Biden-appointed judge denies religious parents’ right to opt kids out of pro-LGBT school lessons.

Challenging the Indoctrination of⁤ Students: A Battle ‍in Montgomery County

As a new school year kicks into gear, a Biden-appointed federal judge is using ‍the legal equivalent of grade inflation to prop up ⁤the misguided efforts ‌of a local school board to indoctrinate students with gender ideology.

Just a stone’s⁢ throw from Washington, ​D.C., Montgomery County Public Schools is one of the largest public school systems in the country, with approximately 70,000 ⁤elementary school students. Last ‍fall, the ⁣Montgomery County Board of ‍Education made headlines by adopting a collection of more than 20 “LGBTQ+ inclusive” books for use in pre-K through‍ eighth-grade classrooms.

The collection includes controversial titles such as Pride Puppy!, which introduces pre-K students to a story about two ‌women taking their children to a “Pride Day” parade. The book includes words like “leather,” “underwear,” and “[drag] queen” ⁤in a word list. Fifth graders, on the other ⁤hand,⁢ are assigned Born Ready: The True Story of ⁣a Boy Named Penelope, which explores a young girl’s transition to identifying as a boy, ​with themes⁢ of ‌family acceptance ‌and⁤ love.

Other books in ​the collection, such as‌ What are Your Words? and⁢ Intersection Allies: We Make Room For All,⁤ delve into topics like pronouns and leftist definitions⁢ of sex and ⁢gender.

Initially, the‍ school board allowed parents to opt ‌their children out of instruction involving these books. However, in a concerning turn of events, the board later removed this option, leaving parents without the ability to ‍protect their children from exposure to ideas⁣ that ⁣conflict with ‌their ‍religious beliefs.

In response, three families representing various faith traditions ​filed a lawsuit, arguing that⁢ the school board’s “no-opt-out”‍ policy violates‍ their and their children’s First Amendment rights to religious freedom and free speech, as well as their ‌substantive due process rights under the 14th Amendment. They sought a preliminary injunction to restore the rights of parents to opt ⁤their children ​out of reading and discussing these books.

However, the Biden-appointed Judge Deborah Boardman denied the requested injunction, claiming that ​the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the policy would result‍ in the indoctrination of⁢ their children. She ⁣dismissed the parents’ concerns about their rights to direct their children’s religious upbringing, stating that exposure to religiously offensive ideas does not impose a government-imposed burden on their religious exercise.

Professor Helen Alvaré of the George Mason University Scalia⁣ School of Law ⁤disagrees with Boardman’s opinion, arguing that teaching on “familial relations” is an integral part of transmitting religious faith and that any interference with it ‍infringes upon the liberty and ‌free exercise ⁣rights of parents.

Unfortunately,⁢ Judge Boardman’s ruling ⁣reflects the concerning trend of Biden’s judicial appointees. However, ⁣there is hope⁣ as the parents plan to appeal the ‌decision, and the Fourth Circuit has ⁢yet to address⁣ the question ‌of when a mandatory public-school curriculum might burden the religious exercise of students or parents.

Parents in‍ Montgomery County, Maryland, are courageously standing up ⁢against indoctrination⁢ in our schools.⁤ Let’s hope that the Fourth ‌Circuit will join them in putting an end to this​ madness.