By Deacon Mike Manno
(The
Wanderer) – In a first-grade classroom in Mission Viejo, Calif., a
little seven-year-old girl who suffers from severe ADHD, and while the Black
Lives Matter chants were echoing throughout the land, decided to draw a picture
for her friend. The girl, only referred to as “Jane” who uses art as her own
form of therapy contained the words, in a little girl’s spelling, “Black Lives
Mater.”
The drawing included figures representing children in all
colors, but when she noticed that no color matched her friend’s, she added the
words “any life” then gave the drawing to her friend.
A simple expression of love and tolerance, right?
Not according to the school principal. Jane was forced to
apologize to her classmates for the picture and was banned from drawing in
class. She thought she had done something bad and was afraid to tell her mother
thinking she would be punished again.
It wasn’t until almost a year later when another parent
mentioned the incident to Jane’s mother who then contacted the school which
started rounds of rebuffs and avoidance by school officials. Mom was ridiculed
as one of those “fringe” parents with views which the school did not agree.
Jane’s mom then got a lawyer.
In another Orange County district, the Los Alamitos Unified
School District, several parents had sent their fifth grade, ten and eleven-year-old
girls to a school-sponsored four-day science camp. When the girls returned home
none were willing to speak about the camp, which was an annual event for the
district.
Finally one of the girls started to talk. It seems that
when they arrived at the camp they were met by counselors who were assigned to
their respective barracks who began asking them which pronouns they used and
identified “itself” (sorry only reference I have) as a “they” or “them.” When
pressed by one of the girls who did not want to stay overnight with a boy
counselor, all she got back was the “they, them” answer.
If that wasn’t disturbing enough for a fifth-grade girl,
they were not allowed to have cell phones and were not permitted to use camp
phones to call home. For the four days and three nights of the camp, they were
isolated.
The experience was so disturbing to the girls that it took
ten days for one of them to broach the subject with her parents. The parents
then began their own investigation and found that the new group that was
contracted by the school to host the camp had a reputation for promoting LGBTQ
propaganda and had received low reviews on the Internet review site, Yelp,
because of its sexual identity. A review of the camp’s web page confirmed some
of the parents’ worst fears and they went to the school district.
“Were our daughters housed with boys or girls?” they asked.
The answer from the school was that it was against the law to tell them — which
of course is an out-and-out lie. Again, like Jane’s mother, these parents were
being stonewalled.
Later, however, the district did try to reply. It told the
parents that it was “pretty sure” the girls didn’t have boy counselors sleeping
in their rooms.
And like Jane’s mother they found a lawyer. Ironically the
same one that Jane’s mom did. His name is Alexander Haberbush from an
organization called the Lex Rex Institute who was on our radio program last
week.
Lex Rex is Latin for “The Law is King,” he told our
audience, “because we are committed to holding government officials and anyone
in government accountable to the law, our leaders are not king in this country,
the law is king.”
Thus they seek to defend the individual rights of people
especially in the areas of constitutional protections, religious liberty, free
speech, Second Amendment rights, and issues of separation of powers.
Both of these cases fall into a pattern we’ve seen many
times before in school — including college cases — that the institution either
ignores the requests for information, provides non answers, or attacks the
questioners.
The issue here, as we have seen across the nation is what
Mr. Haberbush calls the “dismissive” attitude held by the school officials
towards the parents.
“The real problem we see in this country right now is that
school administrators have been held largely unaccountable for what they do. I
deal with people in the government every day in the line of work I do, there is
nobody who is more confident in their decisions and more confident that they
will not have to account for what they do than school administrators,” he said.
So what is going on now in both these cases? In Jane’s case
there is a statutory provision that a lawsuit against the state, or political
sub-division, cannot be filed until the notifications have been served and the
time for reply has expired. This week, as you read this, all the notification
times required will have expired and a lawsuit will be filed. Stay tuned for
this one — as you know, unless one side is willing to settle, these things can
take a long time.
In the science camp case a suit is already in progress. The parents have fired the first volley by demanding copies of documents concerning the district’s communications with the camp organizers which they had requested under a Freedom of Information request and was duly ignored by the school.
The parents make the claim in their filing: “In order to ascertain the facts
and circumstances of [camp] selection, information regarding their children’s
wellbeing, and information regarding [the district’s] response to parental
complaints, [parents] submitted several requests for records. [The district]
has provided a few documents and records, claiming that these responses are
complete. However, Plaintiffs have evidence to show that additional documents
exist, but [the district] has refused to provide them.”
We’re waiting now.
“What’s important here is that the school inform parents
and allow them the opportunity to opt out. When they don’t tell you of the kind
of camp this is, the parents are robbed of this choice,” he told our radio
audience.
I’ve referred to this radio program many times since it
started in May of 2013. In the early days the few school cases we were able to
deal with usually involved something as simple as a lunchroom staffer telling a
kid it was against the law to pray before eating, or a teacher who wouldn’t
allow a child to write about Jesus or draw His picture. In more recent years it
has become apparent that for political and social reasons there are groups of
school officials that seem intent on building a wall between children and their
parents, thus the rash of new cases in which we find administrators promoting
transition closets where little Johnny can change to become Mary for the school
day before changing back at dismissal, and other school policies that are
deliberately designed to keep parents out of their kids’ lives, and to
substitute themselves in that role.
And it’s not just happening in California, it is all over.
Back in 2013 we saw this as a coastal thing and worried that it would creep
into the middle of the country. It has.
I give thanks every day that my little Goddaughter is in a
Catholic school, but don’t assume that parochial schools are immune from this
activity, nor are the schools in your community immune. It is all over and it
affects our most precious treasure which we are obliged to protect. That is why
organizations like Lex Rex and the numerous others that you have read about in
this column deserve your support, both financial and with your prayers.
The child you save might be your own.
You can listen to the complete interview at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/.
(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 9:30 CT on Faith on Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.)
No comments:
Post a Comment