"King and King" (not spooky but news just the same)
 

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
Teacher reads 2nd-graders
story about 'gay' wedding
Since same-sex marriage is legal in state, administrator says no parent OK needed
Posted: April 19, 2006
5:00 p.m. Eastern


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


While two parents in Lexington, Mass., are upset about the fact their second-grade son was read a fantasy book in school about two princes getting married, what makes them even more angry is the fact the boy's teacher said because same-sex marriage is legal in their state there is no way a mother or father can opt out a child from such experiences.

"We are outraged," parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin told the local Article 8 Alliance. "This is a highly charged social issue. Why are they introducing it in the second grade? And we cannot present our family's point of view to our children if they don't tell us what they're saying to them."

According to a statement from the traditional-values organization, March 24 the Wirthlins' second-grade son came home from Estabrook Elementary School and repeated to his mother the story read to him earlier that day about men getting married to each other. His teacher had read the book "King and King" to the class, in which a prince doesn't want to marry any princesses, but instead falls in love with a princess' brother and marries him in a big palace wedding.

The Wirthlins say they immediately contacted the teacher, Heather Kramer, who acknowledged she had read the book to the class and admitted that it was not part of the curriculum.

It was explained to the couple that since same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, discussion of the matter is fair game -- parents do not have to be informed before or after the issue is presented. Kramer reportedly told the Wirthlins that the theme of the day was "weddings" and the teacher wanted to present all points of view on the subject.

Article 8 Alliance reports other parents in the school claim Kramer attended a presentation last year by the Gay Lesbian & Straight Education Network on promoting homosexuality in the classroom.


David Parker, parent of kindergartner, stands before Judge Robert McKenna in Concord District Court April 28 after spending the night in jail (Photo: Article 8 Alliance)

States the organization: "Lexington school officials continue to claim that homosexuality and homosexual relationships do not does not constitute ‘human sexual relationships’ and thus do not trigger the Massachusetts parental notification law – Ch. 73 Sec. 32a."

After the Wirthlins met with Kramer and Principal Joni Jay to discuss their concerns, Jay sent an e-mail to the couple inviting them to contact Dr. Paul Ash, superintendent of the school district, "since your concerns involve district-wide issues."

As WorldNetDaily reported, a North Carolina couple was equally outraged two years ago when "King and King" was read to their daughter's first-grade class.

Estabrook School was also in the news last year when father David Parker faced prosecution for trespassing and spent a night in jail after confronting school officials about homosexuality being discussed in his son's class.
From : http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=49813

I like reading about pioneering schools. It gives me hope.

I'm torn about whether or not the parents should have been informed. They weren't talking about sex, they were talking about love,marriage and tolerance. I mean seriously kids don't really associate sex with marriage when they're 8 do they? I mean some do but overall not so much.

It's nice to see open-mindedness being protected by the law for a change.

As for the "outraged" (nice choice of word) parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin statement "This is a highly charged social issue. Why are they introducing it in the second grade?"

Well, it won't be a highly charged social issue if people learn from a young age about homosexuality as a normal part of life.

exactly!!!!


Big change is always socially charged.

Bah. Kids learn about everything eventually (once we were carpet monsters and look at us now) and keeping them in a bubble won't prepare them for life at all, even if you don't agree with other people's choices.

Why set them up for shock and failure?

I'nm guessing the parents are afraid that acknowledging homosexuality will "encourage" their little ones to become gay. Which is ridiculous.

It's like saying you can encourage a gay person to be straight. When all you can encourage is repression.

I'm surprised that there is such a law. When going to school there is a curiculum to follow, sex should be a part of it, and parents will know when it is the subject of classes.

Also interhuman relations have to deal with gay people because their are real, not just an issue on the news.

Hurray for open minded teachers, dutch teachers though might never get a licence. Here people complain if sexuality or interhuman relations and gay people are not a part of the curiculum.

*after checking this post it might appear i'm angry, but really I'm very suprised about this situation your country appears to be in, I don't understand*

The Netherlands seems to be the most tolerant country in the world. My cousin moved there to get married about 5 years ago and lives there full-time with his husband. Same-sex marriage is still not legal here in Ireland, but the political momentum will make it legal soon enough, I am positive.

A lot of Americans are weird about sexuality when it comes to their kids.

No - some people can't say anything that ISN'T anti-American but you were just sharing your genuine opinion and I full-heartedly agree.

We really are such prudes, but what can you do?

I hope it doesn't get interprated any other way, I'm not per definition against everything American, but reading the political stuff occasionaly, I know what you mean. It is the reason I generaly dislike that part of the forum.

Well in holland being prudes used to be fashion to, about 30 or 40 years ago, some people still are. And the cultural diffrences that there might be between dutch and other people are a big factor.

but slowly the world is changing our way, we might try and take it over
*devil-ish smile*

Yes, we sick fucks the world over that believe in acceptance and tolerance alike should join forces, unite, and overthrow all that is PRUDE in the world today!

How do we start?

Unfortunately, it harkens back to the 'good old days' when people could be jailed for being gay and killing someone for being gay wasn't always frowned on.

The mentality of our society still surprises me, sometimes.

For some reason people seem to hang on to these old-fashioned notions that being gay is something that can be taught to their children. Bah, morons.

I wonder why it should bother anyone so much. It is perfectly acceptable for my uncle to bring his boyfriend to family functions. In fact, my parents' best friends growing up were a lesbian couple - and I was 14 before I ever figured it out! Who cares?

They should be hatin the playa, not the game, G! :)

Ugh.

I get to be the dissenting opinion again.

Whee.

:(

Personally I have to agree with the parents.

It is not the schools place to teach children about "alternate lifestyles".

Schools have enough trouble just teaching our kids the basics. I would prefer that any education on such topics, be received by my child from me. Thus ensuring that he gets the right information, and not the wrong information.

Not to mention First Graders in General have almost zero concept of Sexuality, which is not taught until Middle School/High School usually.

So what kind of sense does it make to introduce such a topic, when the schools do not normally educate children about Human Sexuality until they are MUCH older?

My son has a wonderful teacher, but I still wouldn't want her educating my child about Homosexuality. That is a very personal subject, and one that should be my choice to introduce to my child when they feel it is time.

Not when the Public School System feels it is right.

Imagine the confusion in a young childs mind, when they learn about things in the wrong order. There is a time and a place for these discussions, and Elementary school is just not the place.

My home is the right place, when I feel that my child is ready to understand all of the different reasons that two people decide to share their bodies and their lives with each other.

To play Devil's Advocate for a bit..

There are also people who still do not support Homosexuality for personal or religious reasons. Prayer is not allowed in school at the risk of infringing upon a childs religious freedom, shouldn't the same respect be given to families who choose not to support these alternate lifestyles for religious or personal reasons?

Schools should not have the right to make these kind of decisions.

Schools have taken the word "God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance, but instead should be allowed to educate young children on issues such as Sexual Choices?

It just doesn't make sense.

If we respect a Parent's right to educate and inform on religious choice, the same consideration should be afforded regarding Individual Sexuality.

Everyone here knows that I am the farthest thing from being "Homophobic", but I still feel it is my right and privelege to teach my son about these very personal issues.

When I feel he is ready, not when a Public School System decides my First Grader is ready.

My 1.9 cents on the matter.

It's good to have a voice of dissent in a 'grown-up' discussion. Otherwise it's all just a load "yeah, I agree!". And we learn nothing new.

But what should the basics be? Is it enough to just teach maths and writing and such "concrete" subjects in school? A lot of children wouldn't be lucky enough to have a parent liek you, who would take the time to talk to them about social and personal issues, and they have to learn it from the playground or the TV where they are a lot more likely to pick up inaccurate information.

True that this is about sexuality to us adults, but the story was about marriage. As Oubliette pointed out children of that age - 7 or 8 - will not associate marriage with anything but love, or the natural social order. It's our "advanced" experience that sees this as a "sexuality" issue.


Why should it be a personal subject? It is a fact. Some people prefer the opposite sex, some prefer the same. It is true that there are a lot of nuances and layers to sexuality that need to be carefully taught. But it seems to me that this teach was gently introducing her pupils to the idea that there are more combinations than just "Mom + Dad". In fact I think she laid some groundwork and did the parents a favour by fielding some awkward questions. Although there will be more questions to follow, as is natural with children.


I have to say I feel strongly about the idea of there being an "order" to what children learn. Certainly the physical act of sex isn't something that children should be forced to learn about, because they are not physically old enough to engage in it. It is not part of their lives yet. But marriage is. And as it is a part of life in the state where this happened, it is accepted by law. In fact, considering that, isn't there a possibility that a child in that class has two dads?

The story was about a man choosing a man over a woman as his husband. As a story for children, I doubt it wwnt into much detail about the reasons why.

The fact that "God" was dropped out of the pledge of allegience was because it was a pledge that everyone had to take regardless of religion, right? By leaving "God" in, it was forcing those who did not believe in "God" to lie. Giving information on different lifestyles is not the same, I believe.

thanks E_P_S,

In holland it is accepted that when marriage is discussed in a class, as it might even been done whilst children are 4 or 5, the posibility of gay love, as in the way your parents like eachother, might be mentioned. Nothing radical, just confirm the existence of the thing and pointing out that the feelings for eachother are just as strong as between (normal people) your parents. preferably without the use of the word normal, as to prevent training the viewing of gay's as abnormal.

In the same way as teachers might occasionaly be asked how babies come to this world. It actualy is a part of teacher training to give an awnser without deminishing the parent influence on the subject. Such as, "what do you think?" and after letting the child tell what mummy daddy told, the teacher might give a general awnser; something with when mummy and daddy like eachother and choise. Mostly though children are told babies come from (out of) your mother. I do remember being told, by my mom, about a (small)baby hole that my mom has, I was 5 at the time, and I lost intrest because the truth was boring.. (ofcourse regained at later age).

At my school it was normal for a mother to tell the teacher she is expecting a child, and that a questions or stories concerning babies might be forthcomming from their earlier kid(s). The teacher might then consult other parents or send a news letter to the parents. But in general the teacher knows the parents, so most of the time there is no problem.

On the sex part I do agree with E_P_S, and finding a line between getting babies and making babies and explaining those two different matters seperatly is hard. It also has something to do with teacher- parent relations and that part is not for me.

I forgot this last bit,

I hope that it has become clear why I don't understand the law. If it all works as it should there is no need for it. In holland part of the bringing up of children falls in the hands of teachers most of the social stuff anyway.

edit I now see i'm a slow writer, between reading the thread and posting 2 more posts have been made.

Just remember that the country was settled by fundamentalist and extremist Christians who felt that the the Catholic Church should be strongly condemned, and that the government should do the condemning. Go Puritans!

now we wonder into areas I'm not very familiar with, but when you say it finds its way into the pressent, I agree. But these couses and results are for another thread, I think.