Excerpts — but read the whole thing — from World Net Daily:
A parents group is asking a judge to halt an explicit sex-education curriculum [for middle- and high-schoolers] implemented by a Maryland school board that teaches homosexuality is innate and provides depictions of “erotic” sex techniques.
Brandon M. Bolling, of the Thomas More Law Center, [argues] that state law requires that information presented in public schools be supported with evidence, and the teaching that homosexuality is “innate” lacks that support . . . [and] that the lessons required by Montgomery County Board of Education teach students how to use condoms in violation of a state prohibition against material that “portrays erotic techniques of sexual intercourse” . . .
“Declaring homosexuality to be ‘innate’ is a direct attack upon the ex-gay community and the possibility of changing one’s sexual orientation,” said Peter Sprigg, a Montgomery County resident and board member for Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays . . .
[The school system’s] highly explicit sex curriculum … earlier was struck down by a federal judge because of its content that condemned religious perspectives that did not endorse homosexuality . . .
“Nowhere is abstinence or sex placed within the context of marriage. The word marriage is not mentioned in the 8th or 10th grade lessons” . . .
WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators have promoted a homosexual lifestyle to children under their charge.
UPDATE: Reader Michael Filozov, an adjunct professor at Niagara County Community College, writes:
[I]t seems to me that the educational establishment is caught in a great contradiction. As we know, the educational establishment teaches, as unassailable fact, the theory of evolution. But the theory of evolution is all about reproduction and the transfer of genes to subsequent generations. . .
It goes without saying that homosexuality doesn’t enhance the transfer of our genes to subsequent generations. According to the theory, then, if homosexuality is innate or somehow biologically constructed, it would have to be considered an abnormality or mutation that will eventually be eliminated through the evolutionary process.
Despite their ironclad commitment to evolution, you don’t find schools teaching that, do you?”