SF Bay schools phase out gay-friendly curriculum
12.10.2009 3:52pm EST
(Alameda) A San Francisco Bay area school board will use broad lessons against bias to replace a curriculum against bullying gay people that had become a national centerpiece in the opposition to same-sex marriage.
The vote by the Alameda Board of Education on Tuesday did little to ease tensions in the island city near Oakland. A lawsuit and threats of recalling school board members accompanied debate over the so-called Lesson 9 curriculum adopted in May to prevent anti-gay bullying.Gay parents in the community wanted their children protected from bullying, while other parents argued that elementary school is too early to talk to students about gay people.
The new anti-bullying lessons approved by the board, at the recommendation of School Superintendent Kirsten Vital, will be supplemented by children’s books that explicitly address six specific forms of bias, including against gays.
“This has torn apart our community,” said school trustee Trish Herrera Spencer, the board member most opposed to the gay curriculum and who opposed adding the supplemental books. She said the board’s latest action did not take into consideration “the strong beliefs” of all in the community.
The 45-minute Lesson 9, which was to be taught once a year in each grade starting with kindergarten, sparked a lawsuit, accusations that religious families were being discriminated against and threats of a recall election against the three board members who approved it.
Vital said her recommendation was meant to counter complaints from parents opposed to the original lesson because it highlighted only one type of bullying.
“There is not an off-the-shelf, perfect curriculum that is going to work for our community,” Vital said, explaining that she wants to solicit book recommendations, bring them back to the school board for approval in a few months and then work with teachers to develop accompanying lesson plans in time for the 2010-11 academic year.
Several parents said they did not trust a teachers’ committee to pick books that would both satisfy gay and lesbian parents and parents with religious views that do not condone homosexuality.
“Freedom of religion is protected from harassment and discrimination from anyone. It may be of no consequence to some, but it is a very integral part of many traditional families and should be honored,” said Kellie Wood, who has three children in Alameda schools and is part of a group circulating recall election petitions. “If we’re all honest, the friction between two protected classes, in particular, will not go away.”
Kathy Passmore, a lesbian mother of two, said she hears students using anti-gay language in her job as a sixth grade teacher in Alameda. She urged the school board to retain the spirit of Lesson 9.
“The children of gay families exist and are attending ASUD schools every single day,” she said. “They are here.”
Alameda, an island city that foots Oakland and is home to a Coast Guard installation and a former Naval base that is being eyed for housing, is the latest community to be divided by its school district’s desire to curb anti-gay bullying and the concerns of parents who do not want their children to hear about gay and lesbian issues in school.
During last year’s campaign to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages in California, the measure’s sponsors ran commercials featuring a Massachusetts couple who unsuccessfully sued their local district for the right to pull their child out of anti-bullying lessons that included references to gay households.
A year later, the same public relations firm that developed that ad developed a new one for the campaign to outlaw gay marriage in Maine focusing on a second-grade picture book that was part of Alameda’s Lesson 9. The book, “Who’s In A Family,” contains pictures of families headed by grandparents, single parents and gay parents, among others.
A dozen Alameda families sued the school district earlier this year over its contention that parents did not have to be notified in advance when teachers planned to give the lessons so they could keep their children from receiving them. Last week, an Alameda Superior Court judge sided with the school district, ruling that a state law allowing parents to have their “opt-out” of discussions about human sexuality did not apply to Lesson 9.
Kevin Snider, a lawyer with the conservative Pacific Justice Institute who represented the Alameda families, said before the school board’s vote that his clients would not appeal the judge’s ruling if the school board eliminated Lesson 9. He did not immediately return a call Wednesday for clarification on whether the board’s action satisfied that condition.






obviously being gay myself i don’t see anything wrong with helping kids understand gays but at the kindergarten level, will they even really understand? id say at the earliest start about at the kids of age ten and higher, maybe nine but id go with ten.
“Opt-out”??!!! What in the world?? What is the point in having the lesson if the children that MOST need to hear about human sexuality (The one’s with IGNORANT parents) aren’t even there. That is ridiculous. If you want to teach your children that homosexuality is wrong, that’s one thing, but to take them out of a class that is anti-bullying? I’m furious. Another thing: Elementary school is too early to learn about it? They whisper with their friends about sex during that age…why not be taught that some people are just different. I swear… It thought we where moving one more step towards enlightenment… but I guess I was wrong.
@Christopher A. Emery: As someone who was made fun of for wearing pink in the first grade (i.e., elementary school), I can tell you that kids that young do have, at least, some understanding of these issues and that, even at such a young age, they are already being taught to hate people that do not conform to gender roles.
They weren’t being taught that at school, so one can only presume that this was from their parents and peers.
We need education even at this level to combat the misinformation (or simply ignorance) children are being raised with. I think it’s rather unfortunate that a secular school should be forced to omit or amend a curriculum to avoid contradictions with fiction-based religious dogma.
I am with Christopher Emery on this. These things are too complex for the average 4 or 5 year old to grasp and would be wasted on them. A ten year old, however is old enough….. to begin to comprehend that people should not be bullying or discriminated against on basis of race, skin color, national origin, creed, sexual orientation, gender,etc and that is a good age to start this kind of education on not just the bullying issue connected with sexual orientation but with these other categories as well that make people different from each other.
The new anti-bullying lessons approved by the board, at the recommendation of School Superintendent Kirsten Vital, will be supplemented by children’s books that explicitly address six specific forms of bias, including against gays.
Gays aren’t the only people facing discrimination in school at any grade level. The above statement seems logical and fair to me
The comment was made:
“I am with Christopher Emery on this. These things are too complex for the average 4 or 5 year old to grasp and would be wasted on them. A ten year old, however is old enough….. to begin to comprehend that people should not be bullying or discriminated against on basis of race, skin color, national origin, creed, sexual orientation, gender,etc and that is a good age to start this kind of education on not just the bullying issue connected with sexual orientation but with these other categories as well that make people different from each other.
And I respond:
I do NOT agree with the above. The idea that young children do not understand is false. You do not give children enough credit and do not understand that life is always a learning lesson. It is never to early to teach children about anything (well I do no accept physics but that is a different issue. We are talking about day to day living with other people and it is important that children be started at an early age that different is “OK”.
Yes it OK to be Christian and I hate to admit it but it is OK to be a republican. There is no reason on earth why children cannot be taught that *ANY* kind of bullying is wrong. Yes you have to change the context as children grow but that is a part of any school goal for teach children of any age. Note the younger children need to understand that any type of discrimination is wrong and bullying is a part of discrimination.
Right now the religious right and the republicans are in lock step both do not want anyone to be different. The GITMO base was used primarily as a way to hide POW’s from the American people. I am expecting that they (republicans) will find a way to start to ship people off to prison because they think that people that are different should not be seen or heard and be locked up essentially until they die, just for not believing that the republicans are always right.
I suspect that if a republican president is elected GITMO will be re-activated to send those that are different. The republicans have come full circle to a fascist state. There is one person who thinks and everyone must follow. The religious people are pushing it as well as they have this idea that if you do not believe in their god then you do not deserve to live.
We saw the proposition 8 repeal a valid law and (from what I understand) it was done mostly with out of state money (Utah was one of the big contributors) So you have out of state people coming in with lots of money to tell the state of California what laws are “OK” and which ones are not.
This brings up yet another contradiction in the US constitution the separation of church and state. That seems to have been loss somewhere in the last century and it may take 100 years ruling of the US courts to correct the wedge that religious institutions have created. The catholic church is morally bankrupt as well as all so called christian religious institutions.
I will not forget to mention the Muslim and Jewish religions have their fingers in the pie as well. If we (the US) are to last another hundred years we are going to have to really put a steel door between religious and government institutions and keep it locked tight.
My son understood that he has two dads in kindergarten as much another child his age would understand about heterosexual relationship. Of course theres no need to explain or get into the sexual aspect of any relationship at such a young age but its appropriate that kinds understand that theres different kinds of families so they grow up without prejudices and understand love.
It is vitally important that anti-bullying (including against gay and lesbian people) be taught, right from kindergarten. And that’s exactly why the haters have “torn apart our community” to stop it. Hatred is very very important to them.
The Conservative/Fundamentalist approach to education “deny reality as long as possible or leave the lesson up to someone else”.
We’ve seen it in abstinance only sex-ed that condemns kids to death and disease and denial of science that disagrees with dogma or impacts big business’ bottom line.
I can only assume said Christian parents aren’t sending their little tykes off to Sunday school or anything at that age as they’re FAR to young to learn or appropriate ANY of the moral lessons to be taught by the Sunday School stories.
The headline of this article is misleading. They phased out a “gay focused” anti-bullying program with a bullying program that is “gay friendly” (it includes lessons against anti-gay bias).
The truth isn’t as bad as the headline implies.
The law is pretty strongly on the side of “no opt-outs” for anything that is not explicit sexual education. “Who’s in a Family” clearly does not fall into that category, and the court made a good and consistent decision not to allow an opt-out.
There’s no way to complain about a curriculum that says, “Don’t be cruel to your gay classmates” without basically saying, “We want our kids to feel free to pick on their gay classmates. It’s a grand tradition among traditional Christian families.”
This article is not accurate, particularly the title. Our Family Coalition has contacted the AP writer to correct it. The district will retain lesson 9 (this is the status quo for 2009-2010 year until a literature list for all six (6) protected classes and associated teacher support materials are in place.
I know what it is like to be bullied by someone in school and it’s not nice. I like the fact that people in schools need to know that bulling is not ok. I think that it’s a little hypercritical that in cartoons they teach you not to pre judge or judge by the color of you’re skin but by what is in you’re hart, but in catholic and christian realign they tell you to not like or favor homosexual.