The second story in the video specifically has to do with an educational issue. Who has the ultimate right in deciding what a child should learn...or not? The parent or the state? As you will see in the video, Dr. Parker's son was 5 years old at the time a book was sent home in his backback the parents found objectionable.
The book, included in the "Diversity Book Bag", Who's in a Family, was listed on the school's website:
"Shows the various combinations of individuals that can make up a family, emphasizing the positive aspects of different family structures, including grand-parent headed, single-parent, adopted, gay-headed, and mother-father families. Uses examples from the animal kingdom to illustrate how family groupings can differ."
In the author's own words:According to the parents, they objected to the introduction of this theme to a 5 year old child as they believed it was their parental right to be able to be notified when such curriculum was introduced to their child and have the right to opt their child out if the parents deemed it as objectionable.
"The whole purpose of the book was to get the subject [of same-sex parent households] out into the minds and the awareness of children before they are old enough to have been convinced that there's another way of looking at life.
. . . It would be really nice if children were not subjected to the -- I don't want to use the word 'bigotry,' but that's what I want to say anyway -- of their parents and older people.
. . .The book was written because my neice and her partner [two lesbians] decided to have a family."
Author Robert Skutch, National Public Radio interview, "Here and Now", May 3, 2005
Dr. Parker writes about the video:
The 9th Circuit in 2005 affirmed “Parents…have no constitutional right...to prevent a public school from providing its students with whatever information it wishes to provide…when and as the school determines that it is appropriate to do so.” This is the point the docudrama seeks to convey.
The Court decided the parents have no rights to withhold information from the child (even though the parents have the legal custody and responsibility for the child) that the school deems appropriate for that child. That's amazing to me, is it to you?
The Supreme Court refused to hear the Parkers' appeal. Here is a timeline of this issue. As you read it, remember, this came about because PARENTS objected to a book sent home by the school for their 5 year old son. Shouldn't PARENTS (aka as taxpayers) who fund the existence of the school and the jobs for the teachers and administrators have the right to opt their child out of material they find objectionable?
Do parental rights exist in America? Do you as a parent have any recourse in the teachings your child is learning in public education short of pulling your child out of the school? Is this acceptable to you as a parent and a taxpayer? Is this the type of education that will allow our students to become globally competitive and STEM ready or is this early introduction for such material for some other purpose?