The following editorial appeared Monday in the Washington Post.

What schools should teach children about sex is always controversial. Small wonder that so many places dodge the issue by teaching nothing or very little. Not so Montgomery County, Md., where school officials bravely broke new ground last month with a pilot program that explores homosexuality and other issues of sexual identity. There is fierce opposition, but school officials are right in their resolve to offer a curriculum that promotes tolerance and acceptance.

The effort to update sex education dates to 2004, when a citizens advisory group deemed Montgomery’s sex ed program horribly old-fashioned. Among its recommendations was discussion of sexual orientation and demonstration of the use of a condom. A costly, emotional and at times comical – yes, we are thinking of the cucumber video – battle resulted. As The Post’s Daniel de Vise reported, a determined group fought the Board of Education at every step. It went to federal court to block a previous version that was in fact problematic.

School officials learned a lesson from that bungled effort. The new curriculum was painstakingly developed, with the help of medical consultants and a 15-member citizens advisory group. The revised lessons have been attacked from both sides. The conservative citizens group believes that an alternate view of homosexuality as immoral should be presented while more liberal members of the community think the curriculum should offer more to students who might be confused about their sexual identity. School is not the place for ideology – either from the right or the left. Any parent who doesn’t want his or her child exposed to the lessons can simply refuse permission, and an alternative lesson is provided. The curriculum is posted online and schools hold special informational meetings for parents.

A challenge to the program is pending before the Maryland State Board of Education. State School Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick was careful not to prejudge the case, but it was encouraging that she noted the value of teaching tolerance. If there are weaknesses with the new lessons, it is likely that they will be detected in the field tests. There will be a chance to fine-tune any issues before countywide implementation.

Initial reviews from students judged the lessons to be, if anything, a tad boring. As one student said, “nothing new.” That may be because the schools stuck to a strict script out of concern about the inevitable court challenge. It may be that today’s more worldly eighth- and 10th-graders have already gotten their sexual education from movies and television. Or, as we like to think, maybe it’s because this generation of students is already far more tolerant and understanding than any that preceded it.