|

DEBATE
Tug of war over sex education in
schools
The Montgomery County public school system plans to
revise its sex-education course, but it first must face the daunting
task of reconciling the groups that support and oppose it. Supporters
say they are trying to offer a factual and scientific presentation of
human sexuality, including homosexuality, while fending off the
repressive impulses of conservative Christians. Opponents say they are
trying to separate fact from opinion in the course and provide the
traditional moral views about sexuality that the curriculum ignores or
dismisses as being wrong.
Negotiations on the curriculum over the next seven
months will determine how children in one of the country's leading
school systems are taught about sexuality for years to come. County
schools Superintendent Jerry D. Weast this month suspended the course
after a federal judge issued a 10-day restraining order against it being
taught in a pilot program at six schools. Both sides will likely
participate in revising the course, but each views the other with
suspicion. Curriculum backers accuse opponents of being part of a
national conservative Christian agenda to establish biblical law or a
theocracy in America, citing President Bush's re-election as an example
of the strength of the religious right.
“It can't keep going to the right, or we're going to end up looking like
something that is not a democracy.
But I don't think we will,” said Christine Grewell, a founder of
teachthefacts.org, a group that formed to promote the curriculum. “I
think we're very close to the edge, but we need to stop it. We shouldn't
step off,” Mrs. Grewell said.
On its Web log on April 6, teachthefacts.org posted an entry titled,
“Theocrats making their move in our country.” It showed a picture of two
women covered head-to-toe in Muslim burkas. “So here's the plan.
Conservative Christians are going to 'take back' America. They will
eradicate evil and make sure that all Americans live according to the
Gospel,” wrote Jim Kennedy, a federal worker with two children in high
school.
“You will dress modestly, abstain from liquor, cigarettes, dancing. Your
daughters will learn about sex from their husbands when they marry ...
You will obey the scriptural laws of the country and will attend
services, of course,” he wrote. Mr. Kennedy's Web log entry was aimed at
critiquing a letter that the Center for Reclaiming America had sent to
the county school board to complain about the sex-ed course.
In an April 12 entry, Mr. Kennedy wrote that efforts to stop the sex-ed
course were “part of a larger attack on American values” seeking to
replace “reasoned thinking” with “superstition.” Erik Stanley, chief
counsel for Liberty Counsel, a Florida-based Christian group
representing the groups that filed a federal lawsuit against teaching
the course, called talk of creating a theocratic society “ridiculous.”
“This is not some kind of nationwide plot to establish a theocracy,”
said Mr. Stanley, whose group has ties to Baptist pastor Jerry Falwell.
“It's actually the opposite. We are trying to stop the implementation of
radical indoctrination in the school system. ”If one side has been given
an unfair advantage in this case, it's not the Christian conservative
side,” Mr. Stanley said. “And we're not seeking for any particular side
to have an advantage.” Michelle Turner is president of Citizens for a
Responsible Curriculum (CRC), an ad hoc group that filed the lawsuit
against the sex-ed course.
She said, “It is loony” to think that theocracy is her group's goal.
“That's just so absurd that they would say that, and I would think that
the Montgomery County community would find that very insulting,” said
Mrs. Turner, who has four children in public schools. “We are not
requiring girls to wear head scarves, and, I'm sorry, the schools opened
up the 'religion store,' and if they opened it up, they're going to talk
about all of it, not just certain pieces,” she said.
The most explicit mention of religion in the course is in teacher
resources that compare denominational views on homosexuality.
However, the CRC says the entire curriculum excludes conservative
religious views on homosexuality because the course is based on the
unproven assumption that homosexuality is not a choice.
“It really is the clash of two worldviews, one that says homosexuality
is innate and another worldview that says it is a choice and it can be
dealt with and overcome,” Mr. Stanley said. The CRC filed the lawsuit
with Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), a Fairfax County
group of former homosexuals who say their experience disproves the idea
that sexual orientation is immutable from birth. Mr. Kennedy, who does
not follow an organized religion, said CRC and PFOX's views on
homosexuality are “simply a form of bigotry.” “I don't think that needs
to be in the classroom. Call it unbalanced,” he said. Some Teach the
Facts members say they also are Christians.
“I think [CRC has] a much sterner view of Christianity than I do. It's
kind of like Catholicism versus Unitarianism,” Mrs. Grewell said. On May
5, U.S. District Court Judge Alexander Williams Jr. ruled that
Montgomery County's course did teach about religious points of view on
homosexuality and discriminate against others.
“The revised curriculum presents only one view on the subject — that
homosexuality is a natural and morally correct lifestyle — to the
exclusion of other perspectives,” Judge Williams, who was appointed in
1994 by President Clinton, wrote in his 22-page opinion. On Thursday,
the CRC and the schools agreed to extend the judge's 10-day temporary
restraining order through December in hopes of reaching an agreement on
revising the curriculum.
CRC attorney John Garza said the group will drop the suit if the school
system includes the CRC in the revision. The group wants the schools to
remove a portion that would teach students that homosexuality is not a
choice and another that says gender is determined by a student's
“internal sense.” They also want more information about the health risks
of homosexuality included in the course and say too many background
materials come from liberal or pro-choice groups such as Advocates for
Youth and Planned Parenthood.
A CRC member tried to introduce health statistics from the federal
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into the citizens committee
that approved the sex-ed materials. But they were rejected on the
grounds that similar data were included elsewhere in the health
curriculum. Mrs. Turner said CRC filed its lawsuit because the board
refused to meet with them after they presented 3,500 signatures on a
petition opposing the sex-ed course last month.
Last week, Newsweek magazine ranked five Montgomery County high schools
in the top 100 schools nationally — more than any other county in the
country.
Judge Williams recognized that what happens with the county's sex
education will have national impact. Montgomery County Public Schools
“have to be the pacesetter. This is a very important issue,” he said
during a May 5 hearing in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt. Both sides
are resolute, and discussions between them will be limited. Schools
spokesman Brian Porter said that school board President Patricia O'Neil
“believes it would be inappropriate to talk with the plaintiffs outside
of the ongoing attorney-to-attorney discussions until the litigation is
resolved.”
“It's not that conversations can't occur,” Mr. Porter said. “It's that
they have to occur within the appropriate legal context.” The schools
have hired a new attorney from the high-powered D.C. law firm of Hogan
and Hartson.
“We're not backing away from this,” Mr. Stanley said. “I would view this
case a microcosm of the bigger issue that's raging in the country.”
Jon Ward
16 May 2005
http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20050516-124945-6237r.htm
home
/
Previous
viewpoint |