Great work, thank you! I'd also like to see legal action to designate gender ideology as a religious/faith based movement that has no place being promoted in our public institutions. Put the LGBTQIA+ zealots on the defensive, not mainstream parents who naturally want to guide their own children's moral development, whether they're religious or not.
As an educator I have seen these beliefs sweep into our schools and take over. Many true believers are nice people who teach this to their own children, which is fine. I get along with lots of people who have different religious beliefs. But why do they get away with forcing this down other people's throats in public schools at taxpayer expense??
If you follow the news from Amherst and Ludlow, you can see that educators are in an impossible position: use the wrong pronouns and you're either an evil indoctrinator or a transphobic bully, and probably soon to be unemployed either way.
It's a religious mania that has entrenched itself as our state religion, in my view, and it will take lawfare to win back our schools and institutions. Thanks again for your important work!
Thanks for your comment! You make some great points. Teachers have rights too, though. If you know any teachers who are feeling compelled to speak/act in a way that violates their religious convictions, have them reach out to the MLLC.
Thank you! What about feeling compelled to speak/act in a way that violates secular convictions? In other words, objecting to their imposition of a religious concept (a "gendered soul" which is distinct from biological sex) in the public realm in violation of the First Ammendment? I'll understand if this is not your approach at MLLC or not applicable under this precedent, but I wonder if you know of any groups taking this strategy? Thank you!
That's a great question. The Mahmoud decision focused on religious families, but the MLLC can advise on free speech issues regardless of whether the person is religious or not.
For the record, lesbians and gay men are a natural, normal part of human emotional and sexual behavior. Transgender people have simply chosen a label to describe how uncomfortable they are with their sex. There's nothing wrong with letting proto gay and lesbian children know that they might grow up to be gay or lesbian. Although that's a parent's job, not the school's.
Many LGBs want a divorce from the TQ+crazy. It would help if everyone would stop calling these groups LGBTQIA+. As they actively work against gay and lesbian rights, they're more properly called lgbTQIA2S+ groups. They label themselves such because they're still riding the same-sex marriage coattails. Intersex people, more properly called people with DSDs, also don't want to be used to promote the rights of male fetishists invading female spaces. People with a DSD are one sex or the other.
The more people who label these groups precisely for the devious work they do, TQ+, the more lesbians and gay men will get off the TQ bandwagon.
Yes, that's an important distinction, and I agree with you. Unfortunately nuance will be lost if/when the gender crazies create a backlash from the right and drive all non-conformists off a cliff. Ask the Iranian feminists of 1979 how that People's Revolution turned out for them.
The Supreme Court's ruling took into consideration the age of the children, K - 5. So school districts may be less inclined to respect your request for opt-out for higher grades. Recommended letter is still worth a try, though. Massachusetts has protections for atheists under religion related law. So, if your objection to the teaching of gender ideology is scientific, then you could try just substituting "scientific" for "religious" in the proposed letter and seeing how that goes.
Thanks for your comment! For non-religious parents nationwide there may be an element of "your mileage may vary" since Mahmoud was decided on religious grounds. However, as you said, MA has interpreted religion quite broadly in the past, so we think school districts would be wise not to try and become the arbiters of what counts as being "religious" enough. That's a dangerous line for the state to walk. Regarding the age issue, the age of the kids was taken into account in Mahmoud, but in relation to the types of books, not the religious rights of the parents generally speaking. The decision leaned heavily on Yoder, which is a case involving high school students. Some of the finer points of individual cases will likely end up in court. For now, we think schools would be wise to err on the side of respecting the religious rights of parents regardless of the age of the child, and the MLLC invites parents to contact them if their school fails to do so.
It is not clear what all the ramifications of this decision will be. Now, right after this judgement, is a really good time for parents to assert themselves though. There will be more court cases, and more decisions handed down...
The gender identity pushers are are using the LGB community as cover to promote the insanity of born in the wrong body in schools. Another reason why it is increasingly important to separate from the T&Q dogma.
Great work, thank you! I'd also like to see legal action to designate gender ideology as a religious/faith based movement that has no place being promoted in our public institutions. Put the LGBTQIA+ zealots on the defensive, not mainstream parents who naturally want to guide their own children's moral development, whether they're religious or not.
As an educator I have seen these beliefs sweep into our schools and take over. Many true believers are nice people who teach this to their own children, which is fine. I get along with lots of people who have different religious beliefs. But why do they get away with forcing this down other people's throats in public schools at taxpayer expense??
If you follow the news from Amherst and Ludlow, you can see that educators are in an impossible position: use the wrong pronouns and you're either an evil indoctrinator or a transphobic bully, and probably soon to be unemployed either way.
It's a religious mania that has entrenched itself as our state religion, in my view, and it will take lawfare to win back our schools and institutions. Thanks again for your important work!
Thanks for your comment! You make some great points. Teachers have rights too, though. If you know any teachers who are feeling compelled to speak/act in a way that violates their religious convictions, have them reach out to the MLLC.
Thank you! What about feeling compelled to speak/act in a way that violates secular convictions? In other words, objecting to their imposition of a religious concept (a "gendered soul" which is distinct from biological sex) in the public realm in violation of the First Ammendment? I'll understand if this is not your approach at MLLC or not applicable under this precedent, but I wonder if you know of any groups taking this strategy? Thank you!
That's a great question. The Mahmoud decision focused on religious families, but the MLLC can advise on free speech issues regardless of whether the person is religious or not.
Thank you for your reply and your important work!
For the record, lesbians and gay men are a natural, normal part of human emotional and sexual behavior. Transgender people have simply chosen a label to describe how uncomfortable they are with their sex. There's nothing wrong with letting proto gay and lesbian children know that they might grow up to be gay or lesbian. Although that's a parent's job, not the school's.
Many LGBs want a divorce from the TQ+crazy. It would help if everyone would stop calling these groups LGBTQIA+. As they actively work against gay and lesbian rights, they're more properly called lgbTQIA2S+ groups. They label themselves such because they're still riding the same-sex marriage coattails. Intersex people, more properly called people with DSDs, also don't want to be used to promote the rights of male fetishists invading female spaces. People with a DSD are one sex or the other.
The more people who label these groups precisely for the devious work they do, TQ+, the more lesbians and gay men will get off the TQ bandwagon.
Yes, that's an important distinction, and I agree with you. Unfortunately nuance will be lost if/when the gender crazies create a backlash from the right and drive all non-conformists off a cliff. Ask the Iranian feminists of 1979 how that People's Revolution turned out for them.
The Supreme Court's ruling took into consideration the age of the children, K - 5. So school districts may be less inclined to respect your request for opt-out for higher grades. Recommended letter is still worth a try, though. Massachusetts has protections for atheists under religion related law. So, if your objection to the teaching of gender ideology is scientific, then you could try just substituting "scientific" for "religious" in the proposed letter and seeing how that goes.
Thanks for your comment! For non-religious parents nationwide there may be an element of "your mileage may vary" since Mahmoud was decided on religious grounds. However, as you said, MA has interpreted religion quite broadly in the past, so we think school districts would be wise not to try and become the arbiters of what counts as being "religious" enough. That's a dangerous line for the state to walk. Regarding the age issue, the age of the kids was taken into account in Mahmoud, but in relation to the types of books, not the religious rights of the parents generally speaking. The decision leaned heavily on Yoder, which is a case involving high school students. Some of the finer points of individual cases will likely end up in court. For now, we think schools would be wise to err on the side of respecting the religious rights of parents regardless of the age of the child, and the MLLC invites parents to contact them if their school fails to do so.
It is not clear what all the ramifications of this decision will be. Now, right after this judgement, is a really good time for parents to assert themselves though. There will be more court cases, and more decisions handed down...
Agreed.
This bodes well for the legal profession, at least in districts where parents can afford it.
The gender identity pushers are are using the LGB community as cover to promote the insanity of born in the wrong body in schools. Another reason why it is increasingly important to separate from the T&Q dogma.
Please add a “share this article” button which allows me to cross post
We can see the share button from our end, not sure why you can't see it? But you should be able to cross post using this url: https://massinformedparents.substack.com/p/new-resource-alert-mahmoud-v-taylor
Thanks I was able to cross post from my computer. Didn’t work on tablet even though I was in the site and not the app. Great article!
Glad you were able to make it work. Thanks for sharing!