The names of the parents have been redacted and has been slightly edited for privacy purposes.
This is a complaint of discrimination filed by a family in North Hampton / SAU 21
Case against SAU21 to the Human Rights Commission:
This is a complaint of religious discrimination in SAU21. The district is discriminating against Christian, Jewish, and Muslim students as I will demonstrate by the school’s doing in A,B, and C.
Training for teachers that was completed on September 13, 2022 will require children to behave in ways that conflict with their beliefs about males and females; they would be required to restrict their speech about those beliefs, and would be intimidated by teachers promoting such speech. My rights as a parent are diminished by the teachings about sexual relations which conflict with or are intended to substitute for what is taught at home.
A) SAU21 began a process in February 2022 with Seacoast Outright to provide training for teachers on ways to deal with the LGBTQ students in the school district. Parents and residents in the school district began asking questions on how this training would impact all of the children in the district. For example, would the training institute practices by teachers that could conflict with what religious families were teaching their children at home? How would this subject matter be presented so that all worldviews would be presented and respected during this training?
Inquiries were made to examine the materials that would be used during the training. Parents began looking at the credentials of the trainer, the background of the organization hired to train the teachers, and how teachers would then apply this training to the students who were in their classroom.
As I scanned the documents other residents acquired through their 91-a Right To Know Requests, I became more concerned. Nothing in this training addressed the religious students that the teachers serve in the district. What if a teacher expresses a viewpoint that conflicts with our religious beliefs? How would this be handled?
Seacoast Outright has a narrow political and social viewpoint that they were to present to the teachers during this training session that never took into consideration religious views on this subject.
Members of the community, on our behalf, requested that the training be cancelled. If it was not going to be canceled, would they at least include other viewpoints that would show respect to the religious families they were serving? Here is what was presented to the Superintendent during a meeting with Ann Marie Banfield, a parental rights advocate in New Hampshire. School Board members from North Hampton and Hampton Falls were also present. She requested that the following information also be provided to teachers during the training session. That request was denied by the Superintendent.
1) A statement on Gender identity from the Catholic Church
2) Respect Project (see attached file)
3) U.S. Department of Education: Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer and Religious Expression in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools
4) Orange County Videos: Religious Expression in Schools
5) Detransition Diaries once it is released
6) FDA warning on puberty blockers
As a parent in this school district, I believe the training should be inclusive of all children on this subject, yet there was only one viewpoint provided to the teachers. By adding different viewpoints, the teachers would then be better prepared to address questions from the religious families they serve in the district.
After reviewing the slides that would be presented to the teachers during the training, there was nothing that presented any viewpoints from the Muslim, Jewish or Christian faiths. Some of the information on the slides conflicted with what religious families may be teaching their children. School District administrative staff provided conflicting information regarding how the training would be used: teachers were told they would talk further about strategies shown on the slides to use the information in classes and activities unrelated to education, while taxpayers have been told it was simply informational and addressed terminology, and had no curricular elements.
For instance, Seacoast Outright has a political message that will conflict with some of the families in the district. Those families may not feel comfortable addressing this with the school board or administration for fear of retaliation that could be directed at their children. This makes for a hostile district that is exclusive rather than inclusive.
The slideshow included statements that conflict with our religious views, along with other families in the district. Here are some of those statements included in the slides: Text in black/my comments in RED. (BOLD)
See attached files for the actual slides:
Today’s Agenda: Breaking down the binary of sex assigned at birth: is a political view and not based in scientific facts which conflicts with our religious beliefs.
Foundational Concepts: The Gender Elephant : One political viewpoint, not inclusive of religious views.
Identity Development in Young Children: We and Many other parents do not want any of these discussions with their young children in school. There was nothing about respecting parental rights from those in the religious communities.
Strategy 2: Utilize Gender Neutral Language: Using gender neutral terms is becoming the accepted way to make all people feel recognized and respected: This has actually angered mothers and fathers, so widely accepted may not necessarily be true. Address your classes with gender neutral greetings ex. “Good morning folks!”: This is a political agenda to move society to a genderless society. This is exclusive political jargon not inclusive of religious viewpoints.
Practice using they/them pronouns as singular terms during class: Nothing in here about respecting the conscience of your teachers who may hold sacred religious values. This is more of a political agenda that is exclusive versus inclusive.
Strategy 3 Ask and Tell Pronouns: Nothing in here about respecting the conscience of your teachers again, and is exclusive versus inclusive.
Empowering Your Students: Celebrate Pride Week in October, Ensure representation in books, Put a few small LGBTQIA + flags or stickers in a visible spot on your desk or lanyard: This is exclusive and not inclusive to Muslim, Jewish and Christian students. How many books on Christian, Jewish or Muslim Children are in the class? These are non-academic activities which intimidate my children.
Taking Action Beyond the Classroom: (Sports / Gender neutral and/or private bathrooms and changing areas: This is a political call to action for the teachers from an organization that we were told is not a political organization. Modesty is a big part of traditional religious institutions, and nothing on that is provided in the training. North Hampton School explicitly rejected my daughter’s request for privacy when she uses the school’s bathrooms.
Resources and Sources: Not diverse in any way. Nothing from the Jewish/Muslim/or Christian community that provide sources on the LGBTQ+ children. Statements, resources, etc.
B) I already had one incident with a teacher in the North Hampton School when she asked my daughter to remove the words “Merry Christmas” from the white board. My daughter was told that she could possibly offend someone by writing Merry Christmas on the White Board. I addressed this with the School Board at a school board meeting, but nothing was ever done to rectify the situation. In other words, no one ever apologized for the teacher denying my daughter her free speech rights.
C) My daughter came home a few weeks ago to notify me that all of the religious Christmas carols would be removed from the Holiday music program. I immediately contacted the Principal at the school, Ms. Snyder, to clarify what this meant. According to Principal Snyder all religious music needed to be removed because of the Separation of Church and State Law. I informed her that no law existed, and that religious music could continue. I attended the next school board meeting where a couple of us informed the school board, and brought forth historical information on the misuse of Separation of Church and State.
During the a school board meeting, my daughter who is in the 7th grade spoke about how she did not want any policy that allowed restrooms in the school to become gender neutral. I spoke along with her father, explaining how this would cause the girls in the school to refrain from using the restroom if a biological boy was in there. This is what we had heard was happening in some of the other schools where this policy was put in place. After we all spoke during public comments, one of the school board members, Kate Belanger, made a disparaging remark towards us. This was caught on video tape where others who were watching were shocked by her remarks. I sent an email to the Chair and board members criticizing Belanger, who made my daughter feel bad for simply conveying her honest feelings.
This kind of treatment directed at my family and my daughter has caused us to lose trust and faith in those who are in charge of educating my children. We have not received an apology for the way we were treated at the school board meeting by Ms. Belanger, and we have not seen any good faith effort by school administrators to offer any remedies to the religious families. Instead, good faith efforts by parent advocates have been dismissed and ignored.
There are no training sessions scheduled for teachers to advise teachers on how to address the needs of the religious children they serve in the district. There are no directives on adding religious flags or religious displays from the various religious traditions to accompany the LGBTQ/Pride flags and bulletin boards that children see in their school everyday.
The North Hampton school district recently issued a Resolution of Inclusivity. We have not seen the leadership under Superintendent Nadeau, and Assistant Superintendent David Hobbs support the religious families in the district, and in fact, we feel they have created an environment that appears to be discriminatory and hostile instead.
To rectify this situation, we’d like to see training for teachers so that they will learn that there are other viewpoints on this subject. This would include all items listed above 1 to 6. There should be sensitivity training so teachers and administrators understand how disparaging comments can impact the religious families in the school district. There should be a directive to always include religious symbols and displays alongside LGBTQ symbols and displays.
If district administrators are looking to meet the terms as described by anti-discrminiation legislation and policies, they need to be reminded that religious students are included as a protected class and therefore, should always be included.
RESPECT PROJECT Overview (4 page)
The post Complaint Filed Against SAU21 for Discriminating Against Christian, Jewish and Muslim Students appeared first on Granite Grok.