MD District Agrees to Hold Back Biased School Sex-Ed Program

by Jim Brown and Jenni Parker
May 19, 2005

(AgapePress) - A large Maryland school district has agreed to delay the implementation of a controversial sex curriculum. The decision by Montgomery County Public Schools comes after two parent groups filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the new sex-ed program.

Florida-based Liberty Counsel recently filed a lawsuit, arguing that the graphic sex-ed curriculum in Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) is not only inappropriate, but factually inaccurate and discriminatory against those who object to homosexuality. U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams agreed and issued a temporary restraining order preventing the system from using the pilot program in six schools. Implementation of the pilot was set to start May 2 (see related story).

After negotiations with Liberty Counsel, the MCPS district agreed to extend the restraining order through December 31 of this year. Liberty Counsel president Mat Staver says the curriculum contains serious constitutional violations that need to be corrected, and Judge Williams' ruling in the matter was "a tremendous victory for the rights of parents and students" as well as "a tremendous setback for the radical homosexual agenda."

Staver believes MCPS may have assumed it would easily win the case. What happened instead, he asserts, "is a wakeup call to not only this school district but other school districts around the country." The ruling of the judge in this matter was particularly strong, the attorney points out. "Obviously," he adds, "it sent a huge message to the school district. I think it rocked them back on their heels."

But the head of Liberty Counsel notes that the matter of MCPS's controversial sex-ed curriculum is by no means settled, and the Montgomery County school system is not out of the woods yet. He says the restraining order will allow time for two things to happen: "Number one," the pro-family lawyer explains, "it'll allow us time to pursue further discovery on this case, and it'll also allow us time to try to resolve the issues."

And secondly, the issues in the case -- like the problems with the sex-ed program itself -- "are very serious," Staver adds, "and resolving this will not be just simply pulling out one or two sentences. This curriculum has to be totally redone."

One of the complaints Christian and pro-family plaintiffs have against MCPS's sex-ed curriculum, Staver observes, is that it portrays Evangelicals as intolerant and prejudiced. "And frankly," he says, "it is so egregious and so appalling that we will not just simply settle for some minor patchwork in resolving the curriculum. So it's going to have to have some substantial rework."

Liberty Counsel filed the suit challenging the MCPS sex-ed pilot on behalf of Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, a county group composed mostly of parents, and the Virginia-based Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX). According to one Associated Press report, several members of the pro-family groups cheered in the federal court clerk's office when William's ruling was released.

In his decision, Williams agreed with the two groups that the sex-ed curriculum's discussion of homosexuality amounted to preference of one religion over the other because it backed the views of faiths that are tolerant of homosexuality over those that reject it.