Tolerance, acceptance and the virtue of orthonomy: a reply to Lawrence Blum and Brenda Almond

In the Journal of Moral Education, 39(2), Brenda Almond and Lawrence Blum debate the importance of tolerance versus acceptance in sex education. Blum defines acceptance as ?positive regard?, in contradistinction to mere tolerance, ?a live and let live attitude toward others, an acceptance of coexistence, but with a disapproval of that ?other??. Employing consequentialist and definitional arguments, he defends an acceptant educational policy. I shore up this defence by addressing the issue of autonomy: specifically, I refute the claim that acceptance undermines parental autonomy in a morally unacceptable fashion. Drawing on Philip Pettit and Michael Smith?s defence of the idea of ?orthonomy? or right-rule, I argue that orthonomy, rather than autonomy, should guide educational policy-making. I then show that the principle of orthonomy, together with teachers? professional responsibilities to ensure a safe and prejudice-free learning environment, entails that teachers have an inalienable responsibility to promote homophilic (gay-positive) values, regardless of whether they or their students? parents agree