News

Out with the priests: US School Board vote upsets Christians

Out with the priests: US School Board vote upsets Christians

Fairfax County School Board in Virginia yesterday voted to remove ‘clergy’ from a list of trusted adults with whom children could talk about their concerns regarding sex or sexuality.

This despite the fact that – ahead of the vote – the Most Reverend Michael F Burbidge, above, Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, warned in a letter to Fairfax County Times that such a vote would be:

Disturbing to people of the Catholic faith and to other religious traditions as well. Along with many others, I hope and pray that the misguided and harmful proposals to the Fairfax County Public Schools FLE Curriculum are rejected.

Well, prayers fell on deaf ears, for not only did the board kick clergy into the long grass, it voted 10 to 1 on Thursday to change the dress code to gender-neutral language and adopt a more inclusive sex education curriculum that would create space for transgender students.

Father Thomas P Ferguson of the Arlington diocese said:

A lot of the people who are opposed to the change are making the point that what we want the kids to learn is biology, not ideology. To narrow rather than expand for young people who they might turn to as trusted adults is unfortunate.

But English teacher Mary Mathewson said she supports the change in the curriculum because it makes the distinction clearer between the sex one is assigned and their gender identity.She said she liked the proposed new language:

I think that ‘parent or trusted adult’ gives kids a broad range of choices for who to go to when they’re questioning things.

In his letter, Burbidge wrote:

On June 14, the Fairfax County School Board will be voting on disturbing changes to its students’ Family Life Education (FLE) curriculum. These changes, suggested by the FLE Curriculum Advisory Committee, include using the phrase ‘sex assigned at birth’ instead of ‘biological sex’ in a manner that confuses children regarding the way biology impacts whether one is male or female.

The curriculum would teach students about pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), a drug regimen designed for use by those who are engaged in risky sexual behaviors.

It would also end the practice of teaching that abstinence is the 100 percent effective method of preventing sexually transmitted infections or diseases.

It is truly regrettable that a public school curriculum would deny scientific truth, the reality of how we are made. As a society, we must never forget the dignity of the human person, the true meaning of human sexuality, how God created us and taught us to live.

11 responses to “Out with the priests: US School Board vote upsets Christians”

  1. L.Long says:

    When in school the LAST person I needed advice from was the nuns who thought they were married to an invisible dude or sexually repressed priest that knew less than I did!!! But then maybe the priest did not read the articles in playboy!

  2. tonye says:

    This is a breath of fresh air from Fairfax County School Board. This side of the pond it often appears that these boards are a battleground between religious and scientific practices.

    Ironically it is Bishop Burbidge who states what most sensible adults should think – ‘who they might turn to as trusted adults.’

  3. Terry says:

    “A lot of the people who are opposed to the change are making the point that what we want the kids to learn is biology, not ideology. To narrow rather than expand for young people who they might turn to as trusted adults is unfortunate”.

    To teach ideology, aka rigid primitive dogma, is to expand young people ?????? NO ITS NOT. IT RETARDS and BEGGARS and many of those who teach it BUGGER children in every sense of the word.

    To teach science is to narrow young people???? NO, NO, NO, FUCKING NO. SCIENCE AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD free young people from those that would ensnare them in dangerous lies and myth.

  4. John the Drunkard says:

    Sorry ‘sex assigned at birth’ isn’t an adequate term. ‘Sex Assignment’ isn’t some selection process ordained by clergy, or anyone else. SOME term that gives room for misidentified intersex children, AND those whose eventual gender-identity may not match the ‘chromosomal hand’ they were dealt needs to be coined

  5. fester60613 says:

    Brilliant! Every school district should do this!

  6. Club Secretary says:

    Father Thomas P Ferguson of the Arlington diocese said:
    ……………………………………………………………….. we want the kids to learn is biology, not ideology.

    People of religion really have a major problem with irony.

  7. Vanity Unfair says:

    To John t D:
    “Sex assigned at birth” is an improvement on “Sex” as it does hint at the possibility of revision, or. at least, does insist that the decision must be permanent. The assignment is made by a medical professional (I hope) not a clergyman and these days doctors do seem to be less insistent on their infallibility. Sexuality is no longer an either/or decision. A birth certificate is a finite document, after all, so “Sex assigned at birth, subject to revision” might take up too much space. It is perhaps not adequate but is an improvement. I agree that changes are overdue. Things like this always put me in mind of Robert A. Heinlein’s All you zombies. If you haven’t read it, please also bear in mind that there is nothing so old-fashioned as the future.

    It would also end the practice of teaching that abstinence is the 100 percent effective method of preventing sexually transmitted infections or diseases.
    Not only is abstinence not 100% effective in preventing STDs any Christian clergyman will proudly proclaim that it is not even effective in preventing pregnancy.

    It is truly regrettable that a public school curriculum would deny scientific truth, … how God created us and taught us to live.
    Please engage brain before operating mouth.

  8. andym says:

    The RCC has always warned us how our actions and omissions will have consequences for us, potentially for ever. At the same time, they seem unable to accept that their own actions and failures to act should have any negative consequences at all. Pretty regulation stuff, I suppose, for this self-serving , thieving bunch of hypocrites.

  9. Vanity Unfair says:

    That should be “or, at least does not insist” in line 2 of course.
    My mistake.

  10. AgentCormac says:

    How on earth can anyone still believe that catholic priests constitute anything other than a threat to young people?

    The appalling global track record of their church speaks for itself. And while I’m sure a great many representatives of that particular organisation are not paedophiles themselves, and would not be willing to cover up for the crimes of their child-molesting colleagues, the fact of the matter is that not one of them should be allowed anywhere near young people until it can be proven, unequivocally by secular authorities, that the RCC no longer harbours paedophiles. If the RCC wasn’t a religious organisation it would have been shut down decades ago and its top brass would now be serving life sentences in cells right next to the perverts they enabled, forgave and hid from the sight of secular law.

    I therefore applaud the Fairfax County School Board for their brave and enlightened decision.

  11. fester60613 says:

    I’m shocked that a school in Virginia came up with this marvelous sea change! And I’m also very pleased.