The far-left activists of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals goes anti-parent with this ruling in regard to a sex survey given to elementary school students:
In a recent ruling, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (that be the Left Coast) determined that parents do not have a fundamental right to control when, where and how their children are taught about sex.
Rather the state -- in its far greater wisdom about what's right and wrong -- has ultimate power over your kids.
This is not a new battle, of course. Parents and school boards have argued for years about sex education. But this decision is especially offensive because the children involved are so young.
The ruling stems from a case filed by a group of parents from California's Palmdale School District whose elementary school children were given a questionnaire of dubious content. In their complaint, the parents said they would not have allowed their children to participate in the survey had they known of the sexual nature of some of the questions.
Kids ages 7 through 10 were asked, for example, to rate the following activities according to how often they experienced the thought or emotion:
• "Touching my private parts too much."
• "Thinking about having sex"
• "Thinking about touching other people's private parts."
• "Thinking about sex when I don't want to."
• "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."
Obviously, not every 7-year-old is ready to contemplate those kinds of questions. If you're a parent, there's no contest as to who should determine when such subjects are raised. Parents should.
Not so fast, and not according to the 9th Circuit.
The court made clear that it was not passing judgment on the appropriateness of the questions themselves, but only on the constitutional questions raised in the case. Herewith, plaintiff's evidence as to why the law is, indeed, an ass and why what is "legal" is not always right.
Chief among the parents' arguments was that they were deprived of their fundamental right to "control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex in accordance with their personal and religious values and beliefs."
Even though the Supreme Court has ruled that parents have a constitutional right to make decisions about the care, custody and control of their children, the judges in this case ruled that parents do not have an "exclusive" right.
