Latest news with #PridePuppy
Miami Herald
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners
Opinion Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners | Opinion The 'queens' and 'queers' of the kindergarten alphabet book 'Pride Puppy' finally had their day before the Supreme Court. Predictably on Tuesday, the six conservative justices were not pleased with the Maryland school district that made exposure to this and four other LGBTQ+-themed books a mandatory part of the grade-school English curriculum starting in kindergarten. Religious parents in Montgomery County, Maryland objected to what their kids were being exposed to and made a federal case out of it — this one centered on the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment. As the First Amendment protects my writing, I am a big fan of an expansive reading of the five freedoms it protects — religion, speech, press, assembly and the right to petition the government. But it shouldn't take a coming rebuke from the Supreme Court to get schools to remember that they are only borrowing our kids. Parents' values should be treated with respect. Public schools ought to be a little more modest about how they teach issues that divide us, particularly to young children not yet used to questioning the sanity of the adults around them. If parents don't have the bucks for private school or the time and patience for home schooling, they shouldn't have to hand their kids over for a first grade indoctrination in intersectional feminism. Let's take LGBTQ and religious views out of it. We all know that kids are impressionable. What would you think if kindergartners were required to be exposed to books that presented smoking in a puppy-themed, sparkly and rainbow bedecked light? We'd never do that. Indeed, the Maryland schools intended message of tolerance and support for some kinds of diversity can be widely found on the internet, cable and broadcast and streaming TV, movies and music. But positive depictions of smoking are rare. They can get you slapped with an R rating or raise questions about your broadcast license. We know kids are susceptible to influence from how things are portrayed and we know that some things are only appropriate for an older audience. While most Americans think tobacco is bad for you and most Americans don't think that about being gay, for people who do object, the idea that images and the way things are portrayed to kids can be influential is well-accepted idea. In the coming year, this issue is going to heat up. If you haven't noticed already, the 250th anniversary of the opening battles of the Revolutionary War have already passed. The drumbeat of anniversaries will continue to get louder culminating in a national celebration of the 250th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026. Next school year, the nation's pupils will be awash in Revolutionary War pedagogy. Among the leading voices in shaping what they hear is the 1619 Project, an educational K-12 version of which has been adopted by 4,500 schools across the country. Among its more debatable contentions are the claims that American capitalism is intimately bound with racism, that the Revolutionary War was launched, in part, to protect slavery from British-led reform efforts and that the very idea of police in America is descended from patrols engaged in recapturing escaped slaves. These aren't questions of religious orthodoxy that the Supreme Court can sweep in and give parents a right to opt-out of for reasons of religious freedom. Nevertheless, in the lower grades, schools shouldn't be using complicated and contested interpretations of history to encourage impressionable young children to hate their homeland. Leave such debates for the adults and older students who are equipped to interrogate the evidence for themselves and not as likely to take the word of a teacher as gospel. Kindergarteners don't need to know the word queer any more than 1st graders need to critique capitalism or even know the word at all. Public schools should remember these kids are ours and treat us — and our kids — with a little more respect. David Mastio Opinion Contributor, The Kansas City Star Go to X Go to Facebook Email this person David Mastio has worked for newspaper opinion sections since starting as letters editor of USA Today in 1995. Since then he has been the most conservative member of the liberal editorial board at both USA Today and The Virginian-Pilot, the most liberal member of the conservative editorial board at the Washington Times and founding editorial page editor at the conservative Washington Examiner. As an editorial writer, he has covered the environment, tech, science, local business and national economic policy and politics. Outside of the opinion pages, he has been a Washington correspondent for The Detroit News where he covered the intersection of the environment, regulatory policy and the car industry, California editor of the Center Square and a speech writer on trade and economics for the George W. Bush administration. He also founded his own web company called BlogNetNews, which aggregated and reported on the blog conversations across the political aisle focused on local news and politics in all 50 states.
Yahoo
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
U.S. Supreme Court likely to side with Ohio group on student opt-outs for LGBTQ+ lessons
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — The U.S. Supreme Court signaled last week it will likely rule with parents who wish to opt their children out of school lessons that include LGBTQ+ books, agreeing with an Ohio group that intervened in the case. The nation's top court heard arguments on April 22 in the case against a Maryland school district whose curriculum includes LGBTQ+ books, after lower courts sided with the district and said the books weren't part of 'explicit instruction' on sexual orientation and gender identity. Rather, the materials were included as options within the district's reading list to represent 'a range of cultural, racial, ethnic and religious backgrounds.' Ohio Supreme Court to decide same-sex parental rights case The Protect Ohio Children Coalition had joined other similar groups from California, Colorado, Nebraska and Texas in writing an amicus brief against the school district, arguing in favor of opt-outs for parents wishing to remove their students from such lessons, citing an infringement of their religious beliefs. 'The parents have never maintained that the Pride storybooks, or other specified controversial texts, cannot be taught to other [district] students,' the brief said. 'The parents merely do not want their own children to be subjected to what they view as attempted indoctrination.' LGBTQ+ books on the reading list included titles like 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding,' about a young girl struggling with her uncle's same-sex marriage, and 'Pride Puppy,' about attendees at a Pride march who band together to find a family's lost dog. The district said those on the list are 'made available for individual reading, classroom read-aloud and other educational activities designed to foster and enhance literacy skills.' During oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts was reluctant to agree with the school board's argument that the curriculum didn't require students to affirm or support the content of the books. Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the books appeared to be presenting children with more than just neutral facts about the LGBTQ+ community. 'It's not just exposure to the idea, right?' Barrett asked. 'It's saying, this is the right view of the world. This is how we think about things. This is how you should think about things. This is like two plus two is four.' Seven Buckeyes taken on final day of NFL draft while Sanders goes to Browns Justice Elena Kagan asked whether a ruling for the parents would cause an increase in religious objections and lead schools to abandon aspects of the curriculum because of the difficulty of providing opt-outs. Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned if students had exposure to the contested books. 'Haven't we made very clear that the mere exposure to things that you object to is not coercion?' Kagan said. 'None of them are even kissing in any of these books. The most they are doing is holding hands.' A similar argument was previously made by Judge G. Steven Agee of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the lower courts that agreed with the district. Agee said the parents were not able to 'connect the requisite dots' to show that their religious rights were violated, given there isn't proof that a teacher has used the books in a manner that 'coerces children into changing their religious views.' Protect Ohio Children Coalition joined the amicus brief as the inclusion of LGBTQ+ themes in classrooms is being debated across Ohio, like in the case of a New Richmond teacher who is taking her district to court after she was suspended for having books in her class library with LGBTQ+ characters. Ohio State faculty vote to join Big Ten alliance against Trump A Jackson Township school district said in January it will pay $450,000 to a middle school teacher who resigned for refusing to address two transgender students by their preferred names and pronouns after a court said forcing the teacher to use students' preferred names amounted to 'compelled speech.' The coalition also supported Ohio's 'Parents' Bill of Rights' law, which includes a provision requiring schools to provide parents the opportunity to review instructional material that includes 'sexuality content.' A national crisis hotline said it received a significant increase in calls from LGBTQ+ youth in Ohio within hours after the measure was signed. A decision in the Maryland case is expected this summer. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
New York Post
27-04-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
Supreme surprise: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson accidentally came out — for school choice
During oral arguments in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson unintentionally made a practical and convincing case for universal school choice. A few years back, the Montgomery County, Md., school board instituted an 'LGBTQ-inclusive' curriculum that included storybooks for kids as young as pre-kindergarten. The books are ostensibly part of the English curriculum because apparently they feature words and sentences. Advertisement But the rationale for the program, according to the school system itself, is to 'disrupt' the 'binary' thinking of skeptical kids. Which sounds very much like indoctrination. For instance, one of the 'think aloud moments' for kids reading 'Born Ready,' the tale of a confused girl, is 'noticing how happy Penelope is when his mom hears him and commits to sharing with their loved ones that he is a boy.' 'Pride Puppy' is about a cute little dog who wanders into the Pride parade and meets friendly drag queens and leather-clad participants. Advertisement 'Love, Violet' and 'Prince & Knight' are about same-sex attraction. Even secular parents should find the idea of strangers teaching their prepubescent children about sexuality and gender dysphoria at such a young age and in such a frivolous manner unacceptable. As most conscientious parents understand, kids do not 'know themselves best.' Advertisement One of the most vital duties of parenting is guiding children through the confusion of adolescence and teaching them morality. It is not consecrating every harebrained notion that pops into their precious, underdeveloped brains. In any event, a group of religious parents led by a Muslim family in Maryland who believe the messages in the books conflict with their beliefs sued the county — not to stop the classes, but for the right to opt out of them. Yet Montgomery County refused to allow them to do it, maintaining that the opt-out requests would be so numerous they would disrupt the class. This might sound crazy, but if enough parents oppose a non-academic curriculum that it would be endangered, shouldn't a public school do their best to accommodate taxpayers, rather than the opposite? Advertisement Of course, in the progressive mindset the individual is subservient to the state, not vice-versa. So, Mahmoud v. Taylor is now in front of the court. During Tuesday's oral arguments, which seemed to be going relatively well for parents, Jackson conceded that she was 'struggling to see how it burdens a parent's religious exercise if the school teaches something the parent disagrees with.' After all, they have a 'choice,' she noted. 'You don't have to send your kid to that school. You can put them in another situation.' Theoretically speaking, this makes complete sense. You can surrender your impressionable young child to hokum about gender transformation that conflicts with your faith, or you can leave the school entirely and, presumably, send your kids to a private institution or home-school them. The problem here is that Maryland is one of the worst states for parental choice. Jackson, who spent years on the board of a Christian academy in Maryland, should know this. Other than a tiny voucher program, there is nowhere to go. Maryland doesn't have open enrollment policies that, at a bare minimum, allow parents to change schools within the district. Whichever school happens to be closest, no matter how poorly it performs or how ill-fitted it is for your child's needs, is where they must go. Advertisement Children might be the valuable thing in your life, but a Maryland parent is afforded more choices on where to buy a television than where they educate their kids. Maryland barely has any charter schools. Parents who want to homeschool, which is challenging enough, must wrestle with needless regulatory burdens to teach their own children. Anti-reform activists argue that school choice would result in an exodus of parents (and funding), undermining public schools' ability to function. This is called a marketplace. If you can't attract parents, it's probably because your service is substandard. Advertisement Anti-reform activists also argue that voucher programs are for rich people, when the reality is that they are mostly for the middle and working classes, who are unable to escape these propagandizing institutions. Montgomery County is one of the wealthiest in the country, so perhaps parents there have a better chance of escaping than most. Irrespective of who school reform would help, it is an exceedingly small favor to ask schools to allow parents to opt out of classes that teach 'inclusivity' — a euphemism for a radical cultural agenda. Advertisement The fact that schools refuse to meet this request only illustrates the radicalism of these institutions. But fortunately, Jackson has the answer on how to fix it. David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner. Twitter @davidharsanyi
Yahoo
26-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Queer questions about capitalism aren't right for kindergartners
The 'queens' and 'queers' of the kindergarten alphabet book 'Pride Puppy' finally had their day before the Supreme Court. Predictably on Tuesday, the six conservative justices were not pleased with the Maryland school district that made exposure to this and four other LGBTQ+-themed books a mandatory part of the grade-school English curriculum starting in kindergarten. Religious parents in Montgomery County, Maryland objected to what their kids were being exposed to and made a federal case out of it — this one centered on the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment. As the First Amendment protects my writing, I am a big fan of an expansive reading of the five freedoms it protects — religion, speech, press, assembly and the right to petition the government. But it shouldn't take a coming rebuke from the Supreme Court to get schools to remember that they are only borrowing our kids. Parents' values should be treated with respect. Public schools ought to be a little more modest about how they teach issues that divide us, particularly to young children not yet used to questioning the sanity of the adults around them. If parents don't have the bucks for private school or the time and patience for home schooling, they shouldn't have to hand their kids over for a first grade indoctrination in intersectional feminism. Let's take LGBTQ and religious views out of it. We all know that kids are impressionable. What would you think if kindergartners were required to be exposed to books that presented smoking in a puppy-themed, sparkly and rainbow bedecked light? We'd never do that. Indeed, the Maryland schools intended message of tolerance and support for some kinds of diversity can be widely found on the internet, cable and broadcast and streaming TV, movies and music. But positive depictions of smoking are rare. They can get you slapped with an R rating or raise questions about your broadcast license. We know kids are susceptible to influence from how things are portrayed and we know that some things are only appropriate for an older audience. While most Americans think tobacco is bad for you and most Americans don't think that about being gay, for people who do object, the idea that images and the way things are portrayed to kids can be influential is well-accepted idea. In the coming year, this issue is going to heat up. If you haven't noticed already, the 250th anniversary of the opening battles of the Revolutionary War have already passed. The drumbeat of anniversaries will continue to get louder culminating in a national celebration of the 250th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 2026. Next school year, the nation's pupils will be awash in Revolutionary War pedagogy. Among the leading voices in shaping what they hear is the 1619 Project, an educational K-12 version of which has been adopted by 4,500 schools across the country. Among its more debatable contentions are the claims that American capitalism is intimately bound with racism, that the Revolutionary War was launched, in part, to protect slavery from British-led reform efforts and that the very idea of police in America is descended from patrols engaged in recapturing escaped slaves. These aren't questions of religious orthodoxy that the Supreme Court can sweep in and give parents a right to opt-out of for reasons of religious freedom. Nevertheless, in the lower grades, schools shouldn't be using complicated and contested interpretations of history to encourage impressionable young children to hate their homeland. Leave such debates for the adults and older students who are equipped to interrogate the evidence for themselves and not as likely to take the word of a teacher as gospel. Kindergarteners don't need to know the word queer any more than 1st graders need to critique capitalism or even know the word at all. Public schools should remember these kids are ours and treat us — and our kids — with a little more respect.
New York Times
25-04-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Children's Books Go Before the Supreme Court
Hosted by Rachel Abrams Featuring Adam Liptak Produced by Will ReidAnna Foley and Eric Krupke Edited by Devon Taylor and Dan Powell Engineered by Chris Wood On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard a case that could hand parents with religious objections a lot more control over what their kids learn in the classroom. Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court, explains how a case about children's picture books with titles like 'Pride Puppy' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding' has broad implications for schools across the country. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court and writes Sidebar, a column on legal developments, for The New York Times. In a lively and sometimes heated argument, the Supreme Court's conservative majority appeared set to allow opt-outs from L.G.B.T.Q. stories in schools. There are a lot of ways to listen to The Daily. Here's how. We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode's publication. You can find them at the top of the page. The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Will Reid, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez, Brendan Klinkenberg and Chris Haxel. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam and Nick Pitman.
