Take a Stand Against the Agenda: Empty the Halls on “Day of Silence”

The so called “Day of Silence” has nothing to do with education.  It is a waste of educational resources and sends the wrong message to our children.  The best way to discourage the practice of allowing these radical homosexual groups from commandeering our school systems is to vote with our feet, and take our tax dollars with us.

—Beetle Blogger

See this from CRI:

Capitol Resource Institute is encouraging families to keep students home from school on Friday, April 16, unless their schools expressly expect students to speak on that day.

April 16th is the Day of Silence, a campaign of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which is often used to make homosexual behavior appear normal on school campuses.

“Students should focus on academics in school. They should not be allowed to end their verbal engagement in class for a social agenda,” said Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute.

“We pay California teachers to teach — by speaking in classrooms — and teachers should also be expected to fully discharge their duties on all schooldays,” she said. “If a school allows teachers to stop teaching, it should not get tax dollars for educating our students on that day.”

By urging a one day absence, CRI joins more than two dozen organizations in the Day of Silence Walkout Coalition. The coalition includes organizations such as Concerned Women for America, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, and more. It reaches out to parents across the nation who do not want their children focusing on sexuality at school.

Classrooms and campuses should focus on academics, and any student harassment should be handled with appropriate school discipline. Yet Day of Silence is one of five GLSEN events that are designed to focus campus attention on student sexuality. These events — including No Name-Calling Week and TransAction! — take a total of 16 days.

In addition to these 16 days, California public schools regularly promote the acceptance of homosexual behavior in their school safety programs. State law equally prohibits the mistreatment of all students, whether homosexual, religious, or other students are harmed.

“Every parent, teacher, and student should oppose bullying of all kinds, but Day of Silence moves beyond simple opposition to bullying,” England said. “Day of Silence equates being anti-harassment with being in favor of homosexual behavior. That is unfair to the millions of people who are respectful and friends with homosexuals, while maintaining traditional views of male and female sexuality,” she said.

Call your school to ask whether it is permitting participating in Day of Silence. Schools do not technically sponsor this social protest, but hundreds permit or encourage it. To make sure there is no disconnect between the school office and your classroom, also contact your child’s teacher and ask whether students will be allowed to participate in the Day of Silence.

Also check whether your school has a Gay-Straight Alliance Club. If your school is among the 700 California public, private, and religious schools with a GSA, chances are high that silence will be observed by at least some people on campus.

“In every generation, parents need to teach their children about treating all people with respect, while maintaining their own convictions,” England said. “This is a great chance to do so.”

GSA Clubs

GLSEN

Day of Silence

Reasons for the Day of Silence Walkout

Watch the video that exposes the intolerance of those that promote the Day of Silence.

Louder than Silence

CRI: Reinventing Education— California High School Pushes One-sided, Pro-Homosexual Bias on Kids… Again

See this from Capitol Resource Institute:

High School Welcomes Gay Speakers, but Rejects HIV-Positive Christian Speaker

A Bay Area high school that attracted controversy last year for its “Days of Diversity” program is again welcoming pro-gay speakers. But the school has rejected a request by a student Christian club to host an HIV-positive speaker whose experience with homosexuality proved to be life-threatening.

Castro Valley High School sparked controversy last year by hosting several questionable presenters, including Rev. Arlene K Nehring, a lesbian minister who talked to students in math and science classes about her gay wedding, encouraged them to “come out” to God, their families and themselves, and invited them to a gay prom at her church. Because of the religious overtones in past and pending presentations, students in the Revelation Club were surprised when the school rejected their request to host Christopher Yuan because of “separation of church and state.” Mr. Yuan is HIV-positive and had been invited by the students to speak on the topic “Christian, Gay, and Celibate.” In addition, it appears that the school has blocked links relating to Mr. Yuan, though continuing to allow access to gay websites.

Attorneys for Pacific Justice Institute sent a letter to the high school late last week, demanding that CVHS drop its illegal viewpoint discrimination.

CRI’s Karen England commented, “It is unfortunate that the school’s so-called diversity does not extend to Christians on campus. This type of favoritism in the classroom is unconstitutional and is sending the wrong message to our students.”

There has been no word whether Castro Valley High School has responded to Pacific Justice Institute’s letter and whether or not they will welcome Mr. Yuan to speak at the school after all.

The Pacific Justice Institute

School Prom, School Choice

School Prom, School Choice

Is prom night now a human right? Can schools be forced to have prom night?

In Mississippi, a teen who identifies herself as “lesbian” challenged school standards and dress code rules when she petitioned the school district to allow her to wear a tuxedo and escort her girlfriend to the school prom.  The school refused and responded by canceling the dance for all students rather than let the school prom become a platform for political shenanigans.

The girl, backed by her parents and GLSEN, are now suing the school district to force them to hold prom night:

“A lot of schools actually react rather than do the research and find out what the rights of these students are,” said Presgraves.

McMillen says she hopes her fight will make it easier for gay students at other schools facing discrimination.

“I want other kids to know that’s it not right for schools to do that,” she said on CBS’s “The Early Show.”

In 2002, a gay student sued his school district in Toronto to allow him to attend a prom with his boyfriend. A judge later forced the district to allow the couple to attend and stopped the district from canceling the prom.  —Associated Press

Forcing the school to hold prom night?  Do schools owe students prom night?  Or is prom night simply one activity among many offered by the school at their discretion?

Personally, I think the school did the right thing in this case.  If they couldn’t allow a breech of their standards for all students, then they shouldn’t allow it for one student.  In this political environment where upholding standards is merely another wall to be broken down, their choice to avoid the confrontation altogether by canceling the dance is an unfortunate, but equal response.

They aren’t telling her that only she can’t go, they’re telling her that no one can go if standards cannot be upheld.

Is equal treatment enough?  Apparently not.

Forcing the school to not only have prom, but to break their standards in order to do so goes against the freedom of the school and community to decide what standards their children will be subject to in their own community.

There is nothing keeping this girl and her parents from arranging an alternative prom.  People in our area do it all the time.  In many public schools the standards are already so low that parents don’t want their kids attending, and alternatives to proms are popping up all over as public school norms continue to degrade.

With all the alternatives out there, once again it’s obvious that for gay activists, acceptance is the goal— not equality.

—Beetle Blogger

SaveCalifornia: Alameda School District Tramples Parents

In Alameda County, school districts are implementing plans for indoctrinating children in gay and lesbian themed lessons and forbidding parents from interfering.  Here it comes!  “Whether you like it or not!”

—Beetle Blogger

California school district tramples parents
From SaveCalifornia.com

Tuesday night, over the protests of parents, the Alameda Unified School Board voted to keep and recraft its “Lesson 9″ homosexuality-bisexuality-transsexuality curriculum.

The Dec. 8 vote was 4-1 to “retain Lesson 9 until a replacement that specifically addresses all six of the ‘protected classes’ is…adopted by the board.” Read the blow-by-blow account of the school board meeting.

This means the preying on children to indoctrinate them into the unnatural and unhealthy LGBTQ (“lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning”) lifestyles is even worse now, and will become a more salable model for school districts near you. This is because Alameda school board members voted to hide the curriculum under a more expansive “anti-bullying” label that will continue to teach children that “LGBTQ” lifestyles are good, natural, and maybe even for them.

Alameda’s attack on children and families comes a week after a judge, despite the arguments of pro-family attorneys, ruled that California law trumps a claim to parental rights in this situation. The judge ruled that parents cannot “opt out” their children from Alameda’s pro-LGBTQ lifestyle curriculum. See the school district’s triumphant Dec. 2 news release.

GRASP WHAT THIS MEANS

1. Any government school district can push homosexuality-bisexuality-transsexuality curriculum on students. There is no California state law prohibiting this. All pro-family efforts to protect kid’s minds have been and will continue to be defeated in Democrat-controlled committees of the California Legislature. “LBGTQ-friendly” curriculum is already taught to kids in San Francisco and Oakland. Now, with Alameda on board, it can easily spread to other California school districts (most of which are controlled by liberals or uncourageous conservatives) under the cover of “anti-bullying” curriculum. (See actual video clips of homosexuality-bisexuality-transsexuality indoctrination in Massachusetts.)

2. California school districts are more likely than ever to trump parental rights with immoral education: In a 1995 speech, Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools” project leader, homosexual activist Kevin Jennings, explained how he successfully imposed homosexuality-bisexuality-transsexuality indoctrination by packaging it as “safety.” This deception has been crushing moral standards in California public schools for several years now. Despite many U.S. Supreme Court rulings upholding the inherent right of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children, SaveCalifornia.com has witnessed, over the last decade, the California Legislature passing law after law that either limit or eliminate parental rights in public schools.

3. School districts are already permitting student clubs and campus activities promoting homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality to other children: Public schools can and do hold lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender “diversity day,” “week” and “month.” Public schools can and many do permit the pro-”LGBTQ” “Day of Silence” every April. Public school districts must permit “Gay-Straight Alliance” clubs on high school and junior high campuses. We often hear other horror stories too.

4. Don’t think this isn’t happening your community? There are now 5 statewide California laws promoting homosexual, bisexual and transsexual lifestyles to children: Read what AB 537, SB 71, SB 777, AB 394 and SB 572 push on children as young as kindergarten.

I can’t teach about homosexuality in schools? “Give Me A Break!”

Teacher:  I can’t teach about homosexuality in schools? “Give Me A Break!”

In a teacher’s own words!  Can there be any question what will happen in our schools?  Don’t let it happen!  Get involved!  and then Vote Yes on 1!

Firefly Dove

See this from Stand for Marriage Maine:

National Public Radio interviewed Deb Allen, a Massachusetts sex education teacher, on the topic of how some teachers have responded to the teaching of sex education following the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts. The content is chilling and should be a wake up call to all those who believe our opponents lies that gay marriage won’t be taught in Maine simply because it is not expressly required in LD 1020.

The NPR reporter tells listeners that when Massachusetts legalized gay marriage, homosexual activists went right to work developing a, “gay friendly curriculum for kindergarten and up.” The reporter notes that Allen “says the debate around gay marriage is prompting kids to ask a lot more questions like what is gay sex which Allen answers thoroughly and explicitly with a chart.”  But the most alarming quote in our ad is from Ms. Allen herself:

“I know that, OK, this is legal now. If somebody wants to challenge me I say give me a break.” — Deb Allen, Teacher

The ad actually does not tell the full extent that this teacher instructs 8th graders on gay sex. The news story shockingly reveals that students learn in detail about various ways lesbians engage in sex.

WARNING: Graphic Contents

The full NPR story is available  here.

We entrust our young children to teachers every day that we send them to school. But because marriage has always been understood as being between a man and a woman, we have not had to worry about a trusted teacher teaching our sons and daughters about a new version of marriage and all that it entails. Yet all of that could change, as it has in other states, if we do not prevail on November 3rd.

Please help us get the word to Mainers that there are real consequences if Question 1 fails.  We have been working hard to explain to Mainers that there are significant, negative consequences to legalizing same-sex marriage that reach far beyond the boundaries of the two people who simply want to “marry”. We have laid bare the fact that legal scholars from across the country including those who support gay marriage predict a new flood of lawsuits against individuals, small businesses and religious organizations who may conscientiously object to providing their services to gay couples. We have shown proof that in other states where gay marriage is legal, it is taught to young children in school. We have made it abundantly clear that such instruction is, in fact, a part of public school curriculum. We have further established and the state Department of Education is on record agreeing with us that there is absolutely nothing in LD 1020 that prevents such instruction from taking place.

Time is of the essence to make sure that all Mainers know the very real, very serious, and very negative consequences to society should Question 1 fail on November 3rd. We are counting on your continued support.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE

Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings, Yet Another Gay Activist On Tape—Homosexual “Sensitivity” Training Must Be Taught in Kindergarten

GLSEN_school_bus“Safe Schools” Obama’s Education Czar Under Fire for Pushing Homosexuality in Schools

Hattip to the American Principles Project and Fox News

Kevin Jennings makes no secret that he wants schoolchildren as young as kindergartners to be taught about “not discriminating” based on sexual orientation. Kerry Picket at the Washington Times has found an audio recording of Jennings speaking about this issue.

Here is a partial transcript of Jennings’ comments on the lack of sexual orientation sensitivity training in school curricula, and how it is causing LGBT students to be persecuted and distracted from studying:

Kevin Jennings photo: Fox News

Kevin Jennings photo: Fox News

“The fact that this is not in our curriculum should offend everyone in this audience. This should be our curriculum. Our curriculum at kindergarten, and first grade, and second grade – every grade until students have graduated should be ‘you must respect every human being regardless of sexual orientation [etc.]. If we cannot teach this very basic lesson in our schools we will very surprised at how hard it is for these [LGBT] students to learn french or english or math … you can’t focus on reading, writing or ‘rithmetic if you are instead focusing on survival.”

These comments echo what the American Principles Project has discovered Jennings saying on-camera, that all teachers, must be required to undergo LGBT-sensitivity coursework as a requirement before graduating and being allowed in a classroom, otherwise teachers without such training will inevitable become a “threat to children”, he claimed.

In 1997, according to a transcript put together by Brian J. Burt, managing editor of the student-run Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Jennings said he hoped that promoting homosexuality in schools would be considered fine in the future.

“One of our board members” was called to testify before Congress when they had hearings on the promotion of homosexuality in schools,” Jennings said. “And we were busy putting out press releases, and saying, “We’re not promoting homosexuality, that’s not what our program’s about. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah…. ‘

“Being finished might someday mean that most straight people, when they would hear that someone was promoting homosexuality, would say ‘Yeah, who cares?’ because they wouldn’t necessarily equate homosexuality with something bad that you would not want to promote.”Fox News article exposing Kevin Jennings’ school agenda

The evidence continues to pile up, and yet in contested states like Maine, where same sex marriage is on the ballot, gay activists continue to lie through their teeth, denying the intent of their agenda for schools.  There is fear in the air that should these statements and intents become widely known, that parents, teachers and voters would stage a political backlash against the gay movement.  Counter the lies!

The truth is out there in abundance.  We’ve only scratched the surface.

—Beetle Blogger

Related Posts:

The Mask is Off—Enlightening Conversation on the Gay Agenda in our Schools

From a post earlier this week:

In Maine, gay activists are trying to claim that homosexuality will not be taught in schools, but it already is in other states.  These activists target young children

“before they are old enough to have been convinced that there is another way of looking at life…”

Make no mistake.  Those pushing the gay agenda have put schools front and center in the battlefield over homosexual rights….

That’s where it started.  In responding to this post, there was an eye opening conversation that’s continued over the last few days concerning the gay agenda in schools…(you know, that gay agenda that doesn’t exist?)

Ross, a long time gay marriage advocate was asked:

“Ross, Do you dispute the content of the ad?”

After several dodges and refusing to answer, Ross let it slip:  “Seriously, cant wait for your side to lose within the next decade or so. It’s inevitable…”

When pressed to explain his comment and whether he disputed the charge that gay advocates wanted to teach homosexuality in schools, he continued: “No,I dont. In my state, homosexual marriage is taught in schools because it is legal in the state. Pretty simple, right? Not teaching something is not going to make the issue magically disappear. But I think its definitely extreme paranoia to think that the number one issue on the minds of gay rights activists is getting homosexuality taught in schools..in actuality, its the rights gained from gay marriage. Most people are hardly concerned or have any control over what a few rogue teachers will do once the law passes.”

There you have it.  “Do you dispute the contents of the ad?” The answer is no. He doesn’t. In fact he, like others in the gay activist movement, is actively working for homosexuality to be pushed in schools. It’s the vision he advocates on this blog and others. Total acceptance of homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism and so on down the list until every sexual deviancy is no longer considered deviant. He hopes that if they can continue their reach through the schools that the coming generation will believe their morality over the morality their parents taught, and that this version of morality will eventually supersede all others.

When I pointed this out, Ross responded:  “Why, again, should they (homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism and so on down the list) be seen as deviant? Any of those three are hardly deviant or malicious in nature.”

Why should homosexuality, transgenderism, bisexuality etc. be seen as deviant?  Ross thinks these behaviors are equal, the same as that beautiful union that happens between a man and a wife in marriage, the union that has the potential to light the spark of life, the creation of families and new generations.

Are these things deviant?  Deviant is from the same root as deviate. If you are deviant in your behavior it is because you deviate from normal behavior in some way. Homosexual, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, pedophilia, bestiality, fetishism…..the list goes on. The further you get from the nuclear family, the more deviant and repulsive the options get. Homosexuality is one of many ugly cousins that have nothing to do with marriage, children and families.  No amount of rhetoric can change that.

Is it inevitable that these deviant activities will someday be seen as normal? No way. That is why those promoting the gay agenda have to stoop to lies, false equalities, trick sophistry and base child indoctrination to win points. Have you ever wondered why courts and rogue legislatures IMPOSE same sex marriage? People don’t choose it.

If Ross were to be put on television and radio to spout his views before the people of Maine and other states where gay marriage is being pushed, their movement would be crushed in the stampeding political backlash of concerned parents, teachers and voters.

Over exposure to the true nature of homosexuality turns people off to the sophistry. Reality can’t be hidden forever.   Why? Because the more ground gay activists win, the bolder they become and the carefully crafted mask of normality drops.

Listen to Ross and his fellow gay activists.  The mask is off.

—Beetle Blogger

Related Posts:

Stand for Marriage Maine—Safe Schools

In Maine, gay activists are trying to claim that homosexuality will not be taught in schools, but it already is in other states.  These activists target young children

“before they are old enough to have been convinced that there is another way of looking at life…”

Make no mistake.  Those pushing the gay agenda have put schools front and center in the battlefield over homosexual rights.

—Beetle Blogger

Questions & Answers About Question 1

What is Question 1?

A People’s Veto is a simple and straightforward voter-initiated measure that gives voters the power to decide if they accept or reject an act of the legislature. More than 100,000 Mainers signed the petition to place this People’s Veto on the November ballot as Question 1 to repeal the recent same-sex marriage proposal (LD 1020) passed by Maine’s legislature.

Passage of the Question 1 will restore the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman by asking the citizens of Maine, “Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?”

Marriage is a pillar of society and should be protected from distortion by politicians and homosexual marriage activists who want to redefine it to suit their objectives.

Question 1 will preserve the centuries-old definition of marriage.

What does a Yes Vote Mean?

Voting Yes on Question 1 does several important things:

  • It restores the definition of marriage to what Maine Law has always been and human history has understood marriage to be: between a man and a woman
  • It maintains the rights and benefits of Maine same-sex couples who are covered by our domestic partners law. A YES vote does not take anything away from homosexual couples, but protects traditional marriage.
  • It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage as happens in Massachusetts, where children as young as the second grade are being taught that they can grow up to marry either a boy or a girl, and either option is the same, while parents cannot opt their children out of such “instruction.”
  • And, a Yes vote on Question 1 puts the power in the hands of the voters, not politicians!

What does a NO Vote Mean?

If Question 1 is defeated, LD 1020 will take effect and the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed. Maine law will no longer promote monogamous marriages and the interests of children. Marriage’s powerful influence on the betterment of society will be lost.

The defeat of the Question 1 would result in the very meaning of marriage being transformed into nothing more than a contractual relationship between adults.

No longer will the interests of children and families even be a consideration.

Defeat of Question 1 will mean that homosexual marriage activists will have been able to redefine marriage for all of society, even for those people who have deep objections to it.

The marriage between a man and a woman has been at the heart of society since the beginning of time.

It promotes the ideal opportunity for children to be raised by a mother and father in a family held together by the legal, communal and spiritual bonds of marriage.

And while divorce and death too frequently disrupt the ideal, as a society we should put the best interests of children first, and that is traditional marriage.

Voting No on Question 1 would destroy marriage as we know it and cause profound harm to society.
Will Question 1 take away any rights for gay and lesbian domestic partners?
No.

Question 1 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits from gay or lesbian partners who are covered by Maine’s domestic partners law.

Maine law guarantees gay couples many of the rights offered to heterosexual couples.

Passage of Question 1 will not change that.

Federal law controls other rights and changing the definition of marriage in Maine similarly won’t change that.
If Question 1 does not pass, will my children be forced to learn about homosexual marriage at school?
Yes.

Without Question 1, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between homosexual marriage and traditional marriage and parents will lose control over what their kids learn in school about marriage and sexual orientation.

This is not a hypothesis.

It has already happened.

In states like Massachusetts where same-sex marriage has been legalized.

Children as young as second graders are taught that there is no difference between marriage and same-sex “marriages.”

Worse, parents who do not want their children exposed to this homosexual marriage instruction have been denied an opportunity to opt their children out. (See Parker vs. Hurley)
Why was a People’s Veto needed? Don’t we already have a law clarifying the definition of marriage?
“An Act to Promote Marriage Equality and Affirm Religious Freedom” was passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor on May 6, and is scheduled to take effect 90 days after the adjournment of the Legislature in mid-June. Without a People’s Veto, Mainers will be denied the right that voters in 30 other states have already exercised, which is to decide this critically important question for ourselves. It is wrong for politicians and homosexual marriage activists to redefine marriage for all of society without giving Maine voters an opportunity to have their say.

Who supports this initiative?

A wide range of national, state and local pro-family organizations, churches and individuals have formed a broad-based coalition to enact a People’s Veto, which more than 100,000 Mainers supported to qualify for the November ballot..

People of a variety of different faiths stand united in preserving the definition of marriage in Maine.

To view a list of supporters, visit http://www.standformarriagemaine.com
What will happen to the existing same-sex partnership laws if Question 1 passes?

Nothing.

All laws on the books regarding same-sex couples will remain intact.

Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law. Question 1 does not affect those rights and benefits.
Where can I find more information about Question 1 or get involved in the campaign?

You can visit the People’s Veto site at http://www.standformarriagemaine.com or send an email at info@standformarriagemaine.com.

There are a number of ways to get involved with the campaign, including volunteering, donating and helping to spread the word about the importance of voting YES on Question 1.

http://www.standformarriagemaine.com/?page_id=259

Related Posts:

Marriage and Morality: It’s Not a Question of Inclusion

In the battle between tradition

"Here I stand...like a fiddler on the roof..."

Natural Marriage Vs. “Change”

It’s not a Question of Inclusion. Is it About Replacement?

As voters discuss the nature of marriage and morality with Question 1 on the ballot in Maine, the question has to be asked: What’s really at stake?

Most people just want to get along, but for some, getting along is not enough. One of the deceptive ideas in the culture wars is “So what if you’re apples and we’re oranges, can’t we all share the fruit bowl together?” In the battle of ideas, two diametrically opposing views of society cannot co-exist peacefully side by side…. Or can they? In my mind I picture Tevye, the Jewish dairyman from the play “Fiddler on the Roof”, standing in the middle of the road, cow in hand, pondering these diverging moral paths.

Where is the Traditional Family?

Where is the Traditional Family?

On the one hand, we have traditionally proven societal models, based on the basic principles of the ten commandments. Don’t steal, don’t kill, honor your father and mother, don’t lie…do unto others, and so on….basic Judeo-Christian values, handed down from Heaven for the stability of man.

On the other hand is the belief that morality doesn’t matter, that religious values are passé. There is no morality but the morality of convenience. Society determines it’s own morality, subject to change.

I’ve been considering the idea put forth by some that the apples and oranges should just get along. There’s room in the bowl for all. Physically, that is true. All different races and kinds of people live together and get along, even different religions can get along, because at heart, they have common morals and ideals. They ultimately strive for the same goals. What if there is no common moral ground? Is morality different than race? Is morality a zero sum game? or is there really room for all?

At first, there may appear to be room for all, but over time, the reality shows that there is not. For one side to gain ground morally, the other has to lose.

In looking over the globe, the obvious evidence is that there are no cultures who have successfully incorporated multiple sets of moral ideals, especially when it comes to marriage. Surely in all those independently evolving societies, there must be some reason for this. Perhaps it is because it is human nature for some fringe elements to constantly push against the barriers of society. Civilized society is called “civil” because we control our impulsive natures in order to be better people. There are always some who believe it is an imposition on them to require civil behavior in a civil society. The boundaries of civility can move, but only at the loss to the greater civility of the whole. Zero sum game. I believe that is happening here.

To illustrate this point, I point to Massachusetts and the curriculum changes being made there since same sex marriage was introduced. I just got a good look at the book, “King and King“, by Linda de Haan and Stern Nijland, that was read by a second grade school teacher to her entire class in a segment teaching about marriage. This book’s inclusion in the Massachusetts elementary school curriculum is shocking not just for the obviously inflammatory ending where the prince marries another prince instead of the princess, but in the way that it tears down and denigrates traditional marriage and women.

By the time I was your age, I’d been married TWICE!” a horrible looking, overweight, crooked toothed figure tells her son.

How is this portraying marriage to our little ones? Dirty, Cheap? Meaningless? One by one, the princesses are brought in, “No!” the prince says and goes on to comment about how one princess is too fat, one has crooked teeth, one is black and her arms are too long….and the prince ends up marrying another prince. The book sends a message that replaces traditional marriage, it’s not just including, it’s tearing down and replacing.

“Who’s in a Family?” by Robert Skutch is another book used by Massachusetts schools to teach about the family. Not only does it deal with gay families, but it does NOT include traditional, nuclear families on it’s cover. A quick glance illustrates the main point of the book. There are no pictures of what most of us would consider a family. As I look at the arguments of the opposition I have to ask, why the exclusion if there is no anti-traditional agenda?

In the battle of ideas can two opposing views of society co-exist peacefully side by side? No. Not when the views of society are based on completely diametrically opposite moral views, because for some, and there are ALWAYS some…inclusion is not enough. By spreading their version of the core societal values, they reject and replace the time proven, traditional values that made our nation free.

Marriage is the basic element of society. Destroy it or change it, the end is the same. Marriage needs to be strengthened, not redefined. Which version of society do you believe? Is marriage pre-defined? or open to definition? Is morality pre-defined, or open to definition? Which do you want? Both versions can’t live together. One version must dominate. This November, citizens of Maine are being asked to choose.

There are those who say it’s all the same, fire won’t rain from Heaven, the birds will still sing in the morning. No need to worry! Yet all we need to do is take a look at the fight in Canada or Massachusetts to peek into our future. The tables are turning in those societies.

We are at a crossroads, we are the frontlines in the culture war right now.  If we allow the definition of natural marriage to fail, our kids and families will be affected for generations.

—Beetle Blogger

Related Posts:

Bookmark and Share

Proponents of Gay Marriage Hide School Agenda From Voters in Maine

“It’s Elementary!” …Yet Gay Lobby Denies Agenda in Schools

Check out the propaganda being pushed in this clip intended for school use.  Interesting isn’t it? And here I thought the gay marriage campaigns in California and Maine both promised that this sort of stuff would not be taught in school.

Just this last week the No on 1 campaign issued a letter condemning pro-marriage ads as false and misleading when they talked about gay issues being taught in the schools, yet here it is again—more evidence pointing to the gay lobby’s attempts to gain access to our schools.

It’s Elementary?!  It’s False!  The very premise on which the film is based is biased. If you have a problem with bullying, teach them about kindness and the golden rule, not lesbianism. To disagree with the gay lifestyle is not to hate. How is telling kids that if they disagree with the gay lifestyle they are homophobic or bigoted going to teach them tolerance and love for their neighbor?

A friend of mine commented in defense of this teaching saying:

“Would you prefer that gay and lesbian children in schools continue to get beat up?”

False logic!  Is teaching lesbianism to children the way to promote kindness? Or is teaching kindness the way to promote kindness?

This leap of logic happens in mainstream media all the time, but I believe you can teach children respect for others and their differences without teaching them they have to agree with other’s choices.

The subtle nuance displayed here promotes the gay lifestyle as normal, healthy and good.  It is being pushed in grades where it is too difficult for our young, impressionable children to identify and reject. That is why propaganda such as this should never be allowed in our schools.

What do the Gay Activists have to say?

Don’t buy the lies!  What is the truth of the issue?  Here is the truth, openly displayed even as it’s proponents deny it.

This is what every parent should see because this is what the gay lobby is trying to push in our classrooms across this nation.  It’s being pushed in every state, not just Massachusetts, California or Maine.

—Beetle Blogger

Related Posts:

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.