"There is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children...Parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students."The 9th Circuit dismissed this case which was brought on by California parents who were “outraged over a sex survey given to public school students in the first, third and fifth grades.” This allowance was the result of former Gov. Gray Davis who signed the controversial sex-ed bill.
This is where judges lose the whole concept on the meaning of what parents are about when it comes to caring for their children and how to raise them. Not the school, the state or the government unless there is some horrible abuse involved. California's 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is famous for their judicial activism, including the "Under God" decision.
According to the report:
The parents argued that they — not the public schools — have the sole right “to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex.”
Indeed they do have the right to object and schools should seek parents permission on such matters, especially sex education, which is NOT the school's sole area of responsibility. It's the parents. The school need to seek permission first and nothing else. Here's a typical example of what happened in one high school of Fairfax County of how far the school should (or should not) go:
A survey scheduled for distribution to a group of Fairfax County high school students in April has drawn criticism from some area parents. They feel that some of the questions about sexuality are inappropriate. They are upset by questions such as "How old were you when you first had sex?" and "The last time you had sexual intercourse, what one method did you or your partner use to prevent pregnancy?" One parent complained saying, "Some of these questions are asked in such a way that they give tacit approval to some of these behaviors. Kids will read these questions and think if they're not engaging in this, 'What's wrong with me?' This is so tacky, it makes me squeamish.
But this story here is different. It was a sex survey for 1st, 3rd and 5th graders. Excuse me? They are all under 10 years old! Totally inappropriate. And without the parents' permission, too. And the survey asked totally inappropriate and, even for us who are of age applicably so, completely personal questions. Questions like if they ever thought about having sex or touching other people's "private parts" and whether they could "stop thinking about having sex."
In one report "Sexuality Education in the Elementary School" in New Jersey gives an example of forcing questions upon kindergarteners and up.
In the earliest grades, kindergarten through third, when teachers simply say, "We’re going to be talking about family life and sex, about being a male or female, a boy or a girl," young children eagerly call out their questions. They sense they have been given permission by a nonjudgmental teacher and are relatively free of the embarrassment and self-consciousness that is more evident by the fifth and sixth grades.Permission? By whom? The parents? Non-judgemental teacher?? Do teachers even have the right to discuss these things without having consent of the parents? So much for being "non-judgemental."
No where in that Sexuality Education report states about the importance of asking parents for permission to do these things. Schools in my area do, in fact, ask permission from parents to have sex education discourses or classes for middle school students. Sex surveys is another way of trying to get around from seeking permission first when it's not a sex ed class at all.
Schools and courts have gradually unsurped parental controls regarding their concerns over how education is done for their children at their schools. Not only that, many schools are going down the drain and are becoming more and more irresponsible in educating students.
Judicial activism doesn't mean per se from a liberal judge, it can either be a liberal or conservative judge. The proper approach and right approach for any judges is to examine the law as it is written. Not change the Constitution (state or federal) and its written rules.
In order to change the law or amend the Constitution there are mechanisms allowing just for that. Changing the law does not belong in the hand of one judge or a panel of judges. Judicial activism does not belong in America's society.