California is recommending schools like Sunnyside become ‘discrimination-free” zones
The state of California is poised within days to adopt a resolution that schools be “discrimination-free” zones – a plan one critic asserts is designed “to stamp out the free speech of students and teachers with moral values or scientific ethics.”
ACR 82 already has gone most of the way through the legislative approval process and only awaits state Assembly approval of Senate changes.
The resolution states “all public education institutes are encouraged to … identify themselves as ‘discrimination-free zones’ through placards, signs, notices of available services, and other appropriate identifications to create a campus climate that welcomes diversity and supports the tolerance of others.”
“While this may sound good,” said a statement from an organization called Save California, “the devil is in the details. By including morally controversial lifestyles [homosexuality, bisexuality and others] in this resolution, ACR 82 would encourage schools to ‘enact procedures’ against ‘acts of discrimination that occur on campus.'”
Critics say the “procedures” could be enacted over something as basic as a statement that the Bible does not approve of homosexuality.
The proposal states “all public education institutions, prekindergarten through university campuses, are encouraged to develop and enact policies that support tolerance and acceptance of others regardless of their race or ethnicity, religion, disability, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, nationality, or any other characteristic. … [Further] resolved, that all public education institutions are encouraged to enact procedures, such as counseling services and conflict management, that meaningfully address acts of discrimination. …”
Randy Thomasson, executive director of Save California, told WND that California, which already has a history of pro-homosexual advocacy required by law in its schools, now is moving to the next level.
“Putting these anti-family values in children’s heads is not enough,” he said. The state is “figuratively cutting out their tongues if they disagree.
“Children who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and that there are different roles for men and women in the family will be subjected to reprimand, detention, suspension, corrective counseling or other punishments in order to serve as a bad example to other children,” he said.
In a Save California letter to lawmakers, Thomasson cited a number of statements that could be punished if the resolution passes, including:
- Being bisexual is not genetic
- It’s wrong not to abstain from sex until marriage
- Going outside the Bible’s standards on sexuality is sin
- Marriage is only between a man and a woman
- Homosexuality is the primary transmission mode for HIV/AIDS
“This is a severe attack upon free speech, specifically the moral beliefs of children, teachers and even parents who step foot on campus,” he said.
He said the proposal is expected to be given final approval as early as Monday. Although it remains a “resolution” at this point, it has the weight of the legislature behind it.
Thomasson said it will be the newest tool for homosexual-rights activists to pressure schools to claim “discrimination-free” status and “corral the children more into their agenda and brainwashing.”
Long history of promoting homosexuality
California has a long history of demanding advocacy for homosexuality and other alternative lifestyles in its schools. In 1999, Gov. Gray Davis signed AB 537 permitting teachers and students to announce their homosexuality or cross-dress. The bill also was called a non-discrimination plan..
Then in 2003, Davis signed SB 71 establishing new “sexual health” standards that teach children as young as fifth grade that consensual sex is “safe” if the student is “protected” with a condom. It also teaches homosexuality is normal.
In 2007, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 777 prohibiting any public school instruction or activity that “promotes” a discriminatory bias. The law now requires positive depictions of transsexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality at all levels in school.
Impacted by the law are classroom instruction materials, textbooks, guest speakers, videos, drama, music, school assemblies and sports teams.
Schwarzenegger followed in 2007 with AB 394, which promotes alternative sexual lifestyle choices through “anti-harassment” language.
Thomasson pointed out that California has no prohibition on public school teachers promoting “any legal sexual lifestyle or practice,” and schools already have pro-homosexual “diversity” days, weeks or months.
So what will the new resolution change?
Applying the precedent
“Let’s look at the application,” Thomasson told WND.
“What does a ‘discrimination-free’ school look like? If a student does a writing assignment, saying that marriage is only for a man and a woman or the father has a role different from the mother or that AIDS primarily is acquired through homosexual activity, or going outside the Bible’s standards on sexuality is sin, this could be labeled as hate, intolerance or discrimination, and the hammer can come down.”
He said the state already has more than adequate statutory prohibition on violence and promotion of “tolerance.” So the new plan’s target would be speech, he said.
Thomasson said parents need to wake up and review alternatives to public schools for their children. His organization offers answers to questions about the issue at RescueYourChild.com.
His organization also set up a procedure to contact members of the California Legislature as well as a second route for communications.
The most recent vote in favor of the plan was 22-7, with all Democrats in support and most Republicans opposed.
In a statement about the time of the vote, Thomassan said, “ACR 82 will lead to mandatory counseling and possible suspension of children who believe in man-woman marriage and natural gender roles. The Democrats are giving parents yet another reason to exit the chaotic public school system.”
A state Senate analysis said, “ACR 82 serves to remind and encourage public education institutions to come up with and implement these kinds of measures to prevent and stop discrimination.”
Comes as pediatricians issue warning
The move in California comes just as pediatricians are warning educators not to promote being “gay.”
A letter went out just days ago from the American College of Pediatricians, a nonprofit organization funded by members and donors, to school superintendents across the U.S. that tells them plainly, “It is not the school’s role to diagnose and attempt to treat any student’s medical condition, and certainly not a school’s role to ‘affirm’ a student’s perceived personal sexual orientation.”
Further, schools can create a “life of unnecessary pain and suffering” for a child when they reinforce a behavior chosen out of a child’s “confusion.”
“Even when motivated by noble intentions, schools can ironically play a detrimental role if they reinforce this disorder,” said the letter, signed by Dr. Tom Benton, the organization’s president.
The group also has created a website called Facts About Youth as a resource for school officials to obtain the facts from a “non-political, non-religious channel.”
Officials with the College of Pediatricians told WND that the effort is to counter information delivered to the same schools in 2008 in a brochure called “Just the Facts About Youth and Sexual Orientation” that was sponsored in part by the American Psychological Association.
The brochure, the College of Pediatricians said, “omits critical facts and makes recommendations that are refuted by decades of scientific research and extensive clinical experience.”
“Most alarmingly,” the College of Pediatricians website said, “the recommendations offered will place young people at increased risk of grave psychological, emotional, and physical harm.”
Such policies already are rampant in the United Kingdom, where officials confirm that children as young as 5 years old could be labeled “offenders” for their playground comments about family values.