Moralilty -- whatever the hell that means -- would seem to be the purview of the parent, while basic skills are that of the educator.  The reason sex ed is such a flash point is that it blends scientific knowledge with that moral aspect.

That's also the motivation behind the creationism debate, I guess, but a tad more far afield.

Another example of that morality is the reading of a book about "two kings" that took place in a second grade class around here that had folks panties in a twist.  While obviously the picture book didn't have the two horny princes bending each other over in a royal flourish, it was the type of thing on which the hard right can seize.

On that one I am a little circumspect.  Our 16 year old has been apprenticing with a lesbian horse farrier for 2 years and has been close to her and her partner for about 5 years.  We talked with her and simply waited for the kid to ask questions, rather than sit him down for "a talk."

I think schools unilaterally firing up a book to introduce homosexuality to primary grades is a little much.  Let kids' natural curiosity bring that out, frankly. 

I think parents should have the right to raise their children with whatever backwards moral values they want. When you set standards for what children must know or believe, you're saying that childrearing is first and foremost an activity that happens for the benefit of the state, and that governmental interests are superior to personal, family, religious, and moral interests where childrearing is concerned. I'm not saying that the beliefs of certain individuals should be able to hold back the curriculum in a public school in the areas of sex ed or science or any other topic, merely that parents should always have the perogative to remove their children from said schools if they have such a big problem with what is being taught there.

In my mind, a parent's right to raise their children within their own culture and beliefs ends at the point where the child will be genuinely harmed by the parent's actions. Keeping children in ignorance of certain subjects for longer than is generally considered acceptable, to me, does not meet this standard of harm.

I tend to agree with that.

I may know what was good and bad about how my parents raised me, and be pretty sure their moral decisions were the right ones to ingrain into me (because if I didn't think the morals I have developed were good ones, why would I keep them?), but there are those out there who are horrified at my lifestyle, and would demand that my parents be kept from raising children if they couldn't do it with the proper moral teachings.

A parent who kept his child from learning to read entirely might be considered negligent though not abusive; however at issue is not that parents don't want children to learn about, say, sex and sexuality at all, but that they wish to control how it happens.  If a parent were to say that he didn't want his child taught how to read in school because the school taught a phonics-based reading style and the parent wanted to teach a word-recognition style, then that would be his right.  If the parent doesn't want the kid to read at all, but teaches coping skills for getting along in the world without reading, that's also well within his rights as a parent.  A lot of people would object to it, but if the child could lead a happy, productive life without reading, perhaps the parent knows something about the child or about life that make that the best choice.

By the same token, parents who don't want their kids learning about birth control and homosexuality and transgenderism in a public school have the right to teach their kids about monogamy, procreation, and religious morality at home.  Those are the skills they feel their kids need, not how to use a condom.  Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong, but so long as they're not trying to dictate the moral teachings other people's children will get (which is where most of my problems start in the conflict over sexual, moral, or ethical education), I don't know that it's my place to demand that their children learn things it's counter to their morality to teach.

I think a parent should have all the right in the world to teach their child that abstinance is the right or best or most moral way, but to deny them information that count save their health/life/futures is a different thing... All children should have the facts that could save them from pregnancy and illness. It's the parents' decision to then instill a moral code.

The right to beliefs and culture should be upheld, certainly. But it's naive to act as though young people aren't ever going to experiment, and knowledge should be given accordingly.

Pix -

The basic life skill knowledge is, "Having unprotected sex can increase your likelihood of pregnancy or sexually transmitted infection."

For some, the answer to that is to teach kids not to have sex.  That may or may not be realistic, given kids and their hormones.

For some, the answer is to teach about birth control and barrier methods.  That may or may not be realistic, given kids and their utter lack of planning and foresight.  Also, condoms aren't foolproof, so holding them up like a magic bullet won't work.  You can still get a potentially fatal case of HPV if you follow every rule in the Safer Sex Book, and a lot of sex ed classes get very simplistic about, "Using condoms will save your life."

Neither option is foolproof, and until one option or the other is foolproof, I think it's not really my place or anyone else's to demand that someone else's children be taught either abstinence or comprehensive sex ed.  I want both options available and I'd *prefer* that kids learn about safer sex and birth control, but kids aren't guaranteed to use what they've been taught either way.

I heard the dark side has cookies.  I'm so totally in.

It's true!
http://muss.mcmaster.ca/~bunnjs/cookies.jpg

Does that go for other cultural/lifestyle stuff too or just homosexuality?  We're allowed to teach them about Cinco De Mayo, Kwanzaa, etc.

They share what their parents do for a living, whether they live in a 2-parent home or with their grandparents, etc.

Second grade is not just about learning your multiplication tables, it's also about learning how to get along with the kids in your classroom.  Part of that is teaching you about the diverse backgrounds that these kids come from.  One of those diverse backgrounds is coming from a home with 2 parents of the same sex.  Not everyone comes from a white middle class nuclear family and kids need to hear that.