Credit: Courtesy of Tarah Fleming, Our Family Coalition
This article was updated on May 6, 2019 to reflect a correction.

With the State Board of Education set to vote on new sex education teaching guidance, conservative religious groups are mobilizing parents in an aggressive effort to remove recommendations focused on the sexual health of LGBTQ  students and other material they deem too explicit for young students.

The guidance, known as the Health Education Framework, aligns with the 2015 California Healthy Youth Act, which mandated sex education in public school districts statewide and was among the first in the nation specifically to address the needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual,  transgender students and those students questioning their sexual identities.

In March, hundreds of parents and other residents from communities throughout the state traveled to Sacramento to voice their objections to the framework during a public hearing held by the Instructional Quality Commission, which is an advisory body to the state board.

The commission approved the framework document and now it is slated for final approval by the state board at its meeting Wednesday. But before their vote, commissioners heard comments from dozens of parents and others who identified themselves as Christians and said, among other things, that the new guidelines are part of an LGBTQ “agenda” and “sexualize” California’s schoolchildren.

“Homosexuality is not a right, but a lifestyle of perversion,” said one speaker. Another said “medically inaccurate sexual ideology has no place in education.”

The Healthy Youth Act (AB 329) has drawn vocal opponents since before it was passed in 2015. But with the framework up for adoption, the opposition has ratcheted up its intensity in recent months until LGBTQ advocates have feared for their safety in some of the forums where the issue has been debated.

The framework is not mandatory and is intended to be a resource for teachers and provide guidance for schools as they adapt their curriculums. Frameworks are written and approved by the state board for all subjects — from math and science to history and language arts.

State officials, who are preparing for a contentious meeting on Wednesday, say in addition to being provocative, the rhetoric against the  framework  is mostly inaccurate and misinterprets the power the law and the framework have over a local school district’s sex ed curriculum.

“The foundation of the Health Education Framework is to be sure we are respectful of the differences in all of our students and ensuring that all of our classrooms are inclusive and welcoming,” said Stephanie Gregson, director of the California Department of Education’s curriculum frameworks and instructional resources division. “The comments from the last meeting show that there is a lot of fear and a lot of misinformation.”

Authored by Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, D-San Diego, the Healthy Youth Act covers a broader array of sexual health issues and is considerably more specific than the law it replaced.

For example, it allows abstinence to be taught as a birth control option but requires that other forms of birth control also be taught. The previous law was unclear on the issue and many districts only taught abstinence.

In addition, lessons must include material specifically geared toward transgender students and teach students the meanings of sexual assault and sexual harassment.

The law requires that the sex education lessons, which typically total between 10 and 13 hours, be given to students beginning in the 7th grade and taught once in middle school and once in high school. Districts can choose to teach sex education in lower grades but the state does not require that any sex education be taught before the 7th grade.

A provision in the law allows parents to opt their children out of the sex ed lessons, but they cannot opt them out of lessons focused on the rights and achievements of LGBT people in other contexts.

For example, a parent could not opt their child out of a lesson focused on how LGBTQ students are more susceptible to bullying, or a lesson on the accomplishments of LGBTQ people throughout history.

Most school districts across the state have implemented the law with little or no controversy. But there have been pockets of opposition from San Diego to the Bay Area.

In 2017, more than 1,000 San Diego Unified parents signed a petition objecting to that district’s curriculum, which starts in the 6th grade, as being too graphic and inappropriate for younger students. Similar petitions were signed by 1,600 residents in Palo Alto Unified and by 4,300 people in Cupertino Union.

 In Orange County, Capistrano Unified waited until March, three years after the Healthy Youth Act went into effect, to adopt a curriculum that was compliant with the law.  Orange Unified, another district in the county, has yet to adopt a new curriculum.

It’s been over a decade since the state board adopted a revised framework for health education and state education department staff is recommending the proposal be adopted by the board. Yet, the likelihood of it being approved hasn’t stopped the opposition groups from organizing parents in an attempt to sway board members.

The state education department has received thousands of letters and emails in recent months and officials are preparing for hundreds of people to show up to Wednesday’s meeting in Sacramento. Much of the correspondence sent to the state board and the Instructional Quality Commission contains identical language, which suggests it is part of a coordinated effort.

“This act promotes medically inaccurate and incomplete information and is not age appropriate or unbiased,” many of the letters read. “If this framework is passed I will not reenroll my public school students until this matter is resolved with proper statewide parental input!”

Parents and other residents are being organized primarily by two related groups: the Fresno-based California Family Council and Orange County-based Informed Parents of California. The groups held a joint rally in March, the day the framework came before the instructional quality commission and are planning another one for Wednesday morning in Sacramento.

On its website, the California Family Council declares its mission to be “advancing God’s design for life, family & liberty through California’s church, community, capitol & culture.” The Informed Parents of California website disparages the Healthy Youth Act and urges people to attend the rally. Neither organization returned multiple calls and emails seeking comment.

The groups have some allies in the Legislature, including state Sen. Mike Morrell, a Republican representing parts of Riverside, San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties.

Morrell proposed a bill this year mandating, among other things, that districts offering sex ed in elementary school require parents to make a formal request, or opt in, to have their children be given the instruction. He withdrew the bill last month after it became clear it didn’t have the votes to pass the Senate Education Committee.

“The sex ed curriculum, known as the Healthy Youth Act, has gone from informative to explicit,” Morrell said. “Parents should decide what goes into the minds of young men and young ladies.”

Gregson and other education department officials say comments like Morrell’s contribute to a widespread misunderstanding of the role educational frameworks and standards play in California.

For example, Morrell is incorrect when he refers to the Healthy Youth Act as a curriculum, Gregson said. Nor is the health education framework a curriculum, as many have asserted in their public comments, she added. A framework recommends instructional materials and provides resources to educators, while a curriculum outlines specific lessons and materials to be used when teaching a subject.

In the future, the state will adopt recommended textbooks and other materials that are aligned with the law and the framework, but they won’t be mandated either, Gregson said. California leaves it up to districts to make the ultimate decisions on curriculums and materials as long as they meet the requirements of the law.   

Much of the fear and misinformation that Gregson refers to has emanated from Orange County, say civil rights and LGBTQ advocates. Opponents of the law routinely pack local school board meetings and meetings of the Orange County Board of Education.

Some of the opponents “sit in the front row and call you sick and perverted when you go to the podium to speak,” said Laura Kanter, who runs youth programs for the LGBT Center OC, an advocacy organization.  “Then they chase you when you leave the meetings…we’ve had to have police escorts out of school board meetings.”

Jessica Hubbard, director of programs for the Orange County chapter of Girls Inc., a nationwide advocacy group for young women and girls that works with schools to provide sex ed, said the intensity of the opposition has caused districts in the county that once partnered with the group to shy away.

“We used to teach sex ed across the county,” Hubbard said. “Now the only place we’re offering it is in Anaheim.”

Ian Hanigan, a spokesman with the Orange County Department of Education, acknowledged the level of misinformation in the county.

“We have seen degrees of opposition to the California Healthy Youth Act and the pending Health Curriculum Framework, as well as some confusion that one or both of these represents a state-required curriculum,” Hanigan said. “I think we all share a desire to empower students with the knowledge and skills to make healthy choices.”

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated the grades in which sexual education must be taught under the California Healthy Youth Act. It must be taught beginning in the 7th grade and taught once in middle school and once in high school.

Share Article

Comments are closed

Join the conversation by going to Edsource's Twitter or Facebook pages. If you do not have a social media account, you can learn how to create a Twitter account here and a Facebook account here.

  1. Barry Breakwater 4 days ago4 days ago

    Any curriculum that elevates personal subjective feelings over science has no place in the public schools. This is exactly what teaching about gender identity and transgenderism does. There are literally thousands of objectively, empirical, verifiable anatomical and physiological difference between males and females. The people who support this curriculum want the entire world to pretend that these differences are not real so that a tiny portion of our society may have their … Read More

    Any curriculum that elevates personal subjective feelings over science has no place in the public schools. This is exactly what teaching about gender identity and transgenderism does. There are literally thousands of objectively, empirical, verifiable anatomical and physiological difference between males and females.
    The people who support this curriculum want the entire world to pretend that these differences are not real so that a tiny portion of our society may have their delusions validated so that they can feel more comfortable in their own skin. Also, parents have the final say over raising their children, not the employees of the public schools. If the majority of parents in a certain school district do not want something in their kids school then don’t do it!

  2. Concerned mom 4 days ago4 days ago

    Sex ed should be taught in the privacy of our own homes. How we feel, our convictions, or not, as a family unit. The schools needs to stay out of this. If they want to keep religion out, then keep opposing views out along with that. Stop the double standards.

  3. Troy 1 week ago1 week ago

    Parents throughout the state and US are protesting this inappropriate government overreach and violation of educational trust. This diversity of parents includes many different ethnicities and religions who know it is wrong to introduce sexual content to elementary education where children cannot fully comprehend the proposed material.

    Replies

    • Dee 1 week ago1 week ago

      I guess these people would rather have their kids learn from internet porn *eyeroll* Kids are very resourceful and will find ways to get (mis)informaton. Religion needs to stay out of public school.

  4. Kelli D Bourne 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Thank you for this piece of writing that highlights the facts about AB 329 and the California Framework. It is important for people to know that such "aggressive" organized efforts are well-funded and align with organizations that seek to dismantle teacher unions, protective LGBTQ+ legislation, and Parent-Teacher Associations. Unfortunately the misinformation and fear-mongering surrounding AB 329 and the Health Framework - despite the "parental right" to opt one's student out entirely - … Read More

    Thank you for this piece of writing that highlights the facts about AB 329 and the California Framework. It is important for people to know that such “aggressive” organized efforts are well-funded and align with organizations that seek to dismantle teacher unions, protective LGBTQ+ legislation, and Parent-Teacher Associations. Unfortunately the misinformation and fear-mongering surrounding AB 329 and the Health Framework – despite the “parental right” to opt one’s student out entirely – is where the momentum is beginning.

  5. Concerned Parent 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    How can any of these topics come up regarding LGBTQ and it not be indoctrination? Is anyone really going to mention biology and DNA simultaneously to transgenderism? My 6 year old went to school the other day thinking she was a unicorn. The state of CA does not need to teach sex for pleasure. Promoting bisexuality will do nothing for our children. Stay out of our children's bedrooms and their uterus. … Read More

    How can any of these topics come up regarding LGBTQ and it not be indoctrination? Is anyone really going to mention biology and DNA simultaneously to transgenderism? My 6 year old went to school the other day thinking she was a unicorn. The state of CA does not need to teach sex for pleasure. Promoting bisexuality will do nothing for our children. Stay out of our children’s bedrooms and their uterus. Remember that?
    Thank you for the heavily biased article and lack of any direct quotes straight from the framework. So sneaky, so disingenuous!

  6. Bobby 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    This Framewotk will be good too because it should raise a more sensitive issue that isn’t addressed in schools, taught to future teachers, or talked about in general: types of familial relations at home between siblings and between children and parents. Also factor in if children come from a single family home or parents have only one child. People need to start addressing these sensitive topics that exist for all students and parents across all cultures and religions.

    Replies

    • Amy 6 days ago6 days ago

      Comprehensive Sex-Ed has only increased the number of children born without the benefit of a stable, two-parent home over the past 30 years. This almost guarantees their life of poverty, higher risk for sexual victimization, drug use, and dropping out of school. Your statistics show you that. Why do we want to put children at further increased risk by exposing them to this damaging information at younger ages? This can only increase sexual … Read More

      Comprehensive Sex-Ed has only increased the number of children born without the benefit of a stable, two-parent home over the past 30 years. This almost guarantees their life of poverty, higher risk for sexual victimization, drug use, and dropping out of school. Your statistics show you that.
      Why do we want to put children at further increased risk by exposing them to this damaging information at younger ages? This can only increase sexual activity before any age of “consent” or responsibility is reached, this increasing the number of sexual partners and their risk of contracting serious STDs. How is this health education?

  7. KDJ 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    It's sad that you simply give the one party perspective and don't actually 'report' the genuinely held concerns and/or perspectives of the 'other side' so your readers can understand the issue better. Read More

    It’s sad that you simply give the one party perspective and don’t actually ‘report’ the genuinely held concerns and/or perspectives of the ‘other side’ so your readers can understand the issue better.

  8. Chelsea 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Just opt your kid out from the guidance program. Why is it okay to push your opinions onto other people’s kids?

  9. Mindy lee 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Parents are not misinformed. Please stop stating that. We know what is correct and what is not. We are doing the research ourselves and not just taking information from advocates. We are standing up because parental rights are being violated, minority groups are being discriminated against ( we asked for the framework to be translated into Spanish, Korean, and other largely populated minorities in our county, but was completely ignored on many counts) and for … Read More

    Parents are not misinformed. Please stop stating that. We know what is correct and what is not. We are doing the research ourselves and not just taking information from advocates. We are standing up because parental rights are being violated, minority groups are being discriminated against ( we asked for the framework to be translated into Spanish, Korean, and other largely populated minorities in our county, but was completely ignored on many counts) and for someone like myself who had a very liberal view on the world, who agreed with equality even on the gender part has now turned completely to the other way due to the force of some districts letting the state-advised curriculum into our schools.

  10. James 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Seems like it doesn’t matter if it’s a curriculum or not. It affects what the kids will learn.

  11. Lallia Allali 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    As a Muslim parent of 3 children attending public schools, I appreciate California Department of Education efforts to be more inclusive; however, as a parent I have the right to raise my children according to my faith and moral values and the state must recognize and acknowledge us. According to the CA Ed Code, parents are partners in their children’s education. For that our voice must be respected.

  12. Naheed 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    I am not particularly religious. I have reviewed the material and it is not age appropriate and is not consequence based. Children and teens do not think in terms of consequence, and this aspect is not adequately covered. It also is not sensitive to the cultural and religious diversity in California. One of the comments here was about freedom from religion in public institutions. This nation was founded on Freedom of religion not from it. … Read More

    I am not particularly religious. I have reviewed the material and it is not age appropriate and is not consequence based. Children and teens do not think in terms of consequence, and this aspect is not adequately covered. It also is not sensitive to the cultural and religious diversity in California. One of the comments here was about freedom from religion in public institutions. This nation was founded on Freedom of religion not from it. The State should not favor one religion or ideology over another. Freedom from religion in public institutions and strict enforcement of a certain ideology would be more in line with Communist Russia or socialized France where religious expression like the hijab or cross was not allowed.
    I don’t think the founding fathers and the first immigrants who came here to attain religious freedom had this in mind.

  13. Dawn Ann Urbanek 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Using the Public Education System to Fundamentally Transform America. No one wants to believe that the United States public education system would ever be weaponized against our children and the People of the United States of America. Sadly that fact is becoming harder and harder to deny. I am not a “religious” person but here were my comments to CDE regarding the Curriculum Frameworks for CA Public Schools. https://cusdwatch.com/index.php/public-comment-2019-health-education-curriculum-framework-for-california-public-schools-transitional-kindergarten-through-grade-twelve

  14. Erin 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    There are two issues that are problematic. 1) People who have worked on the framework as consultants and continue to provide guidance to school districts are all in agreement on politics and ideology. So, Planned Parenthood and GLSEN (or related LGBT groups), backed by ACLU, have developed the resources and are available to teach sex education at the request of districts. No other viewpoint is reflected in the materials or the framework. 2) Suggested resources for sex … Read More

    There are two issues that are problematic.

    1) People who have worked on the framework as consultants and continue to provide guidance to school districts are all in agreement on politics and ideology. So, Planned Parenthood and GLSEN (or related LGBT groups), backed by ACLU, have developed the resources and are available to teach sex education at the request of districts. No other viewpoint is reflected in the materials or the framework.

    2) Suggested resources for sex education discuss unnecessary information that is grossly inappropriate for 12-17/18 year olds. How to use dental dams, female condoms, sex toys, BDSM practices, body fluid and blood “play”, fisting, and anal oral sex are the highlights in a book recommended for a “school wide” reading exercise. Exactly why is any of that necessary for kids to know. I’m 53, married and fairly street smart, but I learned things I didn’t really want to know looking at excerpts of the resources.

    Schools are already struggling to teach kids the basics of education effectively. Now this gets saddled on teachers instead of parents being allowed to teach their children about sex as they see fit. It’s a problem that isn’t going away because parents will keep fighting this overreach.

  15. Mark Richardson 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    The members of the group being slandered here do not identify, and are not in any calculable way made up of, conservative Christians. They are a diverse group of concerned parents. Let me rephrase that: they are more than concerned. They are alarmed. And justifiably so. They have protested their right as parents to control the development of their children's sexuality. The Department of Education and various School Boards have been indifferent to their voices. … Read More

    The members of the group being slandered here do not identify, and are not in any calculable way made up of, conservative Christians. They are a diverse group of concerned parents. Let me rephrase that: they are more than concerned. They are alarmed. And justifiably so. They have protested their right as parents to control the development of their children’s sexuality. The Department of Education and various School Boards have been indifferent to their voices. This may not alarm parents who have no issue with the current sex-ed curriculum. But be advised. At some point it will be “your” sacred cow sacrificed on the altar of political correctness and state-mandated curriculum. When the state proclaims this kind of “ownership” of young people, and any kind of ideological agenda can be manipulated into an “educational policy,” or a “health issue,” imposed on your children, to whom will you appeal when it’s your deeply held moral principles that are being violated by state mandate, without any recourse open to you?

    Parents outraged over this sex-ed curriculum are now the kind of diverse association of moms and dads concerned not merely about the perverse nature of this curriculum – but about the fact of the mandate itself, about how it could be imposed for any number of policies that are far from ideologically neutral. This is the group all parents should join: conservative or not, Christian or not. It’s about the rights of all parents to raise their children as they see fit, and to have a say that is respected by politicians and bureaucrats. If you’re a parent that shares these values, come join.

  16. Desiree Ivey 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    This is a biased article. While the act is not "curriculum" there are only 3 choices of curriculum available. The curriculum is hyper sexual. Have you even looked at that? Did you try to contact Informed Parents of California or did you just trust the politicians. And the reviewers of the the curriculums happen to be the people who wrote them. Follow the money trail; it's about the money, and … Read More

    This is a biased article. While the act is not “curriculum” there are only 3 choices of curriculum available. The curriculum is hyper sexual. Have you even looked at that? Did you try to contact Informed Parents of California or did you just trust the politicians. And the reviewers of the the curriculums happen to be the people who wrote them. Follow the money trail; it’s about the money, and our kids in California are going to lose.

  17. Araceli Justiniani 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Hi David, I want to add a very important part that is missing in your articule. The discrimination issue against the Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, and other non-fluent English speakers, who were completely ignored to give access to the input process. That is a huge issue but the California Department of Educación is ignoring the parents completely. The parents opposition is not about religion; it is the imposition of the gender ideology and inappropriate sex educación … Read More

    Hi David, I want to add a very important part that is missing in your articule. The discrimination issue against the Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, and other non-fluent English speakers, who were completely ignored to give access to the input process. That is a huge issue but the California Department of Educación is ignoring the parents completely. The parents opposition is not about religion; it is the imposition of the gender ideology and inappropriate sex educación that excludes the majority and takes the parents’ rights away. That is not right in a democracy.

  18. Angie 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Dear David, You have marginalized the concerned parents that believe this new more explicit version of the CSE curriculum will increase bullying and sexual assault among young people because of the explicit nature. We are also seeing an explosion of STD/STI here in CA while this type of sex ed curriculum has been used for many years. Clearly a bad trend that needs to be reversed. This topic requires much open debate … Read More

    Dear David,
    You have marginalized the concerned parents that believe this new more explicit version of the CSE curriculum will increase bullying and sexual assault among young people because of the explicit nature. We are also seeing an explosion of STD/STI here in CA while this type of sex ed curriculum has been used for many years. Clearly a bad trend that needs to be reversed. This topic requires much open debate about what will and work to help our young people make healthy choices for themselves.

  19. Brian M 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    I am not right wing or left wing (not falling for it anymore) and even have a beautiful, smart, and strong twenty one year old daughter that is lesbian. Thank you for the heads up on the group Informed Parents of California. As a parent of a fifteen year old in California Public schools, I honestly felt I was all alone in this fight. Glad to know other parents are waking up. I examined the planned … Read More

    I am not right wing or left wing (not falling for it anymore) and even have a beautiful, smart, and strong twenty one year old daughter that is lesbian. Thank you for the heads up on the group Informed Parents of California. As a parent of a fifteen year old in California Public schools, I honestly felt I was all alone in this fight. Glad to know other parents are waking up.

    I examined the planned curriculum in my daughter’s middle school two years ago. I couldn’t believe what NGO’s were rolling out State wide under AB329/California Healthy Youth Act (CHYA), and supposedly caring about our Children’s Health. Since then I reviewed many of the options of AB329/CHYA compliant curriculum being offered to California districts. I can see why Christian parents would be against this. In my opinion all moral people should be against this. You cannot simply read the law, or trust the word of those trying to push it.
    I had no problem with the law itself. Only once I compared the law to what they were actually bringing to the classroom (the curriculum), did I see they were antithetical and had a huge problem with it.

    Being politically in the middle trying to follow the Truth rather than a political party/narrative and able to see points on many sides, I see this as nothing more than a political agenda being crammed down California parents’ throats whether we like it or not, with our children ultimately being the intended victims. Parents do your due diligence.

    If we live in a state/world where you have to be “Christian” to be outraged about the theft of the innocence of all children including straight (cis-gender), gay, trans, etc that’s a very sad thing. Understand not everything in the material (curriculum’s being offered) is bad; however at the end of the day it’s not teaching healthy habits for young people, but subjecting/exposing children to dangerous and risky sexual behaviors at a very young age. This is why these groups are being kicked from our schools. Time for California to wake up, get out of the damn political hive mind (mental prison), and protect children.

  20. Concerned Parent 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    These politicians lie lie lie! Of course frameworks will guide standards (law) which will guide publishers to write /framework and standards based new curriculum!
    A curriculum framework is an organized plan or set of standards or learning outcomes that defines the content to be learned in terms of clear, definable standards of what the student should know and be able to do. A curriculum framework is part of an outcome-based education or standards based education reform design.

  21. Karla 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Good summary of the issues facing educators who are implementing the framework. Parents have the option to opt their children out. I offer an extensive preview of materials for parents and address that students also most consider their family family values & beliefs. I feel that the students greatly appreciate the information given in the Curriculum that I use. However still not a lot of training for educations who are told to teach it. Many … Read More

    Good summary of the issues facing educators who are implementing the framework. Parents have the option to opt their children out. I offer an extensive preview of materials for parents and address that students also most consider their family family values & beliefs. I feel that the students greatly appreciate the information given in the Curriculum that I use. However still not a lot of training for educations who are told to teach it. Many feel uncomfortable because they lack training.

  22. Tom Nelson 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    Here are a couple of Youtube recordings of public school board meetings commenting on LGBTQ and inclusiveness:

    http://sjusd05.tandena.org ( School Board member comments – 14 minutes)
    http://sjusd07.tandena.org ( Public comment by about 50 visitors – 2 hours 15 minutes)
    http://sjusd04.tandena.org ( Public comment by 49 visitors – 1 hour 45 minutes)

  23. Nanette Schonleber 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    This statement " … the California Family Council declares its mission to be “advancing God’s design for life, family and liberty through California’s church, community, capitol & culture...” is frightening. It sounds like something from the 13th century church in Europe. What about freedom from any religious beliefs driving our public institutions? One of the strengths of our country is supposed to be tolerance for differences, including an understanding that people have … Read More

    This statement ” … the California Family Council declares its mission to be “advancing God’s design for life, family and liberty through California’s church, community, capitol & culture…” is frightening. It sounds like something from the 13th century church in Europe. What about freedom from any religious beliefs driving our public institutions?

    One of the strengths of our country is supposed to be tolerance for differences, including an understanding that people have different beliefs about religion and sex.

    Giving 7th grade students information about the varieties of beliefs and values that are found in our country and around the world, is part and parcel of the civic responsibility of our public institutions. I believe that we need to focus more on teaching tolerance for a variety of ways of viewing the world and less on imposing a particular religious belief on our public institutions.

    Replies

    • Rebekah Glass 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

      Have you seen the proposed curriculum for third graders? I don't think the celebration of gay people in history is necessary, but I understand why it's there. I'm a concerned parent of California because the proposed curriculum for my 3rd grade son next year includes extremely graphic books that he doesn't need to see at his age. There's more to it than just what you're referring to, unfortunately. Read More

      Have you seen the proposed curriculum for third graders? I don’t think the celebration of gay people in history is necessary, but I understand why it’s there. I’m a concerned parent of California because the proposed curriculum for my 3rd grade son next year includes extremely graphic books that he doesn’t need to see at his age. There’s more to it than just what you’re referring to, unfortunately.

  24. S L 2 weeks ago2 weeks ago

    To author of this article: who is targeting who ? Maybe LGBT targeting my kids' mind? But it's too late - I already told them everything about it, including AIDS among them, suicide rate, including that their blood is not welcomed in hospitals. Don't get me wrong - I don't have anything against them and some of them had nice achievements and contributed to society, I love them as humans, but I am the … Read More

    To author of this article: who is targeting who ? Maybe LGBT targeting my kids’ mind? But it’s too late – I already told them everything about it, including AIDS among them, suicide rate, including that their blood is not welcomed in hospitals. Don’t get me wrong – I don’t have anything against them and some of them had nice achievements and contributed to society, I love them as humans, but I am the one who decides what’s wrong for my kids.
    If no options to opt out will be given – I’ll do homeschool.
    So it’s not conservative religious group “targeting” someone.