Start A Petition
This thread is archived. To reply to it you must re-activate it.
"Mom" & "Dad" banned from schools? More... May 02, 2007 4:23 PM


Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered – again

California agenda would require K-12 'gay' indoctrination

Posted: April 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2007

A plan that has been launched in the California state Assembly – again – could be used to ban references to "mom" and "dad" in public schools statewide by prohibiting anything that would "reflect adversely" on the homosexual lifestyle choice.

It's similar to a plan WND reported was approved by lawmakers last year, but fell by the wayside when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it.

"SB 777 forcibly thrusts young school children into dealing with sexual issues, requiring that homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality be taught in a favorable light," according to an alert issued by the Capitol Resource Institute.

"Not only does SB 777 require that classroom instruction and materials promote and embrace controversial sexual practices, it also bans school-sponsored activities from 'reflecting adversely' on homosexuals, bisexuals and transsexuals," the group said.

"Pushing this radical homosexual agenda in California schools will stifle the truth in favor of political correctness and will inevitably conflict with the religious and moral convictions of both students and parents," said CRI Executive Director Karen England. "The full ramifications of this sweeping legislation could affect the entire nation as most textbook companies tailor their material to their number one purchaser: California."

She noted that Los Angeles schools already have implemented most of the proposals now pending for districts across the state, and among the changes are:

    * "Mom" and "dad" and "husband" and "wife" would have to be edited from all texts.

    * Cheerleading and sports teams would have to be gender-neutral.

    * Prom kings and queens would be banned, or if featured, would have to be gender neutral so that the king could be female and the queen male.

    * Gender-neutral bathrooms could be required for those confused about their gender identity.

    * A male who believes he really is female would be allowed into the women's restroom, and a woman believing herself a male would be allowed into a men's room.

    * Even scientific information, such has statistics showing AIDS rates in the homosexual community, could be banned.

"It's embarrassing that we've got kids who can't pass their exit exams, but we add all sorts of complications [to school]," she told WND.

She cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center.

"If you want to use a restroom that matches your gender identity … you should be allowed to do so," it advises. "Whenever students are divided up into boys and girls, you should be allowed to join the group or participate in the program that matches your gender identity as much as possible."

Further, the groups advise, "If you change your name to one that better matches your gender identity, a school needs to use that name to refer to you."

Randy Thomasson, of the Campaign for Children and Families, noted that the proposal was made by 'lesbian state senator Sheila James Kuehl, D-Santa Monica."

"Schools need to do a much better job teaching kids reading, writing and arithmetic, not a better job advertising controversial sexual lifestyles to captive six-year-olds," he said.

He also noted that, just as last year, two other bills also are pending: AB 394 by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys, would demand that schools distribute to students "anti-harassment" education programs, and AB 675 by Assemblyman Mike Eng, D-Monterey Park, would give $1 million to pay for homosexual, bisexual and transsexual activists to turn 10 public schools into "sexual indoctrination centers."

Last year three similar bills were approved by California lawmakers, but were vetoed by the governor.

Many groups, including several national outreaches such as the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family, had lobbied for the veto.

One of last year's plans would have required the State Board of Education to increase sensitivity to so-called "discrimination." Under the plan the state Superintendent of Public Instruction would have had unlimited discretion to withhold state funds from schools that did not comply with that individual's interpretation of the law.

A second would have "integrated tolerance training" into history and social science curriculum and started a pilot program that would have forced students to learn a "new definition" of tolerance, one that would require them to not only accept but advocate for homosexuality, bisexuality and transgenderism, according to the CRI.

The third would have banned anything that "reflected adversely" on homosexuals, bisexuals or transgenders.

Former Assemblyman Larry Bowler, R-Elk Grove, described them as no more or less than "indoctrination, designed to inculcate our children and our grandchildren."

As WND has reported, California lawmakers also are considering a plan to make it a criminal offense to spank children with a spoon or similar instrument.

 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
 May 04, 2007 3:03 PM

In a way I could see why they want to make it more gender neutral but in the end I think it will only confuse it more.

Like that bathrooms, we'll have boys claiming they are girls just to sneak a peek and vice versa. I mean girls can easily stand to pee on a toilet it is not like many are equiped for urinal use and I know a couple guys who sit on a toilet to pee and since guys bathrooms are equiped for both situations it should be left that way.

As far as making things like cheerleading and sports teams gender neutral I think it is great as long as the necessary saftey precautions are taken.

Also as for banning certain word usage like mom, dad, husband and wife I think that is wrong it doesn't make a difference...."I have two dads (i.e gay parents)" or "I have two moms (lesbian parents)" suits just fine a achild can choose to explain or not.

Also I feel teaching children tolerence for gay/lesbian/transexual rights will not and should not affect moral or religious ethics as it just teaches us what God said about being tolerent to those different for you even if you do not believe as they is the right thing to do.

 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
Anela...Tolerance.... May 04, 2007 3:10 PM

God is so misquoted on that one.

This action would mean that children would be forced to be taught that a particular lifestyle is an good and healthy and acceptable alternative for them and their parents have no say in the matter.

So why not teach all religions, and their values, as acceptable and good?
 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
 May 04, 2007 6:09 PM

What I meant was that tolerence should be taught no matter what, I myself am not Christian but was raised in the church up till I was 8 and I was always taught that tolerence was good whether you were a different religion or lifestyle.

Also if I remember correctly there were several times when Jesus stood against intolerence for different lifestyle aspects and was a teacher of peace not hate against other religions or lifestyles...what I am saying is that instead of saying "you must be this way to be happy" the schools should be saying "you should respect people of other lifestyles , faiths, big, small, white, black, etc etc...and if you can't do that than you should keep your mouth shut and not speak negative but say 'if you want to live this way or believe this or that or whatever that is up to you but these are my beliefs and I stand by them while respecting you'"

A parent can teach a child to hate gays/lesbians/transexuals or whatever, but the schools have a right to teach that maybe hate is not the way. A child will grow up to believe what they want to believe.... My dad for example is highly racist towards blacks school taught diversity acceptance....he hated that and fought tooth and nail against it....and today I believe that race/religion/lifestyle should not be used to segregate us but to bring us together...the USA was meant to be a land of hope and freedom, yet today we allow race/religion/lifestyle to still hold huge barriers against people.

Why shouldn't the schools try and teach kids acceptance...they will end up growing up to see both sides of 'Why?' and have the ability to make the choices right for them.

 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
Some thigs no... May 04, 2007 6:30 PM

Would you tolerate murder? Or Child Molestation? Or Wife Beating?

There are some things we have a duty not to tolerate. 

BTW, nowhere in the Gospels did Jesus say we need to tolerate everything and everyone. Quite the opposite. If you can provide the exact reference, book, chapter and verse, I would appreciate it. Thanks.
 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
 May 04, 2007 6:35 PM

The government mandated teaching of specific values is exactly what was done in Nazi Germany, in Russia under Stalin, and in China under Mao. The goverment mandated how people were to think and then forced this indoctrination on all children whether the parents agreed or not.

Ironically, all three were at first considered Liberal and serving the people. Until they had the power. We are headed in that direction now in the USA.
 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
 May 04, 2007 6:50 PM

You are effectively supporting an official state religion, forced on everyone by law.  [ send green star]  [ accepted]
 May 05, 2007 6:21 AM

First off we are not discussing child molestation, murder or anything of that sort, we are discussing the moral and ethical effects of teaching our children about gay and lesbian rights.

Secondly I do not appreciate you getting on a soap box of religion here... I AM NOT CHRISTIAN which means I do not own a bible, which means I can only quote what I was taught as a child so could you please stop acting as though I am committing a mortal sin just by mentiong that Jesus was a student and teacher of compassion and tolerence.

Last I checked many of the Christian religions had the "repent thy sins and come unto me" clause which applies in almost any situation except suicide which is why in some ways the statement you made about murderers and child molesters can be kinda worked around in many Christian faiths...which there in lies some of the hipocracy that drove me away from the church.

And now I can sincerely say I am through with this discussion since it seems it is going to head into a huge religious fight over the moral ethics of anything but the original post.

Good Day, Blessed Be.

 [ send green star]  [ accepted]
  New Topic              Back To Topics Read Code of Conduct


This group:
Children's Issue's and Petitions
305 Members

View All Topics
New Topic

Track Topic
Mail Preferences

New to Care2? Start Here.