CRC Loses Again
Yesterday the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled against the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, PFOX, and Family Leader Network, who had asked the court for a stay that would overrule a decision by the State of Maryland Board of Education that allowed implementation of the new sex-ed curriculum. The stay has been denied.
The new curriculum is on.
It isn't much to read, just a government web site that says:
Docket type: Ruling ... Status: Denied
(To see the whole court history of this case, click HERE, accept their terms at the bottom. On the next screen, scroll down and enter case number 284980V .)
Check out CRC's lawyer and maybe president (Michelle Turner was introduced as their president Monday night) John Garza on Fox News yesterday, from the meeting we wrote about yesterday, saying it will go all the way to the Supreme Court: HERE.
Hold on to those party plans, it's not over yet. You can be sure they'll find some way to drag this out longer.
The new curriculum is on.
It isn't much to read, just a government web site that says:
Docket type: Ruling ... Status: Denied
(To see the whole court history of this case, click HERE, accept their terms at the bottom. On the next screen, scroll down and enter case number 284980V .)
Check out CRC's lawyer and maybe president (Michelle Turner was introduced as their president Monday night) John Garza on Fox News yesterday, from the meeting we wrote about yesterday, saying it will go all the way to the Supreme Court: HERE.
Hold on to those party plans, it's not over yet. You can be sure they'll find some way to drag this out longer.
posted by JimK at 7:25 AM
34 Comments:
Let's see...
MCPS BOE said "no"
MCPS Superintendent said "no"
State Superintendent said "no"
State BOE said "no"
Circuit Court said "no"
CRC said they're willing to sue MERIT OR NO MERIT. When does this become a frivolous lawsuit?
Andrea not anon
Yeah!
Fortunately, John Roberts lives in Montgomery County so he'll be familiar with the case.
TTF will be infamous.
CRC already is infamous.
While they don't invite the Dwyers and the Kerns to foment about "sodomites" and "spreading hate and fear" at their meetings anymore, they're still a bunch of bullies who have spent more than two years trying to disrupt MCPS almost exactly as they first laid it out:
"This board is NOT going to recant anything because of "supplicant" appeals to listen to our position. The only thing that is going to get their complete attention is:
1. Continuing outrage streaming in to their castle headquarters
2. John Garza proceeding immediatley with his lawsuit. (Lawsuits tend to get peoples attention - merit or no merit because it forces them to deal with their legal team on a continuing basis)
3. 50,000 plus signatures between the paper petition and the on-line petition.
4. Tabulation of all the outrageous things said about us and this issue, and posted on both web sites.
5. Massive email campaign to inform and INFLAME.
In other words, aggressive tactics.
[Date=01-13-2005] Name:ADMINISTRATOR support@recallmontgomeryschoolboard.com, [Msgid=763681]"
More than two years of implementing these bullying tactics have earned them exactly **one** ten day temporary restraining order and brought a whopping 20 members of the public to their recent public meeting. Rather than pursue their 2005 lawsuit to a final ruling, they settled for thousands of dollars taken from the school system's budget, 2 guaranteed seats on the CAC, and reduced community input into the curriculum review process. Liberty Counsel blew them off this year so they had to turn to the Michigan based Thomas More Law Center that lost the Dover Pennsylvania ID lawsuit, to seeks stays of the curriculum from various state agencies and courts. So far, the bullies and their losing Thomas More laywers are 0 for 5.
CRC is a disgrace IMHO.
This is the same Court of Appeals, no, that they've been quoting on immutability and innateness?
"CRC said they're willing to sue MERIT OR NO MERIT. When does this become a frivolous lawsuit?"
The court didn't decide merit. They said all parties can continue to pursue their courses of action while the case is tried. In the trial, the county will have to present some evidence that their curriculum is based on facts. The curriculum is chock full of propagands favoring a gay agenda.
The curriculum will be taught while the trial continues. This is unfortunately to the detriment of the students who will have to sit through these indoctrination sessions but it may work to CRC's advantage when there will be examples of damage done by the curriculum.
Glad to see you're back from your mission to save the county, Dr. Did you get one of those messages that self-destruct in five seconds?
It sounds like you are IMPLYING Judge Rowan is willing to risk harm to MCPS students by this ruling Anon. The suers probably don't appreciate you making public comments like that even under the cover of darkness.
Unlike the fringe that cringes at the mention of "s - e - x" most responsible adults are eager to help teens navigate into adulthood with open and honest discussions of sexuality like this curriculum does.
And now, not only does the MCPS Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development, the Montgomery County Board of Education, the Montgomery County Superintendent of Schools, the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools, and the State of Maryland Board of Education agree that this curriculum should be offered in MCPS health education classes, but Judge Rowan does too. If he thought the revisions would harm any student in any way he would have granted the request for a stay. He didn't. He denied the request for a stay and allowed the curriculum to be taught.
Good! Once AGAIN, a small group of hateful and homophobic parents are told that they do not have the power to misinform an entire school system. Rock on!! I can't wait to share the news with my colleagues here at school.
"most responsible adults are eager to help teens navigate into adulthood with open and honest discussions of sexuality like this curriculum does"
Eager? I don't know about the adults who are eager to guide kids into talking about sexuality but I really don't think the kids are that eager to discuss sex with a bunch of adults.
The MCPS curriculum is anything but open and honest. It is deceptive and misleading.
"And now, not only does the MCPS Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development, the Montgomery County Board of Education, the Montgomery County Superintendent of Schools,"
These are all identical interests. The CAC is a stack of puppets created by Board. The superintendent is an employee of the Board.
"the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools, and the State of Maryland Board of Education agree that this curriculum should be offered in MCPS health education classes,"
No they don't. They simply believe that MCPS is not violating the law by offering it. You may notice that they're not trying to spread this singularly radical curriculum throughout the state.
"but Judge Rowan does too"
Nah. You don't understand the judicial process. Find any statement from the court that this singularly radical curriculum SHOULD be taught. Permitting it to be taught is not the same.
"If he thought the revisions would harm any student in any way he would have granted the request for a stay."
Either that or he didn't think he has the legal authority to halt all potential harm that might take place anywhere in our state. We have a society of laws and he interprets rather than creates them. A classic liberal nut mistake by you. We know you can't help it.
"Good! Once AGAIN, a small group of hateful and homophobic parents are told that they do not have the power to misinform an entire school system. Rock on!! I can't wait to share the news with my colleagues here at school."
Dude!! Sup, dawg? Don't let dem colleagues tell anyone else. We don't want any larger group of parents finding out about this.
Party hardy!!
andrea- not anon,
I thought Peter Sprigg was a failed actor- not a puppet- but anon should know. I am sure someone is pulling the strings on all those CRCers with empty heads.
The Maryland State BOE's Voluntary Curriculum recommends all high school health education curricula include such items as:
--"Demonstrate ways to communicate care, consideration, and respect for self and others..."
--"Investigate factors that contribute to sexual identity..."
--"Compare the effectiveness of various contraceptive methods in preventing pregnancy and STIs..."
--"Use of condoms..."
--"Describe ways to combat harassment. - Bullying..."
--"Describe examples of harassment and intimidating behaviors..."
CRC must be doubly pleased now that Anon has expressed another doubt about Judge Rowan's abilities -- this time IMPLYING he is unaware of his "legal authority." That's the type of comment that caused CRC to shut down its public on-line forum. They were too often embarrassed by what their supporters said.
Not that I think the posts on this obscure blog will come to the attention of the judge in this case but, if they were, I'm sure he won't appreciate the ever anonymous Bea flatly stating that he approves of the most radical gay-promoting curriculum in America.
Doubt he'll be offended by anyone suggesting that he doesn't have delusions of omnipotence.
Doubt he'll want to be too closely associated with uncombed and unkempt TTFers slouching in their seats at the Gaithersburg meeting on Monday night. I don't know why we can't get pictures of you guys in the paper more often.
I hope people who saw the FOX news report didn't think the TTFers were CRCers.
Yikes, that must have been part of the plan.
I am very happy to see this outcome. Fairness and equality always win over lies and hate.
Hey, Anon-
Most of the colleagues are parents themselves and fully support what TTF is doing to promote understanding, truth, tolerance and acceptance. On another note, you respond to EVERYTHING on this blog... Is that what you do all day; sit home and think about homosexuals? Interesting...
Hey Anon,
Is that you in the first shot of the Gaithersburg meeting room wearing the long sleeved shirt hanging onto your pen with both hands on your >cough< lap?
he approves of the most radical gay-promoting curriculum in America.
I didn't say that, you did. I said, He denied the request for a stay and allowed the curriculum to be taught.
From the news clip:
Reporter: "Lawyers said a recent Maryland ban on same-sex marriage could breathe new life into their fight."
John Garza: "and they stated in that opinion that homosexuality is not innate, at least it’s not been proven to be innate. So that supports our position."
Tantamount to saying that human sexuality itself is not innate. Of course they don’t dare say that, to do so would acknowledge that their heterosexual "position" is on equal footing with homosexuality in the proof department.
So they feign objectivity by proclaiming that absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. It’s the same as the ever disingenuous “There is no gay gene” strawman argument.
In fact it’s doubly disingenuous, not only is there no “straight gene” either - or proof of the innateness of heterosexuality, but they already have their response mapped out if it is ever proven that homosexuality is as innate as heterosexuality. Then they just compare it to any potential genetic link to alcoholism, murder, thievery etc., in order to show that it would still be bad.
Take something benign, equate it with something malicious, and then condemn them the same. Strawman.
It’s the secular version of the Biblical tact when they lump same-gender attraction in with behaviors that any atheist would recognize as morally wrong.
In fact it’s doubly disingenuous ...
Really Emp, it's triply disingenuous, because he was lying when he said that "they stated in that opinion that homosexuality is not innate, at least it’s not been proven to be innate." They never stated that, never discussed it, never used the word, never approached the concept. So on top of the logical confusion of his reasoning, you have to take into account that the premises are ... made up.
JimK
andrea-not anon
I wonder how many CRC members/supporters were in the empty chairs.
And now, not only does the
Anon-B lies again:
"I said, He denied the request for a stay and allowed the curriculum to be taught."
Here's her earlier post saying the judge didn't just allow it, he thinks it "should" be taught:
"MCPS "Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development, the Montgomery County Board of Education, the Montgomery County Superintendent of Schools, the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools, and the State of Maryland Board of Education agree that this curriculum should be offered in MCPS health education classes, but Judge Rowan does too."
"Tantamount to saying that human sexuality itself is not innate. Of course they don’t dare say that, to do so would acknowledge that their heterosexual "position" is on equal footing with homosexuality in the proof department."
Improv,
You're really messing yourself up here. You're confusing desire with preference. Obviously, sexual desire is a human need. That doesn't mean the preferred channel for expressing sexuality is also innate.
To equate to something asexual, hunger is obviously a response to an innate condition. That doesn't mean a preference for cinnamon rolls is too.
"So they feign objectivity by proclaiming that absence of evidence IS evidence of absence."
No they don't. They are saying something shouldn't be taught as fact when evidence is absent. Contrary to the histrionics of TTF, CRC simply want the schools to concede that science hasn't determined whether or not sexual gender preference is innate.
It's a concept called truth.
TTF doesn't like it because it doesn't reconcile with the TTF agenda, which is to make homosexuality acceptable.
"it's triply disingenuous, because he was lying when he said that "they stated in that opinion that homosexuality is not innate, at least it’s not been proven to be innate." They never stated that, never discussed it, never used the word, never approached the concept. "
But, regardless of whether the court ruled on it, truth is "it’s not been proven to be innate."
The court part is irrelevant. Homosexuality has not been proven to innate.
End of story.
"I wonder how many CRC members/supporters were in the empty chairs."
Those were the chairs surrounding the TTF...uh....members. People didn't want to get to close to anything repellant or unpleasant.
Anonymous (a.k.a. troll sockpuppet) OK...you lost!! Perhaps you can now think of exerting some of your apparently unlimited spare time and fecund mind to real issues like the horrendous heterosexual divorce rate, or the immoral war in Iraq, or the national health scandal, or even the ever-growing price of milk at the grocery store. Whatever...just leave this site with your tail between your legs and get a life!!
Rob
How many sides of a mouth is it possible for a person to have?
Reporter: “Opponents also claim the curriculum doesn’t focus on health risks, nor does it present homosexuality as a lifestyle choice.”
Michelle Turner: “They are not telling kids that if they do have same-sex attraction feelings that they do not want, that they can change those feelings.”
From the "CRC Fact Sheet."
CRC is headed by Michelle Turner, a Citizens Advisory Committee member, who voted against the adoption of the curriculum. Mrs. Turner is the mother of 6 children and lives in Silver Spring.
Mission Statement: Our mission, as Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, is to be a mainstream voice for fairness and scientific accuracy to the Montgomery County Public Schools' Board of Education regarding its new curriculum on Family Life and Human Sexuality for 8th graders and high school students.
From the CRC's "What the Bible Says" page:
Despite what is often portrayed, Christians do not maintain that homosexuality is a choice. Based on biblical principles, they recognize a basic distinction between homosexual orientation (or same-sex attraction) and homosexual behavior. A homosexual orientation is usually not chosen and is a cause of suffering...Like everyone else, homosexual persons are called to chastity, that is, the right ordering of their sexual desires.
____
How “scientifically accurate” of you Ms. Turner. What thinking person among us wouldn't consider the idea of "changing one’s [sexual] feelings" as being exactly the same thing as sexual repression?
Anonymous said...
Emproph:"Tantamount to saying that human sexuality itself is not innate. Of course they don’t dare say that, to do so would acknowledge that their heterosexual "position" is on equal footing with homosexuality in the proof department."
Anon: "Improv,
You're really messing yourself up here. You're confusing desire with preference. Obviously, sexual desire is a human need. That doesn't mean the preferred channel for expressing sexuality is also innate."
___
This is what I was referring to:
Emproph: “John Garza: "and they stated in that opinion that homosexuality is not innate, at least it’s not been proven to be innate. So that supports our position."
He didn’t say anything about homosexual behavior being innate, or “the preferred channel for expressing sexuality” as you put it, and I didn’t complain about it. YOU conflated the two in order to accuse me of having done so.
I’ve never claimed that behavior of any kind was innate. But you, the CRC, PFOX and the entire anti-gay industry regularly interchange the word homosexuality with the meaning of sexual behavior, without ever saying so. Everytime you say homosexuality is a lifestyle you do it.
Homosexuality means same gender attraction, but “lifestyle” means promiscuous sexual behavior. It’s no wonder you projected your "confusion" onto me.
Anon: "To equate to something asexual, hunger is obviously a response to an innate condition. That doesn't mean a preference for cinnamon rolls is too."
You said yourself that “Obviously, sexual desire is a human need.” So let’s go right back then and say that "sexual hunger is obviously a response to an innate condition.”
And then let’s go to your very next post in the series where you contradict yourself by stating that:
“Homosexuality has not been proven to innate.
End of story."
You’re useless.
And then there’s this:
Emproph: "So they feign objectivity by proclaiming that absence of evidence IS evidence of absence."
Anon: “No they don't. They are saying something shouldn't be taught as fact when evidence is absent.”
Which means that the “innateness” of your own heterosexuality hasn’t been proven either, which puts you on equal scientific AND moral footing as me. WHICH WAS MY ENTIRE POINT.
You can’t even prove that you’re a heterosexual, which moots any claim that somehow heterosexuality should be "taught" as more (morally) acceptable or innate.
Furthermore, the fact that people like you don’t even realize this, means that people like you aren’t in ANY position to be deciding what kids should be taught about ANYTHING. Since you don’t even have a fundamental grasp of logic itself.
"You’re useless."
I take it back. You reminded me of this...
Kids in the Hall: "Citizen Kane."
I take it back. You reminded me of this...
Kids in the Hall: "Citizen Kane."
ROFL Thanks for the morning chuckle Emproph.
Yes Anon, you got me. I meant to say, "this semester."
My amended statement is:
And now, not only does the MCPS Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development, the Montgomery County Board of Education, the Montgomery County Superintendent of Schools, the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools, and the State of Maryland Board of Education agree that this curriculum should be offered in MCPS health education classes this semester, but Judge Rowan does too. If he thought the revisions would harm any student in any way he would have granted the request for a stay. He didn't. He denied the request for a stay and allowed the curriculum to be taught this semester.
Perhaps Judge Rowan simply thinks that parents are capable of deciding for themselves whether their children should take or not take the classes.
It is not a radical idea.
Andrea- not anon
Yes, Tish, the judge believes that as do the vast majority of MCPS parents. It is CRC, as represented by a very few people who actually have kids in MCPS- and none who have taken the even the former human sexuality portion, who tell us(in the voice of Nutty anon) that MCPS parents cannot be trusted to raise their own kids and decide what they should learn or not learn.
"Perhaps Judge Rowan simply thinks that parents are capable of deciding for themselves whether their children should take or not take the classes."
"Yes, Tish, the judge believes that as do the vast majority of MCPS parents."
At least Tish said perhaps. Dreary Andrea seems to think she can read the judge's mind. Unless, he said this in his ruling, you don't what his reasoning was for denying the stay.
As is not unusual, however, TTF will extrapolate toward their fantasies.
Extrapolating others' thought is wrong- and dreary- and Andreary!
"It is CRC, who tell us(in the voice of anon)"
I think you're referring to me, who is not a CRC member.
"that MCPS parents cannot be trusted to raise their own kids and decide what they should learn or not learn."
Oh, I think they can. They've learned, though, that there is no point fighting the MCPS-PFLAG-NEA-NARAL complex. More effective to focus on the individual kid.
Try this: Write two curriculums. One ab-only and truthful about homosexuality. The other condom and homosexuality promoting, like the new curriculum. Offer classroom settings and teachers for each. Let the parents decide which their kids should take.
Which do you think the most parents would opt for?
As is not unusual, however, TTF will extrapolate toward their fantasies.
Extrapolating others' thought is wrong...Which do you think the most parents would opt for?
I think Anon's inconsistency is showing.
Yesterday, Anon extrapolated what MCPS parents think:
99% of parents will sign any paper the school sends home. They think they're required to.
October 10, 2007 7:20 AM
And the day before that Anon extrapolated what TTF thinks:
TTF thinks that too.
October 09, 2007 10:33 AM
Apparently Anon thinks only Anon may extrapolate others' thoughts.
I'll tell you what I think is very interesting. The day after Mr. Teacher Man asked Anon Is that what you do all day; sit home and think about homosexuals?, Anon has come back talking about fantasies.
I think Emproph nailed it when he pointed out "In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions. Projection reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the unwanted subconscious impulses/desires without letting the ego recognize them."
Anonymous said...
“Try this: Write two curriculums. One ab-only and truthful about homosexuality. The other condom and homosexuality promoting, like the new curriculum. Offer classroom settings and teachers for each. Let the parents decide which their kids should take.”
__
Excellent short article on this IDea here:
Teach the Controversy... or Create it?
What they really mean by "teach the controversy" is "teach the religious criticisms we have."
__
Which is a perfect way of putting it. Because we all know what their idea of "truthful about homosexuality" means:
1) Homosexual persons should be defined as anal sex.
2) Anal sex is exclusive to homosexual persons.
3) ALL homosexual persons engage in anal sex, be they male OR female.
4) 1, 2, and 3 are legitimate “religious” beliefs, and should therefore be taught to public school children.
Post a Comment
<< Home