Maryland parents are fuming after a court ruled that they have no right to decide what their child learns in school.
The Deep Blue state’s largest school district was sued by three sets of parents and a parental rights group after learning that K-5 children would be reading books that discuss progressive LGBTQ topics such as sexuality and gender.
A 2-1 ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision, the court said that parents do not have the right to opt their children out of classes that introduce children to indoctrinating far-left material.
The parents and the group argued that not being allowed to choose what is best for their child violates their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion.
The reading curriculum reading list included books such as Uncle Bobby's Wedding, The Pride Puppy, and Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope.
The parents claimed that the books contradicted the family’s religious beliefs and that it was up to them to teach their child "what it means to be male and female; the institution of marriage; human sexuality; and related themes.”
However, Circuit Judge G. Steven Agee argued that the parents failed to provide enough evidence that showed how the material would infringe upon their rights.
Two of the three judges disagreed, claiming that the exposure of the books to children that went against their faith does not violate the First Amendment.
Children learning about issues the parents disagree with is “part of the compromise parents make when choosing to send their children to public schools,” the judges wrote in their decision.
“We take no view on whether the Parents will be able to present evidence sufficient to support any of their various theories once they have the opportunity to develop a record as to the circumstances surrounding the Board’s decision and how the challenged texts are actually being used in schools," Agee said. “At this early stage, however, given the Parents’ broad claims, the very high burden required to obtain a preliminary injunction, and the scant record before us, we are constrained to affirm the district court’s order denying a preliminary injunction.”
On the contrary, however, Circuit Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. agreed with the parents and said that they successfully presented their case, adding that he disagreed with the ruling.
“The parents have shown the board’s decision to deny religious opt-outs burdened these parents’ right to exercise their religion and direct the religious upbringing of their children by putting them to the choice of either compromising their religious beliefs or foregoing a public education for their children," Quattlebaum Jr. wrote. “I also find that the board’s actions, at least under this record, were neither neutral nor generally applicable. Finally, I find the parents have established the other requirements for a preliminary injunction. So, I would reverse the district court and enjoin the Montgomery County School Board of Education from denying religious opt-outs for instruction to K-5 children involving the texts."