School Customizes Lesson for Lone Atheist Student

[Massachusetts] Newton South High School officials dropped a requirement to read excerpts from the Bible for one student last month, after he refused to read the Biblical passages as a literature assignment because he is an atheist.

Yet, when parents protest homosexual indoctrination in this state, the court mandates no opt-out nor advance notification.

-- From "Student Refuses To Study Bible As Literature" WCVB ABC TV5 Boston 12/16/09

Officials said the school doesn't read from actual Bibles and instead distributes handouts with the Biblical passages. After [one student] refused to read the passages and failed quizzes on the subject, his mother went to school officials with concerns, the newspaper reported.

The school said it would drop the failing quizzes and allow [the student] to complete a project that doesn't use the Bible.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Newton South officials give in to student's refusal to study Bible as literature" by John Hilliard, The Daily News Tribune 12/16/09

Jack Summers, a 15-year-old sophomore, said he objected to reading the religious text as part of an honors English class that also includes writings by William Shakespeare and Charles Dickens, among others.

“This is the word of God. People take this literally ... I don’t want to read about what they believe to be true,” said Summers, who described himself as an atheist.

South Principal Joel Stembridge wouldn’t comment on Summers’ case, but said the school uses the Bible to introduce students to the cultural traditions and allusions found in much of Western literature.

“The greatest difficulty I have with someone is when they say, ‘I don’t even want to read a subject matter,’ [and] lose the opportunity to understand others,” said Stembridge.

All sophomores study parts of the Bible as literature as part of 10th-grade English classes, along with Dickens’ “A Tale of Two Cities,” “Antigone” and works by Shakespeare.

South’s freshman curriculum lists the Book of Genesis from the Bible as a required academic subject in ninth-grade English courses, alongside “Lord of the Flies,” “Catcher in the Rye” and “House on Mango Street,” plus passages from “Romeo and Juliet.”

In the 1963 United States Supreme Court case School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, the court ruled that schools can use the Bible and other religious works for studying literature and culture, so long as it’s not used to proselytize.

But Jack’s mother, Marjorie Summers, said her son told his teacher about his concerns about studying the Bible. After her son refused to read Biblical texts, and failed two quizzes on the subject, she went to South officials to discuss her son’s position.

. . . Jack Summers said he would not take a class on world religions in school, either. He said he isn’t opposed to learning about religion, but would rather get his information on religions from media sources such as the BBC and NPR, plus a friend who practices Islam.

He compared reading a religious text in a classroom setting to reading a Bible in a church.

Sarah Wunsch, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said Newton schools haven’t violated Summers’ rights, though their decision to accommodate him was “a good idea.”

“In general, the Bible can be taught as part of a literature class,” said Wunsch, who also noted that “mere exposure of a child to ideas that are offensive is not a constitutional violation.”

She pointed to a January 2008 federal appeals court decision in favor of Lexington public schools for using books in the classroom that included references to homosexuality.

In that case, two families had filed suit against that district because of their opposition to discussion of homosexuality in the classroom. But the court decided that schools didn’t need parental consent before referring to homosexuality in classroom discussions.

“Kids need to learn to grapple with things like that,” said Wunsch.

JC Considine, a spokesman for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, said the state has a suggested book list that includes religious texts such as the Bible, the Koran and Buddhist scriptures, but local districts decide which books to use in classrooms.

However, religious texts are “not something that we’re mandating” in classrooms, said Considine.

No, only homosexual indoctrination is mandatory, per the highest court in the state.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

American Voters Getting Message - Gay Agenda Targets Children

Now that Maine voters have rejected same-sex marriage, this Associated Press article represents the liberal media recognizing that the pro-family message resonates with Americans. This article of Gay Agenda propaganda claims to refute documented facts of the results of legalizing same-sex marriage, including the U.S. Supreme Court's acceptance of homosexual indoctrination in schools (video documentation included).

See extensive documentation/links refuting this propaganda below.

-- From "Schools emerge as new tactic in gay marriage votes" by Lisa Leff and David Sharp, Associated Press 11/6/09

In one ad after another, voters in California and Maine were besieged with images of what would supposedly happen if same-sex marriage were legal: Students on a field trip to a lesbian wedding, elementary kids gobbling up books featuring gay couples, kindergartners learning about homosexuality from their teachers.

The strategy worked. Overruling the courts and lawmakers, voters defeated gay marriage ballot measures in California last year and in Maine this week after conservatives convinced residents that same-sex unions would become common classroom fodder without any say from parents.

The punch-to-the gut claim has emerged as the latest tool in the ever-evolving playbook of same-sex marriage opponents, and the Achilles' heel of the gay-marriage movement. Voters seem to be swayed by the notion that gay marriage will be a corrupting force among children, even though critics blasted the message as a blatantly misleading case of fear-mongering.

"It was very effective. It's drawing on the fears of the unknown," said Sandy Maisel, director of the Goldfarb Center for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement at Maine's Colby College. "There's no evidence that it's going to happen, but there's very clear evidence that it's an effective campaign tactic."

But the [false, homosexualist's] response did not defuse the hot-button issue, advocates on both sides of the issue observe, in part because they failed to address what many parents knew to be true: Many public schools already have lessons that include references to gay families in the younger grades and confronting anti-gay discrimination for older students. Although the topics usually are broached in the context of appreciating diversity and tolerance, for some parents any discussion of gay people is too close to talking about gay sex.

"The trend that we are seeing is homosexuality is being promoted more and more in schools, and the increase in this is creating a hostile environment for kids with Christian or socially conservative viewpoints," said Candi Cushman, education analyst for the Christian group Focus on the Family.

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Click on headlines below; to read complete documentation, follow links embedded within posted articles.

Parents Sue School over Mandatory Homosexual Indoctrination Course

Homosexual Training Videos Infiltrate Schools

Teacher's Union Votes for Same-sex 'Marriage' (and more)

President Obama's "safe schools czar" Founded Nation-wide Homosexual School Clubs

Annual, Nation-wide "Day of Silence" Promotes Homosexuality in Schools

Congress Advancing Homosexuality in Schools

Judge Forces Florida School to Accept Homosexuality

CA Kindergartners Pledge to be Homosexual Advocates

Chicago Elementary School Kids Recruited by Homosexualists for 'Pride Parade'

Gay Agenda: Cross Dressing at School

Maine Ruling: Cross-dressing Male Students Allowed in Girl's Room

Virginia School Bans Books Critical of Homosexuality

Homosexual-only High Schools in New York and coming to Chicago

San Fran. Launches Homosexual School Indoctrination Website

Boston Mayor Promotes Deviant Sex to Children

Children Learn Transsexualism from Their Massachusetts Elementary School Janitor

Chicago Mayor Appoints Homosexual as City School Superintendent

Illinois School Superintendent's Gay Agenda Exposed in Lawsuit

Homosexual Advocates Capture Barely-post-pubescent Students in Wisconsin

ACLU Demands Homosexual Website Access for Tennessee Students

South Carolina School Forced to Accept 'Gay Club'

CA Legislature Mandates Schools to Celebrate Homosexuality

Feds Fund Group Indoctrinating Children on Homosexuality

Supreme Court Allows Gay Agenda to Trump Parental Rights

The highest courts have ruled that same-sex 'marriage' in Massachusetts provides a legal route for indoctrination of homosexuality in kindergartners -- the case of David Parker.

The news story continues below this video of Mr. and Mrs. Parker telling their story.


-- From "Public school lawsuit runs out of federal appeals" by Ian B. Murphy, GateHouse News Service 10/7/08

Lexington — The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Parker v. Hurley Monday, upholding the dismissal by federal district and appellate courts of the parental-rights lawsuit originating in Lexington.

Parker v. Hurley concerned a parent’s right to exclude their children from discussions about homosexuality in elementary schools. It began in 2006 when two Lexington families objected to classroom materials that depicted same-sex marriages.

“This is a very important victory for not only Lexington but also the United States,” said Lexington Superintendent Paul Ash. “This case made clear that teachers should not fear being dragged into court for choosing important educational materials.”

With the nation’s highest court refusing to review the lawsuit, the case is effectively dead in federal court. The Parker and Wirthlin families may still bring the case to Massachusetts state court.

“We’re very disappointed that the Supreme Court has turned their backs on this parental rights issue,” said David Parker, the most vocal plaintiff in the lawsuit. “This clearly has national significance with profound consequences, and they’re ignoring it. We will look into [pursuing it in state court]. We will have further meetings with our attorneys and discuss that option.”

Parker said the judges who dismissed the suit at the district and appellate levels agreed that the intent on using the books in class was to change children’s minds about homosexuality. He said that with the Supreme Court decision, books will be used all over the country to do just that.

“Books and lessons will come into [schools] to have children affirm it,” Parker said. “They will be coerced to affirm the correctness and the normalcy of homosexuality, homosexual conduct, and gay marriage.”

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 10/7/13 - What 'gay marriage' did to Massachusetts (video from Brian Camenker and MassResistance):

Parent David Parker Petitions U.S. Supreme Court

Massachusetts school hell-bent on homosexual indoctrination of children, fighting parents tooth and nail in courts

"What the pro-homosexual camp has done is positioned so-called 'gay' rights' to completely trump parental rights and parental authority in public schools."

-- From "Supremes asked to stop 'gay' indoctrination" by Bob Unruh © 2008 WorldNetDaily 6/5/08

The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to review a case in which parents are objecting to the actions of a school district where officials are trying "to systematically indoctrinate young children into disbelieving core ten[e]ts of their families' faith."

. . . Earlier District Judge Mark Wolf had ordered that school officials' work to undermine Christian beliefs is needed to prepare children for citizenship, and if parents don't like it they can elect a different school committee or homeschool their children.

Those conclusions, according to MassResistance, a pro-family organization following the case, "have been so bizarre that it boggles the mind."

Parker, his wife and another couple have been trying to bring a federal civil rights lawsuit against school officials and others in Lexington, Mass., but have run into a massively funded campaign by nationwide groups promoting homosexuality.

"At issue is the teaching of homosexuality and transgender topics to elementary school children while denying parents rights of consent, opt-out provision, or even notification before or after the fact!" wrote MassResistance.

"The school department, led by Supt. Paul Ash, has stated in school publications and in the media that they will not compromise on any of those points."

The case developed in 2005 when Parker learned of the pro-homosexual indoctrination plan in the school.

"After a long series of meetings with Estabrook Elementary School officials regarding … teaching homosexual issues to his son in kindergarten without parental consent, David Parker finally told the principal and the city's director of education that he would not leave until the school agreed to negotiate some agreement on the matter. Rather than negotiate, the officials had Parker arrested and brought to jail, where he spent the night. The next morning he was led into Concord District court in handcuffs," MassResistance reported.

Also at issue is whether those schools' "open and specific intention to indoctrinate … children into disbelieving core tenets of their families' deeply held religious faith constitutes a burden on the families' free exercise of religion."

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Judge: Schools Can Teach Homosexuality Without Parental Consent

Parents lose more rights as a result of the gay 'rights' movement...

From Judge: Schools can promote homosexual 'marriage' without parental consent, by Jim Brown, published Feb. 24, 2007, for OneNewsNow.com

WASHINGTON - A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by two Massachusetts families who want to remove their elementary school children from their public school classroom during discussions on homosexual "marriage."

U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf has rejected a lawsuit brought by the Parker and Wirthlin families against the Lexington, Ky., school system. The families argued that their constitutional rights were violated when school officials refused to notify them before their children were exposed to pro-homosexual content in the classroom.

In his ruling, Wolf said that, “under the Constitution, public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy.”

One of the plaintiffs, David Parker, says the ruling should be troubling to parents across the country.

"It ignores, really, what we're asking for," he explained. "We're asking for parental notification.

"We're asking for the school not to restrict the flow of information that's critical to enable parents to guide their children," he continued. "And, really, it sets up the situation to usurp a fundamental part of the parental role."

Parker says even parents who support homosexual "marriage" should be concerned about Wolf's decision.

"Taking the position that teachers - behind the backs of parents, to a captive audience of very young children - can indoctrinate any social perspective that they deem right," he argued, "and not even notify the parents, is absolutely unacceptable for all parents on all sides of the issues for all political persuasions.

From Judge dismisses David Parker's federal lawsuit, published by Mass Resistance

According to the 38 page ruling from Judge Wolf:

"An exodus from class when issues of homosexuality or same-sex marriage are to be discussed could send the message that gays, lesbians, and the children of same-sex parents are inferior and, therefore, have a damaging effect on those students," he opined.

Teaching all students that homosexuality is normal is not an appropriate solution to damaging effects on students being raised by homosexuals. Homosexual people are not inferior, but homosexual relationships and behavior ARE. This judge appears to be incapable of making distinctions between people and behavior.

The judge goes on to say:

"Under the Constitution public schools are entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy," the judge wrote. "Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. It is increasingly evident that our diversity includes differences in sexual orientation."

Are we to value all sexual orientation differences? According to the American Psychiatric Associaton there are 23 distinctive sexual 'orientations.' If discrimination against sexual 'orientation' is wrong, then how can we draw an arbitrary line against some 'orientations' and not others? What about bestiality, fetishism and urophilia? Is it OK to discriminate against exhibitionists and sadists or do we teach our children these things are normal too?

On what basis do we 'draw the line?' Of course, the answer to that is, we DON'T. Homosexual activists want to see legal recognition for everything from polyamorous groups to 'queer couples who decide to create and raise a child with another queer person or couple in two households.'

Isn't diversity grand?

Special Event! The Gay Agenda? No Child Left Behind...
Sunday, Mar. 11, 7:15 PM, College Church, Wheaton, IL