By the book -- but with a twist

Last week, the Texas State Board of Education delayed approval of some middle and high school health textbooks after a member argued the books' language legitimizes homosexuality. The board member disapproved of the books' vague language use regarding marriage, as they use phrases like "couples" and "partners." \nTerri Leo, the concerned board member, asked publishers to include phrasing in the teachers' editions explaining that gays and lesbians "are more prone to self-destructive behaviors like depression, illegal drug use and suicide." Leo said using neutral words like "partners" contributes to the inclusiveness of gays and lesbians. \nHeaven forbid we teach young students to be inclusive. \nInstead, Leo prefers the child to read specifically that marriage is between "husbands and wives" and "men and women."\nThe book publisher agreed to the changes and to use wording that reflects marriage as being between a man and a woman. With the recent sweep of gay marriage ban approvals, this scenario is hardly shocking. And since Texas is the nation's second largest textbook buyer (after California), a money and market incentive reigns above anything else, right? This is also troubling to the rest of the national textbook market -- what is limited in Texas is likely going to become limited in the rest of the nation.\nWhile the board approved the book only after the changes were made, one board member disagreed and said the board shouldn't follow political agendas.\nEven with financial incentives, we believe it's wrong for the publisher to make these changes to the book. What is this teaching the younger generation? Since most people regard textbooks as unbiased sources of truth, young students will read this, intrinsically accept it and possibly continue a cycle of discrimination. Textbook publishers have the same responsibility as journalists: to present the unbiased truth.\nWhat's next? Disciplining a child for mentioning the word gay or lesbian? Wait, that's already happened. \nLast year, a young Louisiana boy was sent to the principal's office for discussing the fact that his mother is gay and "likes another girl." His teacher scolded him and told him "gay" was a bad word. At the school's behavior clinic, he was told to write the phrase "I will never say the word gay in school again" over and over.\nThe bottom line is that special interest groups or personal beliefs shouldn't dictate or have power over academics or, more importantly, censorship of textbooks. By censoring textbooks, we censor our future's education.\nAre we saying that school shouldn't teach morality? No. We're just saying that schools need to be aware of all the different forms morality can take. If a parochial school or a school in a conservative area wants to provide handouts providing a context for its textbook, it's within its rights to do so. \nWhile people are free to have their own opinions, the idea of changing phrases in a textbooks because it's being too inclusive is not only backward, it's a little bit scary.