I remember when I used to cringe that my kids' schools were moving in the direction of teaching "tolerance" toward perversion...but I was thinking forward to how we'd handle it if/when they went to high school. Never did I think that moms and dads of six- and seven-year-olds would be facing the dilemma. But really, wasn't it only a matter of time before a concept such as "King and Queen" was just way too narrow for our open-minded, pluralistic society?

Thursday, September 27, 2007

By Catherine Donaldson-Evans

A fairy tale about two princes falling in love sparked a backlash — and a lawsuit — against a teacher and a school last year when it was read to a second-grade class in Massachusetts.

But the three frontrunners in the Democratic presidential race suggested Wednesday night at their debate in New Hampshire that they’d support reading the controversial book to children as part of a school curriculum.

Mind you, this wasn't a book just "available" in the library, which is scurrilous enough. This book was READ ALOUD to a class of second-graders.

And while some of the Democratic candidates thought maybe they should back-pedal, by say, half a pedal, from reading this aloud to second-graders, they all had to be careful to stick close to the party line. Broadening the issue to one of teaching little ones about g*y marriage and other perverted lifestyles (in schools), we heard this gem from John Edwards:

“I don’t want to make that decision on behalf of my children,” he said. “I want my children to be able to make that decision on behalf of themselves, and I want them to be exposed to all the information, even in — did you say second grade? Second grade might be a little tough, but even in second grade to be exposed to all those possibilities, because I don’t want to impose my view. Nobody made me God.”

Yes, and don't we thank Him.

Article here.

Labels: Children, Education, News, Social Observation, Theater of the Absurd