Thinking About Plan A
So ... what would happen if MCPS delivered a sex-ed curriculum, and it was exactly the same as the curriculum that the school board approved unanimously last year, but with the offending background resources removed?
And what would happen if the citizens advisory committee voted to accept it? And what would happen if the crybabies refused to apply properly for the committee, and weren't there to vote?
I'm just thinking about Plan A. We could see a proper sex-ed curriculum in classrooms in the spring, couldn't we?
And what would happen if the citizens advisory committee voted to accept it? And what would happen if the crybabies refused to apply properly for the committee, and weren't there to vote?
I'm just thinking about Plan A. We could see a proper sex-ed curriculum in classrooms in the spring, couldn't we?
posted by JimK at 12:15 PM
7 Comments:
The problem was in the teacher reference materials not in actual curriculum itself...so yes MCPS could just use what has been written(new) and leave out items that caused the rub in reference materials.
And remember, the last time there was a PFOX member on the committee, and the President of the (not yet formed) CRC was on it, too. This time, they have decided not to participate. So it might all go a lot easier now.
Dontcha think?
JimK
Since the only problem the judge had was with a few resources, the answer is yes. However, I think there will be a lawsuit.
Andrea
I believe that that is precisely what MCPS should do. Indeed, I believe that MCPS should present that curriculum to the CAC as soon as it is reconstituted. But I have no say in the matter.
At minimum, the Superintendent should begin by presenting the 8th Grade curriculum as it was to be piloted and the 10th Grade curriculum as it was approved in November to the experts he apparently is going to disclose soon to the BOE and see what those experts say about them.
Of course, CRC/PFOX cling to the idea that MCPS MUST present their views about homosexuality. But the portion of Judge Williams' opinion upon which they base that hope is plainly wrong legally, and that is why, in the settlement agreement, MCPS explicitly reserved the right to decide what would be in the curriculum and there was no admission of "wrongdoing." Any decent curriculum will almost certainly be challenged in court by CRC/PFOX. But everything I hear from MCPS is that they are willing to stand up and fight such a lawsuit. This time, they should be prepared and there should be no temporary restraining order.
David
No judge will allow them to present as facts things that haven't been established.
Lightning
Lightning, that's one of those "when did you stop beating your wife" questions. The judge's ruling had nothing to say about the "factualness" of anything in the curriculum.
How about asking your question concretely -- click on the links on the righthand side of this page, to either the 8th or 10th grade curricula, and pick out a statement that you think has not been "established." And ask about that. Show us what you think a judge would not allow.
JimK
Yeah I could think of a lot of comments for a poster such as below....
*****************
CRCPrecious(Retta Brown posted)on CRC message board
Re: Time on Gay Youth=Oct.2005
« Reply #2 on: Today at 07:25:52 PM » Reply with quote
Everyone should read this.
The gay agenda is following this books' script. I did like the statement that the weakness in all of this is
"Simply put, it is unnatural and self-destructive" and this is what the gay agenda, like the book says, do not want to talk about.
Heterosexuality is the NORM for a reason.
Anyone involved in sodomy will suffer grave medical consequences and be miserable. Look at the CDC.
Post a Comment
<< Home