Parental Rights, School Choice and the Homosexual Agenda

CHESAPEAKE, VA (Catholic Online) – Fr. John Malloy is a feisty priest, a Salesian of Don Bosco. He demonstrates the kind of courage so necessary in this new missionary age. This self described “87 years young” priest maintains a weblog entitled “A Shepherd’s Voice” (http://johnmalloysdb.blogspot.com/) where he updates the faithful on the latest fronts in the cultural struggle. On Wednesday he reported that “…board members of the Alameda Unified School District voted 3-2 to introduce a new curriculum that will expose children as young as five to homosexual activist propaganda. …The curriculum in question is defined as the “Safe Schools Curriculum Addressing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.” However, a quick look at the lesson plans reveals that the issue of “safety” is being used as an excuse for indoctrination.”

He is correct. The details can be found at Father’s Weblog and they are deeply disturbing. This kind of thing is happening elsewhere where fringe elements of the activist homosexual community have decided to advance their cultural revolution, in spite of the rights of parents, by using children and the willing administration in some school systems. The Pacific Justice Institute is representing the parents in that area, free of charge. Rather than deal with the specific incident, I want to address the broader problem, the growing failure in some public school districts to respect parental rights. I also want to affirm the Catholic teaching on the primary role of parents in the lives of their children and in education. The Church is in favor of parental choice. Let me explain.

Parents are the first teachers of their children. The family is the first school. To support "Parental Choice in Education" is to affirm that Parents should be able to make the choice of how to extend their own teaching mission by choosing a school for their children outside of the home. It is to support their right to participate in curriculum development. The teaching of the Catholic Church on this issue is crystal clear. The family is the first cell of society, the first church, first government, first school, first hospital, first economy, and the first mediating institution of society. That teaching is at the heart of Catholic Social Thought. It should also lay the foundation for building a truly just public policy in the area of education.

A just view of good governance is grounded in the understanding that the family is the first government and that all other government must first be at its service. In his marvelous apostolic exhortation on the family ("The Role of the Christian family in the Modern World") the Servant of God Pope John Paul II affirmed the social and political role of the family and called for the development of a “family politics”. Catholics, other Christians, other people of faith and all people of good must now embrace this challenge and develop just such a "family politics".

All education begins in the home and all education outside of the home is an extension of that foundation. Those who render this extended teaching should see themselves as acting on behalf of the parents. This view used to be openly acknowledged in the legal doctrine called “in loco parentis.” Teachers were seen as standing in the place of the parents. Sadly, it is being replaced these days with a view which seems to undermine the role of parents. Children are not, in the words of the US Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), “mere creatures of the State". William Bentley Ball, the late, great Catholic lawyer and gentleman, secured this victory for parents and many others which reinforced it. That case secured the rightful role of parents. To stand in the place of parents did not mean “replacing” the parent but rather assisting them and deferring to them.

The teaching of the Catholic Church on the primacy of parents in the education of their children is undeniable and fundamental. Among the magisterial documents reaffirming it is the Apostolic Exhortation "Familiaris Consortio" (The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World) by the late Servant of God John Paul II. In it he wrote: "The right and duty of parents to give education is essential, since it is connected with the transmission of human life; it is original and primary with regard to the educational role of others, on account of the uniqueness of the loving relationship between parents and children; it is irreplaceable and inalienable, and therefore incapable of being entirely delegated to others or usurped by others...”

In his “Letter to Families”, he addressed parents as the ones responsible for the first School, the domestic church of the family: "Parents are the first and most important educators of their own children, and they also possess a fundamental competence in this area; they are educators because they are parents. They share their educational mission with other individuals or institutions, such as the Church and the State. But the mission of education must always be carried out in accordance with a proper application of the Principle of Subsidiarity. This implies the legitimacy and indeed the need of giving assistance to the parents, but finds its intrinsic and absolute limit in their prevailing right and actual capabilities.

"The principle of subsidiarity is thus at the service of parental love, meeting the good of the family unit. For parents by themselves are not capable of satisfying every requirement of the whole process of raising children; especially in matters concerning their schooling and the entire gamut of socialization. Subsidiarity thus complements paternal and maternal love and confirms its fundamental nature, inasmuch as all other participants in the process of education are only able to carry out their responsibilities in the name of the parents, with their consent and, to a certain degree, with their authorization."

The challenges being faced by parents in the Alameda Unified School District in California are replicated in many other places in the United States. It is essential that Catholic parents join with others who share this view of the family and this philosophy of education to defend parental rights and build a new family politics. It is time for a State by State and National effort to promote Parental Choice in education.

Hey Dawn, thanks for the comment. To be honest, I was looking for less abstract ideas and more concrete, implementable ideas on how to teach kids to be nice to each other in a way that would respect religion and secularism at the same time. Please don't think I am criticizing what you wrote back, I was just expecting something different.

As I said earlier, I am a major proponent of children receiving the majority of their (early) education from their parents. However, of course there is a point at which that education might have to be supplemented. I think the vast majority of us would probably agree that we wouldn't want our parents teaching us everything we learn. Indeed, I'd think most Americans might struggle with instruction on the English language, let alone science or math. Indeed, I think supplemental education is almost necessary nowadays given that education beyond high school is essential (and really, not enough). With that said, I do feel some sort of sensitivity training is necessary for children, even beyond what parents can teach their children. Children, if they are going to be in schools with other kids, have to know how to function as a normal, respectful human being around others.

To make my point a little more clear, I was speaking with my aunt who teaches in the Burbank school district. N.B. her school is not subject to the efforts of the Alameda district referenced in the article. I asked her about what she thought about the initiative in this particular article. She adamantly stated that CA schools desperately needed some form of cultural sensitivity training. Indeed, my cousin who also teaches in a rather rough CA school district has also said the same thing. These are good kids, but some have problems that are improperly manifested towards other children. There are children out there that learn to say the most abrasive, terrible things, and they don't know what they are even saying. For sure, these things are not necessarily being taught by parents; my cousin's school deals with a lot of gang problems, bless their hearts.

The problem that liberal Californians have with this, and particularly teachers and school-board members who want these types of initiatives to come through, is that these kids are learning anti-social behavior that is ultimately damaging their lives. These are kids whose future is threatened by the mere fact that they are products of intolerant social networks, i.e. insufficient parents, gangs, drug circles, etc.. Unfortunately, my cousin's classes are filled with children from financially unstable homes, most of these kids are part of minority cultures. These are primarily the children we are trying to reach.

I think this type of education, although it is contrary to Catholic thought (and very, very important issue of concern), has benefits that greatly outweigh the problems to religious people, in my opinion. My aunt was telling me that several of her students (these are young, young kids, 2nd graders I think) are constantly harassed for the way they dress, the way they talk, their skin color, the non-gender-conforming ways, etc. Indeed, her young children are saying words to one another that I never knew existed until being much older than they. Now, it is common for kids that age to go around calling each other pejorative, homosexual words, racial slurs, words derogatory to women, etc. No one should have to hear such things, and it should not be tolerated in these schools. Truth be told, if I ever found out another child was calling my son "gay" (in a derogatory way), I would first wonder why a child of such an age knows derogatory language like that, and secondly I would wonder why that child feels it appropriate to say such things in the classroom. Of course the tact of children is not nearly as developed as that of an adult. But to pass off racial or homosexual slurs (or even worse behavior) as children being cute or misguided or immature is severely improper.

In my opinion, I do not think this is a religious issue in the least. Like I said in a previous post on this board, children need to learn how to respect other people, no matter who they are. I think the Deacon and people on this board are turning issues of rightful and mandatory respect into an improper and unnecessary challenge to their religious convictions. These schools are not trying to "indoctrinate" homosexuality into children, they are trying to keep them from being jerks to one another. I do not think anyone is trying to force anyone to approve homosexuality, they are just saying your kids can't tease one another about it. I see nothing wrong with that nor do I see anything unCatholic about it.

I have a solution that people on this board might find interesting (although the article is a month old so people probably aren't reading it anymore). Quite frankly, I totally agree with Christian parents who want to protect their children from this type of education. I do not think that any child should be subjected to something that his or her parents disagree with. Quite frankly, although I don't care one bit about homosexuality, I would not want my children learning it's ok to be a transgendered person. Nothing against people who are, good for them if they are happy, but I don't want my children learning it's ok to go through artificial medical processes to become the opposite gender. However, I still think those people deserve tolerance and respect, and I would not want my children thinking it's ok to make fun of them because they are different. With that said, I think maybe the more proper way to go about this is to start permanently removing kids out of schools that aren't able to function in a normal, diverse society. I would not want my kids around other children that have not learned to respect one another. If conservatives wish to abrogate this kind of education on religious grounds, then they need to bear the brunt if their children do not choose to behave in a respectful, well-mannered way towards other people. Undoubtedly, I do not think anyone on this board would probably condone such reprehensible behavior towards anyone. As religious people we understand the value of every person, no matter who they are, what they do, or how they act. We are most likely all adults and know how to function around diverse groups. With that said, if people like that have children in school that are not respecting other children, then they should be permanently removed. It is not a religious right to have children going around schools creating hostile or unsafe environments for people they do not approve of.

Also Dawn, I am not an expert on the development of American parochial schools by any means. However, Catholic parochial schools (or more accurately, Catholic-affiliated institutions) developed in the 18th century due to largely Protestant curricula, not secular. Catholics also wanted strictly Catholic schools because the Irish Catholics immigrating to our country were dissatisfied with the treatment of Catholics in their Protestant affiliated schools. Indeed, the Catholic immigrants were viewed as a rag-tag group that suffered from Protestant majority discrimination. Further, I've never heard nor read any literature that asserts public schools were viewing parents as bad for their children. Indeed, this goes against some fundamental Constitutional and religious views that our country has hold dearly for hundreds of years. If you've heard differently and have other sources, I'd greatly appreciate hearing about them. Mine just came from years learning in Catholic schools and some yahoo searches.

To Jean, I totally agree with you. I think Catholic schools provide a form of education you cannot get from the public schools. Unfortunately, many of them are terribly under-funded and lack the technology and new things public schools have. I was lucky enough to go to a Catholic school in Minneapolis that had access to such funding, but I think many of them tend to not fare so well. I also agree that an education is really what you make of it, of course with some exceptions. God Bless.

Kevin | 8/26/2009

| Politics