Since California solved all their other problems, they had time for this

See California passes bill mandating pro-gay teaching in schools, no parent opt-out | LifeSiteNews.com. What a freak state.  The Democrats have run that state into the ground, and now this.  Just another reason to vote Republican.

A bill requiring public schools to teach the “historical contributions” of homosexual Americans was approved by the California legislature on Tuesday, July 5. The bill also prohibits any school material or instruction that reflects adversely on homosexuality, bisexuality or transgenderism, and prohibits parents from removing children from classes over offensive material.

Bill SB 48 was sponsored by openly homosexual state senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and passed in the Democrat-controlled Assembly by 49-25, with all Democrats voting for the bill and Republicans opposing it. The legislation passed the state Senate in April.

If signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown, schools would have to introduce the homosexual curriculum after the bill becomes law in January.

“This bill will require California schools to present a more accurate and nuanced view of American history in our social science curriculum by recognizing the accomplishments of groups that are not often recognized,” said Assembly Speaker John Perez, the first openly homosexual speaker of the California Assembly.

Republican critics of the bill observed, however, that the measure has less to do with education than with homosexual indoctrination of school children.

11 thoughts on “Since California solved all their other problems, they had time for this”

  1. According to the the text of the bill, “Existing law requires instruction in social sciences to include a study of the role and contributions of both men and women to the development of California and the United States.” Note that this law is purely in regard to contributions to the development of California and the United States without regard to gender. In other words, teach the kids about people who contributed to the development of California and the United States. Yeah, we get that. Fine. The bill goes on to say”

    This bill would require instruction in social sciences to also include a study of the role and contributions of Native Americans, African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, European Americans, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, and other ethnic and cultural groups, to the development of California and the United States.

    There is a double-sided suggestion here. First, people, by virtue of their heritage or their desire for sex, have something specific to contribute to the development of the state and the nation. It isn’t, therefore, their contribution itself that is significant, but their heritage and sexual preference. Second, there is the suggestion that those with such heritage or sexual preference have been intentionally ommitted from class. An editor of a shoolbook, for instance, would be reading along and find a reference to, say, Harvey Milk as having made a contribution to the development of the state, but the editor would delete it because Milk was a homosexual. I would like to point out that this is fundamental nonsense.

    “Oh, you’re overreacting,” some might say. Well, according to the bill, this is the requirement:

    Instruction in social sciences shall include the early history of California and a study of the role and contributions of both men and women, Native Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, European Americans, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, and members of other ethnic and cultural groups, to the economic, political, and social development of California and the United States of America, with particular emphasis on portraying the role of these groups in contemporary society.

    That’s their point. The teaching emphasis is not the development of the state and the nation, but “the role of these groups“. That is, the point is not contribution and development, but these groups.

    But here’s where it gets down to the point. The bill states:

    Existing law requires that when adopting instructional materials for use in the schools, governing boards shall include materials that accurately portray the role and contribution of culturally and racially diverse groups including Native Americans, African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, and European Americans to the total development of California and the United States.

    This bill would revise the list of culturally and racially diverse groups to also include Pacific Islanders, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, and other ethnic and cultural groups.

    The goal, then, is to classify LGBT as a “culture” (or race?). Mind you, there is no conclusive evidence that “they’re born that way” despite the popular belief that they are. Mind you, no such protections exist for other Americans or cultures. Thus, based on “consensus” rather than science or reason, the California senate has decided to confirm a status and a preference on a group of people.

    Then it turns ugly … uglier. The bill specifies, “This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that alternative and charter schools take notice of the provisions of this bill in light of provisions of existing law that prohibit discrimination in any aspect of their operation.” So, you have a Christian school (as an example) that teaches that homosexual behavior is a sin according to the Bible. This bill would mandate that your school counter that teaching by intentionally giving preferential treatment to homosexuals whose existence appears to be a contribution to the state and the nation.

    Now, this wouldn’t be complete if I didn’t point out the other side. This article declares, “California passes bill mandating pro-gay teaching in schools, no parent opt-out”. The article claims, “The bill also prohibits any school material or instruction that reflects adversely on homosexuality, bisexuality or transgenderism, and prohibits parents from removing children from classes over offensive material.” I’ve read the bill. I see no such prohibition. I looked through it multiple times. I didn’t find it. While I find it offensive that the government has decided to teach children that homosexuals by their very existence are a contribution to the state and the nation and that those schools that disagree are banned from saying so, I don’t think we should try to make our case with false alarm.

    Like

  2. Maybe this will cause a lot of parents to rethink sending their kids to public school. Those who have the option to do so would be better served by private, parochial, and home school. While this bill is bad, it might be the thing that destroys the stranglehold the government has on the education of children.

    Like

  3. They have been working on passing this law for quite some time. I kept thinking possibly someone would stop the insanity in its tracks, but that never happened – go figure, it’s in California where there are few sane people left.

    My question has always been, why do we need to know about their sexual proclivities if they contributed something noteworthy to history? What other sexual “orientations” should we ensure are mandated for coverage? Pedophilia? Zoophilia? What about adulterers?

    Excellent comments, Stan!

    Like

  4. This is the future. Not equal opportunity but equal representation regardless of actual achievement. The sad part is that no matter how many laws they pass, it will never allow them to feel accepted. Because the stain they feel is not from other people not accepting but from within themselves. It is called sin. We all feel it. However, most of us do not try to pass in a futile effort to try and make it go away.

    Like

  5. Word accidently missed on my first post corrected below.

    This is the future. Not equal opportunity but equal representation regardless of actual achievement. The sad part is that no matter how many laws they pass, it will never allow them to feel accepted. Because the stain they feel is not from other people not accepting but from within themselves. It is called sin. We all feel it. However, most of us do not try to pass laws in a futile effort to try and make it go away.

    Like

  6. California also has five or six gun control bills in the pipeline, including a couple that are a heartbeat away from the governor’s desk. Yeah, they got THAT far:

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=384410

    Because, as you said, we don’t have any other problems left to solve in our state – like a budget deficit, skyrocketing unemployment, runaway illegal immigration, or anything else – so we’ve got time for trifling nonsense.

    Like

  7. “This article declares, “California passes bill mandating pro-gay teaching in schools, no parent opt-out”.”

    Watch me “opt out.” It’s not up to the state to decide my kids are going to learn gay history. I’ll call in and tell them my kid is sick that day.

    If they want to send a truant officer to my house, let ’em.

    Like

  8. Texas has it right. Their legislature meets for about six weeks a year, figures out what really does need to be done, and then moves along with life. Thus, no ridiculous laws coming through every year and a very pro-business environment.

    Neil, does anyone there need an attorney? 🙂

    Like

    1. Good points about the timing of the legislature. You don’t want to give them too much time, or they’ll just make more laws.

      “Neil, does anyone there need an attorney? :)”

      Probably! They’d like you in Texas.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s