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

[j brown's body]

I used the word that fit where the line is drawn for me. If that happens, it would be wrong because a teacher would be acting as an advocate rather than a teacher. That's not their job, nor is it appropriate for them to do that with other people's children.

Are you suggesting that teachers should be advocating for or promoting some sexual orientations or gender identities over others? Or should they simply be stating that LGBT people exist, just like heterosexual and cisgender people exist, and leave it at that? Why would they need to go any further than saying that in the first place?



No, it's generally not. Perhaps in some classes it has relevance, but it most definitely has nothing to do with teaching math, ELA, history, the vast majority of science classes, and on and on.



If it was a sociology class, then sure. That's relevant in the study of societies. However, sociology is not part of elementary school curriculum, and is only rarely (as an elective) part of high school curriculum.



What are you talking about? Health class isn't specifically about sex, kissing, STD, or where babies come from. It's about the human condition and physiological processes, nutrition, diseases, physical health, substance use and mental health conditions, parenting, and family functioning, among other things. If it was a psychology class, it would also be appropriate to discuss relevant factors of the human experience such as gender identity and sexual orientation.

It is not part of the curricula of the remaining courses that have nothing to do with gender or sex/attraction. This is common sense and not at all difficult to understand.



From a teacher who holds no expertise in sociology? Yes, I'm against that. Because that would be them talking out of their ass instead of staying in their lane.

If it's in a sociology class presumably taught by a qualified person, then I have no problem with that.



Who said what was a deviation?



Is anyone asking to remove their kids from classrooms for these reasons, or is this a red herring?

The biggest takeaway I get from your posts is that while you say you support the acknowledgement but oppose promoting transgenders, you don't call out posters who consider acknowledgement a form of promotion. You support parents who oppose acknowledgement, a position you oppose.

 

[reinaert]

Its been referred to as the 3R's for decades

So what? Other than illustrating the problem of traditionalist repetition replacing critical inquiry and thought, so what?

 

[Fletch]

So what? Other than illustrating the problem of traditionalist repetition replacing critical inquiry and thought, so what?

Not sure what you are ranting about. And Im not sure I care.

 

[jaeger19]

Who has published reliable and replicated objective outcome research on these treatments for children?



There are no laws against treating people with gender dysphoria. They are free to go to therapy in all 50 states. If you were referring to children receiving gender reassignment and HRT treatments, that's not allowed in every state due to a lack of long-term research supporting the practice.

Actually I just provided scientific evidence that showed long term support for those procedures .

If you’d like more education on the subject here is another one

“Gender-affirming surgery is a durable treatment that improves overall patient well-being. High patient satisfaction, improved dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persist decades after GAS without any reported patient regret.”

Long-term Outcomes After Gender-Affirming Surgery: 40-Year Follow-up Study - PubMed

Gender-affirming surgery is a durable treatment that improves overall patient well-being. High patient satisfaction, improved dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persist decades after GAS without any reported patient regret.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

It's also why many countries around the world, including several very liberal countries, have banned the practice.

Actually they did NOT ban the practice but instead still perform gender reassignment surgery and HRT etc in a research setting.

The issue was in some countries whether the process of determining whether gender care was appropriately rigorous.

Here in the states the process is much more rigorous than it was becoming in other countries like the uk.

 

[reinaert]

Not sure what you are ranting about. And Im not sure I care.

Lady Irony honors your devotion.

 

[jaeger19]

Thats not true at all. Government schools should teach the 3 R's and thats it. But thats not good enough for you libs. You cant pass up the opportunity to indoctrinate a captive audience of little kids.

I see. So no teaching of science like biology or scientific method ,
Gosh kids might question that whole bible thing with Noah’s ark
No teach astronomy and how the planets move cuz we don’t want the kids to learn the earth isn’t flat and the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth.
No teaching civics and how the government works and what’s the difference between democracy and authoritarianism .
Certainly we shouldn’t be teaching the children about the constitution and the rights they gave and the responsibility they have to protect them.

Nope all they need to learn is to write , read and do math.

Heck it’s not like them having a computer class, or learn how to fix a transmission is going to help them get a job and be productive in society.

Lmao.

 

[BrotherFease]

Are you suggesting that teachers should be advocating for or promoting some sexual orientations or gender identities over others? Or should they simply be stating that LGBT people exist, just like heterosexual and cisgender people exist, and leave it at that? Why would they need to go any further than saying that in the first place?

There you go again. Using that word "promotion" so freely. TEACHING about gay / trans / non-binary / intersex is not the same as promoting. Reading a book about a gay marriage ceremony is not the same as encouraging children to be get gay married. This is what the court case in question was about: a book about a gay wedding was presented in an elementary school classroom. I would agree with you, if they were reading the book "This Book is Gay" or "Gender Queer".

If it was a sociology class, then sure. That's relevant in the study of societies. However, sociology is not part of elementary school curriculum, and is only rarely (as an elective) part of high school curriculum.

Elemental School classrooms discuss sociology all the time. That's where children get their first exposure.

What are you talking about? Health class isn't specifically about sex, kissing, STD, or where babies come from. It's about the human condition and physiological processes, nutrition, diseases, physical health, substance use and mental health conditions, parenting, and family functioning, among other things.

I never said it was specifically about sex, kissing, STD, or where babies come from. "Health Class" is an umbrellas term as well.

Within the educational system, topics and subject matters can overlap. History class can also be a math lesson as well. If you're learning about psychology, you will need to learn about math, history, English, and sociology.

Who said what was a deviation?

That would be you. You're accusing the educational system of throwing topics about LGBTQI into unrelated subject matters.

Is anyone asking to remove their kids from classrooms for these reasons, or is this a red herring?

You're arguing that parents should be allowed to remove kids from classrooms, if the topic contradicts their beliefs. The question is how far do you take that?

 

[BrotherFease]

If parents can opt their kids out of LGBTQ books because it conflicts with their religious beliefs, then they should also be able to opt out of other things as well such as evolution, geology, sex education and reproductive health, anything related to morals or ethics, anything involving religious content, etc. Actually, I feel like you can make a case that literally anything you teach in school might conflict with someone's religious beliefs one way or another. If a parent wants to opt out of these things then they should do homeschooling or send their kids to a private school that teaches things that aligns more with their beliefs. That is completely within their right if they don't like what public education teaches.

That's exactly my point about the problematic nature of the ruling.

Are these "beliefs" purely connected to sex, or can they be applied to historical events/figures, geology, or gender roles in society?

 

[AJG]

The characters aren’t the issue in this case. The issue is whether or not the government can impose and mandate a moral philosophy with religious implication on children in a compulsory setting. And the answer is NO.

If a depiction of an LGBTQ relationship can be seen as "the government imposing and mandating a moral philosophy with religious implications" then a depiction of an interracial or interfaith relationship can be seen as that as well if their religion objects or condemns those things.

 

[Captain Adverse]

A win for parents. They have rights.

—————

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

Parents sued Montgomery County, Maryland, schools after it said they couldn't opt their children out of exposure to LGBTQ books in the classroom.

www.nbcnews.com

Personally, I don't think Pre-Schoolers should be dealing with sex and sexuality at all. No "day care" personnel should be raising ANYTHING beyond this:



Even then only if the kids ask about the differences between boys and girls. Otherwise, NO "indoctrination" of literally innocent minds on all this sex/gender fluid crap beyond the obvious differences the video identifies between typical boys and girls.

 

[Hello My Son]

The biggest takeaway I get from your posts is that while you say you support the acknowledgement but oppose promoting transgenders,

Correct. Teachers promoting LGBT or heterosexuality/cisgender lifestyles would be wrong. They should be unbiased, because they are not professional activists for a cause. It's really pretty straightforward and easy to comprehend.

you don't call out posters

I don't call out any posters because I'm not in junior high, so I understand that conceptual discussions are more productive than throwing rocks on the playground. I learned that about 40 years ago or so. This is also a pretty straightforward and easy idea to comprehend.

who consider acknowledgement a form of promotion.

I've already stated I wouldn't make the same decision that they would. And I already asked you in an earlier post (which you unsurprisingly avoided responding to) about what exactly you want me to do to people with whom I have different opinions. Are you suggesting I should flog them with bamboo or something?

You support parents who oppose acknowledgement, a position you oppose.

I support the government allowing parents to parent their own children and leave strangers like yourself out of it, yes. You seem to think other people's children is your personal business, whereas I do not think it's my business.

Your position is one of entitlement. My position is one of minding my own business.

If you want to make decisions about children, you're free to have your own children, adopt, etc. and decide what's right for them. You don't get to do that with other people's children, and neither do I. I don't have a problem with that, while you do.

 

[Gardener]

Not sure what you are ranting about. And Im not sure I care.

I think he is saying it that he wants all children to read Gender Queer, but I'm not certain

 

[Hello My Son]

Actually I just provided scientific evidence that showed long term support for those procedures .

If you’d like more education on the subject here is another one

“Gender-affirming surgery is a durable treatment that improves overall patient well-being. High patient satisfaction, improved dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persist decades after GAS without any reported patient regret.”

Long-term Outcomes After Gender-Affirming Surgery: 40-Year Follow-up Study - PubMed

Gender-affirming surgery is a durable treatment that improves overall patient well-being. High patient satisfaction, improved dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persist decades after GAS without any reported patient regret.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A. That's adults, not children.
B. Phone surveys for 15 people out of 90+ in their original sample is not a reliable methodology, nor a representative sample of all people who underwent procedures.
C. That study has no controls or methodology to measure unhappy outcomes, desistance, suicide, or any other measure for defining negative experiences from those who did not respond.
D. That study isn't a legitimate longitudinal study, as longitudinal studies don't begin in hindsight. A longitudinal methodology would be defined as such from the beginning, and subjects would have a defined protocol for long-term follow up from day 1 of the research.

Actually they did NOT ban the practice but instead still perform gender reassignment surgery and HRT etc in a research setting.

And I'm fine with that for the purpose of reliable, long-term data collection.

The issue was in some countries whether the process of determining whether gender care was appropriately rigorous.

Different countries did different things.

Here in the states the process is much more rigorous than it was becoming in other countries like the uk.

It's supposed to be more rigorous, but they failed to live up to that standard in trans procedures on kids, as there still aren't any reliable and objective long-term outcome studies, and the meta-analyses of the limited studies that do exist haven't shown favorable results.

 

[trixare4kids]

Personally, I don't think Pre-Schoolers should be dealing with sex and sexuality at all. No "day care" personnel should be raising ANYTHING beyond this:



Even then only if the kids ask about the differences between boys and girls. Otherwise, NO "indoctrination" of literally innocent minds on all this sex/gender fluid crap beyond the obvious differences the video identifies between typical boys and girls.

At their young age Pre-K and with the lower elementary grades, answer questions but TMI isn't necessary. Leave it to the child's parent's discretion, precisely why this particular SC ruling is on the money.

 

[trixare4kids]

I think he is saying it that he wants all children to read Gender Queer, but I'm not certain

Why do leftists take it upon themselves to act like the parent of other people's children?
Liberals would never do that.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Lets have an honest conversation about what is and isn't appropriate to discuss with children at different ages

We could try.

But that isn't the honest conversation Trumpist Fascists across the country want to have.

When one looks at the broader policies of this administration and its enablers at the state and local levels, the situation is crystal clear.

They wish to delete, LGBT from public view, entirely, as much as they can get away with and entirely if they can.

When one is talking with a Trumpist.

Their arguments are ALWAYS, ALWAYS in bad faith.

Every single time.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Why do leftists take it upon themselves to act like the parent of other people's children?
Liberals would never do that.

If there were more Parents that were good parents across the nation and raised their children right, they would see nothing good in electing a person like Donald Trump.

But in the context of your post, what do you think the education system is for exactly?

I mean if its gonna be like that, why bother with it at all, every Trumpist dicksuck moron can just homeschool their kids and be done with it so they never have to be exposed to ANYTHING that could trigger them.

 

[Hello My Son]

There you go again. Using that word "promotion" so freely. TEACHING about gay / trans / non-binary / intersex is not the same as promoting.

Yes, because there's a difference between promoting, as in showing bias for one thing over others, and simply stating something as factual.

This is common sense, of course, and not at all difficult to comprehend.

Reading a book about a gay marriage ceremony is not the same as encouraging children to be get gay married.

Didn't say it was.

This is what the court case in question was about: a book about a gay wedding was presented in an elementary school classroom.

No, this court case is about whether or not parents get to make decisions for their own children instead of strangers in the classroom or the government.

I would agree with you, if they were reading the book "This Book is Gay" or "Gender Queer".

Others on your side don't agree with us on that issue.

Elemental School classrooms discuss sociology all the time. That's where children get their first exposure.

No they don't. Experiencing elements of society in daily life is not the same thing as teaching sociological theory to a classroom full of children.

I never said it was specifically about sex, kissing, STD, or where babies come from. "Health Class" is an umbrellas term as well.

Then why, in response to me saying that health class is an appropriate place to discuss orientation and identity, did you say this:

"Health Class?" We're not talking about sex, kissing, STD, or where babies from, we're talking about people living in society.

As I correctly pointed out, health class covers a wide range of elements regarding people living in society, health issues, mental health, and so on. Therefore it's an appropriate curriculum to cover gender and sexual issues.

Within the educational system, topics and subject matters can overlap. History class can also be a math lesson as well. If you're learning about psychology, you will need to learn about math, history, English, and sociology.

Sociology is not part of an elementary school curriculum. One doesn't even have the option of taking a sociology class until high school at the earliest.

That would be you. You're accusing the educational system of throwing topics about LGBTQI into unrelated subject matters.

Lol.....if they're not already doing it, then why are you putting up such a fight about them being able to continue doing it?

And if they're not doing it, then why do you care if parents have a legal right to opt out of their children being part of it? If they're not doing it, then the parents don't have anything they can opt out of, right?

Just stop with these silly gaslighting posts. It's hilarious, but ultimately pathetic.

You're arguing that parents should be allowed to remove kids from classrooms, if the topic contradicts their beliefs. The question is how far do you take that?

Do you have any slippery slope examples that are actually happening in real life, or are we still talking about hypotheticals that have never happened and probably never will?

 

[NatMorton]

Decisions like this merely confirm what a hateful religion and what hateful people many Christians are.

^^^ A post just dripping with tolerance.

 

[rahl]

Actually I just provided scientific evidence that showed long term support for those procedures .

If you’d like more education on the subject here is another one

“Gender-affirming surgery is a durable treatment that improves overall patient well-being. High patient satisfaction, improved dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persist decades after GAS without any reported patient regret.”

Long-term Outcomes After Gender-Affirming Surgery: 40-Year Follow-up Study - PubMed

Gender-affirming surgery is a durable treatment that improves overall patient well-being. High patient satisfaction, improved dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persist decades after GAS without any reported patient regret.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Actually they did NOT ban the practice but instead still perform gender reassignment surgery and HRT etc in a research setting.

The issue was in some countries whether the process of determining whether gender care was appropriately rigorous.

Here in the states the process is much more rigorous than it was becoming in other countries like the uk.

Nothing wrong with adults mutilating their own bodies or taking harmful unapproved hormone blockers. But we won’t be allowing this nonsense and child abuse for much longer among children.

 

[Jetboogieman]

distorted, contorted, hell outright lies, and inflaming rhetoric

You support a ****ing idiot who stated Haitian migrants were eating peoples pets.

So I wouldn't be so quick to be outraged by shit like this.

 

[trixare4kids]

Decisions like this merely confirm what a hateful religion and what hateful people many Christians are.

Why would you presume that it would only be Christian parents who would have the choice to request opt-outs for their children? This ruling also pertains to all parents with religious objections. For example, Islam, and Judaism are two religions that comes to mind. Are their religions hateful too? For that matter, I don't even think a parent would have to be religious to want to choose an opt-out for the Pre-K thru fifth grader children.

 

[BrotherFease]

Yes, because there's a difference between promoting, as in showing bias for one thing over others, and simply stating something as factual.

This is common sense, of course, and not at all difficult to comprehend.

I am not sure if I understand your response. "Bias over other things"? That still doesn't make sense to me.

Didn't say it was.

You were defending the SCOTUS decision.

Others on your side don't agree with us on that issue.

Who is "my side"?

I am a registered Republican and hold moderate beliefs.

Then why, in response to me saying that health class is an appropriate place to discuss orientation and identity, did you say this:

As I correctly pointed out, health class covers a wide range of elements regarding people living in society, health issues, mental health, and so on. Therefore it's an appropriate curriculum to cover gender and sexual issues.

Yes, I think health and sex education classes should ideally teach about LGBTQI issues.

Sociology is not part of an elementary school curriculum. One doesn't even have the option of taking a sociology class until high school at the earliest.

Sociology is taught in every grade.

Just stop with these silly gaslighting posts. It's hilarious, but ultimately pathetic.

Give me examples of this happening.

Do you have any slippery slope examples that are actually happening in real life, or are we still talking about hypotheticals that have never happened and probably never will?

Are you aware of the Don't Say Gay bills in Florida? They tried to ban books about Roberto Clemente and Rosa Parks because of race.

Judge dismisses lawsuit that said teaching evolution was 'forcing' kids to accept atheism

A federal judge in Indiana dismissed a lawsuit filed by parents who argued the school should be banned from teaching evolution because it amounts to the state coercing students into accepting atheism.

lawandcrime.com

Where is the line? Are we purely about sex education or can they opt out of other programs?

 

[Hello My Son]

I am not sure if I understand your response. "Bias over other things"? That still doesn't make sense to me.

Promoting something means that you are demonstrating a bias in favor of one thing or set of things over another.

If a teacher is giving equal weight to stating that it's great to be hetero/cisgender, LGBT, and anything else, fine. That's unbiased. But doing special lessons about being LGBT or talking about how great people who are LGBT are, while spending no time teaching about being heterosexuality/cisgender or not talking about how great hetero/cis people are, well...that person is practicing biased promotion of LGBT lives over non-LGBT lives.

Their job is to not preach or promote one thing over any other.

You were defending the SCOTUS decision.

You falsely attributed this argument to me: "Reading a book about a gay marriage ceremony is not the same as encouraging children to be get gay married." I never made that argument, and the SCOTUS decision doesn't make that argument.

Who is "my side"?

You tell me. Would you consider the crowd that defends Genderqueer being in school libraries to be on "your side?"

I am a registered Republican and hold moderate beliefs.

I'm a former Democrat who's now anti-party and believes in states' rights unless the US Constitution says otherwise. Put simply, I'm a classical liberal.

Yes, I think health and sex education classes should ideally teach about LGBTQI issues.

Agreed.

Sociology is taught in every grade.

No it isn't. You couldn't tell me a single sociological construct or concept that is taught as a part of curriculum in any elementary school classroom.

Give me examples of this happening.

Where what's happening? You gaslighting, or teachers promoting their agenda in classrooms?

Are you aware of the Don't Say Gay bills in Florida? They tried to ban books about Roberto Clemente and Rosa Parks because of race.

Who's "they?" Studies Weekly (the publisher) who chose to edit things out of their book for no reason at all?

If by "they" you mean the Florida elected officials, here's what "they" said about it:

The Florida Department of Education said in a statement to Insider that the state encouraged instruction on Parks and other Civil Rights Movement leaders, per state law. "It would be impossible to teach about the significance of Rosa Parks without discussing her race," the statement read. "Any publisher who attempts to avoid the topic of race when discussing Rosa Parks or topics such as the Civil Rights Movement, slavery, segregation, etc. would not be adhering to Florida law."
So it wasn't the Florida government doing that, it was some wiseass publisher who was probably a far-leftist and thought they were being cute.

Judge dismisses lawsuit that said teaching evolution was 'forcing' kids to accept atheism

A federal judge in Indiana dismissed a lawsuit filed by parents who argued the school should be banned from teaching evolution because it amounts to the state coercing students into accepting atheism.

lawandcrime.com

Where is the line? Are we purely about sex education or can they opt out of other programs?

A civil lawsuit that was dismissed by a low-level judge? Really? That's what's going to take over the world?

Please....

 

[Lisa]

^^^ A post just dripping with tolerance.

How tolerant are Christians, especially conservative or evangelicals, of others? They deserve that same amount of tolerance that they extend to others.