Brave New Schools

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by bjlooper, Oct 15, 2007.

  1. bjlooper

    bjlooper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    147
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to 'gays'

    Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger

    "Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.

    "We are shocked and appalled that the governor has blatantly attacked traditional family values in California," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.

    "With this decision, Gov. Schwarzenegger has told parents that their values are irrelevant. Many parents will have no choice but to pull their children out of the public schools that have now become sexualized indoctrination centers."

    "Arnold Schwarzenegger has delivered young children into the hands of those who will introduce them to alternative sexual lifestyles," said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, which worked to defeat the plans. "This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.

    "Shame on Schwarzenegger and the Democrat politicians for ensuring that every California school becomes a homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination center," he said.

    Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states.

    The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.

    There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.

    "SB 777 will result in reverse discrimination against students with religious and traditional family values," said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Institute. "These students have lost their voice as the direct result of Gov. Schwarzenegger's unbelievable decision. The terms 'mom and dad' or 'husband and wife' could promote discrimination against homosexuals if a same-sex couple is not also featured.

    "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. Now that SB777 is law, schools will in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual experimentation," she said.

    Also signed was AB394, which targets parents and teachers for such indoctrination through "anti-harassment" training, CCF said.

    Schwarzenegger had vetoed almost identical provisions a year ago, saying existing state law already provided for penalties for discrimination.

    "We had hoped that the governor would once again veto this outrageous legislation but he obviously decided to side with the out-of-touch extremists that control the legislature. This law does not reflect the true values of the average Californian," said England. "True leadership means standing up for what is true and right."

    Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any "instruction" or school-sponsored "activity" that "promotes a discriminatory bias" against "gender" – the bill's definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes – as well as "sexual orientation."

    "Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school," CCF noted.

    Offenders will face the wrath of the state Department of Education, up to and including lawsuits.

    CCF noted that now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes.

    Further, homecoming kings now can be either male or female – as can homecoming queens, and students, whether male or female, must be allowed to use the restroom and locker room corresponding to the sex with which they choose to identify.

    AB394 promotes the same issues through state-funded publications, postings, curricula and handouts to students, parents and teachers.

    It also creates the circumstances where a parent who says marriage is only for a man and a woman in the presence of a lesbian teacher could be convicted of "harassment," and a student who believes people are born either male or female could be reported as a "harasser" by a male teacher who wears women's clothes, CCF said.

    Thomasson said Schwarzenegger also signed AB14, which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.

    Affected will be day cares, preschool or after-school programs, food and housing programs, senior services, anti-gang efforts, jobs programs and others.

    Thomasson said it also forces every hospital in California – even private, religious hospitals – to adopt policies in support of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality and opens up nonprofit organizations to lawsuits if they exclude members that engage in homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual conduct.

    "It's the height of intolerance to punish individuals, organizations, businesses, and churches that have moral standards on sexual conduct and sexual lifestyles," said Thomasson, in response to the signing of AB14. "This is another insensitive law that violates people's moral boundaries."

    The vitriol over the issue rose to new levels in its latest campaign.

    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." The advocacy group also warns schools against bringing parents into any such discussion with students.

    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, the 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.
     
  2. blackco

    blackco Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    205
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    I wish they had this in place when I was in high school; I would have put on a scarf right before gym class and headed right into the girls locker room....WAHOOO!!! ;-) While I might agree with some of the reasons behind this, the ends do not justify the means, it opens up so much for reverse problems, and the cost involved make this a no-brainer bad idea. I hope the first time a "student with a penis" walks into a girls locker room, every parent with who has a "student born genderly female" sues for sexual harassment under title 9 rules. And I had such a high opinion of Conan.
     

  3. Eaglet

    Eaglet Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,779
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    There is a difference between "The Antichrist" and "an Antichrist".
    The word "Anti" is something that is against.
    The word "Christ" means the anointed one. Means the "WORD".
    Anything that is against God's WORD is antichrist.
    That's what the people of California elected as a Governor, "an Antichrist".
     
  4. Coyboy

    Coyboy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,132
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Look at it in a different way and Arnolds a genius.

    The legislature is made up of extremlly libereal Democrats.

    They introduced and passed a Bill. (however ridiculous it is)

    Arnold signed it into law. BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE REPRESENTS THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA.

    Now if the more conservative voters, Dems and Republicans alike, don't agree with or like the law, then they can elect representatives that are more conservative.

    So by signing this into law, Arnold may have single handedly cost dozens of extremlly liberal politicans the 2008 election.

    If this new law is so rediculous to the majority of CA voters, then there is sure to be a big change in the legislature.

    Arnold has a cop out as well, "The people of CA elected the legislature, and when this law passed over my desk for the second time, I assumed this must be what the voters wanted."
     
  5. Roll-Yur-Own

    Roll-Yur-Own Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    630
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Coyboy, no offense, but your statement is ridiculous! Arnold is a liberal, he is married into the Kennedy family. He caters to those lefty tree huggers in CA.

    Bottom line is that, if gays want rights thats fine. Want to get married, be my guest. Its not my business and I don't mind other peoples business.

    BUT, don't act like it is the norm and teach it to kids like you just choose A or B.

    So what happens, when the guys from the football team decide to go into the girls locker room to shower with the girls?

    I don't think the gay men will get into the girls locker room anyway, because the straight men will get there first!!!!
     
  6. Coyboy

    Coyboy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,132
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    R Y O, no offense taken, Arnold MAY be liberal but he has along way to go to catch Fienstien, Schummer, and Clinton. If I remember correctly he originally ran for Governor as a Republican. As far as him marrying into the Kennedy fammily, I watched a Barbra Walters some years ago where he and Maria discussed there political differences, and there were many. And for California, at least at that time, Arnold would be considered a conservative.

    I peresonally think the law is rediculous, hopefully Californians will also.

    If they do then they may elect more conservative politicians.

    Wishful thinking...... may-be.
     
  7. accuratebrass

    accuratebrass Active Member

    Messages:
    44
    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Coyboy, you are correct. But I think arnold is worse because he is a turncoat. At least the others have the right label.
     
  8. wildcat338

    wildcat338 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    199
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Good one Johnny damn near fell out my seat laughing so damn hard!!!