INTRODUCTION
Recent events around the teacher at South Side who facilitated a gender identity conversation amongst 2nd graders has caused family conversations to occur. One of which has led to yet another allegation of East Noble Schools teaching sexual ideology without the informed consent of parents.
A student has come forward expressing that a South Side Elementary teacher read a book to their 4th grade class entitled “In Our Mothers’ House”. This violation of trust occurred without the fully informed consent of the parents, leaving them to discover it after the fact, or not at all.
A simple search of the book turns up this information:
SHORT SUMMARY OF THE BOOK
The book speaks from an adopted child’s perspective about having two “mommys”. If you were to assume the positive, like a situation where life’s circumstances cause two moms to work together to raise kids, you would be wrong. It is clear that the book has an agenda.
It all starts out innocent enough, drawing a picture of an idealistic family full of fun, magic, and completely unrealistic harmony. That is until the Lockner parents “unexplainably” treat the mommies poorly (which of course we all agree is wrong to do).
Here begins the planting of seeds which stir from a natural sense of justice in the reader. Through the cuteness of a child’s book, it insidiously continues to develop guided values and normalized opinions on a lesbian/homosexual lifestyle in young children.
On the scale of 1 to 10 of “in your face” gender and sexual ideologies for kids, this book rates pretty low. However, that is how the ideology gets the foot in the door with kids while not alarming parents or raising legal challenges.
This book was published in 2009 when there was much less awareness of sexual activism by teachers in schools, and it does well to fly below the radar. It is easy to see why a student didn’t come home and immediately express a concern to their parents.
Further research of the book indicates that it was reasonably well known for its controversy even back in 2012. It would be hard to accept that this would not be known by educators. It was, after all, defended by the ACLU.
It would go a long way to build trust if schools had a default opt-out policy, or would first seek the full informed consent of parents before exposing their children to content that undermines their values.
* ANOTHER CAME FORWARD:
After some discussions in the community about this book, it was discovered that another parent expressed concerns back in 2023 about this very same situation. This adds further credibility to the claim at the school board meeting. That parent did not wish to comment further at this time.
Here are some excerpts from that feedback:
PARENT COMMENTS
IMPORTANT INSIGHTS:
Before critics of the article jump to the conclusion that parents are somehow “bigoted” for not wanting their kids to be taught values which are counter to their own, let’s be clear: Most agree that what adults do on their own time is their own business. We are to bear with one another in love, and treat each other with respect, but this doesn’t mean that we have to agree.
Disagreement is not hate, no matter how hard some want to deceive people into believing that.
Government schools claim that they may not teach children values derived from a traditional religious point of view. Logically and ethically then, they do not have the right to promote what opposes traditional religious values either. These are two sides of the same coin.
If one side of the coin cannot be “promoted”, then it is hypocritical to endorse the other. Doing so would be promoting a state mandated dogma, no less “egregious” than a traditional religious dogma. Paganism or Secular Humanism are religions in and of themselves. Denying God exists is no less religious than saying that He does. Both are faith-based. Both worship a deity of their choosing.
It is unjust for schools to claim the authority to undermine parental rights, regardless of a schools mission statement to religiously disciple students to be “empowered through inclusion” (a reference to East Noble’s vision in the District Goals).
If the tables were turned and traditional religious values were being encouraged in the place of gender ideology, there would be outrage by secular true believers too.
Teachers who read books like these, or push their secular religious ideology on students without expressed informed consent of the parents violate trust, at a minimum. Stick to academics and leave these religious values to parents!
THE LOW BAR OF LEGALISM:
Superintendent Gremaux often responds to criticism of her leadership, her policies recommendations, and her poor management results by resorting to defending them as simply being legal. She has taken the same approach to gender ideology related topics during her tenure at East Noble, and North Manchester.
Legalism alone is an incredibly low bar, and it will never result in excellence in education, nor true enduring success in any other part of life.
Legalism is the bare minimum, and it is soulless. Excellence requires us to do not only what is legal, but what is good, appropriate and necessary, often for the benefit of others before ourselves.
MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!
