| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
28 Apr 2007 11:27:12 PM |
| Object: |
Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
.....and they wonder why some professionals classify homosexuality as a
mental illness.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55413
Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again
California agenda would require K-12 'gay' indoctrination
A plan that has been launched in the California state Assembly - again
- could be used to ban references to "mom" and "dad" in public schools
statewide by prohibiting anything that would "reflect adversely" on
the homosexual lifestyle choice.
It's similar to a plan WND reported was approved by lawmakers last
year, but fell by the wayside when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed
it.
"SB 777 forcibly thrusts young school children into dealing with
sexual issues, requiring that homosexuality, bisexuality and
transsexuality be taught in a favorable light," according to an alert
issued by the Capitol Resource Institute.
"Not only does SB 777 require that classroom instruction and materials
promote and embrace controversial sexual practices, it also bans
school-sponsored activities from 'reflecting adversely' on
homosexuals, bisexuals and transsexuals," the group said.
"Pushing this radical homosexual agenda in California schools will
stifle the truth in favor of political correctness and will inevitably
conflict with the religious and moral convictions of both students and
parents," said CRI Executive Director Karen England. "The full
ramifications of this sweeping legislation could affect the entire
nation as most textbook companies tailor their material to their
number one purchaser: California."
She noted that Los Angeles schools already have implemented most of
the proposals now pending for districts across the state, and among
the changes are:
"Mom" and "dad" and "husband" and "wife" would have to be edited from
all texts.
Cheerleading and sports teams would have to be gender-neutral.
Prom kings and queens would be banned, or if featured, would have to
be gender neutral so that the king could be female and the queen
male.
Gender-neutral bathrooms could be required for those confused about
their gender identity.
A male who believes he really is female would be allowed into the
women's restroom, and a woman believing herself a male would be
allowed into a men's room.
Even scientific information, such has statistics showing AIDS rates in
the homosexual community, could be banned.
"It's embarrassing that we've got kids who can't pass their exit
exams, but we add all sorts of complications [to school]," she told
WND.
She cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight
Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center.
"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."
.
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
29 Apr 2007 04:56:23 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1177820832.766221.223760@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
....and they wonder why some professionals classify homosexuality as a
mental illness.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55413
Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again
California agenda would require K-12 'gay' indoctrination
A plan that has been launched in the California state Assembly - again
- could be used to ban references to "mom" and "dad" in public schools
statewide by prohibiting anything that would "reflect adversely" on
the homosexual lifestyle choice.
It's similar to a plan WND reported was approved by lawmakers last
year, but fell by the wayside when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed
it.
"SB 777 forcibly thrusts young school children into dealing with
sexual issues, requiring that homosexuality, bisexuality and
transsexuality be taught in a favorable light," according to an alert
issued by the Capitol Resource Institute.
All of these classes teaching sexual orientation and sexual identity are a
violation of the statutes that forbid presenting adult material to underage
persons.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tockk" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
29 Apr 2007 06:00:41 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <johndwentzky@alumni.furman.edu> wrote
All of these classes teaching sexual orientation and sexual identity are a
violation of the statutes that forbid presenting adult material to
underage persons.
There's nothing "adult" about orientation; at least nothing any more adult
than, say, a textbook on trigonometry.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "chibiabos" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
30 Apr 2007 05:54:30 PM |
|
|
In article <1177820832.766221.223760@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, J
Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
"SB 777 forcibly thrusts young school children into dealing with
sexual issues, requiring that homosexuality, bisexuality and
transsexuality be taught in a favorable light," according to an alert
issued by the Capitol Resource Institute.
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_777_bill_20070
223_introduced.pdf
or
http://tinyurl.com/2zp32q
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
29 Apr 2007 12:34:37 AM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
....and they wonder why some professionals classify homosexuality as a
mental illness.
We wonder than more do not classify YOU as being mentally ill. Or
maybe they do and you're just hiding behind other people's propaganda.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
29 Apr 2007 07:21:40 PM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> writes:
....and they wonder why some professionals classify homosexuality as a
mental illness.
Actually, it is proof of why the *real* mental health professionals
classify homophobia as a mental disorder. :-)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55413
Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again
California agenda would require K-12 'gay' indoctrination
A plan that has been launched in the California state Assembly - again
- could be used to ban references to "mom" and "dad" in public schools
statewide by prohibiting anything that would "reflect adversely" on
the homosexual lifestyle choice.
This, in the computer industry, is called FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and
Doubt), usually used by the purveyor of an inferior product to scare
customers away from something newer and better.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
29 Apr 2007 02:22:38 AM |
|
|
On 29 Apr., 06:27, J Young <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
....and they wonder why some professionals classify homosexuality as a
mental illness.
As opposed to, say, people who spends for years the same articles
night after night after night to discussion group and have their *****
kicked day after day after day...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55413
Ah, right! The usual reliable source...
Here we go again: if you want to be taken seriously, J Young, how
about using serious sources?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Ban on 'mom' and 'dad' considered - again |
29 Apr 2007 12:07:43 AM |
|
|
On Apr 29, 12:27 am, J Young <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
....and they wonder why
ah, shut the ***** up already.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
