Supreme Court Appears Ready to Rule that the Montgomery County School System Violated Religious Rights by Making Gay Propaganda Books Available for Children In Their Libraries, and Bizarrely, Refusing a Simple Opt-Out for Children of Concerned Parents

The opt-out would just consist of a librarian checking to see if the student is approved by parental consent to check out the book.

Also, when teachers would bring these gay storybooks into the classrooms and indoctrinate children into Gay Studies, parents wanted an opt-out for those classes as well.

But the school board refused.

But you may have noticed -- librarians are now almost all extremist radical lesbians who are determined to allow children to watch porn on library computers and fill their libraries with actual gay porn how-to books.

And teachers are 80% hard left as well.

Even Elena Kagan could not understand why the school system would allow opt-outs for lots of different sensitive topics, but is choosing to dig its heels in for full-on gay sexual grooming of children.

Wait a tick, I think I just figured it out.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared likely to rule for parents in Maryland who objected on religious grounds to books made available in a school district's elementary schools that feature stories about gay and transgender characters.

Members of the 6-3 conservative majority, which often backs religious rights, seemed sympathetic during the lively 2½-hour oral argument toward the parents' claims that the Montgomery County Board of Education violated their religious rights by failing to provide an opt-out for their children.

Some justices indicated that the board's refusal to provide an opt-out might have been motivated by hostility toward religion. A ruling is due by the end of June.

At issue are books included in the English language arts curriculum in Montgomery County. The dispute arose in 2022 after the school board in the large and diverse jurisdiction just outside Washington decided it wanted more storybooks reflecting LGBTQ stories to better reflect the people who live there.

...

One book, "Uncle Bobby's Wedding," features a gay character who is getting married. Another, called "Born Ready," is about a transgender child who wants to identify as a boy.

Some parents, including Muslims and Orthodox Christians, objected on religious grounds under the Constitution's First Amendment, saying their children should be able to opt out of any exposure to the content.

Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch was one of several justices who raised comments made by a former member of the school board, Lynne Harris.

She had suggested in a media interview cited in court papers that a student who objected to the books was "parroting dogma" passed on by her parents and compared their complaints to those of white supremacists who opposed civil rights laws.

"Does that suggest a hostility toward religion?" Gorsuch asked, citing a 2018 ruling in which the court ruled for a Christian baker who refused to serve a gay couple on the grounds that a state civil rights commission had shown anti-religious animus.

Other conservative justices expressed disbelief that the school board found it too difficult to provide an opt-out.

"Why isn't that feasible?" Justice Samuel Alito asked.

"I'm not understanding why it's not feasible," Justice Brett Kavanaugh added.

Chief Justice John Roberts seemed skeptical of the school board's argument that the policy did not require the children to affirm or support the content of the books.

"Is that a realistic concept when you are talking about a 5-year-old?" he asked.

The DEI Justice -- I'm sorry, that's not specific enough; one of the three DEI Justices (does Amy Coney Barrett also count?) -- Ketanji Brown Jackson declared that any parent who doesn't want their kids flooded with gay porn can just put their kids in a private school.

Note that the government forcibly extracts tax money from parents to pay for school, and refuses to give them vouchers to send their kids to private school. So she's saying the state can violate your religious rights and make the schools you are forced at gunpoint to pay for completely unusable by you, but that's okay, because you can just take the double-penalty of paying for a school you don't use and spending $25,000 per year on a private school, Bigots.

Fellow liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also appeared skeptical, noting that parents have other options if they do not like what their children are taught in school.

"If the school teaches something that the parent disagrees with, you have a choice. You don't have to send your kid to that school," she said.

...

The lead plaintiffs are Tamer Mahmoud and Enas Barakat -- a Muslim couple who have a son in elementary school. Other plaintiffs are members of the Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox churches.

They are not challenging the curriculum itself, just the lack of an opt-out.

A federal judge and the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both ruled in favor of the school board.

...

The parents, represented by the religious liberties group Becket, say that under Supreme Court precedent, they have a right to opt out of any instruction that would interfere with their children's religious development.

The school board is "compelling instruction designed to indoctrinate petitioners' children against their religious beliefs," the parents' lawyers wrote.

The parents have the backing of the Trump administration.

Gorsuch wanted to know about a book made available to three-year-old pre-schoolers. There were drawings of a drag queen dressed in leather, and kids were instructed to Find the Leather-Daddy Drag-Queen in the books as if he was Waldo.

The lawyer for the school board insisted that this wasn't sexual and the all-leather get-up wasn't bondage gear.

A drag queen danced in protest:

Isn't that wholesome and Normal.

Here's how smug authoritarian cunt Nina Totenberg "reports" the case for NPR:

The U.S. Supreme Court jumps back into the culture wars Tuesday, as the justices tackle a clash between two bedrock values in American public schools: On one side is the longstanding tradition of local school boards determining class curriculum for everyone. On the other side is the notion that public schools should accommodate religious objections to some materials by allowing parents to opt their kids out of some classes.

At the center of Tuesday's case is the school system in Montgomery County, Md., the most religiously diverse county in the United States, with 160,000 students of almost all faiths. The school board approved five storybooks with LGBTQ+ characters for use in elementary school classes. The avowed purpose was to teach students tolerance and respect for LGBTQ+ students and parents. But some parents objected, contending that exposure to the approved materials conflicted with their religious beliefs.

Grace Morrison is one of the parents suing the school board. Her daughter, who has Down syndrome, was in a special-needs general curriculum class, when the school board decided to include books that talk about LGBTQ+ children and parents. Her daughter was, by then, 10 years old, and Morrison was concerned that her child would be confused by the books.

"They are in conflict with our faith. And I also think that's too heavy for our daughter," she said in an interview with NPR. "These are topics that I'm just not ready to start on down the road with her."

While the school board initially allowed parents to opt their kids out of regular classes with some LGBTQ+ content, the board eventually found that it was both too difficult and too disruptive to accommodate the number of opt-out requests.

"Too many people asserted their religious rights so it became too burdensome to grant them."

If so many people want to opt-out, maybe the list of opt-ins would be smaller and more easy to manage...?

That's what's really going on here: A majority of parents object to Gay Training Classes and want to opt-out. The school might give in if it were just a few Bigot-Children here and there, but this is the majority of parents objecting to this material.

Therefore, they must be crushed. There will be no dissent from Gay Indoctrination. Certainly not so close to Pride Month!

In the Supreme Court on Tuesday, the school board's lawyer will tell the justices that it's relatively easy to have opt-outs for a single class, like health and sex education, a course that allows opt-outs. But it is a logistical nightmare to take children out of a classroom when a single story book that features same-sex parents or gay and lesbian kids could come up at any time. Among the logistical questions are where to put the opt-out kids and for how long? And how would the schools then meet the needs for alternative lesson plans?

How about you just have special Gay Training classes for the students of leftwing nutbag parents who want them, and keep the topic out of other normal classes?

posted by Ace at 04:24 PM

| Access Comments