Bizarre Story in the Sentinel

I'm not sure, really, what to make of this, in fact I admit I am totally confused by it. The Sentinel has an article explaining what school board candidates the anti-MCPS Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum support, and how they feel about the recent primaries. It seems to me there are two questions here. First ... why is this news? Second, why is the CRC, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, tax-exempt organization, endorsing candidates, in apparent violation of IRS regulations?

Here, read some of this:

The Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum are pretty happy now that at least one candidate they supported in the Board of Election primary race is still in the running for the at-large position and that the new condom demonstration video meets their approval.

The CRC is a non-profit, grassroots organization made up of parents and members of the Montgomery County community who opposed 2004's Family Life and Human Development Curriculum, which included sex education for public school students.

CRC President Michelle Turner said they are pleased that Tommy Le made it past the primary election, but District 5 candidate Susie Scofield's loss to incumbents Nancy Navarro and Philip Kauffman disappointed them. CRC weighs in on recent election results

See what I mean? Why is The Sentinel promoting the CRC? They didn't use to.

Let's read a little more.

Scofield supported the teaching of homosexuality as long as it is taught unbiased, a stance supported by CRC that sexual orientation should be discussed in terms of those who support homosexuality as well as those who don't. The CRC argues that the current sex education curriculum leaves out information about groups that oppose homosexuality and "exgays."

Le will be competing in November's election against Shirley Brandman, who Turner said is among the Board of Education candidates that the CRC are worried about.

"[Brandman] she feels that homosexuality is not a choice and that some people are born that way," said Turner. "We have concerns about how she wants this taught to the kids in the school system."

It appears that the CRC has decided to give up their nonprofit status.

Turner expressed concerned that Brandman, in addition to Navarro, Kauffman, incumbent and District 3 candidate Patricia B. O'Neill, who is running unopposed, and District 1 candidate Judy Docca are endorsed by NARAL Pro-Choice American, Montgomery County Education Association, and National Organization of Women. She said she is concerned about the MCEA because they are associated with the National Education Association, who endorsed same-sex marriage.

Yeah, well, she says we're affiliated with organizations, too.

Look, HERE is what the President of the National Education Association says: "It has come to our attention that the American Family Association and possibly other conservative groups have begun a malicious e-mail campaign distorting the facts related to proposed amendment changes," said Reg Weaver, NEA President.

"While I understand that the emails and phone calls you are receiving are generating concern, we must not allow the tactics and manipulations of these divisive groups to derail our process," he said. "NEA has no position on same-sex marriages, and leadership is not seeking to establish such a position. We are focused on Great Public Schools for Every Child."

But that doesn't stop Ms. Turner.

I'm going to skip some of this.

Turner adds that she believed the condom video was a part of their agenda during the lawsuit because they were against the inclusion of anal and oral sex in the curriculum and that the video included information about it. "We do not want to see them introducing oral or anal sex to 8th graders," said Turner, "but if they have to include it - and we'd rather they didn't - but if they do, we prefer it remain at the 10th grade level along with the correct information regarding all risks and information on diseases and physical ailments that go along with risky behavior."

But, of course, the condom video was only for tenth-graders. Not that this reporter would check or anything.

Well, that's enough, there's more if you really want it.

The Sentinel is not our area's leading newspaper. They have had some terrific reporting, and some outrageous schlock, regarding the development of a new MCPS sex-ed curriculum. Editorially, they have been soundly in our corner on sex-ed revisions, but whoever runs the newsroom seems to take long naps at crucial times. It's not clear to me why this story exists, it just seems to say that "somebody knows somebody."