You might not have heard about this case which has made its way all the way to the Supreme Court. It concerns a Maryland public school district using LGBTQ-themed books and a group of parents who have not been allowed to opt out of the indoctrination citing religious objections.
(Yes, Montgomery County schools is literally teaching kids about gay stuff in pre-K, and they won't let parents opt out.)
Here's the cover of one of the books in question:
Like you, I was also surprised that the pup in this book was an actual canine, and not some bro in a dog suit.
Fortunately, this book was so bad it has already been removed from the curriculum.
Some more context on this case from the New York Post:
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) approved certain LGBTQ-themed curriculum books in late 2022. Initially, MCPS allowed an opt-out for parents with religious concerns, but by March of 2023, it reversed course, citing concerns about absenteeism and administrative burdens.
A group of parents from Muslim, Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox faiths, sued the school district, arguing the lack of an opt-out system trampled upon their religious rights as parents.
So the parents have taken this opt-out fight all the way to the Supreme Court, and Justice Neil Gorsuch had some thoughts when speaking to the school's attorney.
Gorsuch: And [the books] are being used in English language instruction at age three, some of them?
Attorney: So 'Pride Puppy' was the book that was used for the pre-kindergarten curriculum; that's no longer in the curriculum.
Gorsuch: That's the one where they're supposed to look for the leather and bondage, things like that? Sex worker, right?
Attorney: It's not bondage, it's a woman in a leather [jacket] … No, that's not correct.
Gorsuch: Gosh, I read it. [corrects himself] Drag queen.
Attorney: The leather that they're pointing to is a woman in a leather jacket, and one of the words is 'drag queen.'
...
Gorsuch: Now, you've included these in the English language curriculum rather than the Human Sexuality curriculum to influence students. Is that fair? That's what the district court found. Do you agree with that?
Attorney: I think to the extent that the district court found it was to influence, it was to influence them toward civility …
Gorsuch: Whatever, but to influence them.
Attorney: In the manner that I just mentioned, yes.
Good news: It looks as if the Supreme Court is leaning toward siding with the parents on this one, though until we get a ruling (probably during Pride month, coincidentally) we don't really know.
A federal judge and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have already ruled in favor of the school board, the 4th Circuit saying it needs to be proven that the kids are being coerced into acting in a different way than what their religion teaches them.
Here are a few other books being used at Montgomery County Public Schools.
Again, this is curriculum students are not allowed to opt out of.
Kentanji Brown Jackson had the absolute worst take on this one:
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson stressed that parents ‘can choose to put their kid elsewhere' and are not required to send their children to public schools if they disagree with what is being taught.
‘I guess I'm struggling to see how it burdens a parent's religious exercise if the school teaches something that the parent disagrees with,' she admitted. ‘You have a choice, you don't have to send your kids to that school.'
So that's how our public schools work now? If you don't like being force-fed gay propaganda that goes against your religion you just have to find another place to go to school.
Good to know, KBJ.
Good to know!
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
