9th Circus leftists
 

The new ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stating, "There is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children...Parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students," has Californians in an uproar, and rightfully so! The liberal ninth district court known for it's legislating from the bench, such as in the recent case where the court ruled the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional because it contains the words 'under God', dismissed a lawsuit by California parents on November 3, 2005 who sued the school district because a sex survey with inappropriate, nosey questions was given to children in the first, third and fifth grades. The survey was administered by the Palmdale School District and asked students questions such as if they ever thought about having sex or touching other people's "private parts" and whether they could "stop thinking about having sex. Other questions in the survey involved:

Touching my private parts too much

Washing myself because I feel dirty on the inside

Not trusting people because they might want sex

Getting scared or upset when I think about sex

Having sex feelings in my body

Can't stop thinking about sex

Getting upset when people talk about sex

Reputable news source

These questions were asked of 6 YEAR OLDS!!!

Parents are not a protected class so the court only had to do a rational basis analysis. I beleive it was 6th graders, not 6 year olds. Since parents have failed miserably at discussing sex with their children I think the court got this one right. Were would it go if parents were permitted to instrruct the puclic schools as to the content of the teachings.

EDIT: I just read the full opinion. The subjects above were based upon a survey to determien the impact on children. The test group were 1 throug 6th graders. The survey was voluntary and any parent could elect not to permittheir child to participate. These subject matters were not discussed in the open class room but by a trained professional (not a teacher). Any results were sealed.

Thinking a parent has a fundamental right to control what a public school teachers their children is ridiculous.

This was a test case, and I think it was a mistake to even take this case up to the appelate court. This case made law adverse to the motive of the petitioners. In short now teachers can instruct children on these subjects if it is approved by the school. Since the court specifically set forth these categories it seems theschools have unfettered reign in teaching these subject now.

Rare instance when I find myself in complete agreement with Mulhollanddose. That is simply out-f*cking-ragous.

My child will not be attending public schools if she is going to subjected to the whims of ultra leftist wacko sex 'research'.

pbs911, you are mistaken, and obviously do not have children. If you did, you would be angry, not analytical.

The parents were not told the subject matter of the survey in question, and yes, 6 year olds were asked some pretty inappropriate questions. Too bad this will never be appealed. THere is a reason the 9th Circuit is the most overturned, because they make bad decisions and bad laws.

Think that over again. How about a tenured teacher pontificating on the joys of pedophilia?

How about teaching your kids that drug abuse may help their creativity.

The courts intrusion into the sanctity of the family is outrageous and will thankfully be overturned.

I understand the concern. However the question before the court is as follows:

The Ninth Circuit responded to the question. Counsel for the parents framed the question. The reasoning is sound and suported by opinions in the 1st, 2nd 3rd Appellate Districts in addition to the US Supreme Court.

Items like this demonstrate the lack of parental involvment children have and blame the public school system for their shortcommings. The survey was approved by the school district, including the specific questions. If the parents wanted to know the specific questions they could have contacted the school district after recieving the authorization form. They made no such inquiry. They signed the authorization form and now try to blame the school district. I blame the parents not the school.

Agreed, the Ninth Circuit is the most overturned circuit. I don't agree with everything they say, but on this one I find they made the correct decision when looking at the question they set out to decide.

But then again, I guess the study should never be performed because we, as adults, should not conduct any research into the paterns and behaviors of children who are inappropriately proposed by pediophiles. I guess we should just close our eyes and ears and pretend it doesn't happen.

Parents who want to have a say into exactly what it taught to their children should look into private schooling. The Consitution simply does not provide the fundamental right alleged by the parents. It is the way law works.

Those concerns where not in any way considered in the opinion, the survey or by the school district. Apples and oranges.

Re: 9th Circus leftists
 

Like most parents, I've got big huge problems with that.

Where in the Constitution is public schooling provided for?...Where in the Constitution allows these extra-Constitutional educational bureaucracies to supersede parents?

This is right out of communist reeducation camps...Force both parents into the workplace, take control of the children and warp them into a form dictated by the socialistic bureaucracy.

Re: Re: 9th Circus leftists
 

So do I, but the problem is not with the courts on this one. We need some real legistlation passed.

What the Court said, was the parents had no say in what or how this subject was presented. This of course means, that if perchance a NAMBLA leaning teacher were around, he could do as he pleased. He of course could sue for discrimination if he got fired for it, particularly if he were a tenured person.

What we have here is the 9th Circuit once again overstepping its bounds. They are answering questions no one has asked, and are making law, which clearly is not in their realm.

You are still mistaken my friend. The parents could have opted out, and perhaps would have, if they had any idea what the survey was about, they did not. This is more a case of the school district failing in ITS responsibility to communicate with the parents. I still am saying you have no school age children.

Re: Re: 9th Circus leftists
 

This is precisely why I won't give any ground to leftism whatsoever...The Road to Serfdom.

And one other thing...

What would lead the school district to believe that they are qualified to teach the delicate subject of sex with any more expertise than they teach math or english?

I'd wager that the children of parents who care enough to opt out of the schools sex-ed program have fewer STDs and pregnancies that the students who attend the schools program.

In my home sex is discussed openly as soon as the kids ask meaningful questions. That's my call as a parent. They have also attended the schools sex-ed programs and found them to be error filled and strangely presumptive.

They can't manage to turn out literate kids, what makes you think they can teach them appropriately about sex?

If I found out they were asking my 6 year old OR my 6th grader about sex like that I'd be in their office so damn fast it would make their heads spin...

A 6th grader is what, 11 or 12? You want some dude talking to your 12 year old daughter about touching peoples "private parts?"

EXACTLY. That can't seem to turn out kids that can f*cking read, so why is this a priority?

You know what percentage of American high school kids can find Iraq on a map? 13%. 13% . How about we fix that first, before teaching 11 year olds about 'touching peoples private parts'.

thats all I'm saying.

The premise that parents have no say in what public schools teach their children is absurd. Not only regarding sex, but anything else as well. Anyone that would tell a parent to take their kids out of public and enroll them in private schools if they don't like what public schools teach has missed the point entirely. "Public" schools - now just who would that "public" be? Maybe us? Don't WE put together OUR public schools to educate our children? Since when do public school administrators have any right to tell parents they can teach whatever the hell they want and it's none of the parents' business? Talk about the tail wagging the dog. They work for US; they are at OUR beck and call to teach what WE, collectively as a community, want them to teach our children. Public school administrators do not make the call on that; we do as a community. They need to understand that. The courts need to understand that and quit with their wishfull thinking, social engineering, make it up as they go approach with our laws and Constitution. Most do, save for the 9th Circus.

The survey was discussed in an open forum at a school board meeting. I wonder how many concerned parents showed up to join in the discussion whether the survey should be performed. I wonder just how many parents attend school board meeting that deside the subject matters taught to our students.

I vigorously support parents' right to control what their children are told and asked. But some of you are not going to understand what I'm going to say next, and so you will also not like it.

First, the Ninth District Cout of Appeals has been making head-scratching decisions for decades, and has disappointed left leaners AT LEAST as often as right-leaners. Mul, not everything is a leftist, commie pinko plot.

It looks to me like the Court was not making a ruling on whether parents can have this right. It looked at whether the Constitution has already pre-empted this issue. Some of you guys need to separate your notions of what's right and wrong, and what's good and bad.....from what's legal and illegal. It's convenient to assume there is a one-to-one relationship, but there is not.

And finally, I've never been comfortable with over-generalizations and universal proclamations. All generalizations are false. (yep, that's a joke also) Our public schools do indeed graduate students who can read and write. Frankly, if you ask any serious professional public school teacher what the biggest source of problems with students these days you're likely to hear it's the parents. Im quite confident that Moses is raising responsible young people. But I'm just as confident that at the nearest public high school to his house there is a substantial proportion of students who teachers virtually cannot teach, for one reason or another, and whose parents will not meet with the teachers, will not talk to their kids about drugs or sex, and very possibly who use drugs and lead a lowlife lifestyle themselves. Remember all those lazy freeloaders out there that you whine about sucking from the public teat? Well, they have kids, and their kids go to public schools.

And frankly, if parents are not going to talk to their kids about these things, then someone else has to.

Touche'

To Mul, this is a delicious opportunity to lambaste the pinkos. To others, whining about our education system. Fact is, our education system is asked, necessarily, to step into the parents' shoes at times. And parents who care......have plenty of opportunity to control what their kids are asked and told, and whether and what they learn at school.

Exactly, Jeff. You've got it.

Except for the Court thing. Again, I think they ruled on a specific narrow question of law, and ruled correctly and.......with a good result. By ruling that this issue is not pre-empted under Federal law, this Court was pushing the decisions back to the local level.

Yeah, but you are a good parent. How about all the kids who have crappy ones, or scared ones, or absent ones?

It is sad that the public school system has to take care of so much of the spectrum of things normally associated with "parenting" but that is the reality of our current society.

Coming into this discussion late - my two cents:

The key point here is that the court was ruling on whether the action by the school was prohibited by the constitution, not whether it was wise, appropriate, stupid, etc.

The court is saying that the constitution does not give individual parents a right to control what their children are taught in school regarding sex or presumably other subjects.

You should see that the contrary ruling would be impractical. Each parent could demand that the school teach or not teach a particular thing, based on that parent's personal belief. What Mul and Len might want their children to be taught is likely to be different from what Superman and Todd might want, and so on. You basically couldn't teach sex education in that situation - and as the precedent is further applied, you'd have trouble teaching anything that even one parent finds controversial: history, biology, civic studies, etc.

I think the parents in this case have a remedy, and that is to vote out the school board and/or otherwise apply political pressure. The remedy is not the constitution.

Some people have a tendency to assume that whatever they find objectionable should be legally prohibited by "the Constitution". Then they turn around and complain about a litigious society and clamour for strict constructionist judges.

That's not the problem. The problem is that good, well meaning parents will not have the option of declining the schools sex-education program.

"There is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children..."

That's not just "sort of" wrong, it's completely backwards. I believe that parents should have the absolute and inviolate right to be the exclusive providers of information regarding sexual matters to their children if they choose to.

Look, there are many ways to parent. I have friends whose home sex education basically amounts to ; "Sex before marriage is a sin and is not acceptable". That is not my approach, but they are good people raising good kids. Sexuality is a delicate issue wrapped in morality, religion, psycology. It is way beyond the mission of the public schools to think that they have a "right" to provide sexual information to a child despite the objections of a parent.

How about this. Put yourself in the judge's shoes. I invite you guys to find and quote the Article or Amendment to the US Constitution which gives each individual parent control over how a specific subject is taught in a public school. Let's see how "activist" a judge you'd have to be, to make such a ruling.

Moses, just as a basic tenet of capitalism is this "if you don't like it, buy somewhere else" option, at a minimum, parents have this option. Yeah I know, I don't think much of this dodge on the part of capitalists and its resultant assertion that some commercial venture will provide a healthful and appropriate and responsible alternative. But in this case, the primary option (before we get into your right to home-school, or your right to use private schools), the public school system, is YOUR system. What the court did in this case is push the decisions down toward you. You are a good parent and intelligent and active. I imagine you will indeed exert all necessary and appropriate control over how your children are handled in a public school system (if that is where they are or will go). I'd be very surprized if any parent ever is placed into a situation where they cannot control the content, or even the existence of their child, in a sex education course. In the instant case, the parents had every opportunity to control that. This decision DID NOT say that a child MUST participate in such-and-such a study.

But you fail to observe that this decision does exactly that. They say the parents have no right to any input on this matter. I will grant you that this is not a right delineated in the Constitution, but then, neither is the "right" to an abortion for a minor, or anyone else for that matter.

In this case, the parents were not notified of the content of the survey. Perhaps it was discussed at a school board meeting, but most people I know with kids are too busy working and paying taxes to attend every school board meeting. There are a lot of bad parents out there, and they tend to be the ones with the most kids, but that does not mean the good parents should be penalized for taking an interest

Super,

The Court said, "Parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students." What does that mean to you? What rights do parents have in regard to what public schools teach their children? You say that you would "be very surprized if any parent ever is placed into a situation where they cannot control the content, or even the existence of their child, in a sex education course." I would too, but the Court clearly states parents do not have that right.

On further reflection, I stand corrected on my stance concerning the court's decision. Those who have chimed in with a strict Constitutional interpretation of their decision are correct. Pushing this back to the local level is the right thing to do.

This does, of course, demand responsibility and action at the local level. This is sounding more and more like parents that were asleep at the wheel and only woke up after the fact. The time for their input was when the school board was asking for it, not after the fact pretending they never had the chance.

So what at first cut appears to be an evil, secretive school board being supported by a dastardly left-wing court falls appart upon closer examination. They are still our schools, our communities, to get involved with and shape. Those who choose not to might want to reconsider raising hell after the fact. The courts are there to help us settle these disputes when all else fails. It's too bad that non-participants from the get-go are using them as a first measure.

Supe, I get that. And I haven't seen a copy of the original suit the 9th court is ruling on, but this part of the opinion bothers me;

"There is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children..."

The "go elsewhere" argument is hollow. The vast majority of parents can not afford private school and with two working parents, home schooling is not a real option. What we have is a classic double-bind; Education is compulsory, and parents will have no control in limiting their childs exposure to sexually related material.

I have few issues with schools determining academic content, but sexuality is a moral issue. Parents are the ultimate authority regarding their childs moral development. To suggest that the public schools have the right to usurp parental moral authority is the ultimate absurdity.

The opinion can be found at the court's web site http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/Opinions+by+date?OpenView&Start=1&Count=100&Expand =1.1 The case name is Fields v. Palmdale.

The Court's conclusion includes this statement:

We conclude only that the parents are possessed of no constitutional right to prevent the public schools from providing information on that subject to their students in any forum or manner they select.

Utter B.S.

We're unlikely to hear about the after-effects from this (not newsworthy) but I'm hopeful they will include: parents getting more involved in the school, replacement of some school board members, and this situation not being repeated next year.

Some of you are reading the holding that there is "no constitutional right" of parents to control curriculum to mean that parents have "no right" to control what there children are taught.

Parents have every right to control what their children are taught. In the voting booth, on the school committee, at the PTA, and in individual teacher conferences. Worse comes to worse, they can take the kid right out of school.

They just can't enforce their rights as a constitutional protection. If I want my child taught intelligent design, I have no constitutional right to demand that. I have a political right to fight for that, but if I loose, there is no recourse in the courts.

The strict constructionists among you, including the starter of this thread, should be pleased as punch with this holding.

This issue juxtiposed with SF Prop H to ban firearms demonstates the hypocritical aspects and misunderstandings of California.

Prop H (gun ban) is specifically addressing the specific language within the 2nd amendment.

Fields v. Palmdale asks the court to create a new fundamental right that is not contained in the Constitution.

I understand the concerns, anger and disgust that this topic has generated. For those poeple, I hope it generates interest at the local level school board. Remember, the school board is elected by the people. It is, however, difficult to comprehend the mentality of the people who claim their Constitutional Rights are being infringed and at the same time denying deeply rooted Constitutional rights.

This foundation for bringing this caseon appeal is a joke. I hope the Respondents were awarded attorney fees and costs on appeal.

Rodeo has pretty much nailed it.

In fact, I'll bet that the parents' existing rights here include the authority to keep the child in the school, but not expose them to the sex education courses or material or research/testing. I'd guess that if any parent went to a Principal and said "I'm comfortable having my child in your school generally, but not comfortable with the sex education and research. I will teach that at home. Please excuse my child from those courses." I'd bet the answer would be "okay."

Instead of "9th Circuit leftists" this thread should be entitled:

"9th Circuit Refuses to Legislate From the Bench!"

Hey, if real freedom were the issue here, or anywhere, you'd have wild-eyed liberals like me locking arms with conservative idiots like Mul (smily face goes here) to fight that.

I must assume you are not familiar with their other decisions.