Sex Ed Revisions Blasted for Alleged Pro-Homosexual Bias -- GOPUSA

Sex Ed Revisions Blasted for Alleged Pro-Homosexual Bias
By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor
March 10, 2005

(CNSNews.com) -- A new sex education program for 8th and 10th graders in Montgomery County, Md., public schools is being attacked by conservatives for allegedly advancing a homosexual agenda. The chairman of the advisory committee that drew up the sex education curriculum is a homosexual activist whose writings on a religious website include, "Gay Marriage, A Jewish Perspective."

The revised curriculum, will be piloted in three county middle schools and three high schools in mid-April and then evaluated in June. The curriculum calls for, among other things, a condom demonstration video and information about "sexual variation."

Steve Fisher, spokesman for the newly formed Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, told Cybercast News Service that the new Montgomery County curriculum is pro-homosexual and would unfairly ask students to examine their sexuality.

"One of the things the new curriculum is proposing to do is to encourage children as early as 13 to self-identify their sexual preference in school," Fisher said. "The new curriculum is essentially saying that same-sex experimentation and play among adolescence is normal and should not be discouraged."

He described the new curriculum as a "blatant attempt to make sure that the only information that was going to be provided to the teachers as far as resources and background information was [pro-homosexual]."

Fisher said attempts by some of the members on the Montgomery County Board of Education's advisory committee "to balance the information with recommendations from other organizations like various mainstream churches" were denied. Instead, he said, the curriculum was "pushed through pretty much without a whole lot of exposure or discussion from the parents."

David Fishback, chairman of the panel officially known as the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development, was reportedly inspired to join the panel because he has two sons who are homosexual.

Fishback is also listed as the contact for the Temple Emanuel Outreach, which declares its support for "Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual and Transgender inclusion" on its website and informs visitors to the site that the group "participated at the Capital (Gay) Pride Festival on June 13th in downtown Washington."

In the annual report explaining the revised sex education curriculum, produced by Fishback's advisory committee for the county board of education, the panel states that it "recognized the concept of sexual orientation as an essential human quality and [stated its belief] that individuals have the right to accept, acknowledge, and live in accordance with their sexual orientation, be they heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian."

The report cites the conclusions of the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, "and every other mainstream medical and mental health organization in the United States ... that homosexuality is not a disease or mental disorder."

Changes for the 8th grade curriculum "include definitions of sexual identity and sexual orientation," the advisory committee's report states. "Homosexuality is not a mental disorder," but rather, "a natural response," and "having some homosexual feelings does not necessarily mean that one is homosexual," the report declares.

Having homosexual parents or guardians also does not predispose a person to being homosexual, according to the advisory panel.

Grade 10 changes include a description of "the kinds of families that exist in our community," including the "same sex parents family," the report explains.

Fisher took issue with a video entitled "Protect Yourself," slated to be part of the sex education program for 10th graders. The video includes a demonstration in which a condom is placed on a cucumber.

The video, according to Fisher, implies "if you're not sexually active, you're not cool," and downplays the risks associated with sexual activity.

"We have concerns [about] the age group that they're targeting," Fisher said. "We also think that this is the domain that belongs to the parents and the family ... not in the public school."

The Archdiocese of Washington has also reportedly gotten involved, encouraging Catholic parishes to petition the school board to reject the new curriculum. Michael Caruso, the archdiocese's assistant superintendent for secondary schools, explained in a February 24 Washington Times report that "the curriculum is obviously not reflective of our values."

But in an op-ed in the Washington Examiner on February 14, David Fishback defended the new curriculum and suggested that other points of view about homosexuality - for example, that it is a choice -- do not belong in the curriculum. "Such theological debates have no place in the public school health curriculum," Fishback wrote.

He also defended the condom demonstration video, saying it was prepared "at the request of the board of health [education] teachers who concluded that lack of information on correct condom use was leading to unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections.

"The proposed revisions simply present the conclusions of every mainstream American medical and mental health professional association, that homosexuality is not an illness ..." Fishback continued. He denied claims that homosexual activist groups were behind the "Protect Yourself" video.

Brian Edwards, director of communications for Montgomery County public schools, also denied that the revised curriculum contained any pro-homosexual agenda.

"Pro-homosexual agenda?" Edwards asked. "I don't think so. It introduces the term homosexuality, defines homosexuality, discusses that fact that it exists in the world," he told Cybercast News Service when contacted Wednesday.

Edwards said the curriculum merely describes homosexuality as a "type of family unit that exists in our community." He added that the sex education program was not only optional, but that written parental permission was necessary before students could participate.

However, for students who opt out, they have "three weeks of unstructured time," Fisher said. "We should develop a course where we don't have to worry about opting out or opting in. That kind of smacks of separate but equal school systems."