No- the underlying issue is what is a religious or moral issue, and when the issue rises to the level that the schools cannot teach it. Before you argue about whether schools can teach things, you have to decide what segment of the Venn diagram I mentioned your subject lies in. You have sort of predetermined this is an issue that is religious or moral, perse, because it is for you, or because it is for "most" people as you define them, even though there are plenty of good arguments that it is not that for everyone.
I understand that for you, and for many people on this board, this is probably a religious and moral issue. But since no one I know considers it that, I know your opinion is not unversal. So when we get to the point where you can acknowledge this is not universal (and it's not just the unitarians)- and I think we are there, you have to decide at what point religious delicacy gets imported into the schools wrt issues of lifestyle, and general information in books around the school.
I happen to think any parent should be able to opt out of just about anything, and we agree on that. But I don't agree that the curriculum needs to be changed for everyone, or that certain books need to be banned. Are you thinking it does need to be changed for everyone? If you don't think that, I'm not sure what we're talking about.
FWIW- I see a lot of differences in the practice of religion where the rubber meets the road. You aren't arguing moral equivalency are you? 'Cause those is fightin' words 'round here.
"I think most religions are broadly similar on this. " |
