Earlier this week, I wrote about the pilot sex-education course developed for use in Montgomery County, Maryland public schools. The course struck me as containing elements of indoctrination, especially with respect to issues pertaining to gays.

Yesterday, a federal court judge temporarily enjoined the County from implementing the program, which was set to begin today. The injunction is for ten days, but the judge's ruling expresses deep concern about aspects of the course, and the school system apparently has decided to back down. Judge Alexander Williams, a Clinton appointee, wrote that the course:

open[s] up the classroom to the subject of homosexuality, and specifically, the moral rightness of the homosexual lifestyle. However, [it] presents only one view on the subject -- that homosexuality is a natural and morally correct lifestyle -- to the exclusion of other perspectives. The public interest is served by preventing [school officials] from promoting particular religious beliefs in the public schools and preventing [the officials] from disseminating one-sided information on a controversial topic.

UPDATE: Reader Richard Bingham writes,

You added no editorial comment to your post, so I will. . .That’s all we need from the federal courts. Here comes the reincarnation of the Fairness Doctrine, this time by judicial decree. Yes, I know this is a school. But radio frequncies are a public trust according to the federal government, right? People living within that school district need to get off their butts and achieve this result through the ballot box. The last thing we need from conservatives is this particular type of litigiousness.

Mr. Bingham makes a good point. I haven't had time to read Judge Williams' opinion, which was written in the context of providing preliminary, not final relief. However, as much as I agree with the judge's sentiment, this may be a case of undue judicial activism.

FURTHER UPDATE: Several readers have pointed out that Montgomery County's sex-ed program is government speech to a captive audience. And it is government speech about issues with religious implications.

I'm still hoping to find the time to read Judge Williams' opinion and think about the issue. However, the rest of my day (and night) will probably be devoted to thinking about antitrust law and watching the Wizards-Bulls game.

Posted by Paul at 09:09 AM  |    |