Tuesday, May 03, 2005

What Their Lawyer Says

We don't know yet what's actually contained in the lawsuit filed by Ex-Recall and PFOX today, or if they even filed it. But here's a clue -- let me draw your attention to a news story on a site called TownHall.com. This news site seems to have the inside track, they talked to somebody from Liberty Counsel, the lawyers who are representing Ex-Recall and PFOX in their lawsuit. I'm going to edit here, to keep it brief, but you gotta see this...
[Liberty Counsel's president and general counsel Mathew D.] Staver says the Montgomery County curriculum is "inaccurate and unashamedly hostile to certain Christian views."

Liberty Counsel offers the following examples from the instruction booklet:
  • "Fact: Sex play with friends of the same gender is not uncommon during early adolescence and does not prove long-term sexual orientation;"
  • "It is no more abnormal or sick to be homosexual than to be left-handed;"
  • "Heterosexual parents are consistently not found to be more loving or caring than gay parents;"
  • "Jesus said absolutely nothing at all about homosexuality;"
  • "Religion has often been misused to justify hatred and oppression;"
  • "One's sexual and emotional orientations are fixed at an early age -- certainly by age five;"
  • "Human sexuality is a continuum;"
  • "Many homophobic responses are born out of a fear that one's own sexual orientation may not be entirely heterosexual;"
  • "[A]bstinence until marriage" is detrimental to "GLBT youth;"
  • "It is perfectly natural to be gay, lesbian, bisexual, and/or transgender."
According to the Liberty Counsel, the sex-ed curriculum mentions that "fundamentalists" and "evangelicals" may think they can overcome same-sex attraction, and therefore, it says questioning students should be referred to "sensitive clergy" to "reconcile their religious beliefs."

The curriculum never refers to husband and wife, the Liberty Counsel said. Instead, family is defined as "two or more people who are joined together by emotional feelings or who are related to one another."

One video features a high school girl using a cucumber to show how a condom is used.

The plaintiffs say the curriculum promotes dangerous sexual activity without any discussion of its health risks, such as diseases associated with homosexual behavior.

Said Staver, "When sexually transmitted diseases are epidemic in some portions of the country, especially among same-sex behavior, it is inconceivable that a school board would promote such activity without presenting any associated medical risk." ... Lawsuit Seeks to Block 'Radical Homosexual Sex-Ed Curriculum'

The instruction booklet? We don't know about any "instruction booklet," other than the instruction booklet for teachers, called the "Teachers' Editions" of the curriculum.

Now, just for the exercise, go to those Teachers Editions. Click here for the actual HEALTH CURRICULUM DOCUMENTS, and see -- just see -- if you can find a single one of those things in either the 8th or 10th grade curriculum (Items Number 10 and 11 on that web page).

Unbelievable what people will say to get their way. Just unbelievable.


Blogger Kay2898 said...

Liberty Counsel has found a new job since Good News Club.

To file a case one can say most anything. The proof will be in arguments and documents of fact.

Not those that are "dreamed up..."

Kay R

May 03, 2005 4:31 PM  
Anonymous Gleeful said...

Yeesh. I haven't read either of your sites for months and even I recall the language quoted above. Was it removed or something?

May 03, 2005 5:41 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

The old BOE report is at the site linked here, you can check it too if you think you're gonna catch something. I think one of these things was in that old report. This quote is posted today, and the lawsuit was filed today -- changes to the curriculum have been seen by everybody.

May 03, 2005 7:57 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Let me add, for those who haven't followed this situation, the first bulleted quote in this post, about the "same-sex friends" was in an earlier draft of the curriculum. When this phrase was removed, Ex-Recall put out a press release claiming victory, the newspapers wrote about it -- everyone in this game was well aware of the fact that this misleading phrase had been changed.

So why does Ex-Recall tell the world all this junk is in this curriculum? Let's just say, it doesn't show a great commitment to truthfulness.

May 04, 2005 7:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is no assurance that the minor changes Russ Henke made to the pilot will be carried through into the curriculum if it is implemented.

May 04, 2005 8:00 AM  
Blogger Kay2898 said...

To be truthful there.... are no assurances that any changes to health curriculum pilot would ever suit Recall (CRC) unless Recall writes the curriculum themselves and have the only right to approve.

Kay R

May 04, 2005 8:27 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home