OxBlog’s David Adesnik notes some particularly lacking reporting on an issue in my backyard (literally, at the school across the street): the new sex education curriculum in Montgomery County, Maryland. You might have heard local conservative parents were up in arms, but if you wanted to know what’s actually in the curriculum, the Post’s story isn’t the best place. It does include one excerpt that sheds light on what could have more than just conservative parents upset, although only in the print version and on the jump page:
Myth: Homosexuality is a sin.
Facts: Religion has often been misused to justify hatred and oppression. Less than a half a century ago, Baptist churches (among others) in this country defended racial segregation on the basis that it was condoned by the Bible. Early Christians were not hostile to homosexuals.
Sounds a bit like a church-state violation – should a school curriculum really weigh in on what constitutes sins? The curriculum also praises certain religious denominations over others. But as Adesnik points out, the article itself mostly quotes supporters of the curriculum putting down its opponents, starting with a portrayal of the controversy as the conservative movement’s attempt to impose its will in public schools. The reporter includes a gratuitous quote from a supporter comparing the opposing parents to those “challenging evolution” in Kansas. Even critics of he-said-she-said journalism should shake their heads at this one-sided portrayal of a series of events that don’t fit the cut-and-paste template for the prudes vs. tolerants issue. I’m also skeptical that Montgomery County is as liberal as curriculum supporters claim. It’s not a precise political fit, but people in Bethesda drive really slowly, there are no bohemian coffeehouses, and grubby little children abound. (Three strikes, but I can’t seem to get outta here!)
I’m a tech journalist who’s making a TV show about a college newspaper.