Teachers to parents: "Shut up, go away. We know what's best for your children."
The argument before the Supreme Court
Teachers who run roughshod over the right of parents to raise their children got a well-deserved red light.
In oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, it appears likely the high court will empower parents to protect their young children from exposure to school books that promote the “LGBTOQ” agenda.
You might not have heard about this because it seems that the liberal media didn’t want to publicize what might be a victory for parents and religious liberty. Parents of children in Montgomery County, Maryland, public schools sued the school because the almighty education hierarchy would not let the parents opt-out of instruction that includes LGBTQ+ indoctrination.
The reason for kicking parents out, the school explained, is to give kids as young as 5-years-old the means to “work effectively in cross-cultural environments” and “confront and eliminate stereotypes.”
Oh sure. That’s thinly disguised edu-speak for “do it our way.” That way is intended to snuff out parents whose objections are based on their religious beliefs.
The high court is considering some complex constitutional questions, but this case is way beyond legalities. Even if the court rules in favor of the parents, the victory would be small potatoes compared to the broader fight over just how much parents are allowed to raise their children. For some educators, it’s their job to treat children as incubators of the teacher’s design.
That’s the fight, you’ll recall that prompted Virginia voters to elect Glenn Youngkin as their governor. If the court rules—and it’s hard to predict how the court will rule—in favor of the school district, the larger question still looms large. The Maryland case gets national attention because it is located close to the media cluster in D.C. My guess is that this nonsense goes on across the country.
Although it’s not enunciated in the Constitution, parental rights have been the coin of the realm for centuries. That an argument now has been raised against those rights is…well, I can’t think of a word more powerful than shocking. Unbelievable? Appalling? It’s a sign of just how the education industry and political left have lost their minds. A case of bone-headed arrogance. I can’t write it strong enough.
The oral arguments are interesting, as described more fully by Amy Howe, in the Supreme Court Blog. For example:
Several of the justices, however, seemed to see the question as a fairly straightforward one. As Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Baxter, the parents are not “seeking to stop instruction in the classroom,” but only “not to be forced to participate in it.” And if the parents are simply seeking to have their children excused from instruction using the storybooks, Alito asked, “what is the big deal about allowing them to opt out of this?”