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Where is the line between kids not being exposed to gay characters in books and kids not being exposed to gay people in schools?

AP:

“The stories include a family’s attendance at a pride parade, a girl’s introduction to her uncle’s husband-to-be, a prince’s love for a knight amid their battle against a dragon, a girl’s anxiety about giving a valentine to another girl and a transgender boy’s decision to share his gender identity with his family.”

In this case, I believe the line has been crossed from education to promotion.

Agree. I have no problem with books that feature same gender parents. But when you start reading books romanticizing kids’ relationships (girls having crushes on a girl classmate) or kids changing genders, that crosses the line for me. Gender identity and romantic relationships between kids shouldn’t be topics taught in schools

So, a book like Junie B Jones which talks about her crushes on boys should be banned too right?

No books are being banned here.

That’s quite literally what this is. If a parent “opts out” of having their kid have access to these materials how does a teacher reasonably do that? They take the materials out of the classroom. It’s not like they’ll have a section in their libraries where they say “sorry Jimmy, that’s off limits to you”

If a book can be procured through other means, such as a public library, book story or Amazon, that by definition means it is not banned.

Banned in school. Better?

Gay people exist. Deal with it.

Please keep up with the case we are talking about. The plaintiffs are not asking for the books to be BANNED IN SCHOOL so your argument is irrelevant. And it’s not about teaching that gay people exist. It’s about specific books geared towards the elementary school age cohort and instructions to teachers about lessons accompanying the reading of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Where is the line between kids not being exposed to gay characters in books and kids not being exposed to gay people in schools?

AP:

“The stories include a family’s attendance at a pride parade, a girl’s introduction to her uncle’s husband-to-be, a prince’s love for a knight amid their battle against a dragon, a girl’s anxiety about giving a valentine to another girl and a transgender boy’s decision to share his gender identity with his family.”

In this case, I believe the line has been crossed from education to promotion.

Agree. I have no problem with books that feature same gender parents. But when you start reading books romanticizing kids’ relationships (girls having crushes on a girl classmate) or kids changing genders, that crosses the line for me. Gender identity and romantic relationships between kids shouldn’t be topics taught in schools

So, a book like Junie B Jones which talks about her crushes on boys should be banned too right?

No books are being banned here.

That’s quite literally what this is. If a parent “opts out” of having their kid have access to these materials how does a teacher reasonably do that? They take the materials out of the classroom. It’s not like they’ll have a section in their libraries where they say “sorry Jimmy, that’s off limits to you”

If a book can be procured through other means, such as a public library, book story or Amazon, that by definition means it is not banned.

Banned in school. Better?

Gay people exist. Deal with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Where is the line between kids not being exposed to gay characters in books and kids not being exposed to gay people in schools?

AP:

“The stories include a family’s attendance at a pride parade, a girl’s introduction to her uncle’s husband-to-be, a prince’s love for a knight amid their battle against a dragon, a girl’s anxiety about giving a valentine to another girl and a transgender boy’s decision to share his gender identity with his family.”

In this case, I believe the line has been crossed from education to promotion.

Agree. I have no problem with books that feature same gender parents. But when you start reading books romanticizing kids’ relationships (girls having crushes on a girl classmate) or kids changing genders, that crosses the line for me. Gender identity and romantic relationships between kids shouldn’t be topics taught in schools

So, a book like Junie B Jones which talks about her crushes on boys should be banned too right?

No books are being banned here.

That’s quite literally what this is. If a parent “opts out” of having their kid have access to these materials how does a teacher reasonably do that? They take the materials out of the classroom. It’s not like they’ll have a section in their libraries where they say “sorry Jimmy, that’s off limits to you”

If a book can be procured through other means, such as a public library, book story or Amazon, that by definition means it is not banned.

For sex ed, it is in middle school and parents are typically sent what is covered and then a permission slip is signed. Id be ok with LGBTQ issues being presented in middle school as part of sex ed, with the topics included in the permission notice. This should not be part of elementary school curriculum

The LGBT stuff in schools these days is way too much. It’s no doubt connected with the massive surge in kids saying they are LGBT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

It quickly becomes chaos. Opt kids out of evolution in biology, books in English, topics in history.

We have that where we are (for sex ed) in public school, and nobody actually opts out. That being said many kids do this opting out already by being homeschooled with a specific curriculum not covering all these topics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Where is the line between kids not being exposed to gay characters in books and kids not being exposed to gay people in schools?

AP:

“The stories include a family’s attendance at a pride parade, a girl’s introduction to her uncle’s husband-to-be, a prince’s love for a knight amid their battle against a dragon, a girl’s anxiety about giving a valentine to another girl and a transgender boy’s decision to share his gender identity with his family.”

In this case, I believe the line has been crossed from education to promotion.

It will be fun to see how this logic works in history classes in the south when they start excising discussions of slavery and civil rights.

Slavery and civil rights are historical facts. Again, you are distorting two different issues. Just as we allow an opt out for sex ed and it hasn’t led to “excising discussions of slavery in the south”, so can Maryland allow an opt out here.

Where’s the line? It’s a historical fact that Harvey Milk was assassinated for fighting for LGBTQ rights. How is that less historical than teaching that MLK Jr. was assassinated for fighting for rights during the racist Jim Crow era?

What about a teacher having a photo of their spouse of the same gender on their desk? Can parents opt out of having a gay teacher too?

This isn’t an ideology. This is people’s lives…

The line is defined by age (Harvey Milk belongs in a high school level history or government class) and material. No one is trying to ban books. They simply want to opt out their elementary age kids which is their right. Why is it so important to you to introduce these topics to three year olds against a parent’s objection?

Okay let’s play this out then. I as a parent think it’s important to not reinforce the gender binary to my child. I think it’s important to teach them that there’s no such thing as “girls toys/clothes/etc” and “boys toys/clothes/etc.” And yet at some point in kindergarten there was a lesson where they were identifying themselves as girls and boys. Can I opt my kid out of that? Or only if the curriculum is progressive because it acknowledges that gender is a social construction?

The equivalent would be the teacher reading a book about a girl identifying as a girl and launching a discussion about the importance of maintaining a gender binary in society. Yes you should be able to opt out of such a lesson.

It’s not the same. Gender dysmorphia is a psychiatric disorder classified in the DSM-5. While it is theoretically possible to change genders without having gender dysmorphia, in reality it is almost never that simple. A child switching genders usually involves therapy, a psychologist, meds, co current psychiatric struggles (depression, anxiety). It’s a big deal and shouldn’t be presented to all kids as “be whatever gender you feel like today!”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Allowing opt out seems like a no brainer.

Where is the line between kids not being exposed to gay characters in books and kids not being exposed to gay people in schools?

AP:

“The stories include a family’s attendance at a pride parade, a girl’s introduction to her uncle’s husband-to-be, a prince’s love for a knight amid their battle against a dragon, a girl’s anxiety about giving a valentine to another girl and a transgender boy’s decision to share his gender identity with his family.”

In this case, I believe the line has been crossed from education to promotion.

Agree. I have no problem with books that feature same gender parents. But when you start reading books romanticizing kids’ relationships (girls having crushes on a girl classmate) or kids changing genders, that crosses the line for me. Gender identity and romantic relationships between kids shouldn’t be topics taught in schools

So, a book like Junie B Jones which talks about her crushes on boys should be banned too right?

Different poster

I forbade my kids from reading Junie B Jones based on the bad grammar. Can we ban it for that?