More than 620,000 residents of California have signed petitions demanding that a “bathroom bill” adopted by the state legislature that allows students to choose which gender they represent be killed.
And they did it in just 80 days.
State officials now are checking the names, but supporters of the petition drive, at Privacy For All Students, say they only need about 500,000 names to put the issue on the 2014 ballot for voters to decide.
The law, AB 1266, adopted during this year’s legislative session, provides that students be given access to gender-segregated facilities according to their “gender identity.” It’s the latest in a long list of sex indoctrination laws adopted in California, including one that requires a day of recognition for Harvey Milk, the homosexual politician who also was an advocate of infamous cult leader Jim Jones.
One of the principals behind the effort, Karen England of Capitol Resource Institute, said the flurry of activity by churches and others to collect signatures was “unbelievable.”
One woman who had collected three signatures in the San Jose area missed her connection to have the petition page delivered to campaign organizers to be counted and submitted. So she drove a five-hour round trip to make sure the voters’ names were on the list.
Another man found out about the petition drive Saturday morning, spent the day at his church to collect 13 names, and because of the lateness of the hour, also made that same five-hour round trip to deliver them, England said.
She said the state has 10 days to verify names through a sampling process. A team of attorneys from the Pacific Justice Institute is lined up to challenge any disqualified signatures it believes are valid.
Never before in California’s history, England said, have so many volunteer names been submitted for a petition drive.
If there are enough names and voters eventually reject the legislature’s sex agenda, it will be as if the law never existed. So a court challenge likely would be futile, she said.
“They (lawmakers) absolutely have awakened the sleeping populace,” England said.
She explained that supporters of the ballot issue don’t have to persuade anyone. They just need to give them the facts.
As WND reported, some parents were so stunned by the law that they checked online rumor sites, such as Snopes, according to England.
The campaign’s goal is to veto the “extremist” language adopted by majority Democrats in the state legislature and signed by Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown that opens public school locker rooms and restrooms to students of either sex.
Apparently, students will only need to tell school officials which gender they feel like. England affirmed that the law has no provision for certifying that someone is gender-disoriented or gender-confused before being given the rights provided in the new law.
England said parents in other states also should be concerned.
“We’re not like Las Vegas. What happens in California spreads to other states,” she said.
England told WND the law is a direct assault on parental rights. It allows schools to treat children as members of either gender and send them to locker rooms or restrooms that may be in conflict with their physical gender. The law also keeps all such information away from parents.
“This is as far as they’ve (lawmakers) ever gone. This is the most extreme. Parents and teachers are absolutely outraged,” she said.
“Not one lawmaker campaigned on allowing boys in the girls locker room and restrooms,” she said. “Nor is there one who, I think, will, or will be able to stand and explain why they think this is a good idea.”
Attorney Tim LeFever, who also is working with the initiative effort, wondered how many people would think it’s “too extreme to have sex-segregated bathrooms.”
“On this one, the general public doesn’t have a problem saying boys in the girls locker room isn’t a good idea,” he said.
He said telling a 16-year-old boy struggling with gender identity issues to use the girl’s restroom defies logic.
“I think that shows a real lack of compassion. One needs to deal with such an individual in a way that does not humiliate,” he said.
England discussed the issue with talk-radio host Mike Huckabee recently:
“We respect that some students are struggling with their own sexual identity, but we ask for respect for the other students who will be humiliated when a boy walks into the girl’s locker room,” said England. “This is a privacy issue, a safety issue, and a common sense issue.”
She said it seems “unbelievable that this bill would ever have made its way through the legislature and signed into law by the governor.”
The law, the first of its kind in the nation, drew the wrath of state Assemblyman Tim Donnelly.
Allowing teenage boys and girls in the same locker room, showering side by side, is a bad idea. In fact, AB 1266 is a recipe for disaster. This will take the normal hormonal battles raging inside every teenager and pour gasoline onto those simmering coals. The right to privacy enjoyed by every student will be replaced by the right to be ogled.
While trying to address a concern of less than 2 percent of the population, California is now forcibly violating the rights of the other 98 percent. Many of the parents I have heard from within the last few days have literally pulled their kids out of public schools and have enrolled them in homeschool and private school programs. My boys, who went back to the public school after many years away, will not be returning.
It is completely unreasonable to expect teenagers, who are uncomfortable with themselves at this age, to accept this level of privacy invasion. After all, in the Capitol building, not only do they not allow men in the women’s bathroom, the women must enter a code to access their restrooms.
The controversy earlier reached the ludicrous, when a woman who has “transitioned” to be a “man” became outraged when a pro-family advocate, Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com, addressed her as lady in a CNN interview.
See Thomasson’s closing words in the CNN interview:
In a recent analysis, WND Managing Editor David Kupelian wrote of the atrocities that develop because of gender confusion, especially for children.
“Indeed, the recent renaming of gender identity disorder as gender dysphoria, thanks to pressure from the powerful LGBT lobby, means the condition itself is no longer considered abnormal or ‘disordered,’ but only the anxiety one may feel over it,” he wrote.
“This is a halfway measure; the unabashed, publicly stated goal of the LGBT world is to get gender identity disorder completely de-pathologized so it is officially and legally declared to be an absolutely normal variant of human sexuality. It is, after all, the ‘T’ in the LGBT coalition.”
“Being transgender no longer a ‘mental disorder’: APA,” announced NBC News last December, along with other major news outlets, Kupelian documented.
But he continued, “Reality check: Transgenderism (or transsexualism) is not normal. In fact, it’s so abnormal and unnatural that a staggeringly tragic 41 percent of all transgender individuals living in the United States have attempted to commit suicide, according to a 2010 study.”
He highlighted the dangers: “Consider the incredibly sad story, reported last week in the London Telegraph, of ‘female-to-male’ transsexual Nancy Verhelst of Belgium, who was legally euthanized by lethal injection after a botched sex-change operation. The back story? Her parents hated and rejected her because she was a girl and they wanted another boy. So this poor girl tried to become a boy, and when it didn’t work, she took her life.”
Further, making such conditions “normal” then results in the amputation of health body parks, he said.
California lawmakers have built a long reputation for promoting “gay” rights and resisting attempts to uphold traditional values in public schools and elsewhere. Majority Democrats on a California state legislative committee at one point killed a plan that would have cracked down on intimate relationships between school teachers and their students.
The unsuccessful Assembly Bill 1861 would have made it a felony if any teacher or employee of a public or private school “engages in a sexual relationship or inappropriate communications with a pupil.”
Another bill, SB48, requires positive portrayals of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons in public school social studies and history classes.
Others state laws:
- SB 543, signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2010, “allows school staff to remove children ages 12 and up from government schools and taken off-campus for counseling sessions, without parental permission or involvement. The purpose is to permit pro-homosexuality teachers and administrators to remove sexually confused children in 6th grade and up from campus and take them to pro-homosexuality counselors who will encourage them to embrace the homosexual lifestyle.”
- ACR 82, approved by the California Legislature in 2010, “creates de facto ‘morality-free zones’ at participating schools (pre-kindergarten through public universities). Schools that become official ‘Discrimination-Free Zones’ will ‘enact procedures’ (including mandatory counseling) against students from pre-kindergarten on up who are accused of ‘hate,’ ‘intolerance,’ or ‘discrimination’.” What is the hate? Peacefully speaking or writing against the unnatural lifestyles choices of homosexuality and bisexuality.
- SB 572, signed by Schwarzenegger in 2009, establishes “Harvey Milk Day” in K-12 California public schools and community colleges. In classrooms, schools and school districts that participate, children will now be taught to admire the life and values of late homosexual activist and teen predator Harvey Milk of San Francisco the month of May.
- SB 777, signed by Schwarzenegger in 2007, prohibits all public school instruction and every school activity from “promoting a discriminatory bias” against (effectively requiring positive depictions of) transsexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality to schoolchildren as young as five years old. SB 777 means children will be taught their “gender” is a matter of choice.
- AB 394, signed by Schwarzenegger in 2007, effectively promotes transsexual, bisexual and homosexual indoctrination of students, parents and teachers via “anti-harassment” and “anti-discrimination” materials, to be publicized in classrooms and assemblies, posted on walls, incorporated into curricula on school websites, and distributed in handouts to take home.
- SB 71, signed by Gov. Gray Davis in 2003 and implemented in 2008 through the new “sexual health” standards approved by appointees of Schwarzenegger and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, teaches children as young as 5th grade that any consensual sexual behavior is “safe” as long as you “protect” yourself with a condom, and teaches children that homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality is “normal.”
- AB 1785, signed by Davis in 2000, required the California State Board of Education to alter the state curriculum frameworks to include and require “human relations education” for children in K-12 public schools, with the aim of “fostering an appreciation of the diversity of California’s population and discouraging the development of discriminatory attitudes and practices,” according to the state legislative counsel’s digest.
- AB 537, signed by Davis in 1999, permits teachers and students to openly proclaim and display their homosexuality, bisexuality or transsexuality, even permitting cross-dressing teachers, school employees and student on campus, in classrooms, and in restrooms.
The state legislature even demanded that students in public schools every year honor Harvey Milk, a homosexual activist, reported sexual predator and advocate for Jim Jones, leader of the massacred hundreds in Jonestown, Guyana.
SaveCalifornia.com contends that in honoring Milk, schools are advocating for the acceptance of what Milk sought: the entire homosexual, bisexual and cross-dressing agenda; a refusal to acknowledge sexually transmitted diseases spread by the behavior; his behavior as “a sexual predator of teenage boys, most of them runaways with drug problems”; advocacy for multiple sexual relationships at one time; and “lying to get ahead.”
A 1982 biography of Milk tells of a 16-year-old named McKinley who “was looking for some kind of father figure.”
“At 33, Milk was launching a new life, though he could hardly have imagined the unlikely direction toward which his new lover would pull him,” the book says.
“It would be to boyish-looking men in their late teens and early 20s that Milk would be attracted for the rest of his life.”