This Is How The GAY Agenda Affects the rest of us!!!

[Bonnie]

Talk about shoved in our faces!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will veto legislation
that would require California textbooks to contain information about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in American history, according to a spokesman.

The bill, which has already been passed by the Senate and awaits a vote in the Assembly, seeks to recognize "the contributions of the LGBT community in the social science curriculum in the same way the state has come to recognize the achievements of women and minorities,” the Sacramento Bee reports.

But Schwarzenegger spokesman Adam Mendelsohn told the Bee: "The governor believes that school curriculum should include all important historical figures, regardless of orientation. However, he does not support the legislature micromanaging curriculum.”


Schwarzenegger earlier angered gay activists by vetoing a bill legalizing same-sex marriage.


The textbook bill was introduced by Sen. Sheila Kuehl, a Democrat from Los Angeles, who argued: "Silence and biased messages about lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people only promotes negative stereotypes and this, in turn, can lead to discrimination, harassment and violence.”

But Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families, says the legislation is "a deceptively written bill that would do tremendous harm to our children.

"The core of the bill is an absolute mandate requiring all textbooks, all instructional materials and all school-sponsored activities to positively portray transsexuals, bisexuals and homosexuals as role models for children as young as kindergarten.”

Despite the statement from Schwarzenegger’s spokesman, Kuehl said she is not prepared to accept that the governor intends to veto the legislation if it passes the Assembly.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/25/161947.shtml?s=et

 

[CSM]

Talk about shoved in our faces!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/25/161947.shtml?s=et

I am all for it...IF they also include phrasing that requires portrayal of transsexuals, bisexuals, and homosexuals in a negative light and suitable as bad examples for children as young as pre-school!

 

[Bonnie]

I am all for it...IF they also include phrasing that requires portrayal of transsexuals, bisexuals, and homosexuals in a negative light and suitable as bad examples for children as young as pre-school!

:rotflmao: Keep that sense of humor!!!

 

[cslaughlin13]

well, I disagree with forcibly placing irrelevant GLTB figures into textbooks, however, if they are going to talk about somebody important that did have an effect on histoy and they to happen to be gay or lebian or transgendered, then it is fine. For instance on the topic of world history, pretty much all of the romans and greeks were bisexuals, if they mentioned the fact that they were, that wouldn't be a problem. However, if they are talking about John Doe's second assistant's cousin who invented the pocket protector or something that is totally irrelevant, they should not have to include that into history.

 

[theHawk]

When are these yahoos every going to realize being gay isn't the same as being a "woman or a minority"? Its not a sin to be born a woman or a certain race/color. We don't need the government telling our children who their role models should be. Liberals' only hold on society is our schools, where they fight to shove their morality (or lack thereof) down our children's throats. We will see more of this, they will fight tooth and nail to keep their hands in our education system and to push their agendas.





:baby:

 

[rtwngAvngr]

When are these yahoos every going to realize being gay isn't the same as being a "woman or a minority"? Its not a sin to be born a woman or a certain race/color. We don't need the government telling our children who their role models should be. Liberals' only hold on society is our schools, where they fight to shove their morality (or lack thereof) down our children's throats. We will see more of this, they will fight tooth and nail to keep their hands in our education system and to push their agendas.





:baby:

Any version of good must have as it's focus government power and intervention, for the new world order to succeed. People who solve the basic problems (irresposibility, addiction, poverty) are less a profit center for government, so to increase government market share, many policies of government undermine personal responsibility training in some form or another.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Talk about shoved in our faces!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/25/161947.shtml?s=et

The gay lobby has become way too powerful. Our children's future is at risk. It is past time for middle America to crush this political movement once and for all. First, however, people must realize that it is a political movement.

 

[cslaughlin13]

screaming eagle: I want to know, how does me being gay endanger the lives of your children and the children in the US?

 

[Avatar4321]

This is kind of not about gays at all.

But since when does the government have power to dictate what is placed in school textbooks? Shouldnt the first amendment protect publishers from such laws?

 

[Nienna]

This is kind of not about gays at all.

But since when does the government have power to dictate what is placed in school textbooks? Shouldnt the first amendment protect publishers from such laws?

The mandate was for the state curriculum, not the text books, I think. Of course the curriculum certainly influences the demand for certain texts.

 

[Nienna]

The mandate was for the state curriculum, not the text books, I think. Of course the curriculum certainly influences the demand for certain texts.

So a publisher could still publish a text saying what it wants to say, but the schools wouldn't buy the texts.

I'm interested in the freedom of speech of religious schools... would the mandate affect their curriculum?

 

[Abbey Normal]

The gay/lib argument is that being gay is just an alternative, normal, lifestyle, and as such gays should be treated just like anyone else. Even to the point of marriage. Yet, when it comes to curriculum, they are to be set apart as a special, distinct group, so they can be singled out for praise. Are they the same as everyone else, or not? Oh, I see: The same when it suits the agenda, but different and special when it suits a different agenda.

Once again, when you scratch the surface of liberal tenets, they are shown to be inconsistent, hypocritical and illogical.

 

[Abbey Normal]

The mandate was for the state curriculum, not the text books, I think. Of course the curriculum certainly influences the demand for certain texts.

If it is part of the state-mandated curriculum, I would think it has to be taught, period. Whether the information comes from a textbook, a handout, or just a lecture probably wouldn't matter.

Kathianne?

 

[Bonnie]

well, I disagree with forcibly placing irrelevant GLTB figures into textbooks, however, if they are going to talk about somebody important that did have an effect on histoy and they to happen to be gay or lebian or transgendered, then it is fine. For instance on the topic of world history, pretty much all of the romans and greeks were bisexuals, if they mentioned the fact that they were, that wouldn't be a problem. However, if they are talking about John Doe's second assistant's cousin who invented the pocket protector or something that is totally irrelevant, they should not have to include that into history.

Point is why mention anyone's sexuality? If someone is great on their own merits why do textbooks need to clarify their sexual proclivity?

I don't hear historians talking about Martin Luther Kings sex life..........it's irrelevant to the impact he had on civil rights.

This is a purposeful and transparent means for gay activists to differentiate, and place gay public figures on a pedastal in childrens eyes, and absolutely ramming it down parents throats whether they like it or not!

 

[Avatar4321]

The mandate was for the state curriculum, not the text books, I think. Of course the curriculum certainly influences the demand for certain texts.

I would still question the legality of it.

 

[cslaughlin13]

Bonnie, I do agree that there really isn't any point to mentioning somebody's sex life, however, what i am trying to say is that if the issue arises that they do need to talk about homosexual issues, then it should be perfectly okay, but I don't believe that the state necessarily needs to make schools incorporate that into their teachings. Chances are though, that it will probably passed anyways just because California is extremely liberal.

And also, I do agree that some gay activist do take it a little to far as well when it comes to being pro gay. But at the same time, I think that many Christians take it to far with the anti-gay stuff as well.

 

[Avatar4321]

Bonnie, I do agree that there really isn't any point to mentioning somebody's sex life, however, what i am trying to say is that if the issue arises that they do need to talk about homosexual issues, then it should be perfectly okay, but I don't believe that the state necessarily needs to make schools incorporate that into their teachings. Chances are though, that it will probably passed anyways just because California is extremely liberal.

And also, I do agree that some gay activist do take it a little to far as well when it comes to being pro gay. But at the same time, I think that many Christians take it to far with the anti-gay stuff as well.

Exactly when would the need to discuss homosexual issues arise in elementry school or even middle school?

 

[cslaughlin13]

Avatar, I'm not necessarily saying that they would need to incorporate it into middle or elementary school, but isf they did, they should be allowed to do so.

 

[Avatar4321]

Avatar, I'm not necessarily saying that they would need to incorporate it into middle or elementary school, but isf they did, they should be allowed to do so.

I know thats what you are saying. And im asking you what kind of situations these might be. Also what kind of laws are currently preventing schools from addressing these hypothetical issues of yours?

Because if you cant think of a reason that it might arise and there are no laws preventing it, why do we need any law allowing it?

 

[cslaughlin13]

Well, I think the point is to create more gay awareness, but I personally think that they are going about it the wrong way. You're probably right in the fact that there might not be any topics covered in school, maybe except for government, that would need to incorporate some history of the GLTB community.
What they should probably be doing instead is be talking about homosexuality and putting it in sex ed. I can't think of any gay figurehead that has contributed to history.