Culture War

April 7, 2006

Think the American people’s war is in Afghanistan & Iraq? Think again. There’s a war right here on the home front for the minds and souls of America’s youth. If conservatives don’t stand up for their values America has no hope for it’s future. It’s a good thing “reasonable” thinking people have pulled creationism out of our schools. They did it just in time to make room for Homosexuality 101.

Bill requires gays’ history to be taught
STATE SENATOR WANTS CALIFORNIA TO LEAD WAY

By Aaron C. Davis
Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
SACRAMENTO - The state Senate will consider a bill that would require California schools to teach students about the contributions gay people have made to society — an effort that supporters say is an attempt to battle discrimination and opponents say is designed to use the classroom to get children to embrace homosexuality.

The bill, which was passed by a Senate committee Tuesday, would require schools to buy textbooks “accurately” portraying “the sexual diversity of our society.” More controversially, it could require that students hear history lessons on “the contributions of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender to the economic, political, and social development of California and the United States of America.”

Though it’s a California bill, it could have far-reaching implications, not only by setting a precedent but also because California is the nation’s largest textbook buyer and as such often sets the standards for publishers who sell nationwide.

The bill could also bring sex wars roaring back into state politics in an election year in which gay-rights advocates had already purposefully relegated same-sex marriage to the legislative back burner, and as signature-gathering efforts for propositions rolling back gay rights had begun to slow.

“We’re totally opposed to inserting sexual orientation into textbooks in our schools. This is more than just accepting it, it’s forcing our kids to embrace it, almost celebrate it,” said Karen England, executive director of the public-policy group Capital Resource Institute, which believes teaching about sexual orientation should be left up to parents.

“This is not about discrimination. California is one of the most friendly gay, lesbian and transgender states in the nation,” England said. “This is a bold and out-front attempt to do what I think has always been the goal of a small but very loud group.”

The bill’s author, Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Los Angeles, rejects the criticism. “We’ve been working since 1995 to try to improve the climate in schools for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender kids, as well as those kids who are just thought to be gay, because there is an enormous amount of harassment and discrimination at stake,” she said.

As for the need to teach gay history, Kuehl points to research she says concludes that gay students might do better in school and be less at risk for suicide, truancy or drug and alcohol abuse if they saw their own lives more accurately reflected in school textbooks and if the issue were more openly discussed in classrooms.

“Teaching materials mostly contain negative or adverse views of us, and that’s when they mention us at all,” said Kuehl, one of the Legislature’s six openly gay lawmakers. A Senate analysis of her bill noted that one of the few times homosexuality is routinely discussed in classrooms is in relationship to pathology. “In textbooks, it’s as if there’s no gay people in California at all, so forget about it,” she said.

The bill expands on the existing state education code that already requires inclusion in the curriculum of the historical role and contributions of members of ethnic and cultural groups.
But central to the coming legislative floor debates will no doubt be questions about how gay issues might be woven into American history. The answer is still up for debate — as is which historical figures might be outed in the process, and how textbook authors would decide their relevance.

“We’re not suddenly going to say, `So and so was gay’ when they never said that,” Kuehl cautioned. “But if you’re teaching Langston Hughes poetry, you get a twofer because he was admittedly gay and he was black. So you could say he was a gay, black poet and talk about that.”

Aejaie Sellers, executive director of the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center in Santa Clara, said she thinks required gay-history lessons for students are a fantastic idea.

“Gays throughout history should be recognized. This is not something new, this goes back to the 18th and 17th and 16th century,” said Sellers. “The decriminalization of history could go back hundreds of years. There are certainly people who have made positive contributions to American history but all we ever hear is the tragic stuff.”

“Who knows,” Sellers asked, “that the author of `America the Beautiful,’ Katharine Lee Bates, was gay?”

England says she doesn’t really care, because a person’s contribution to history doesn’t hinge on sexual orientation.

“I don’t care if, or who, whatever historical figure they want to say is gay,” England said. “If we’re discussing history, who someone had sex with is inappropriate. I don’t think most Californians want history and social sciences taught through the lens of who in history slept with whom.”

Sellers said she thinks the need for gay history and other lessons may vary from school to school.

“There are some schools that have gay-straight alliances where students feel heard and where teachers believe gender identity is not optional, that you’re born with it. And it seems teachers there support and reflect that in their teaching. There are other schools where that’s not the case.”

Whether the bill becomes law and if gay-history lessons become mandatory might quickly become Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s call.

The bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee by a vote of 3-1; voting in favor were Sens. Joe Dunn, D-Garden Grove; Martha Escutia, D-Norwalk; and Kuehl. Voting against it was Senate Republican leader Dick Ackerman, R-Tustin.

The bill, SB 1437, requires only a majority vote in the Assembly and Senate, meaning that it could pass even if lawmakers — Republican and Democrat — voted the same way they did for last fall’s gay-marriage bill. That bill passed, but the governor vetoed it.

April 7, 2006 | Filed Under Politics

Comments

5 Responses to “Culture War”

  1. J-Dub on April 7th, 2006 9:07 am

    Here is my view on this and it may differ from most conservative Christians who freak out at the very thought of homosexuality. As a Christian, I believe it is our fundamental duty to love homosexuals (not that kind of love, sickos!) as we love an alcoholic or drug addict. Christians should not fear homosexuals but rather embrace these individuals. However, make no mistake about it, homosexuality is a sin, and we do not need to embrace the act. Jesus embraced the sinners but did not embrace the sin. My concern is that too many Christians turn their backs on the sinners, pointing out the plank in their brother’s eyes before removing the speck in their own eyes first.

    Now to the topic at hand. If someone’s sexual preference must be discussed to understand some historical significance, by all means it should be discussed. In 50 years, our history books will discuss the homosexual movement taking place right now. Right or wrong as the movement may be, it will still be discussed in history books much like the civil rights movement is discussed. In the context of the gay movement, someone’s sexual preferance obviously would be appropriate. In the context of Langston Hughes, it may be appropriate to mention he was a gay black man to understand where his poetry came from.

    However, on the flip side, who cares if the woman who wrote “America The Beautiful” is gay. What in the world does her sexual preference have to do with history? I have heard rumors about past Presidents that may or may not have been gay. In the context of a high school history class, a President’s sexual preference has no relevance.

    Therefore, to summarize my opinion, let us be fair and judge the context in which a historical figure’s sexual preference is inserted into the fabric of historical teaching. If it is being done to better understand circumstances surrounding events and policies, it has relevance and should be included. If sexual orientation is being inserted to make gay teens feel better about themselves, then it serves no purpose and should be eliminated.

  2. Carol Meaninglis Giannone on April 8th, 2006 5:55 am

    Hating the sin yet loving the sinner is a command that I can obey with ease. I am not homophobic. I am just a realist. There are gays who are gay by choice and there are flaming gays and proud of it…and there are gays that were born with the wrong set of hormones. I believe some behaviors are inherent and not all learned. I have a problem with the flaming gays that are out to prove that the traditional marriage is bogus and that they are the wave of the future. The destruction of the traditional family has deep reaching consequences, the least of which I believe is driving us even deeper into the destruction of our moral fiber. I can’t watch one TV show during prime time hours without having a homosexual relationship thrown in my face. Hollywood’s agenda is right in your living room and you are subliminally being fed this agenda on a nightly basis. Perhaps you have a gift of discernment and can smell this a mile away, but the majority of people and children can not. We are all being desensitized to the gay life. Just like raw sex is now being introduced on local channels and not just cable anymore (as is swearing). Slowly the corruption slips into your mind like smoke under the door. This offends me and my intelligence. Unfortunately, the majority of people are like cows being led to the slaughter because they “like” that show and it has “good acting” so they support it. I even had a Christian friend the other day tell me how much she likes Boston Legal. You all better start thinking about what kind of environment your children are going to grow up in and what they are going to be force fed when you are not around.

    The Gay Life? If someone feels they have been born into a homosexual body then the Lord calls for them to abstain from homosexual activities. They might be gay…but then they must be celibate or work towards accepting a heterosexual lifestyle with the help of counseling. This is where love, warmth, encouragment and exhortation plays into your friendship with a gay individual. Not acceptance of the lifestyle or the destruction of the traditional family because you have gone soft with pity.

  3. Lis on April 19th, 2006 1:42 am

    Here’s an update on this topic.

    I’m curious if a Christian believes that homosexuality is genetic doesn’t that Christian have to believe in evolution? Since Christian belief is that man was created for woman only, evolution of genetics could be the only explanation.

  4. Lis on May 13th, 2006 5:16 am

    State Senate Endorses Teaching of Gays’ Historical Achievements
    By Jordan Rau, Times Staff Writer May 12, 2006

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-books12may12,1,163235.story?coll=la-headlines-california

    SACRAMENTO — Saying more role models could help reduce the social estrangement and high suicide rates of gay and lesbian students, the state Senate voted Thursday to require that the historical contributions of homosexuals in the United States be taught in California schools.

    Apparently the first of its kind nationwide, the measure passed with no Republican support. It must also be approved by the Assembly and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has taken no position on it. California’s Legislature last year became the first to authorize gay marriage, but Schwarzenegger vetoed the measure.

    If passed, the textbook bill could have national implications. California is a huge portion of the textbook market, where it often sets trends, and many publishers put out a specific edition for the state that others can also use.

    Textbooks meeting the bill’s requirements would not be incorporated into California classrooms until 2012. Social science courses would then include “an age-appropriate study” of the “role and contributions” that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people have made to the “economic political and social development” of California and the United States.

    Schools are already required to teach the historical and social roles of blacks, women, Native Americans, Latinos, Asians and other ethnic groups.

    “Even though we passed an anti-harassment bill seven years ago, it’s still pretty obvious that there’s a hostile environment for kids who are gay or lesbian — or even thought to be gay or lesbian,” said Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), the bill’s author and one of six openly gay legislators. “Part of that stems from the fact that nobody reads about any positive examples.”

    Social conservatives responded harshly to the Senate’s action.

    “Happy Mothers Day, California,” said a statement issued by Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, a Sacramento group. “By passing SB 1437, Democrat politicians have declared war on mothers and fathers and their children.”

    The bill passed the Senate 22 to 15, with all 14 Republicans opposed. Democrat Dean Florez of Shafter voted against the bill, and two of his colleagues, Michael Machado of Linden and Denise Ducheny of San Diego, abstained, which effectively count as “no” votes.

    Sen. Bill Morrow (R-Oceanside) called the bill “dangerous” and “insidious” because it lumps sexual orientation — something he said was a “cultural or behavioral lifestyle” — together with race and sex, which are biological. He also said there was no reason for a textbook to point out historical figures’ sexual orientation when “their contribution to history has nothing to do with their sexual proclivities.”

    Kuehl’s bill would make the state Board of Education responsible for integrating the subject into curricula. The legislation does not specify what should be included or at what grade level the new material should be taught.

    Advocates said subjects might include the 1978 assassination of San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk. Geoffrey Kors, executive director of the gay-rights group Equality California, said textbooks might also specify the sexual orientation of well-known Americans such as writer Langston Hughes.

    Kors said that when the state Board of Education approved the latest social science curriculum in 2003, his group asked unsuccessfully for gay issues to be included.

    “If you’re teaching social movements in schools, and you talk about the United Farm Workers and Cesar Chavez, and you talk about the civil rights movement and Martin Luther King, and you talk about the women’s suffrage movement, to leave out the gay rights movement seems glaring,” Kors said.

    The state Board of Education reevaluates the social studies curriculum every six years. The next review is in 2009, and it takes three years for new books to reach classrooms.

    The state board has no position on the Kuehl bill, said Roger Magyar, the board’s executive director.

    “Until it actually is signed by the governor, from our standpoint it’s not law,” he said. “We find ourselves invested in enough controversy that we don’t have to go out and find more.”

    Schwarzenegger aides had no comment.

    Gay rights groups say homosexual students are two to three times as likely to attempt suicide as their peers, based on studies conducted by academics and state governments. However, most of those studies are at least a decade old.

    A national survey conducted last year by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network in New York reported that 75% of homosexual students overheard derogatory remarks often at school, and 38% said they were physically harassed because of their sexual orientation.

    The bill’s fate in the California Assembly is not clear. Because of its strong contingent of moderate Democrats, it traditionally has been more reluctant than the Legislature’s upper house to pass very liberal legislation.

    But Kuehl noted: “If gay marriage could pass in the Assembly, this is nothing.”

  5. Lis on May 25th, 2006 3:49 pm

    California Governor Says He’ll Veto ‘Gay History’ Bill
    By Susan Jones CNSNews.com Senior Editor May 25, 2006

    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200605/CUL20060525a.html

    (CNSNews.com) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger reportedly plans to veto a “gay history” bill if it reaches his desk.

    A conservative advocacy group that led opposition to the bill called the report good news for parents:

    The bill, SB 1437, would have required social studies textbooks used in California public schools to include “the role and contributions of…people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender…with particular emphasis on portraying the role of these groups in contemporary society.”

    The bill also would have barred textbooks and school-sponsored activities from “reflecting adversely” on transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality.

    Conservative critics said the bill would have forced schools to promote same-sex marriage and even sex-change procedures.

    “The governor believes that school curriculum should include all important historical figures, regardless of orientation,” Schwarzenegger’s director of communications, Adam Mendelsohn, told Thursday’s Sacramento Bee. “However, he does not support the Legislature micromanaging curriculum.”

    A conservative advocacy group that lobbied against SB 1437 said it is pleased that Gov. Schwarzenegger is listening to the concerns of parents.

    But that’s not the end of the story, the Campaign for Children and Families said: “Now the governor needs to pledge to veto the two remaining sexual indoctrination bills, AB 606 and AB 1056. Parents and grandparents are demanding it.”

    “This terrible trio of bills would promote cross-dressing and sex-change operations to children as young as kindergarten,” said CCF President Randy Thomasson. “Schools should be about academics, not about promoting alternative sexual lifestyles to impressionable schoolchildren.”

    AB 606 would require school districts to establish and publicize an antidiscrimination and antiharassment policy that is based on specified characteristics, including “actual or perceived gender identify and sexual orientation.”

    In other words, conservative critics say, the bill would withhold state funds from any school district that does not adequately promote transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality in its school policies.

    AB 1056 would spend taxpayer money on a “Tolerance Education Pilot Program,” providing one-time $25,000 grants to ten schools that would either purchase instructional materials or provide staff development — “to promote tolerance and intergroup relations.”

Leave a Reply




Polls

Is Fox News "Fair and Balanced"?

  • Yes (60%)
  • No (40%)

Poll Ends: October 29, 2008 @ 10:22 am

Loading ... Loading ...