WELCOME TO STATE MANDATED HOMOSEXUAL INDOCTRINATION FOR YOUR CHILDREN
Homosexual Curriculum Bill Passed by Calif. Senate A controversial bill that bans bias against homosexuals, transgenders, and bisexuals in public schools was passed on Thursday by the California Senate, unleashing a wave of concern through those opposed to normalizing homosexuality. Fri, May. 25, 2007
A controversial bill that bans bias against homosexuals, transgenders, and bisexuals in public schools was passed on Thursday by the California Senate, unleashing a wave of concern through those opposed to normalizing homosexuality. SB 777 went through by a 23-13 vote, and would prohibit all classes, textbooks, and teachers from any instruction that "reflects or promotes bias against" those perceived with gender issues. All instructional materials and school activities would then have to positively portray all of these sexually alternative lifestyles, something many refuse to support.
Children starting from kindergarten would learn about the practices, as a result, and would be forced to accept them as socially acceptable, pro-family conservatives argue. "SB 777 is designed to transform our public schools into institutions that disregard all notions of the traditional family unit," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute (CRI), in a statement. "This reverse discrimination is an outright attack on the religious and moral beliefs of California citizens." Voting for the bill went strictly along party lines with Democrats in favor and Republicans opposed, passing a slim margin of three votes. No Republican senator made an address to oppose the legislation. SB 777 is much like a previous bill that was passed in the last session of the California legislature, SB 1437, but was subsequently vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. "Parents are angry at the Democrats for passing this school sexual indoctrination bill and frustrated that Republicans did little to fight it," explained Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), a California-based pro-family organization, in a statement. "We call on Arnold Schwarzenegger to pledge that he will respect parents, protect children, and veto this bad bill, just like he did last year."
As part of the bill, which was authored by Senator Sheila Kuehl, a lesbian, the language also redefined what the word “gender” means, stating that “gender” means “sex” but that a person’s gender identity and related appearance can constitute “sex” despite the person’s assigned “sex” at birth. SB 777 also erased the current definition of “sex” from the education code, which originally defined it as the biological condition of being male or female. Several parents, Christians and non-Christians, have voiced their concern over schools regulating what their children should think is acceptable.
They feel their children should not be forced to support homosexuality and other non-traditional gender lifestyles as being normal and healthy. "The notion of forcing children to support controversial sexual lifestyles is shocking and appalling to millions of fathers and mothers," added Thomasson. "Parents don't want their children taught to become homosexual or bisexual or to wonder whether they need a sex-change operation. SB 777 will shatter the academic purpose of education by turning every government school into a sexual indoctrination center." Under the bill, school districts must comply with the new standards or else they will be regulated by the California Department of Education. In addition, teachers do not need parental permission to teach about the subjects to their students.
According to CRI, the Los Angeles Unified School District has already implemented the policies in this bill. "In that district, boys who perceive themselves as girls may enter the girls' locker room and restroom,” described Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for CRI, in a statement. “Teachers and school officials are required to hide the gender identity of a transgender student if the parents are unaware of what's taking place at school. This astonishing policy will be expanded to every school in the state if SB 777 becomes law." Students up to the twelfth grade would be affected by the bill.
Homosexuality and the Nazi Party
The pink triangle, symbol of the "gay rights" movement, is familiar to many Americans. As the badge used by the Nazis to designate homosexuals in the concentration camps, the pink triangle perfectly expresses the message of "gay rights." That message is that homosexuals are currently and historically victims of irrational prejudice and that those who oppose homosexuality are hateful bigots. This all-important victim status engenders sympathy for the homosexual "cause" among well-meaning heterosexuals.
Thus, millions of otherwise rational Americans support a movement whose sole unifying characteristic is a sexual lifestyle they personally find repugnant. When homosexuals display the pink triangle, they are equating all opposition to homosexuality with Nazism and themselves with the Jewish victims of the Holocaust. As pro-homosexual Rabbi Bernard Mehlman puts it, "Homophobia and Anti-Semitism are part of the same disease." This quote appeared in an advertisement in a homosexual newspaper. It announced the dedication ceremony of the New England Holocaust Memorial in Boston last year.
An accompanying article reported that New England homosexuals had pledged $1 million to help build the memorial, including $50,000 for an initial monument consisting of six steel and glass towers. Alongside the monument is an inscription honoring homosexual victims of the Nazis. Another Holocaust memorial being prepared in New York City is expected to similarly honor homosexuals. Washington, D.C. is home to the official U.S. Holocaust Museum which not only maintains a pro-homosexual display, but also employs noted homosexual activist Klaus Mueller as a staff researcher.
Other Holocaust related projects, such as the Anne Frank Exhibit now touring the United States, incorporate a similar message in their programs. While some homosexuals were interned in Nazi work camps, the role of homosexuals in Nazi history cannot be accurately represented solely by a pink triangle. Our review of more than 200 history texts written since the 1930s suggests that a pink swastika is equally representative, if not more so. For, ironically, while many homosexuals were persecuted by the Nazi party, there is no doubt that the Nazi party itself had many homosexuals within its own ranks, even among its highest leadership.
[SNIP]
LINK
ABOUT DAVID PARKER:
On Wednesday, April 27, 2005, at 6:24 p.m. David Parker, of XXXXXXX., Lexington, was arrested and charged with “trespassing” at the Estabrook Elementary School. This occurred during a meeting scheduled by the Principal of Estabrook, Joni Jay, to discuss the Parkers’ request that the school abide by the Massachusetts Parental Notification Law concerning curriculum involving human sexuality issues.
During the three hour meeting, the Principal and the Lexington Director of Education brought the Superintendent, William Hurley, into the discussion via telephone. A hand-written agreement was faxed over to the Superintendent as negotiations continued. David Parker was led to believe that the school administration would adhere to the Laws of Massachusetts and honor his request for parental notification, allowing his child to be opted-out of teacher-initiated discussions of sexuality. Instead, the police were called, the school rejected his requests, and David Parker was arrested.
Statement by David Parker “I, David Parker, am the father of a kindergarten student at Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington, Massachusetts. Since the beginning of this school year, my wife and I have learned that school materials and discussions about gay-headed households/same-sex union issues have been exposed to the children. There are definitive plans to increase the teacher/staff/adult mediated discussions of these subjects. “We have officially stated on many occasions—to the Lexington school administration—a request that we be notified when these discussions are planned, and want our 6-year-old opted out of such situations when arising “spontaneously”. “Our parental requests for our own child were flat-out denied with no effort at accommodation. In our meeting on April 27, I, insisted that such accommodation be made and refused to leave the meeting room. I was informed that I would be arrested.”
An Interview with David Parker
No comments:
Post a Comment