Dads Against the Divorce IndustryDA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS. DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes. |
This is a
WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
Friday, July 18, 2003
By
Ron Strom A California legal organization is pushing an effort to guarantee
rights of parents in the state to direct the moral upbringing of
their children in the wake of efforts by a controversial state
senator to inform school superintendents that parents have few
rights to "opt out" their children from mandated "anti-bias
education."
Copies of Democratic state Sen. Sheila Kuehl's letter to all the
state's public-school superintendents have been distributed via the
Internet by The Pro-Family
Law Center. According to Kuehl, the purpose of the letter was to
inform school districts of their "responsibility" under the
California Students Safety and Violence Prevention Act, which she
authored, to teach tolerance and diversity. Kuehl, a lesbian
Democrat, said even though the law has been on the books for over
two years, "there still is substantial and documented harassment and
discrimination against students who actually are or are perceived to
be gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. …"
One of the documents accompanying Kuehl's letter that is in a
question-and-answer format was highlighted by the Pro-Family Law
Center:
Diversity or tolerance education programs that focus on
preventing verbal harassment, threats and violence against
students are not "sex education" or "family life" programs within
the meaning of the California Education Code. Parents do not have
a right to receive notice about or to opt their children out of
such programs. …
If they elect to send their children to public schools, parents
have very limited rights to prevent their children from receiving
the entire range of instruction available in public schools.
There are some topics that parents have a right to notice about
and/or the right to opt their children out of, but, outside of
these specific topics, parents do not have any general right to
notice and the opportunity to opt their children out of the
curriculum.
Q: Do parents have a constitutional right to prevent their
children from receiving education in public schools on subjects
they disapprove? Almost never. Rich Ackerman, vice president of legal affairs for the law
center, was shocked a state senator would contact every
superintendent in the state with such a directive.
"It's horribly offensive what she did," said Ackerman, who
recently found out about the mailing that originally went out in
December. "She is misrepresenting her own law" in the letter and
accompanying documents, he added.
The remedy to Kuehl's law, Ackerman says, is a statewide
initiative that would amend the California Constitution. "That's the
most powerful weapon in our arsenal," the attorney told WND.
The proposed amendment says:
"Parents have a fundamental right to raise, and direct the moral
upbringing of, their children. The state shall not interfere with
this right without a compelling state interest."
Ackerman says such an amendment would establish a "bastion in the
law" that could be used to combat a myriad of laws and regulations
that lessen parents' rights, especially in government school
districts.
Another method of putting the language in the state constitution
is to go directly through the Legislature. Ackerman is convinced if
such a bill were introduced by Republicans, most Democratic
lawmakers would not risk the ire of constituents by opposing it.
Part of Ackerman's motivation to propose the amendment was recent
action by the judge presiding over a lawsuit in Novato, Calif.
As
WorldNetDaily reported, last year the Pacific Justice Institute
filed a suit against the Novato Unified School District on behalf of
parents who say the district authorized pro-homosexual assemblies
without any prior notice or parental consent.
The presentations, entitled "Cootie Shots," exposed elementary
school children as young as 7 to skits containing gay and lesbian
overtures. "Cootie Shots: Theatrical Inoculations Against Bigotry"
is a collection of plays, songs and poems written by members of
Fringe Benefits Theatre, a coalition of theater activists who,
according to their website, are "dedicated to building bridges
between gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) youth and
their straight peers, teachers and parents."
Gary Kreep, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, decried action by
the judge that recently granted an American Civil Liberties Union
motion to intervene in the case.
"This is the beginning of a litigation campaign to defend the
rights of parents," declared Brad Dacus of Pacific Justice Institute
when the suit was filed.
PJI is supporting another effort at expanding parental rights: AB
1012 in the California Assembly. According to the group's website,
the bill would require all school districts to allow for parents to
be present when their children are being interrogated by a police
officer on a school campus.
Related story:
To view this item online, visit
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33633
LAW OF THE LAND
Guarantee of parents' rights sought in
California
Constitutional amendment seen
as fighting pro-'gay,' diversity education
Posted: July 18, 2003
1:00 a.m.
Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
Q: Do parents have the right to notice about and to
opt their children out of diversity education programs that
include discussions of sexual orientation or other controversial
topics? No.
Dads Against the Divorce Industry