I don't want to take any business away from the Gazette, which is driving home a terrific point today in their editorial section, but I am going to quote most, well, all of their message. Be sure to go to their web site, The Gazette, buy lots of stuff from their advertisers, send them chocolates...

The most important function the school system can perform in sex education is to clear up misinformation. Kids in the 10th grade already know a lot about sex, but often what they know is just wrong.

Most parents do a good job of telling their children about sex, answering their questions and helping to shape their children's attitudes about sex. But sex "education" does not stop at the front door of the home; it continues on the playgrounds, at the mall and in the hallways and locker rooms of schools. And much of what children "learn" out there is simply not true.

That is where the school can step in. A good sex education program at school should help reinforce the instruction children are receiving at home, supporting the parents in their role as the primary teacher. The best program will provide unbiased information, and leave value judgments up to the parents.

A group of parents believes that the Montgomery County school system has gone too far in substituting its judgment for the parents in new curriculum for health classes. They are especially upset about plans to include discussions of homosexuality and a video discussing the value of condoms and demonstrating (on a cucumber) how to use one.

The school board has voted unanimously to show the video -- discussing how condoms can reduce the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases or becoming pregnant -- to all 10th graders.

That seems an appropriate age to provide straightforward information to young people. The system tried out the video at three county high schools in the spring, and feedback from students was positive.

As always, if parents are adamantly opposed to having their child informed on the subject, for moral, religious or any other grounds, they can opt out of the program and their child will be excused from that class. Few parents do so, according to the school system, but the option is available.

More controversially, the board has also approved a discussion of "sexual variations," to be tried in eighth- and 10th-grade classes at three middle and three high schools in the spring. It will be the first time the system has initiated discussions of homosexuality, although teachers have been permitted to answer students' questions on the subject since 1970.

Since homosexuality is a much more open topic in society today than it was 30 years ago, with openly gay characters portrayed on television and the movies, it stands to reason that children will have more questions about it than they did in the past. Devoting a few sessions of the health class to information about homosexuality makes common sense.

Yes, common sense, that's how it seems to us, too. The funny thing in this controversy is that the materials seem so appropriate. The group has tried to make it sound like an assault on the family and everything that is good, but really the curriculum is just a little bit of factual information.

Parents should be having their own discussions with their children about homosexuality, and imparting their own moral judgments. Only they have the right to teach their children right from wrong. But it seems entirely reasonable that the school system take some time to give young people unbiased information about the topic.

The school system cannot be seen to promote homosexuality, nor should it condemn it. The school's role is to provide factual information on a subject about which young people are very likely to be curious.

Parents should make themselves aware of the content of the curriculum, and if they have concerns about language or emphasis, they should communicate with the schools and seek changes.

In the end, if the parents are still not satisfied with the content, they are entirely within their right to withdraw their child from the class. And they should do so. If large numbers of children were removed from the health classes, it would send a strong signal to the board that content does not have community support.

The criticism of the new sex education curriculum merits serious discussion. The parents certainly have every right to express concerns and to fight for unbiased content.

We tend to believe, however, based on what we know now, that the parents are overreacting. And we completely disagree that discussions of homosexuality or demonstrations of condom use should be off-limits in schools.

I apologize to The Gazette for reproducing their entire editorial, but it was perfect. They are advocating, as we would, that values be taught in the family, and that facts be taught at school.