logo
Why mom joined Supreme Court lawsuit over LGBTQ+ books in elementary school: ‘Emphasis on children's romantic emotions'

Why mom joined Supreme Court lawsuit over LGBTQ+ books in elementary school: ‘Emphasis on children's romantic emotions'

New York Post22-04-2025

Controversy erupted in Maryland's largest public school district when it introduced more than 20 inclusivity books, some with LGBTQ+ themes, into its elementary schools.
Most states, including Maryland, have laws in place that allow parents to choose whether their children attend sex education.
However, Montgomery County school district has introduced the 'inclusivity' books in subjects such as Language Arts class, and school leaders said they would not offer the same opt out choices.
Hundreds of parents from multiple faith backgrounds have joined the case which has gone all the way to the Supreme Court.
Advertisement
Grace Morrison is part of the case through the Kids First organization. She explains why her family joined the lawsuit:
5 Grace Morrison pulled her daughter out of school and started homeschooling her when the 'opt-out' option became no more.
Courtesy of Grace Morrison
My husband and I have seven children. Our youngest daughter, who is now 12, we adopted from Ukraine as an infant. She has Down syndrome so she has special needs.
Advertisement
We started her in the Montgomery County school system and she continued there until she was 10 years old. We started homeschooling her in 2023 after our local school board introduced a new set of 'inclusivity' books for pre-K through fifth-grade students.
Instead of teaching universal lessons about kindness and respect, these books push polarizing views on gender and sexuality while placing an unusual emphasis on children's romantic emotions.
I was told one book that would be presented in her classroom was called Pride Puppy where children going to a pride parade get an alphabetical list of things to look for, like the 'intersex flag,' a 'drag queen,' 'leather,' and a controversial LGBTQ activist. They were way too advanced and sensitive for children as young as three.
5 Hundreds of parents are fighting the district's decision to not offer the ability to 'opt-out'.
Becket
Advertisement
Another book they presented [Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope] was about a little boy who decided he was trans and wanted to become a girl and how his whole family supported him and made him a pink wig. It was telling young readers that the decision to transition doesn't need to 'make sense.'
To be presenting those ideas to children, especially those with special needs, I can't imagine what confusion that causes. But the school sent out a notice saying we would no longer have the option to opt out.
I was concerned for two reasons: we are in the Catholic faith and opposed to that; and it was not appropriate to her age or her needs.
Until this point we had a great relationship with the teachers, it was very respectful and we worked very well together. I found out from a teacher these materials would be presented in a Language Arts class. It was not just a simple class – it involved teaching.
5 Jeff and Svitlana Roman are also part of the lawsuit and wanted their son to opt out of certain teachings in the 'inclusivity' books due to their Roman Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox beliefs.
Becket
Advertisement
5 parents claim they should not be placed in a position where their only alternative to instruction which offends their religious values is to take their children out of public school.
Becket
Maryland, like forty-seven other states, mandates parental notification for Family Life and Human Sexuality classes and allows parents to opt their children out of these lessons. But because these books are tucked into a Language Arts program, somehow they believe it doesn't require the parents being notified.
I reached out to the principal and was told they adhere to Montgomery County's policy and if I was not comfortable, this was not a place for my child and to find another school…so we removed our daughter.
I got involved as a board member for Kids First – the organization challenging the school board's policies in federal court. It's a diverse group of parents and teachers from all faith backgrounds including Catholic, Muslim and Jewish.
Today, we take our fight — the case 'Mahmoud v. Taylor' — to the Supreme Court, asking for the restoration of our fundamental right to guide our child's education in alignment with our faith.
5 Another of the parents in the case, Billy Moges, pictured doing homework with her daughters. Moges is the director of Kids First, which argues parents should have more of a choice in what their kids are learning at school.
Becket
Every child deserves to experience the innocence of childhood, with their parents playing a central role in guiding them through such complex and sensitive subjects introduced in the classroom.
Our daughter brings great joy to our family. But this sudden change in our family life and routine was unexpected and has cost us a lot. We've had to adapt both financially and in our day-to-day living. I would hope that someday I could return my daughter to public school so she would have the benefits of being with a lot of other children and the services provided through schools.
Advertisement
It was very confusing to her in the beginning because other children in the neighborhood still get on the school bus that she's no longer getting on. But I think she's adapting fine.
There are ways to teach love and respect and tolerance but not to remove parents from the equation because the school thinks they can do it better.
This is a majority issue — not a transphobic, homophobic or discriminatory issue — and this is about parents being parents and deciding what is best for the children.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling

time2 hours ago

Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling

The Kentucky county clerk who became known around the world for her opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage is still arguing in court that it should be overturned. Kim Davis became a cultural lightning rod 10 years ago, bringing national media and conservative religious leaders to eastern Kentucky as she continued for weeks to deny the licenses. She later met Pope Francis in Rome and was parodied on 'Saturday Night Live.' Davis began denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Videos of a same-sex couple arguing with Davis in the clerk's office over their denial of a license drew national attention to her office. She defied court orders to issue the licenses until a federal judge jailed her for contempt of court in September 2015. Davis was released after her staff issued the licenses on her behalf but removed her name from the form. The Kentucky Legislature later enacted a law removing the names of all county clerks from state marriage licenses. Davis said her faith forbade her from what she saw as an endorsement of same-sex marriage. Faith leaders and conservative political leaders including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and then-Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin rallied to her cause. After her release from jail, Davis addressed the media, saying that issuing same-sex marriage licenses 'would be conflicting with God's definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This would be an act of disobedience to my God.' Davis declined a request for an interview from The Associated Press for this story. In 2018, one of the men who had confronted Davis over her defiance ran for her office. David Ermold said he believed people in Rowan County were sick of Davis and wanted to move on. When he went to file his papers for the Democratic primary, Davis, a Republican, was there in her capacity as clerk to sign him up. Sitting across a desk from each other, the cordial meeting contrasted the first time they met three years earlier. Both candidates lost; Ermold in the primary and Davis in the general election. She has not returned to politics. Davis' lawyers are attempting again to get her case before the Supreme Court, after the high court declined to hear an appeal from her in 2020. A federal judge has ordered Davis to pay a total of $360,000 in damages and attorney fees to Ermold and his partner. Davis lost a bid in March to have her appeal of that ruling heard by a federal appeals court, but she will appeal again to the Supreme Court. Her attorney, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, said the goal is affirm Davis' constitutional rights and 'overturn Obergefell.'

Government files appeal after Kilmar Abrego Garcia ordered released by federal judge
Government files appeal after Kilmar Abrego Garcia ordered released by federal judge

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Government files appeal after Kilmar Abrego Garcia ordered released by federal judge

The government on Sunday appealed a federal judge's order to release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia pending trial on human smuggling charges, another chapter in the saga of the Maryland father who had been erroneously deported to El Salvador. The Trump administration admitted having mistakenly deported Abrego Garcia in March, and the Supreme Court ordered it to facilitate his return. Upon his return this month, though, Abrego Garcia was hit with federal charges of conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal immigrants for financial gain and unlawful transportation of illegal immigrants for monetary gain. He pleaded not guilty. 'Abrego, like every person arrested on federal criminal charges, is entitled to a full and fair determination of whether he must remain in federal custody pending trial,' U.S. Magistrate Barbara D. Holmes of the Middle District of Tennessee wrote in her opinion Sunday. 'The Court will give Abrego the due process that he is guaranteed.' The government quickly filed a request to stay the order and keep Abrego Garcia in custody, a filing that made it clear it would again subject him to deportation proceedings. The government argued that a stay, or pause, would allow the court 'to conduct meaningful review' of custody ahead of the judge's ruling on a separate court filing. 'He will remain in custody pending deportation and Judge Holmes' release order would not immediately release him to the community under any circumstance,' Justice Department lawyers said in request for a stay Sunday. In concluding Abrego Garcia should be released pending trial, with certain conditions, Holmes faulted the government for its language surrounding the case and indicated he has been so far denied ordinary due process that might come to any defendant. She noted that government lawyers have used the terms "human smuggling" and "human trafficking" interchangeably, though the former refers to helping someone willfully enter a country, while the latter refers to bringing someone to a country against their will. She also noted that the government accused Abrego Garcia of being "involved" in transporting a minor as part of the alleged smuggling — without solid and specific evidence of such. Holmes set a hearing for Wednesday to discuss terms of Abrego Garcia's release and ordered federal authorities to produce him for the event. She held out little hope that Abrego Garcia would actually be free, however, noting that immigration authorities were likely to detain him upon release because he is alleged to be in the United States without permission. "Either Abrego will remain in the custody of the Attorney General or her designee pending trial if detained under the Bail Reform Act or he will likely remain in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ('ICE') custody subject to anticipated removal proceedings that are outside the jurisdiction of this Court," she wrote in her decision. "That suggests the Court's determination of the detention issues is little more than an academic exercise," Holmes said. This article was originally published on

Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling
Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling

Hamilton Spectator

time4 hours ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

Clerk who denied same-sex marriage licenses in 2015 is still fighting Supreme Court's ruling

The Kentucky county clerk who became known around the world for her opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage is still arguing in court that it should be overturned. Kim Davis became a cultural lightning rod 10 years ago, bringing national media and conservative religious leaders to eastern Kentucky as she continued for weeks to deny the licenses . She later met Pope Francis in Rome and was parodied on 'Saturday Night Live.' Kim Davis denied marriage licenses to same-sex couples Davis began denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015. Videos of a same-sex couple arguing with Davis in the clerk's office over their denial of a license drew national attention to her office. She defied court orders to issue the licenses until a federal judge jailed her for contempt of court in September 2015. Davis was released after her staff issued the licenses on her behalf but removed her name from the form. The Kentucky Legislature later enacted a law removing the names of all county clerks from state marriage licenses. Davis cited her Christian faith Davis said her faith forbade her from what she saw as an endorsement of same-sex marriage. Faith leaders and conservative political leaders including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and then-Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin rallied to her cause. After her release from jail , Davis addressed the media, saying that issuing same-sex marriage licenses 'would be conflicting with God's definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. This would be an act of disobedience to my God.' Davis declined a request for an interview from The Associated Press for this story. A man who was denied a license ran for her office In 2018, one of the men who had confronted Davis over her defiance ran for her office. David Ermold said he believed people in Rowan County were sick of Davis and wanted to move on. When he went to file his papers for the Democratic primary, Davis, a Republican, was there in her capacity as clerk to sign him up. Sitting across a desk from each other, the cordial meeting contrasted the first time they met three years earlier. Both candidates lost ; Ermold in the primary and Davis in the general election. She has not returned to politics. 10 years later, Davis wants the Supreme Court to reconsider same-sex marriage Davis' lawyers are attempting again to get her case before the Supreme Court, after the high court declined to hear an appeal from her in 2020. A federal judge has ordered Davis to pay a total of $360,000 in damages and attorney fees to Ermold and his partner. Davis lost a bid in March to have her appeal of that ruling heard by a federal appeals court, but she will appeal again to the Supreme Court. Her attorney, Mat Staver of the Liberty Counsel, said the goal is affirm Davis' constitutional rights and 'overturn Obergefell.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store