Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The ABCs of Tolerance

By Deb Price, AlterNet. Posted March 3, 2008.


As American society becomes more gay-friendly, so must public schools.
Deb Price

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Deb Price

Courageous Gay Bishop Weathers Storm
Bishop Gene Robinson calls on religious gays and lesbians to fight for acceptance within their spiritual communities.
May 5, 2008

Schwarzenegger Backs Gay Rights
California's governor has taken a humane and reasonable stance on gay marriage. John McCain should pay attention.
Apr 21, 2008

A Gay Friendly Message to Mega-Churches
A new generation of church leaders avoids rabid, anti-gay rhetoric. Can they be pushed to accept and support gay rights?
Apr 7, 2008

More stories by Deb Price

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 

Kindergartner Jacob Parker brought home a "diversity" book bag that included a picture book called "Who's in a Family?"

The book shows a variety of families, including a mom-dad family, a family headed by a grandmother, an animal family and a family headed by lesbian moms. "Who's in a family? The people who love you the most!" the book ends.

In the same Massachusetts elementary school, second-grader Joey Wirthlin listened as his teacher read from another picture book, "King & King." A prince, told by his mother Queen to marry, passes over several princesses before falling in love with another prince. The princes kiss on the final page, and a red heart is superimposed on their lips.

The parents of Jacob and Joey sued in federal court, charging that because they believe homosexuality is immoral, the school violated their constitutionally protected freedom of religion by introducing their children to the gay-friendly material.

Fortunately, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit unanimously ruled in favor recently of the Lexington school's efforts to promote tolerance.

"Public schools are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas," the court ruled in Parker v. Hurley.

That case is just one of a series of high-profile clashes over gay issues in public schools.

What ties them together, notes American Civil Liberties Union attorney Ken Choe, is the effort by gay-rights foes "to erase discussions about anything gay" from public schools.

Recent battles:

Over the objections of some religious conservatives, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Montgomery County's addressing sexual orientation in middle and high schools.

The ACLU is suing Ponce de Leon High School in Florida for banning such things as gay-friendly rainbow stickers and claiming they "likely would be disruptive" and would suggest students were part of a "secret/illegal organization."

Under pressure from the ACLU, a high school in Portsmouth, Va., agreed not to again censor a student who wore a T-shirt with a lesbian pride symbol.

In a disturbing federal court case, the Okeechobee, Fla., school board is trying to shut down a gay-straight student club, using taxpayer-paid "experts" to argue such clubs are inherently harmful.

A pair of federal cases finds the ACLU on the other side, trying to protect the rights of kids to wear anti-gay T-shirts with hostile slogans or to voice disagreement with material in gay-friendly harassment-prevention programs.

The Parker ruling doesn't order public schools to teach gay-friendly messages, but instead backs up those choosing to do so.

And, while it technically applies only to the First Circuit -- Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico -- the ruling is likely to influence other federal circuits dealing with similar objections by small groups of parents riled up over educators' overdue attempts to encourage tolerance.

As American society grows more gay-friendly, so must public schools: All school kids need to learn the ABCs of tolerance.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: aclu, gay rights, education, schools

Deb Price of The Detroit News writes the first nationally syndicated column on gay issues. To find out more about Deb Price and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I disagree, and here's why:
Posted by: rickiey on Mar 4, 2008 1:36 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These schools are in the activity of teaching tolerance. That sounds like a good thing. But it isn't.

The purpose of schools is to teach children how to think, not what to think.

Like it or not, tolerance for lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders is a personal choice that everyone has to make on their own.

The school should be in the business of teaching facts, not opinions.

They should teach that people with the alternative lifestyles exist, are due to the genetic makeup of the person, and have the same fundamental rights as everyone else. That should be the entire scope of the lesson.

Students presented information, in a factual manner, should decide for themselves. There should be no bias in the information present.

The reason that there should be no bias in the way the information is presented, is that there are schools that will choose to present the information with the opposing bias. Be honest, Christian fundamentalists hate gays because the bible tells them to (yes, it's subject to interpretation).

If you allow the schools to choose to present with a tolerance bias, you will have schools presenting with a bias against tolerance.

Instead, if the facts are presented in an unbiased manner, more often than not, tolerance will be the result.

Hatred of those different than you is a learned trait, not an inherent one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I disagree, and here's why: Posted by: cwilsondrum
ethics is superior to religious learning
Posted by: luzmejor on Mar 5, 2008 6:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Schools are not allowed to propose that children learn what is essentially untrue and hateful propaganda. Neither should parents insist that professional teachers berate even their own children with lies.

Yes, the most important factor in schools is to teach children how to learn, to reason and to critique everything, not to prescribe a list of what to think.
An Ethics class is preferable for teaching how to treat your neighbors fairly than any religion ever dreamed.

It is a fact that various parts of the Bible conflict with other parts and that, taken as a whole, it is a collection of stories of ancient Middle Eastern belief systems, written as literature.

Let the public schools serve only for an integrated public education. Parents and pastors who want to mandate a religious beliefs education for their own children should set up their own religious schools. It is never going to be acceptable to teach religious propaganda in public schools in America.

I am a religious person and I certainly would not want anyone else to teach my children or anyone else's how to think about my own religion. Sensible people know what a minefield that could become. It's an obvious attempt at brainwashing for political and social gain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Homosexual Yip Yap as Usual
Posted by: rjs on Mar 5, 2008 7:37 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"As American society becomes more gay-friendly, so must public schools."

Another real winner of an article. How many is that in a row now?

Schools are not built, nor is individual academic progress achieved by basing anything at all on ones sexual orientation or preference. There are no requirements to even mention sexual preference to gain any type of degree. Again, as with your other articles, you mix sexual matters with politics, and now education. None of which has any direct connection whatsoever.

School is for education, not for being "friends" with anyone based on sexual orientation or preferences.

--rjs

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Giving Liberalism a Bad Name
Posted by: NoPCZone on Mar 6, 2008 8:45 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the author is advocating is social engineering in schools- not education. This kind of mucking around with the curriculum has contributed to the decline in the quality of our public schools.

When public money is spent for the education of our children here are the priorities:
1- Language skills (reading, writing and research).
2- Computational skills (mathematics and analytic skills).
3- History & Political Science.
4- Natural & Applied Sciences.
5- Art (Music, Visual Art, Theater).
6- Human health and fitness (Phys Ed).

That's It. Not the knuckle-dragging right's agenda and not the granola left's agenda.

Like an earlier post, the idea should not be teaching people what to think. What is needed is practice and instruction in the processes of critical thought- not indoctrination.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ban Dick and Jane?
Posted by: Bouldercreeker on Mar 6, 2008 11:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Schools are not built, nor is individual academic progress achieved by basing anything at all on ones sexual orientation or preference. There are no requirements to even mention sexual preference to gain any type of degree."

What you're suggesting is that educational materials should have no mention of families or love relationships of any kind. Because when a book tells a story about mom, dad, and kids it is likely portraying a heterosexual family. Heterosexual is a sexual orientation. Along with bisexual and homosexual. And asexual, some would add.

Kids of non-heterosexual families need to see their families positively represented in school books and films in the same way that kids of non-white families need to see themselves reflected. Gay kids need to read books with gay characters so they don't grow up feeling like freaks and hide themselves in shame until their parents find them hanging from a belt in their bedrooms. (Sorry for this image, but a high percentage of youth suicide is related to being tormented about nonconforming sexuality.)

For god's sake, sexual orientations are simply variations on a theme much like handedness. We've got righties, lefties, and the lucky ambidextrous.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If some parents fought half as hard over the quality of their child's education...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Mar 7, 2008 1:49 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...instead of on the pro's ("you will approve of my lifestyle choices") and con's ("we hates us some king on king action") of Kings and Kings living happily ever after, I suspect we might just elevate this discussion beyond silliness, in a matter of a few short years.

Can the child read? Can he or she add at a grade-appropriate level? Are they still in that sort of business at the public school level? If not, be prepared to find alternatives--they can be found aplenty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]