- WND - http://www.wnd.com -
'Mom,' 'dad,' targeted by California bias ban
Posted By Bob Unruh On 09/12/2007 @ 1:00 am In Front Page | Comments Disabled
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
A new plan approved by the California Legislature could be used to ban the words “dad” or “mom” in all public schools as being discriminatory against “partner 1″‘ and “partner 2″ in same-sex relationships, according to critics.
The legislation, in fact, seeks to impose a “radical homosexual indoctrination” on the young children in the state, according to Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Family Impact, a new affiliate of Capitol Resource Institute.
“It is simply outrageous that the California legislature continues to ignore the values and beliefs of citizens by forcing this radical homosexual indoctrination on our young children,” England said.
The plan, SB777, has passed the state Assembly on a 43-23 vote and it now moves forward to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who previously vetoed another similar plan, SB1437 from 2006.
It bans any teaching or activities in schools that “promotes a discriminatory bias against” homosexuals, transgenders, bisexuals, and those with gender (perceived or actual) issues. England said the essence of SB 777 is that it seeks to normalize alternative lifestyles in California schools with special recognition for homosexuality, bisexuality, and transexuality.
Meredith Turney, the legislative liaison for the CRFI, said a clear picture of what will be demanded of schools in the state can be obtained by looking at the Los Angeles Unified School District, which already has adopted many of the requirements being set up for statewide use now.
“LAUSD policy instructs schools to provided access to restroom and locker room facilities that ‘corresponds to the gender identity that the student consistently asserts at school.’ If a male student ‘consistently asserts’ himself as a female at school, he will be granted access to female restrooms and locker rooms. This poses a serious danger to the safety of young female students,” Turney said.
“SB 777 will implement statewide the shocking policies LAUSD already enforces. Concerned parents do not want such radical, perplexing policies in their local schools. Parents want the assurance that when their children go to school they will learn the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic-not social indoctrination regarding alternative sexual lifestyles,” she said.
“SB 777 also will do away with such ‘arcane’ terms as ‘mom and dad’ and ‘husband and wife,’” stated England. “‘Promoting a discriminatory bias’ is so vague that it could be interpreted to mean that any reference to traditional families is discriminatory and requires equal time for radical sexual behavior.”
The Los Angeles District policy notes under its “Issues of Privacy” requirements “school personnel should not disclose a student’s transgender status to others, including parents, and/or other school personnel, unless there is a specific ‘need to know.’”
“Whenever discussing a particular issue such as conduct, discipline, grades, attendance, or health with a transgender or gender nonconforming student, focus on the conduct or particular issue, and not on any assumptions regarding the student’s actual or perceived gender identity,” the rules require. “When school personnel must contact the parents of a transgender or gender nonconforming student, ‘best practice’ would dictate that the student should be consulted first to determine an appropriate way to reference the student’s gender identity.”
Students also should be asked how they want to be addressed.
“In cases where students and parents may be in disagreement about the name and pronoun to be used at school, school officials may refer families to appropriate outside counseling services,” the rules require.
CRFI noted three members of the assembly stood in opposition to the plan: Ted Gaines, Bob Huff and Chuck DeVore.
“Assemblyman Gaines expressed his concern that the bill would silence students with traditional values while Assemblyman Huff explained that the education code already protects all students – including homosexuals – from discrimination and ‘harassment,’” the organization said. “Assemblyman DeVore inquired of the bill’s floor manager, Assemblyman John Laird, why the bill was necessary. When Laird declared that homosexual students are discriminated against, DeVore asked for specific examples. … Laird could not share any.”
“We hope that Gov. Schwarzenegger will … [veto] this legislation that pushes a radical social agenda.”
Randy Thomasson, of the Campaign for Children and Families, said the idea is just wrong.
“SB 777 requires textbooks, instructional materials and school-sponsored activities to positively portray cross-dressing, sex-change operations, homosexual ‘marriages’ and all aspects of homosexuality and bisexuality, including so-called ‘gay history,’” he said. “Silence on these sexual lifestyles will not be allowed.”
Thomasson said the notion “of forcing children to support controversial sexual lifestyles is shocking and appalling to millions of fathers and mothers.”
“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,” he said.
The current education code’s definition of “sex,” which reads, “‘Sex’ means the biological condition or quality of being a male or female human being,” is eliminated. The new “gender” definition considers “a person’s gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.”
The new mandate would be enforced by the attorneys of the California Department of Education, which would sue school districts that don’t comply, Thomasson noted.
England earlier warned of the ramifications nationwide, including a tailoring of textbooks by publishers to meet new censorship requirements in California, the largest purchaser of textbooks in the nation.
No matter how traditional a community may be, school officials would find themselves faced with the same religious, moral and social biases instituted in California reflected in their textbooks, she warned.
As WND reported, a board member for the homosexual advocacy group Equality California verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill earlier.
The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.
“The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance,” said England. “Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools.”
She also cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center that already is lobbying for special treatment in the school system.
“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.”
WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators, including leaders in California, have taken it upon themselves to promote a homosexual lifestyle to children under their charge.
WND reported California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, under whose supervision hundreds of thousands of children are being educated, has used his state position and taxpayer-funded stationery to praise a “gay” pride event used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.
That drew vehement objections from several educators, including Priscilla Schreiber, president of the Grossmont Unified High School District governing board.
“I am outraged that a person in this high-ranking elected position would advocate an event where diversity is not just being celebrated but where pornography and indecent exposure is being perpetrated on the young and innocent children of our communities,” she said.
WND also covered the issue when officials in Boulder, Colo., held a seminar for students in which they were told to “have sex,” including same-sex experiences, and “take drugs.”
Another school event promoted homosexuality to students while banning parents, and at still another, WND reported school officials ordered their 14-year-old freshman class into a “gay” indoctrination seminar after having them sign a confidentiality agreement promising not to tell their parents.
Are you a representative of the media who would like to interview the author of this story? Let us know.
Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com
URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2007/09/43477/
© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.