Monday, May 02, 2005

CRC's Lying Letter

[Note: due to a Blogger crash, this post was unavailble for a while]

People, this is unbelievable. We got a copy of the letter that Ex-Recall is sending to families at the schools that are pilot-testing the sex-ed curriculum.

I'm sorry, but I don't have words for how reprehensible this letter is. I will include it in its entirety, and then comment afterwards.
Dear Tilden Middle School Parent:

Your child will be taught sexual variations (homosexuality, transgenderism, bi-sexuality) as part of the new Montgomery county sex education curriculum being piloted in your school this spring for 8th graders. Unfortunately, though the board of education (BOE) was tasked with introducing material to help teachers define homosexuality in response to children's questions, the new pilot curriculum does not define sexual variations -- it defends and advocates sexual variations.

Here are some specific examples of areas that are especially disturbing:
  • Health professionals believe that transgenderism is a gender identity disorder. However the new curriculum does not state this. The curriculum instead teaches children that their gender identity is not based on their anatomy. The new 8th grade curriculum defines "Gender Identity: a person's internal sense of knowing whether he or she is male or female."
  • While encouraging children to determine their sexual identity -- heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual -- all material from the CDC (Center for Disease Control) that discusses the health risks of homosexual behaviors was excluded. That is irresponsible.
  • The new curriculum includes resources about sexual variations that: (1.)encourages confused and impressionable youth to self-identify as homosexual, (2.)recommends that schools establish unisex bathrooms to transgender students [transgenderism is a recognized gender identity disorder], (3.) urges teachers to refer students to non-mainstream religions that do not view homosexuality as a sin, (4.) defines 'heterosexism' as "promoting heterosexuality as superior".
  • the 10th grade condom video narrator states "Remember to us a condom for oral, anal, and vaginal sex." The condom manufacturers state on the package that condoms are not recommended for anal sex and the Surgeon General has stated "Anal sex is simply too dangerous to practice", however, these facts were not included. Clips from the video may be viewed on our web site. An infectious disease doctor was appalled at the video. Her article to the Gazette on this video is also listed on our web site.

CRC is an organization of parents and citizens very disturbed by the lack of balance in the new curriculum, and we have organized to take action. Please visit our web site so we can track the percentage of students opting out.

Best Regards,

The Parents and Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC)

OK. Catch your breath, take a bath, have a drink, whatever you have to do.

Explain this to me: "Your child will be taught sexual variations." Yes, it's a sex ed course, they'll be learning about sex. Not everybody is the same. They'll be taught about sexual variations. About.

The idea that the curriculum "defends and advocates sexual variations" is, I suppose, a matter of perspective. The curriculum does not say that all homosexuals will roast in hell, and that may be taken as advocacy. The curriculum simply teaches that sexual variation exists.

This statement: Health professionals believe that transgenderism is a gender identity disorder -- is simply incorrect. There are many causes of transgenderism, including chromosome abnormalities, unusual patterns of hormone activity, etc. These are physiological, and are not a form of personality disorder. Now, there is a DSM disgnosis of "gender identity disorder," where a person believes themselves to be the "wrong sex," and where that belief causes them "clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning." The DSM-IV says, The diagnosis is not made if the individual has a concurrent physical intersex condition (e.g., androgen insensitivity syndrome or congenital adrenal hyperplasia).... The diagnosis is also not made in cases where the person is not under stress because of the belief -- a guy who thinks he's really a woman, and who feels fine about that, is not suffering from "gender identity disorder." Why would CRC want you to believe that transgendered persons, including those with congenital physiological conditions, are "suffering" from a disorder?

The second point is silly. There is a section of the health curriculum on sexually transmitted diseases. It isn't in the sex-ed section because it's already covered. They're assuming you won't know that.

Items listed under the third bullet seem to be simply made up. Pure fiction. The curriculum does not encourage children to determine whether they're gay or straight -- that is a total fabrication, and the writers of this letter must know that. And there's nothing in the curriculum about unisex bathrooms, of all things! No students are referred to any religion, no matter what the feeling about homosexuality, and finally the word "heterosexism" doesn't appear in the curriculum at all -- anywhere!

One doctor may have been appalled. Others weren't. This is not much of a criticism of an entire curriculum.

These people -- notice they are careful never to describe themselves as "parents", always "parents and citizens" -- say they want balance. does not agree that objectivity needs to be balanced with bigotry, or that facts need to be balanced with lies.

[Edited for accuracy 4:19 PM]


Blogger War Diaries said...

Jim, I guess we have to dirty our website with this letter for the sake of information, right?
Otherwise, I would say it qualifies for the category of "removed by blog administration due to vulgar content, and open lying."

May 02, 2005 2:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What exactly is it you do at Georgetown Isabel? Because whatever it is, you are a disgrace to the institution.

May 04, 2005 8:14 AM  
Blogger War Diaries said...

I thought you were against personal attacks. Let me think again.
Also, in Spanish we have an expression "dar la cara," and it is directly linked to the concept of honor: you never attack someone without "dar la cara".
That, translated to blogger terms means, you don't attack someone without putting your name on it.
I see a pattern of that "honest" behavior in all of the anonymous here.

May 04, 2005 9:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Calling you a disgrace to Georgetown is not an 'attack'. It is a statement of fact. You're very uncharitable and hateful attitude combined with your own attacks and lies about the CRC is a disgrace to the very institution you claim to work for.

May 04, 2005 9:49 AM  
Blogger Kay2898 said...

What specific lies about Recall (CRC)??????

Please list them.

Kay R

May 04, 2005 10:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again... you TTF members run from the issues. Can we please move on??? The topic is CRC's Lying Letter... The fact is the only thing that is lying is your information.

The CRC took their information straight from the curriculum. If you are accusing them of lying... you are accusing your trusted BOE & CAC of lying... They wrote the stuff. Did you know this????

Doesn't is make you wonder why they (the BOE & CAC) have been working on changing the language of some of the statements that are listed in the curriculum? An example is (let me tell you know, it's not word for word), Sex play with same gender friends is not uncommon. To say this is absurd. Where do they get this stuff from??? Are these the things you want taught to your children???

Mrs. Lopez

May 04, 2005 7:43 PM  
Blogger Kay2898 said...

"Mrs. Lopez, Parent"

"Sex play with same gender friends is not uncommon. To say this is absurd. Where do they get this stuff from??? "

You tell us why it is not true....

Kay R

May 05, 2005 1:28 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

Many kids do play doctor.

May 05, 2005 7:08 AM  
Blogger War Diaries said...

Brave Mrs. Lopez,Parent
We ALREADY stated in the very same post many of the things that were lies and/or misrepresentations of the curriculum. (Not all, some were such lies that we couldn't even found to what part of the curriculum they may be referring to).
You have not added anything new to the debate except saying that we are lying. If you don't want to run from the issue, instead of attack, quote. Get the quote that supports your lies. BTW, check also the opinions of the judge, because he seems to believe you were asking "more than a few logical leaps" from the Court.
And he read the, we could assumed, well presented argument of well paid lawyers. Imagine if he read your (or Susie's which are my favorites)comments here!

May 06, 2005 3:39 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home