Refuting Fishback
In today's Washington Examiner, David Fishback, chairman of the Montgomery County Board of Education's Citizen's Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development, has a letter full of entertainment to those of us who know what the curriculum actually holds.

He corrects the Examiner story from a week before and then launches into some doublespeak:

The condom video that was approved is separate from the proposed health curriculum revisions, which mention some basic facts on sexual orientation for the first time. Neither video was "published by gay activist groups."

True enough, as far as it goes. However, Fishback fails to mention that many of the materials other than the video are, in fact, publications by homosexual and/or liberal activist organizations like Advocacy for Youth, Planned Parenthood, the Family Pride Coalition, etc. Somehow, that's defensible to Fishback, just so long as it's not the video.

Fishback goes on to toss out another ridiculous assertion:

Another underlying premise of "ex-gay" groups is that all homosexual activity is sinful, even among committed adult couples. Some religious denominations accept this view; others vigorously reject it. But such theological debates have no place in a public school health curriculum.

Really? Then why is it that the CAC itself listed the Anglican Church in Canada as an example of a denomination that accepts homosexuality? In fact, that is the only religious institution mentioned by name in the curriculum. The advisory committee completed omitted the views of any other religion--notably the two largest, the Roman Catholic Church and the Baptists. No, they're not looking for a theological debate. A debate would require the other side to be invited. They're just looking for a theology that will support their bias.
- posted by Admin J @ 9:26 AM