Supreme Court backs parents seeking to opt their kids out of LGBTQ books in elementary schools

[snakestretcher]

All in all its pretty sweet for bigots that the Supreme Court lays out this loophole for them.

Sweet irony that the faiths it is accommodating preach that all are created equal.

Yep, I don't recall, 'except xxxx who shall be smited', in the bible.

 

[roguenuke]

You play the same game as the other leftists here in the creation of your straw man.

Yes, there are a few outliers who do object to what you mentioned, but what the overwhelming majority are ACTUALLY objecting to is graphic sexual content.

It isn't just a few outliers. An entire state was ordered to teach the bible in every class, including science and history.

Oklahoma education head discusses why he's mandating public schools teach the Bible

A new directive from Oklahoma’s top education official requires all public schools to teach the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It comes weeks after Louisiana mandated the display of the Ten Commandments in classrooms. Stephanie Sy discussed more with Ryan Walters, the author of the order and...

www.pbs.org

Teaching evolution in U.S. public schools: a continuing challenge - Evolution: Education and Outreach

Background Over a decade ago, the first nationally representative probability survey concerning the teaching of evolution revealed disquieting facts about evolution education in the United States. This 2007 survey found that only about one in three public high school biology teachers presented...

evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com

This 2007 survey found that only about one in three public high school biology teachers presented evolution consistently with the recommendations of the nation’s leading scientific authorities. And about 13% of the teachers emphasized to their students that creationism was a valid scientific alternative to modern evolutionary biology.

A mandatory "intelligent design" bill in Oklahoma | National Center for Science Education

ncse.ngo

We have several states now with laws mandating the 10 Commandments be placed in every school classroom or at least hallway, despite a 1980 SCOTUS ruling forbidding this.

The overwhelming majority are not, although many are being fed lies about what is going on, where such books are found, etc. My own area had a school refuse to remove Genderqueer from the HS by vote.

But note though that you gaslight the topic. This isn't about sexually graphic content in schools, since that was never actually taught, but simply available in school libraries. This is about any stories or talks about homosexuals or same sex couples or transgender people in classrooms, being able to opt out of those, which is not at all any sort of majority, and absolutely would involve mainly those people who believe in young earth creationism.

 

[j brown's body]

Education is supposed to inform, not preach about and promote social agendas.

There isn't any reason for schools to be teaching about LGBT issues any more than schools should be teaching about the Bible, Torah, Koran, or any other religious text.

Citing that LGBT people or religions exist is one thing, but getting up at the podium and telling kids how to think, promoting one ideology over another, or actively shaming kids into saying/thinking certain things is a lot of things, but it's certainly not "education."

You dont object to teachers acknowledging that trans exist but support parents who do.

That's a pretty neat trick.

 

[j brown's body]

So what?

The remark is intended for people who are capable of empathy.

 

[roguenuke]

I remember kids back in middle school a lot like you.

They were not the same ones in my high school physics and calculous classes.

Most of those in my advanced classes support LGBTQ rights now. I stay in touch via social media with at least a few, not to mention my Navy nuke friends. The most intelligent people, parents would absolutely not be the ones removing their children from classes because same sex couples or being transgender, gender and sex being two different things came up to be discussed.

This topic, btw, is about parents being allowed to remove their children from class when homosexuality, same sex couples, asexuality, or gender identity is being discussed at all, not "graphic depictions of sexual content", which was never discussed in classes.

 

[roguenuke]

Placing age restrictions on porn shops does not "ban" the material they contain.

For today's authoritarian leftists, all bets are off when under the auspices of a public school.

This is completely unrelated to what this thread is about. Please stay up with this thread, not your strawman.

 

[VySky]

The remark is intended for people who are capable of empathy.

Oh, others who like to virtue signal online. Got it!

 

[roguenuke]

I'm a little late to the party here and I haven't read it all, but here's what I have.

First, read the actual decision. Remember, the media likes to play keep-away with the primary data so they can get you riled up into partisan tents.

Now my thought is, first off, it shows a general sensible legal logic. So far, my fears of Trump appointing 13 WWE wrestlers to the Court to give the verdicts he wants haven't materialized, though tomorrow's another day.

The case compares the situation to Jehovah's Witnesses who don't salute the flag. My mother told me the story of a kid like that, relentlessly picked on by a teacher for his refusal, and so that particular precedent carries a lot of resonance. Do parents have a right to opt out of specific things they don't like? Now to be sure, opting out of speech and opting out of reading seem like two very different things to me. But how different?

A key phrase in the ruling is "unmistakeably normative". This is an important one. The kids aren't being asked to read a book about gay penguins adopting an egg, because it is one of the best-known works in the English language, exhibiting spectacular glibness of speech, while introducing students to the rich archaic vocabulary of years gone by ... that would be Shakespeare. No, a book like that is being presented because it is trying to make kids think a certain way. A good way, to be sure, where LGBT etc. is concerned, but still, they are clearly laying it on thick. This makes it more like the Pledge of Allegiance in that they're trying to promote some kind of morals, and puts them squarely in the gunsights of the court verdict.

As a general rule, people should be reluctant to get involved in fighting a Supreme Court verdict unless their most fundamental rights have been denied. You have to more or less commit to an insurgency, at least in the spiritual sense, to take on a fight like that: you either have to get the constitution rewritten, or deny the legitimacy of government, or do some such major thing. The Democrats have repeatedly come to voters saying "this is a bad verdict and we're going to fight it all the way..." only to forget about it six months later. I say, skip ahead the six months and save yourself some time. The "opt out" thing sounds annoying and inconvenient to some bureaucrats - who may have to deal with a flood of opt outs of many descriptions beyond LGBT soon - but it is nothing for most people to worry about per se.

It is a book that shows current events, love is love, no different than having them read a book about the Lovings, even if people don't agree with that decision, those relationships.

 

[j brown's body]

The kids aren't being asked to read a book about gay penguins adopting an egg, because it is one of the best-known works in the English language, exhibiting spectacular glibness of speech, while introducing students to the rich archaic vocabulary of years gone by ... that would be Shakespeare. No, a book like that is being presented because it is trying to make kids think a certain way. A good way, to be sure, where LGBT etc. is concerned, but still, they are clearly laying it on thick.

This reminds me of what I used to hear back in the '60s about blacks demanding too much too fast.

 

[j brown's body]

Oh, others who like to virtue signal online. Got it!

Are you arguing that you're capable of empathy? Your posts don't seem to bear this out. It appears to be against your religion, so apparently its ok.

 

[eohrnberger]

Well. I think it’s certainly possible that a book as Kennedy listed might get past a librarian in some school.
But that does not mean it’s standard curriculum nor even in a minority of elementary libraries.

Strawman, as being part of the standard curriculum' was not claimed nor was it asserted.

For an appropriate age population why not?

Why does providing this sort of content to students need to be part of a school library's responsibility?
Why does providing this sort of content to students need to be part of a school system's responsibility?

See above.

 

[CaughtInThe]

It's like MAGA is backing Nixon x100 and a Supreme Court from before the Civil War.

 

[j brown's body]

It's like MAGA is backing Nixon x100 and a Supreme Court from before the Civil War.

Indeed, it is so hostile to the Reconstruction Amendments, I think of them as the Antebellum Court. Their embrace of states rights recalls the Dred Scott decision.

 

[eohrnberger]

Show that these books are even in the minority of elementary school libraries.

What do you think spurred the parents into action to attend their local school board meetings to complain about them?

No, I'm going on no wild goose chase for your amusement.

They come from the same right wing conspiracy. Just show that these books show little kids giving fellatio to each other and are in the minority of elementary libraries.

Again, what caused the parents to take the action of attending school board meetings to complain about those books?

Oh no we are not. It’s pretty obvious there.

Whatever.

Yeah let’s go down your conspiracy rabbit hole. So explain why the teachers of this country are in one great conspiracy to control children be “ sexualizing” them. How do they plan to use this to control them and to control them to do what exactly??

This is pretty obvious, given the hard left progressivism we've seen from teachers, schools, and school boards. The culmination of a public education steeped in leftist thought being shown in the riots on college campuses in support of Hamas terrorists and other such organizations.

Because unfortunately some parents teach their children bigotry, hatred and frankly are ignorant.

Because many parents do not want to expose their children to that content does not make those parents bigots, hateful nor ignorant.
It just means that those parents disagree with you on the subject of what content is appropriate for their children, and those children are their children, not yours, and those children are not the State's children either.

And before you say “ do you think parents are stupid”
Well how many parents can teach their kid calculus , or advanced chemistry , or physics?
Should the state not teach these subjects because they aren’t in line with the parents knowledge of the subject.?

So you'd rather have the State raise these children rather than their 'bigoted, hateful and ignorant parents'?
You are supporting the idea that the State should be injected between children and their parents.
You realize this, don't you?
Has history not taught you how bad an idea this is?

If a child tells the teacher. “ My daddy says that the holocaust never happened that it’s a lie by the JEWS”
Does the state have a responsibility to society to educate people to the truth and intervene and teach the truth about the holocaust? Or should the state not teach this child.

Here you are doing it again.

By the way, this actually happened when I went to school and we were studying World War Two in junior high .

So what that it did? What possible bearing does this have on the topic of what type of books school libraries must have on their shelves?

You need to show that the left demands this. You need to show that the left demands elementary age children need to be taught how to do fellatio.

Asked and answered in post #730.

You are the one jumping to conclusions regarding this issue.

 

[j brown's body]

What do you think spurred the parents into action to attend their local school board meetings to complain about them?

No, I'm going on no wild goose chase for your amusement.


Again, what caused the parents to take the action of attending school board meetings to complain about those books?


Whatever.


This is pretty obvious, given the hard left progressivism we've seen from teachers, schools, and school boards. The culmination of a public education steeped in leftist thought being shown in the riots on college campuses in support of Hamas terrorists and other such organizations.


Because many parents do not want to expose their children to that content does not make those parents bigots, hateful nor ignorant.
It just means that those parents disagree with you on the subject of what content is appropriate for their children, and those children are their children, not yours, and those children are not the State's children either.


So you'd rather have the State raise these children rather than their 'bigoted, hateful and ignorant parents'?
You are supporting the idea that the State should be injected between children and their parents.
You realize this, don't you?
Has history not taught you how bad an idea this is?


Here you are doing it again.


So what that it did? What possible bearing does this have on the topic of what type of books school libraries must have on their shelves?


Asked and answered in post #730.

If parents wanting to eliminate the acknowledgement of transgenders and gays in the public sphere isn't bigotry, what is it?

"Bigotry - obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group."

Link

 

[jaeger19]

Strawman, as being part of the standard curriculum' was not claimed nor was it asserted.

Cool so what’s the big deal then. ?lol.
First you actl like this is being rammed down parents throats and it’s everywhere.
As a plot by teachers to control children.
And now suddenly it’s not.

Why does providing this sort of content to students need to be part of a school library's responsibilitydo now ?

it would depend on the book and its content.
In the case of banned books like I cited A Purim Superhero it simply acknowledges that there are multiple types of families and they should be respected.
Which ultimately what you are really against.

Why does providing this sort of content to students need to be part of a school system's responsibility?

To have a just and free society free from bigotry , hate and ignorance.

 

[rahl]

We can’t tell the future. This gender affirming care works.
That’s your logic.

No it isn’t

 

[j brown's body]

No it isn’t

What percentage has come to regret it?

 

[rahl]

What percentage has come to regret it?

Irrelevant

 

[jaeger19]

What do you think spurred the parents into action to attend their local school board meetings to complain about them?

Religious zealots that want to force their morality on the rest of society.

No, I'm going on no wild goose chase for your amusement.

So you just admitted that your whole premise is bunk because it’s a wild goose chase.

Again, what caused the parents to take the action of attending school board meetings to complain about those books?

Religious zealotry.

Whatever.


This is pretty obvious, given the hard left progressivism we've seen from teachers, schools, and school boards. The culmination of a public education steeped in leftist thought being shown in the riots on college campuses in support of Hamas terrorists and other such organizations.

Yeah okay.
Show me how teaching tolerance of homosexuals in society … which Hamas and other Muslim extremist organizations are vehemently against
How teaching the right to free speech … which hamas is vehemently against.
Teaching the separation of religion from schools …. Which hamas is vehemently against
Teaching the rights of women to education and body autonomy which Hamss is vehemently against.
Teaching religious tolerance which hamas is vehemently against…

Leads to support of Hamas.

You do realize that YOUR beliefs. Anti homosexuality , anti sexual education
Anti science , anti free speech . And the belief in a nation based on religion
Is more in line with Hamas teachings than leftists right?

Because many parents do not want to expose their children to that content does not make those parents bigots, hateful nor ignorant.
It just means that those parents disagree with you on the subject of what content is appropriate for their children, and those children are their children, not yours, and those children are not the State's children either.

Explain how banning a book like a Purim superhero because the main character happens to have two dads is not bigotry.
Would it have been banned if the character had a mom and a dad?

So you'd rather have the State raise these children rather than their 'bigoted, hateful and ignorant parents'?

I d rather these parents didn’t dictate what my children can learn.

You are supporting the idea that the State should be injected between children and their parents.
You realize this, don't you?

Yes. There is definite reasons for this.
Should schools accept racism and racist acts in school because the parents teach it?

Has history not taught you how bad an idea this is?

Explain how teaching tolerance,, free speech, and science are bad ideas.

Here you are doing it again.


So what that it did? What possible bearing does this have on the topic of what type of books school libraries must have on their shelves?

Well according to your i
Premise because some parents don’t believe the holocaust happened, books depicting it should be banned. Because the state should not interject themselves between the parents and children

Asked and answered in post #730.

 

[j brown's body]

Irrelevant

Why is it irrelevant?

 

[jaeger19]

No it isn’t

We are not able to see the future so gender affirming care must work.
So say you.

 

[rahl]

Why is it irrelevant?

It has nothing to do with my post.

 

[rahl]

We are not able to see the future so gender affirming care must work.
So say you.

non sequitur

 

[j brown's body]

It has nothing to do with my post.

What is your definition of gender affirming care working?