Same-sex teaching upheld

A federal judge yesterday dismissed a suit by two couples who contended that the Lexington public school system violated their constitutional rights by teaching their young children about same-sex couples, but the ruling is unlikely to end a controversy that has roiled the district for nearly two years.

The lawyer for the two couples said they would appeal the ruling, which was praised by Lexington educators and civil libertarians but skewered by supporters of the parents. The controversy has made the affluent town a lightning rod on talk shows and on blogs and prompted the school superintendent to defend the curriculum on national television and radio programs.

In his 38-page decision, Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf of US District Court said that under the US Constitution, public schools are "entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy."

"Diversity is a hallmark of our nation," he said.

Wolf said that the couples, David and Tonia Parker and Robert and Robin Wirthlin, have the option to send their children to private schools or home-school them. He also said they can work to elect a School Committee that might change the curriculum, but that they have no right to dictate what the school district teaches.

"Parents do have a fundamental right to raise their children," Wolf wrote. "However, the Parkers and Wirthlins have chosen to send their children to the Lexington public schools with its current curriculum. The Constitution does not permit them to prescribe what those children will be taught."

Jeffrey A. Denner, who represented the couples described in the suit as devout Judeo-Christians, said they will appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston and to the US Supreme Court, if necessary.

David Parker said the dispute is really about who has the final say over what children are taught, parents or educators.

"The parents have the fundamental right to be the primary directors of their children's upbringing and moral education, and the current ruling of this court undermines and burdens parents and their parental rights," he said.

The suit also complained that parents weren't given advance notice about the lesson content, and Parker said the ruling leaves that unresolved.

Paul B. Ash, Lexington's superintendent of schools, applauded the decision.

"As much as we try to be sensitive to the parents' views, they don't have a veto over what we teach in the schools," said Ash, who has received hate mail and threats over the curriculum.

The couples sued in 2006, after Jacob Parker brought home books from the Joseph Estrabrook Elementary School about different families, including same-sex couples. One of the books in his "diversity book bag" in kindergarten was "Who's in a Family?"

Joey Wirthlin was exposed to similar material in the first grade at the same school, said the complaint. His teacher read aloud "King & King," a fairy tale about a prince who rejects his mother's entreaties to marry a princess. The prince ends up falling in love with and marrying a prince. The book concludes when the two princes kiss.

Joey Wirthlin's parents transferred him this year to the Hanscom primary school in the Lincoln school system, said David Parker.

The school district contended in court that such books promoted an atmosphere of tolerance and respect.

Lexington officials pointed out that a 1993 state law directed school systems to teach about different kinds of families and the harm of prejudice. The effort gained momentum after the state's highest court in 2003 legalized same-sex marriage.

But the Parkers and Wirthlins said in their suit that teachers were indoctrinating children to believe that homosexuality is acceptable and were doing so in a compulsory school setting.

The views of the parents and the school system first collided in April 2005, when David Parker refused to leave the school in a protest over the books. Parker was arrested for trespassing and temporarily banned from school grounds.

Brian Camenker -- president of MassResistance, a Waltham-based parents' group that sided with the plaintiffs -- denounced yesterday's ruling as "unbelievably odious and horrific."

"It reinforces the rights of schools to normalize homosexuality without parents' knowledge and consent," he said.

However, Sarah Wunsch -- a staff attorney for the ACLU of Massachusetts, which filed a brief siding with the school district -- said that the lawsuit's effect was "to frighten and chill people who teach in Lexington" and that the ruling should change that.

Wolf, in the decision, said he based his ruling on a 1995 decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals on a sex-education assembly at Chelmsford High School.

The appellate court ruled that the constitutional right of parents to raise their children did not include the right to restrict what a public school can teach, even if the teachings contradict a parents' religious beliefs.

Wolf said Lexington educators could exempt some children from a lesson concerning homosexuality if they chose, but he did not define how to do that. But he said an exodus from the classroom would probably undercut efforts to foster tolerance and would deprive pupils of learning from each other.

"As Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote in his journal, 'I pay the school master, but 'tis the school boys that educate my son,' " Wolf wrote.

Jonathan Saltzman can be reached at jsaltzman@globe.com.