Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor warns “chaos” will ensue if public schools don’t mandate LGBTQ+ lessons in classrooms.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled parents in Maryland can remove their children from mandatory LGBTQ+ classes.
In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said Maryland parents who have religious objections can opt to remove their children from classes using LGBTQ+ storybooks in public school.
Prior to the ruling, children as young as 5 were required to read or listen to storybooks like “Prince & Knight” about two male knights who get married, and “Love Violet” about two little girls who fall in love.
Another book, titled “Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope,” was about a girl who transitions to being a boy.
Opting students out of LGBTQ+ lessons will result in “chaos for this Nation’s public schools.”
Montgomery County Public Schools told teachers these lessons were mandatory and that children could not opt out. The public school system issued guidelines to teachers instructing them how to respond to children who opposed the lessons (“That comment is hurtful!”)
If a student asked, “What’s transgender?,” teachers were directed to say, “When we’re born, people make a guess about our gender and label us ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ based on our body parts. Sometimes they’re right and sometimes they’re wrong.”
After the Supreme Court’s historic ruling, Justice Sonia Sotomayor (one of 3 justices who voted no) claimed there “will be chaos for this nation’s public schools” and both children and schools will “suffer”.
In her opinion, Justice Sotomayor criticized the Court’s decision. She said LGBTQ+ lessons offer “children of all faiths and backgrounds an education and an opportunity to practice living in our multicultural society.”
Sotomayor said the Court’s ruling will pressure other school districts to avoid offering such classes.
She said allowing parents to opt out for every subject that conflicts with their religious beliefs “will impose impossible administrative burdens on schools.”
LGBTQ+ lessons is to “teach children what society needs them to know.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson previously stated that parents who objected to the lessons could simply remove their children from public schools.
State Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Wis.) also insisted: “If parents want to ‘have a say’ in their child’s education, they should homeschool or pay for private school tuition out of their family budget.”
Iowa school board member Rachel Wall said: “The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client is not the parent, but the community.”
