Monday, October 20, 2008

Proposition 8 and Schools (update)

Here's the latest ad from the "Yes on 8" Defend Marriage campaign:

Now, of course you could say "Well, that's just a political ad. Why should we believe it?" In fact, you should say that, even if you agree with the campaign doing the ad. Being cynical, I did say that. So I did a little research, and here is an excerpt from a story on this very issue, dated April 20, 2006, in the ultra-liberal Boston Globe :

"Lexington Superintendent of Schools Paul Ash said Estabrook (the school the Wirthlin's child attended) has no legal obligation to notify parents about the book. ''We couldn't run a public school system if every parent who feels some topic is objectionable to them for moral or religious reasons decides their child should be removed," he said. ''Lexington is committed to teaching children about the world they live in, and in Massachusetts same-sex marriage is legal.'"

Emphasis added.

That is exactly the argument made by backers of Proposition 8, and hysterically denied by those who oppose Proposition 8. Schools teach about marriage. If Proposition 8 fails, and same-sex "marriage" is left legal, children will be taught that marriage is no longer marriage, but is just what anybody decides it is.


Frank said...

These are lies. Under California law parents have the right to opt out of such education. So, what you're really saying is that you have a right to dictate what other people's children learn in the "best interest of the child."

Might the same standards be applied to Catholic schools? Consider St John Chrysostom's sermon against sodomites in which he calls them worse than murderers and declares that they would be better off dead. To a gay minor reading this at a Catholic school, St. John Chrysostom's words clearly suborn suicide. That's certainly the way I read them when I was thirteen. If you're allowed to dictate how others should teach their children for the sake of children, others have just as much of right to dictate how Catholics should teach their children.

Anonymous said...


These are not lies. Can you tell me where in the educational code parents are given the right to "opt out" of such education? I looked but I couldn't find it. I'd be interested to see the section you are citing.

The idea is that, because the education code requires schools to "teach respect for marriage," changing the definition of marriage requires children to be taught about "marriage" between members of the same sex. Such changes do require community input, but not their permission.

Regardless, this is kind of a silly argument coming from the pro-gay-marriage forces. Is there anyone in their camp who wouldn't want kids taught about gay marriage? Just look at the first graders being dragged to the lesbian wedding--the left has long realized the value of using the educational system to mold society to their image, and it's not any different with this.

As for Catholic schools, this is not at all relevant to the prop-8 debate. They are not government schools so this is really a distraction from the real argument.

If, however, your Catholic teachers convinced you that suicide is condoned, then they taught you falsely. Suicide is a grave sin. Regardless, the Church's condemnation of homosexual acts should not lead one to suicide--it should lead one to refrain from homosexual acts!

Frank said...

That outing to a lesbian wedding was organized by the parents of the students in that class. Parents always have to give permission for field trips. Any parent in that class could have opted out of that field trip. Sex and marriage are taught as part of the health curriculum in California. Parents can opt out of that, too.

Are you demanding the right to dictate how parents raise their own children according to the lights of their own beliefs? There certainly is a Catholic precedent for it, given that Pius IX kidnapped the child of a Jewish couple, Edgardo Mortaro, to raise him as a Christian. Don't expect a peaceful response if you decide to put that into action.

Anonymous said...

Frank first says: "Under California law parents have the right to opt out of such education."

He does not define what he means by "such education" and the rest of the comment has nothing to do with the subject.

In the second post he says: "Sex and marriage are taught as part of the health curriculum in California. Parents can opt out of that, too."

Here, Frank introduces two separate categories, pretends they are one in the same, and makes a blanket claim for both that is true for one category but not the other. That's a well-known rhetorical trick. The fact is: parents CAN opt out of sex education, but they CANNOT opt out of health and family life education. Marriage has nothing to do with sex education.

The Boston Globe article cited in the blog post indicates as much:

"Ash, who became superintendent this school year, wrote a memo to parents in September defending the system's philosophy of teaching diversity. His memo, which clarified the state's parental notification law, stemmed from the controversy with Parker. Schools are required to notify parents of lessons on sex education and give them the right to opt out, but in Lexington, sex education doesn't begin until fifth grade, Ash said."

So the teaching on marriage was not part of sex education, and hence not "opt-outable."

Anonymous said...

Last week it was first graders at a lesbian wedding fieldtrip, now this week a secret kindergarten "gay day."

Kids are being taught about gay marriage in our schools. This story is from today, kindergartners held a secret GAY DAY today.... WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT! It is exactly what the opposition told us would never happen, they are spending millions this week telling us it STILL won't happen. This is the fight of our lives.'s bank account is empty, we need to make donations to respond to the lies the opposition is telling us.

see the story here:

beetlebabee said...

The opposition’s claims that their self interests are not being met are just selfish. They have no right to impose their moral views on our children. ESPECIALLY without our consent. It’s more than just “love” at stake here. I think it’s important to recognize the human rights of the children involved. France rejected same sex marriage because it trampled the rights that children have to a mother and a father. Their pursuit of self interest at all costs is selfish. Making our children be exposed to same sex marriage ideas corrupts their impressionable minds.

MONTREAL, March 20, 2006 ( - In late January, a 30 member parliamentary commission of the French National Assembly published a 453 page Report on the Family and the rights of Children, which rejected same-sex marriage.

DeSerres, told “Referring to the rights of children as a human rights issue, the report argued that children ‘now have rights and to systematically give preference to adult aspirations over respect for these rights is not possible any more.’”

In the report, the commission says that “the child represents the future of society.” The commission asks legislators to make sure that “children, confronted with mutations in family models, be fully taken into account and not suffer from situations imposed upon them by adults.” It adds: “The interest of the child must take precedence over adults’ exercise of their freedom (…) including with regards to parents’ lifestyle choices.”