Word games in Newton

By Eileen McNamara, Globe Staff

Warriors in the battle against creeping homosexuality in the Newton public schools haven't abandoned the fight. They've merely moderated their rhetoric.

Instead of the angry denunciations we heard last spring of the corrupting influence on suburban schoolchildren of the ''homosexual agenda,'' this fall we are greeted by Newton Parents for Moderation.

They are not homophobic or bigoted or intolerant. They are just concerned the public schools might be ''presenting controversial issues to our children in ways that conflict with the values of many of the diverse families in the community.''

They are not affiliated with the religious or political right. They just distribute literature from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality and the American Family Association, two groups that view homosexuality as a curable perversity.

They are not against safe schools for everyone. They just object to ''schools that place the teachers' right to 'express' their personalities above the welfare of his or her students when the expression involves a controversial moral issue.''

That would be a not-very-veiled reference to David Gaita, the first-grade teacher at the Burr Elementary School who, in response to a question from one of his students last May about his family, told the class that he is a gay man.

Newton Parents for Moderation want to make sure that no child is exposed again to such a shocking revelation without the prior approval of his parents. ''We are forced by law to send our children to public schools. Therefore, as parents, we have a right to be informed and involved when controversial moral subjects are presented in the classroom,'' the group asserts in the mission statement it has widely circulated in advance of a forum it is hosting tomorrow night at the main library about parental options ''when school and family values diverge.''

Set aside for a moment the fact that no parent is ''forced'' to send a child to public school. Private schools, religious schools, and home schooling are rather popular alternatives to public education. But, as a practical matter, it is worth asking what this group means when it demands that public schools provide ''advance parental notification when children will be exposed'' to controversial moral subjects, ''particularly those related to human sexual behavior and identity.''

Does that mean if a 10-year-old boy calls another child a ''faggot'' on the playground a supervising teacher should call his parents before explaining why that epithet is offensive?

Does it mean that if a gay teenager begins to talk about his own alienation during a class discussion of ''Catcher in The Rye'' that the teacher should silence him?

Does it mean that the Gay-Straight Alliances that have sprouted in public high schools as a means to combat harassment should be disbanded?

Does it mean that administrators should be prevented from holding staff development workshops that address issues of sexual orientation in schools?

A month ago, the Department of Education dismissed a complaint from some of these Newton parents that Gaita had violated state law by failing to notify parents before coming out to his class. The DOE noted that the Parental Notification Law allows parents to hold their children out of sex education classes, not to censor the speech of teachers.

This week, the DOE got a new complaint, contending that Newton schools violated the notification law when administrators held a workshop for teachers after school, with no children present, to discuss how to provide a nurturing climate for gay students.

Newton Parents for Moderation has asked parents of ''all views'' to attend tomorrow night's session at the library for a ''polite, respectful discussion of these issues.''

How could the conversation be anything but polite and respectful? These are not homophobic, bigoted or intolerant people. These are Newton Parents for Moderation.

Return to P.E.R.S.O.N. Project Home Page