Dispatches from the Creation Wars

Idiot of the Week: Tamara Wilhite

Thanks to Timothy Sandefur for providing the link, and a thorough critique, of the absolutely mind-boggling stupidity contained in this essay by Tamara Wilhite, entitled Gay Marriage and Terrorism. It’s on a site called bushcountry.org that claims to be “promoting the ideals of conservatism”. Mrs. Wilhite says that by rejecting the Federal Marriage Amendment we “play into the hands” of the terrorists. Why? I’ll let her explain:

Not only do we allow our women to go unveiled. Not only do we allow our daughters to have sex outside of marriage. Not only do we allow abortion. Not only do we allow women equal rights. We dare to allow homosexuality to exist.

In Muslim countries, the punishment for homosexuality ranges from death to a long prison sentence. Mohammed’s word was for homosexuals to be executed. Not only do we allow homosexuals to exist. Not only don’t we allow them to live, we tolerate them living in the open. They can be seen in public office and public broadcasting. Now, worst of all, we are granting them equal parity in the law with heterosexual couples. If that is not giving the green light to sin, then neither is Madonna dancing around in the near nude provocative.

We don’t stop lesbians from making children. Our courts are slowing giving homosexuals equal adoption rights to children. Now we are unwilling to say that two men or two women married in a civil ceremony are not equal to the natural pairing of man to woman. We have just given the signal that we are the Sodom and Gomorrah cesspool they accuse us of being. All with Kerry and the other Democrats’ support.

Yes, of course. Terrorists bomb us because John Kerry and the Democrats won’t emulate the terrorists and remove the right of homosexuals to exist. The best way to defeat the terrorists, you see, is to beat them to the punch and become just like them. And that, naturally, is why you should vote for Bush. And if you find this argument even a tiny bit reasonable, then you are likely every bit as stupid as Tamara Wilhite.

Update: Okay, I rooted around that site a little more and I may have to apologize to Tamara Wilhite. Why? Because Jen Shroder, another writer for that site and the founder of an organization called Blessed Cause, makes her look like Socrates by comparison. Her article, entitled Senators Defy Marriage Amendment: America’s Taliban Tyranny, sees Wilhite’s stupidity and raises it astronomically. Just look at some of these pearls of wisdom:

California government has mutated to a perverse form of the Taliban leading the nation to a Caliban, led by Senators Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein who have completely ignored the will of the people to impose their own agendas and argue for gay marriage…

“Pluralism” is a hate religion dedicated to eradicating the fundamental beliefs of Judeo-Christianity and all real faith. In their own words, Harvard, Stanford and Yale professors:

1. claim to “defeat Christian exclusivism” (the belief that Christ is the only way);

2. demand that Christian exclusivists prove their religious beliefs or relinquish them;

3. admit the impact of pluralism can “significantly reduce levels of confidence in the truth of certain beliefs” and precipitate belief abandonment, (diminish faith);

4. develop formulations to determine whether Christians are “rational.” (Thus begins the argument that real faith is a diagnosable mental disorder).

5. provide a definition of pluralism that meets the legal criteria of religion and are thus in violation of the Establishment Clause.

Will our sons and daughters be asked to fight for a country that teaches its children that there is no God? That FORCES gay recruitment upon them? Our “freedom” is being ripped away by today’s legislators and senators. Our only recourse is to study how our so-called representatives vote in this Amendment proposal. Any vote against the Amendment is a vote for Caliban tyranny.

Wow. Double wow. I see it so clearly now. It is Taliban-like tyranny if people like Shroder are not allowed to impose precisely the kind of anti-gay laws that the Taliban imposed in Afghanistan. I’m sure there’s some alternate universe in which this is not an abysmally idiotic argument, but I don’t think I want to visit there any time soon.

Comments

  1. #1 eon
    July 20, 2004

    You ought to rename this column “Tales of the Oxygen Thieves.”

  2. #2 Seth
    July 20, 2004

    Can I throw in some local buffonery? We’ve had a bit of a controversy where a church pastor protesting a Gay Pride festival week before last said the same thing (gay marriage==terrorism).

    In return about a dozen people protested his church in return this past Sunday. As reported on B1 of the local paper he apologized when faced with picketers. One problem. He defends himself here on B6 (scroll down) of the very same paper claiming that his critics are the ones who should apologize.

    Hypocrite.

  3. #3 Bill Ware
    July 21, 2004

    It’s on a site called bushcountry.org that claims to be “promoting the ideals of conservatism”.

    Well, Ed, remember what Bush said in North Carolina:

    “We’re gonna win this election in November, ’cause Americans share are values.”

  4. #4 Tim B.
    July 21, 2004

    My mind perplexes and retards while trying to reconcile the essence of Christ’s mission with today’s “Christian” fundamentalists (a bunch of hardhearted, “moral” busybodies). Where are those denoucing possessions, tending the sick and lonely, embracing one’s enemies, socializing with sinners? Resentful fundamentalist Christianity manifests some kind of twisted purity-fetish, some kind of psychosexual rage-irruption. It certainly has nothing to do with Jesus.

  5. #5 lucia
    July 21, 2004

    has mutated to a perverse form of the Taliban leading the nation to a Caliban

    A Caliban? A fictional Shakesperean character?

    Doesn’t she mean a cabal?

  6. #6 Bill Ware
    July 21, 2004

    lucia,

    My take on it was its short for CALIfornia TaliBAN
    CALIBAN

  7. #7 Jen Shroder
    August 2, 2004

    Thanks for repeating my article. I just came out with a new one about the tyranny of liberals, any comments about this one?

    Bush Bashing for a College Degree
    by Jen Shroder 8/1/04

    Have you checked the requirements for a college degree? Our choices are narrowing while categories of “Analytical Thinking”, “Arts and Humanities” and “Social and Behavioral Studies” are rapidly advancing. Searching for a class that doesn’t attack religious belief is like stepping through a MINDfield. Even History classes with a “cultural” pretense are actually a dissection of religious beliefs.

    Psychology and Philosophy are now featured in four out of six categories to choose from at Cuesta College, California. With the current liberal claims of the APA such as “child sexual abuse could be harmless and beneficial,” I wouldn’t go near a psychology class with a ten-foot pole. So what about philosophy?

    In the article, Bush Bashing disguised as Philosophy Class, a student explained how her philosophy teacher began class with, “If you like Bush or Rush Limbaugh, LEAVE NOW!” The student’s anti-Bush claims were confirmed as the class website contained Dean campaign pictures and slogans along with required reading of Bush bashing like MoveOn.org.

    The article created an uproar. Administrators asked the teacher, J. Marcus, to remove Cuesta’s logo from her website. Marcus wrote in a local liberal paper the administrators were in fact very supportive of her, and the logo is back. As of August 1, her website lists “recommended reading” of TruthOut.org (which has Kerry campaigns and donations) and “The Onion” which contains President Bush’s campaign costs next to a cartoon of a woman with spinning disks over her breasts. Another title at The Onion reads, “What the f___…” with the word written out. Is this where taxpayers or parents want college instructors to refer their children?

    Marcus’ website currently includes pictures of wounded soldiers with the blocked heading:

    No Justification for the Invasion of Iraq

    This does not seem open to discussion. Dare a student bring up the network of terrorists that expands beyond borders? Of our brave heroes fighting terrorists away from our homeland before another World Trade Center attack? Dare a student ask how liberal propaganda relates to an introduction of philosophy?

    So what else is taught as “Philosophy”? Marcus describes it on her website:

    “To use a traditional metaphor, philosophy (the love of wisdom) is the tree of Knowledge, with its corresponding disciplines: science and art, religion and ethics.

    “Our discussions will involve a critical and comparative analysis of how, for example, Plato, as well as modern and contemporary philosophers, Augustine, Kant, Nietzsche, Tolstoy, Kafka and J.S. Mill would attempt to evaluate and resolve current ethical problems.”

    This class is on the “Degree Requirement” list to choose from. So if I want a degree at Cuesta College, I need to choose from classes exploring the beliefs of Nietzsche, who claimed there is no God or moral compass. A man who at age 44, witnessed a horse being whipped, threw his arms around the horse’s neck and had a mental breakdown, never to return to full sanity or be able to take care of himself again, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

    For a degree, I should analyze Kant, famous for his criticism of religion and favoring agnosticism.

    Or how about J.S. Mill, said to be the chief founder of secular humanism.

    Tolstoy? He believed that all Christian churches were corrupt institutions that had thoroughly falsified true Christianity and wrote his own religion.

    Plato: “All these women shall be wives in common to all the men…the children too should be held in common so that no parent shall know which is his own, and no child shall know his parent” (Plato 119) …lovely

    Augustine is named, but textbooks have twisted his words out of context so that he appears New Age.

    Kafka: a self declared atheist that referred to Judaism as “insufficient scrap…a mere nothing, a joke—not even a joke.”

    It’s a shame that we cannot brush off the liberal attacks on religion at college campuses as “a mere joke.”

    Marcus wrote in a full front-page article for a local liberal paper, “If I’m to be charged like Socrates, of ‘corrupting the youth,’ then let’s examine the accusation in light of Russia’s history.” It is ironic that Marcus then compared herself to the famous Russian poet, Anna Akhmatova, who was condemned for her “narrow preoccupation with love and God” and later extolled Stalin to save her son from Siberia.

    Who must we extol to save our sons and daughters from the liberal tyranny in public education? The jailer is claiming to be the victim as she requires students to buy her book in which she writes, “And our submissiveness, those prison gates, stark and helpless as our God.”

    Newtopia magazine has posted some of the poetry of Marcus, who describes President Bush as “smirking absentmindedly,” that he has a “learning disability,” a “fourth grade level of history,” and that in 2004 the Bush family will return to the “vastly polluted state of Texas where they belong.” Laura Bush is also mocked for her Christmas ornaments of birds as Marcus lashes out about Bush’s timber initiative, which Marcus describes as given “for no good reason.” (shock) Forestry officials blamed the policy of no logging for the 2002 wildfire season that torched 6.9 million acres nationwide. In 2003, California fires killed 22 people, ravaged 3,300 homes and consumed over 750,000 acres in little over a week. Is that “no good reason?” Should we thank “environmentalists?”

    As a student, I have a question. If actual religious belief is to be censored, how is it that actual hatred of said religious belief is being forced upon us in public education? How is it we are forced to view Bush bashing propaganda? In the separation of church and state case, the Supreme Court ruled that the “best interest of a society required that the minds of men always be wholly free.”

    Is this freedom?

    Source: Marcus’ Website:

    http://www.tcsn.net/jackie/cuesta_college_philosophy_class.htm

    http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=16148

  8. #8 Ed Brayton
    August 2, 2004

    I’d be delighted to comment on this article. I found your opening statement quite amusing:

    Have you checked the requirements for a college degree? Our choices are narrowing while categories of “Analytical Thinking”, “Arts and Humanities” and “Social and Behavioral Studies” are rapidly advancing.

    Oh my gosh, analytical thinking? Arts and humanities? Behavioral studies? My god, what do they think they’re doing, running a university or something? Would you prefer non-analytical thinking (something tells me you do, though I doubt you’d admit it). Would you prefer that humanities be removed from a college curriculum? I also find it hilarious that you think that studying Nietzsche, Kant, Mill, Tolstoy, Descartes and Plato in an Introduction to Philosophy class is “liberal tyranny”. Would you have them study something other than philosophers in an intro to philosophy course? Finger painting, perhaps? Please stop by again. Your stupidity is quite amusing.

  9. #9 Jen Shroder
    August 4, 2004

    No, Ed, what gets me is the pretense of it all. Analytical thinking as described by California’s state standards are extremely transparent and specifically directed at religion. Christian children are learning “analytical thinking” very well, because Christians are teaching them to be careful what believe from teachers who have become so liberally biased, one can’t trust anything they teach. This is a real problem because in a perfect world, one could send their children off to school with trust. Public schools have completely trampled that trust.

    Teachers should teach FACTS, you know, like reading which so many children are having difficulty in.

  10. #10 Jen Shroder
    August 4, 2004

    by the way, Seth, I live in that area…the pastor has received a mountain of support from his congregation. The truth is, he didn’t mean to offend anyone, he’s a very gentle man. Christians strive not to offend anyone, but when faced with recruitment tactics of gay groups in public schools, we have no choice but to make a stand.

    I have many posts at my site very similar to what that pastor said, I also have many gay friends. The kids I drove to school know very well that if they wanted to push my buttons and get me mad, all they had to do was criticize gays or Muslims or any group. Christians hate to see anyone persecuted, it’s wrong, and toleration classes should be implemented. But that is NOT what gay activists are forcing on public schools. It’s all about recruitment.

    Did you know that African Americans and Jews are by FAR the most persecuted groups according to FBI statistics? Gays are a distant third. So where are all the pro African-American and Jewish toleration courses? There aren’t any. Because it’s not about tolerance. It’s about recruitment of the gay community. If you don’t believe me, check out the Top 20 Gay Hits. It’s what gay groups would teach our kids if parents didn’t file lawsuits.
    http://www.blessedcause.org/protest/Top%2020%20Gay%20Hits.htm

  11. #11 Ed Brayton
    August 4, 2004

    No, Ed, what gets me is the pretense of it all.

    The pretense of WHAT? Your article basically said two things – that you didn’t like the fact that this college professor disagreed with your political views, and that you didn’t like that she taught – gasp – philosophers in an intro to philosophy class. Where is the pretense in any of that?

    Analytical thinking as described by California’s state standards are extremely transparent and specifically directed at religion.

    Can you perhaps cite something specific in California’s state educational standards that is “specifically directed at religion”? And what would this have to do with a college professor teaching about philosophers in a philosophy class?

    Teachers should teach FACTS, you know, like reading which so many children are having difficulty in.

    Well you’re already on record as objecting to a philosophy class teaching about some of the most famous and influential philosophers in human history, so you’ll pardon me for wondering just what the word “facts” means to you. I suspect it means “they shouldn’t teach anything I disagree with”.

  12. #12 Jon Rowe, Esq.
    August 5, 2004

    “Did you know that African Americans and Jews are by FAR the most persecuted groups according to FBI statistics? Gays are a distant third.”

    Bullshit. FBI stats prove that gays are more likely to suffer a hate crime than either of those groups.

  13. #13 Ed Brayton
    August 5, 2004

    According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, the answer is somewhere in between. Based on 2002 data, the latest available, the total number of hate crimes against those groups is as follows:

    Against blacks: 2486

    Against Jews: 931

    Against homosexuals: 1244

    It further shows that blacks and homosexuals are far more likely to be the victims of physical assault than Jews, with nearly 1000 incidents of assault against blacks and over 600 assaults on homosexuals that year, as opposed to 52 against Jews.

    We can of course further break this down by percentage of the population to get a roughly per capita breakdown. As of 2002, blacks numbered 38.3 million, Jews numbered 5.2 million, and if we use a figure of 5% for homosexuals, that would mean approximately 14 million.

    For total hate crimes per 1000 people, it breaks down like this:

    Blacks: 15 per 1000.

    Jews: 5.6 per 1000

    Homosexuals: 11.3 per 1000

    That doesn’t look right to me. Total population divided by 1000 divided by the number of incidents, right? Where are my math geeks?

  14. #14 Jon Rowe, Esq.
    August 5, 2004

    Ed,

    I didn’t have a chance to examine the PDF in detail. I will though. I do know that for “race” reported hate crimes, 1/3 of those are reported by whites. For sexual orientation, virtually all are reported by gays, none by straights. Also taking into account that blacks are 12% of the population, gays about 3%, on a per capita basis, a gay person is more likely to be the victim of a hate crime than a black.

    Jen makes her error by simply looking at the raw #s without taking into account the respective populations of each group. A greater number of race hate crimes are reported. But this is like saying, “the majority of the people on welfare are white.” Yes, but given that blacks are 12% of the population and make up slightly less than 50% of welfare cases (on a different note, at certain recent times, blacks have actually crossed the threshold and become a statistical majority of welfare cases), a black person is significantly more likely to be on welfare than a white.

  15. #15 Jon Rowe
    August 5, 2004

    When I have more time I plan on reading this paper by U Cal Berkley Law Prof. Rubenstein. It was featured on Larry Solumn’s page. Here is an abstract:

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=547883

    Since 1990, the federal government has collected data on hate crimes reported throughout the United States. To date, the conventional account of that data has simply been to report that racial hate crimes are the most frequently reported type, followed by religious hate crimes, and sexual orientation hate crimes. While this conventional story is not technically wrong, I argue in this Article that it is not the real story the data tell.

    Undertaking the first comprehensive empirical analysis of this data, this Article develops a new account of hate crimes in the United States. First, the Article pierces the neutral categories (race, religion, sexual orientation) to demonstrate that three sub-groups – blacks, Jewish people, and gay people – report, by far, the most hate crimes. Second, I adjust the raw data to account for the differing population sizes of targeted groups: per capita, gay people report the greatest number of hate crimes, followed by Jewish people and blacks, these three groups reporting hate crimes at greater per capita rates then all other groups. Third, gay people are especially like to report personal – as opposed to property-based – hate crimes.

  16. #16 Ed Brayton
    August 5, 2004

    Jon-

    The race numbers were specific to hate crimes against blacks, not just racially motivated crimes in general. I used 5% for the gay population. If we use 3%, the total population is around 8.5 million. But my calculation per 1000 can’t be right, because lowering the total from 14 million to 8.5 million and dividing by 1244 (the total number of hate crimes) yields a lower rate per 1000, not higher, which can’t be right. Where are our statistics majors to do some basic math? I haven’t taken a math course in over 20 years.

  17. #17 Ed Brayton
    August 5, 2004

    Ah, Rubenstein’s article does the math for us. The numbers are as follows for the # of hate crimes per 100,000 people:

    Blacks 8.9
    Jews 18.0
    Gays 20.7

    The other thing that should be remembered is that, as I noted above, a far higher percentage of hate crimes involve physical assault for gays than for Jews. Rubenstein noted the same thing in his study, I just found. When you break down the data between crimes against property and crimes against the person (physical assaults or intimidation), you find that 72% of the incidents involved physical assault against blacks, 74% against gays, but only 38% against Jews. So not only do gays suffer more incidents per 1000 than do Jews, those incidents are twice as likely to be violent.

    Having said that, I’m actually quite surprised to find out that crimes against Jews are that high. I honestly had no idea there was that much anti-Jewish sentiment in this country. Those numbers really surprise me, while the anti-gay numbers don’t surprise me at all. But in both cases, it should be said that while the incidents of hate crime against them is ridiculously high, the hate crimes committed by them is virtually nil. Physical assault of heterosexuals by homosexuals, or of non-Jews by Jews, is virtually non-existent.

  18. #18 jen shroder
    August 5, 2004

    According to highlights of the FBI report from Partners against hate, which is NOT a conservative group:

    Racial bias again represented the largest percentage of bias-motivated incidents (48.8%), followed by Religion Bias (19.1%), Sexual Orientation Bias (16.7%), Ethnicity Bias (14.8%) and Disability Bias (0.6%).

    Anti-black bias was the most prevalent racial motivation, with 2,486 incidents (33.3% of all hate crimes); anti-male homosexual bias was the most common sexual orientation motivation, with 825 incidents (11.1% of all hate crimes).

    http://www.partnersagainsthate.org/law_enforcement/2003_fbi_facts.html

    sorry, no time for more, gotta jet

  19. #19 Ed Brayton
    August 5, 2004

    We’ve already covered those stats above. You have to adjust for population size, since there are 5 times as many blacks as there are gays and almost 8 times as many blacks as Jews. When you make that adjustment, you find that per capita, hate crimes are far lower against blacks than against either Jews or gays, and hate crimes against gays are both higher in total number than against Jews and twice as likely to be violent. So your citation of FBI statistics was simply false.

    I’m still waiting for you to explain why your last article was about the “tyranny of liberals” when the only thing it really said was that some college professor was liberal and taught about philosophers in a philosophy class. How exactly does that establish “tyranny”?

  20. #20 Jen Shroder
    August 6, 2004

    Do I really have to explain this? It’s obvious. Why are students compelled to take classes aimed at assaulting religious beliefs?

    A lot of it comes from the State Standards. Public schools and textbooks now have a license to control our children’s thought process under their favorite phrase, “critical thinking.” The definition is well written, but in reality it only opens the door to our children’s minds for teachers and textbooks to instill their own agenda. Our children are being ravaged by a two-headed wolf; the current emphasis to teach religion while simultaneously giving teachers the right to lead our children to believe what they deem “rational.” More often than not textbooks prove their “rationale” is atheism.

    Example: from Houghton Mifflin’s “Modern World History,” (pg 627):

    “Human beings are spiritual animals…Men and women started to worship gods as soon as they became recognizably human; they created religions at the same time they created works of art.” (see full text )

    From “History-Social Science Framework for California Public Schools”:
    “Students should understand the intense religious passions that have produced fanaticism and war as well as the political arrangements developed (such as separation of church and state) that allow different religious groups to live amicably in a pluralistic society.” (pg 23)

    These state standards admit RIGHT HERE that the goal is to water down the faith of children. We can believe, just do not believe passionately. “Intense religious passions that have produced fanaticism and war.” What about the intense religious passion that has prompted so many to love and acts of compassion? Overwhelmingly the largest charities and free service organizations world-wide stem from passionate religion and faith. But public education sees passionate religion as something to be abolished and is taking steps to do so. It was the passionate religion of our forefathers that shaped the foundation of this nation. To diffuse the passion of religion is not the purpose of public schools. In addition, different religions were already living amicably in a pluralistic society without the help of separation of church and state, as indicated above.

    “Students need to understand why a democracy needs citizens who value give-and-take on issues, who do not feel it necessary to go to war over every idea, and who seek the middle ground on which consensus and cooperation can flourish.” (pg 39)

    There IS a right and wrong, and when something is very wrong, I hope our children become passionate about it. The above sentence is not about peace, it’s about dumbing down America. Teaching us to be non-responsive and apathetic. What if Patrick Henry or our forefathers were conditioned this way? What if America sought the middle ground with Hitler? There is such a demand in society to deny right and wrong and to put everything in the gray, but this will not achieve peace, we will become like sheep ready for the slaughter.

    Modern textbooks have successfully rewritten American history and we are behaving like sheep in allowing it with an occasional bleating. Under the guise of “critical thinking,” textbooks are taking the opportunity to instill their own atheist philosophies and lead our children down any slanted path imaginable. Our children should be learning FACTS, and need protection from the exposure of personal agendas easily blanketed by the term “critical thinking.” Our “History-Social Science Framework for California Public Schools” State Standards describes critical thinking as follows:

    Critical Thinking Skills

    “The skills involved in critical thinking enable students to question the validity and meaning of what they read, hear, think, and believe. Critical thinking requires a questioning mind and a skeptical withholding of assent about the truth of a statement until it can be critically evaluated. While such skills are developed through everyday living as well as by schooling, the history–social science classroom is an especially appropriate setting for developing such skills.”

    Why is the history-social science classroom an especially appropriate setting for developing such skills? The Houghton Mifflin textbooks are a prime example of how “critical thinking” can be used to promote an agenda. The textbooks are literally saying, “This is a religion and this is how you look at it.” The presented religion is not fact based, as openly admitted the goal is to present the positive attributes only, (except for Christianity).

    Critical thinking is indeed “especially appropriate” if you are an atheist eager to apply skepticism of religion to young impressionable minds. Would an atheist hope to “critically evaluate” religion with children? Oh you bet.

    A far better application of “critical thinking” would be in the classroom of science. Why not teach children to question the truth about scientific theories? In the case of evolution, the “rational thinking” would be most appropriate. Scrutiny of Darwin’s theory could prove invaluable. “To reach conclusions of solid evidence” would be a welcome reality check.
    “History-Social Science Framework for California Public Schools:” (pg 24)

    “This framework proposes that critical thinking skills be included at every grade level. Students should learn to detect bias in print and visual media; to recognize illogical thinking; to guard against propaganda; to avoid stereotyping of group members; to reach conclusions based on solid evidence; and to think critically, creatively, and rationally. These skills are to be taught within the context of a curriculum that offers numerous opportunities to explore examples of sound reasoning and examples of the opposite.

    The “sound reasoning” as determined by public schools, which often prove opposing to Christianity! This is not the right or place of public schools!

    “To detect bias in print”

    The Houghton Mifflin textbook is loaded with previously undetected bias. Obviously public school is incapable of discernment.

    “To recognize illogical thinking”

    As determined by who? Teachers insist Islam cannot be taught without induction practices, yet teach American history stripped of it’s Christian foundation? Public school can’t recognize its own “illogical thinking.”

    “To reach conclusions based on solid evidence”

    This is the opener to attack faith. (We walk by faith not by sight)

    “To guard against propaganda”

    Houghton Mifflin’s textbooks should be used in courses as examples of propaganda, not history.

    “To think critically, creatively, and rationally.”

    Our children already do that. Children are able to make up their own minds if you give them FACTS and not public school programming. “Critical thinking” only gives teachers and textbooks the opportunity to lead them in whatever direction their philosophy dictates.

    Public schools need to teach our children the FACTS and allow them to form their own opinions. This phrase “critical thinking” might be well intentioned, but public schools do not have the right to play mind games, to lead our children to discern through their philosophies, under their frameworks and guidelines. Public schools are teaching our children to filter everything they are taught through what the school considers “rational.” The entity of “public school” revoltingly has deemed itself to be a god, equipped to program our children how to think.

    The “thought provoking questions” are asked of children after they are given a biased version of a religion and led to respond the way it slants, repeating and instilling public schools view on it. Our children should be learning FACTS, to the best ability of the school to provide them.

    Critical thinking may be appropriate in other applications, but definitely NOT religion. Teachers could not possibly grasp in full different religious beliefs and are not qualified to determine the validity for our children. The word “teach” means to sway a child to conform to the teachers way of thinking, therefore teachers need to be limited to FACTS. In the “Bias in Textbooks” section at BlessedCause.com, HUGE examples can be found where the textbook imposes it’s own biased ideas as truth to children. This absolutely must stop. Parents have the right to share faith with their children without public schools atheist philosophies taking advantage of unprotected innocent young minds and imposing atheist or Islam beliefs.

    This “wolf in critical thinking” has been ravaging our children for years. The outcry over the editing of our Pledge of Allegiance proved some of us still remember what our nation was founded on, but if we continue to teach our children untruths and “critical thinking,” what made this country great will be gone. As the atheist in our local paper stated about omission of God from the pledge,

    “America isn’t ready for it yet. We tried too much too quickly.”

    Atheists working against America and what she stands for have been slowly and methodically dismantling our precious heritage and openly admit their agenda. Will we continue to allow others to “get us ready for it?”

  21. #21 Jen Shroder
    August 6, 2004

    And as far as the stats go, if there are 500 students, 50 of them African-American and one gay, and 10 of the African American students are assaulted as well as the one gay, there is still a bigger problem of African Americans getting abused than there is of 100% of the gays. I still don’t see any “tolerance” training for African Americans, why are the ten ignored while the one gay is glorified? Why all the RECRUITMENT trainings under the pretense of tolerance?

    And to top that off, being African American is a birthright. Homosexuality is a choice, after millions are spent trying to prove one is born that way, they can’t. They keep finding evidence to disprove it. So why let the African Americans and the Jews be persecuted while far fewer gays are persecuted?

    No comments about the 20 top hits of gay attempts to indoctrinate children? And while teachers are claiming that homosexuality is normal, and a high number of gays participate in rimming, does that make rimming normal too?

    Something is happening that I’m not happy to see. As more and more parents are realizing the gay agenda in public school, and that agenda continues to be forced upon us, hostility is growing as parents seek to protect their children. I don’t want to see anyone persecuted, ESPECIALLY a child, gay or not. But militant gay activists are creating a ton of resentment, I just hope it doesn’t get vented on innocent kids.

    http://www.blessedcause.org/protest/Top%2020%20Gay%20Hits.htm

  22. #22 Jon Rowe, Esq.
    August 6, 2004

    “I still don’t see any “tolerance” training for African Americans, why are the ten ignored while the one gay is glorified?”

    You live in an absolute fantasy world. It has just been demonstrated to you that a gay person is more likely to be the victim of a hate crime than a black and you deny it. And wherever a white person may abuse a black, to think that this occurs in the public school system in a systemic manner is absolutely laughable. In any event, 1/3 of the victims of race hate crimes are white (meaning it’s black on white) and in terms of regularly reported interracial crimes (far more common that “hate crimes”) a black person is far more likely to abuse a white than the other way around.

    “Why all the RECRUITMENT trainings under the pretense of tolerance?”

    That’s funny, since gay people truly believe that they didn’t have a choice in the matter, they don’t believe that they have the ability to RECRUIT.

    “And while teachers are claiming that homosexuality is normal, and a high number of gays participate in rimming, does that make rimming normal too?”

    I wonder, does your husband perform oral sex on you when you have sex? I normally don’t like to get graphic like this during such conversations, but it’s clear that you started it. Anyway, I took a gander at your website which is full of lies in the form of statistics. Particularly Paul Cameron’s “Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do,” has been debunked as phony and he in particular has been debunked as a gay hating crackpot.

  23. #23 Jen Shroder
    August 6, 2004

    Quoted: “I still don’t see any “tolerance” training for African Americans, why are the ten ignored while the one gay is glorified?”

    Jan esq: You live in an absolute fantasy world. It has just been demonstrated to you that a gay person is more likely to be the victim of a hate crime than a black and you deny it. And wherever a white person may abuse a black, to think that this occurs in the public school system in a systemic manner is absolutely laughable.

    Jen: How can you say the opposite of what I posted? I just showed that if the total number of African Americans persecuted on a school yard is more than the total amount of homosexuals persecuted, then persecuting African Americans IS the larger problem! If there are ten Jews bloodied and bruised for being Jews, even if there are 20x more Jews on the playground, and one gay person who makes up 100% of gays on the playground, a principal still has to confront the problem that ten Jews are getting beaten up. Or are you trying to make the argument that one gay is more important than 20 Jews or African Americans?

    On top of that, African Americans are being persecuted for who they are, they can’t change that and shouldn’t have to. But homosexuals make the choice to be homosexuals, even though it has created serious medical consequences on society as a whole. And further, gay activist groups have developed multiple RECRUITMENT programs. If homosexual abuse is on the rise, then get the gay activist blatant recruitment techniques out of our schools! I think we would all get along a lot better.

    Jan Esq.: In any event, 1/3 of the victims of race hate crimes are white (meaning it’s black on white)

    Jen: I don’t believe that’s true, and even if it was, why aren’t they teaching real TOLERANCE of ALL groups? We all know why! It’s because these so-called tolerance trainings are nothing less than recruitment techniques as evidenced by their own literature advising students to try it, they might like it.

    Jan Esq.: …and in terms of regularly reported interracial crimes (far more common that “hate crimes”) a black person is far more likely to abuse a white than the other way around.

    Jen: If true, moot point for reasons just stated.

    Quoted: “Why all the RECRUITMENT trainings under the pretense of tolerance?”

    Jan Esq: That’s funny, since gay people truly believe that they didn’t have a choice in the matter, they don’t believe that they have the ability to RECRUIT.

    Jen: You have got to be kidding. How many homosexuals were seduced in the first place? And how many homosexuals attempt to seduce or rape others? But the real organized recruitment efforts are well documented, it’s why parents continually file lawsuits and the gay groups BACK DOWN, but keep chipping away and demanding to get their foot in the door. Unchecked they would probably have turned the gym lockers into bathhouses if they could have got away with it.

    Quote: “And while teachers are claiming that homosexuality is normal, and a high number of gays participate in rimming, does that make rimming normal too?”

    Jan Esq.: I wonder, does your husband perform oral sex on you when you have sex?

    Jen: Your level of integrity has just been identified.

    Jan Esq: I normally don’t like to get graphic like this during such conversations, but it’s clear that you started it. Anyway, I took a gander at your website which is full of lies in the form of statistics. Particularly Paul Cameron’s “Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do,” has been debunked as phony and he in particular has been debunked as a gay hating crackpot.

    Jen: LOL, and what about the dozens of other medical reports? You find ONE that is controversial, what about the DOZENS of others?

  24. #24 jen shroder
    August 6, 2004

    I’m sorry, after typing Jan Esq., I see it’s Jon Esq, my mistake, I apologize

  25. #25 Jon Rowe, Esq.
    August 6, 2004

    Jen,

    Your thoughts about homosexuals are about as rational and in fact remind me of the way that the Muslim Mullahs speak of the Jews when they make such remarks as Jews like to bake with the blood of the children of the Gentiles.

    There is no such thing as “recruiting” by gays and this is a vicious lie that has been debunked years ago. Ask any gay person and they will tell you that they always knew they were gay, most long before puberty. And in fact I’ve seen even the likes of James Dobson of all people vet social science that demonstrates that whatever it is that makes people gay, the orientation is fixed by before the ages of 4 or 5.

    “But homosexuals make the choice to be homosexuals….” This rings about as true as “the earth is flat.” Again, I’ve even seen James Dobson admit that being gay is not a choice. (Although he does believe with therapy the orientation can change).

    “How many homosexuals were seduced in the first place?” Well unless they were seduced before the age of 4 or 5, I don’t know any.

    “And how many homosexuals attempt to seduce or rape others?” The Jew and the Mullah analogy…it is quite apropos.

    As far as the hate crimes #s are concerned, I’ll defer to Ed’s shredding you apart, posted above.

    I’ll let you get back to your rattlesnake handling session. Don’t drink as much strychnine next time. That and the venom clearly has gone to your head.

  26. #26 Jen Shroder
    August 6, 2004

    Jon, if this isn’t attempts to recruit, what is?

    1. A conference for teachers, middle and high school students at Tufts University in March 2000 erupted in a controversy that became known as “Fistgate.” Students at one of the workshops, billed for “youth only ages 14-21,” learned explicit details of high-risk homosexual practices, including the practice of “fisting” which involves the insertion of a fist into a rectum or vagina. The instructors were three professionals from the Massachusetts Departments of Education and Health. A workshop participant secretly taped the workshop and when tapes were released to the public, a firestorm of controversy erupted, but the liberals prevailed in Massachusetts, and the conference has returned to Tufts every year since, just without that particular workshop. GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, one of the conference sponsors, sued the person who taped the workshop and another pro-family activist who wrote about the workshop. It is estimated that these two could incur over $200,000 in legal defense costs. The three workshop instructors were meanwhile dismissed, but one was later re-hired.
    2. Middle school students were recruited in West Virginia schools to serve on “civil rights action” teams. Students as young as sixth grade were trained by local police to listen for and report statements of peers that were “hateful” regarding homosexuality. The project was funded by the U.S. Safe and Drug Free Schools program. The effort, which originated out of the state Attorney General’s office, came to a halt last year once pro-family groups exposed it through the media. In Maine, 2,000 students attended a Civil Rights Team conference in April 2003 as part of a similar effort in that state. Pro-family volunteers and pastors tried to hand out literature at the conference with a different viewpoint, including testimony of an ex-homosexual. Apparently organizers of this taxpayer-funded event had coached the students in advance, because many students refused to accept the brochures at this conference on “diversity,” where students heard one young woman speaker describe her testosterone hormone therapy to change her gender to male.

    3. The national 2003 Day of Silence (DOS) event, organized by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), was observed in April by a reported 200,000 students in 2,000 middle and high schools. Students and some teachers remained silent all day to protest “discrimination” against homosexuals. At Evansville High School in Wisconsin, Christian students who countered the DOS by praying and sharing Bible verses in the school commons were given unexcused absences. The Silence students, by contrast, were permitted to publicize the event through posters and over the intercom, as well as being given a “safe room” for use that day if they believed they were being harassed.

    4. Over 2,000 people protested the forced establishment of a homosexual club at the high school in Boyd County (Ashland) Kentucky. The ACLU sued the school which eventually succumbed to pressure. The club proceeded as an approved non-curricular activity in 2003.

    5. In Novato, CA (Marin County), parents sued the schools after a pro-homosexual play called “Cootie Shots” was shown to two elementary schools. Parental opt-out forms were ignored and children saw the play without parental notification or approval. The play portrays those who don’t accept homosexuality as hateful and bigoted. The suit was dismissed by parents in 2003. The former principal had been replaced by a parent-friendly administrator, and a working parental opt-out program established. “Cootie Shots” includes the song, to be performed by a grade school age boy, “Mommy’s High Heels,” in which the boy is supposed to proudly reveal he’s wearing his mom’s shoes.

    6. Belying the usual claims that homosexual clubs for youth don’t focus on homosexual sex, members of California “gay-straight alliances” (GSA’s) marched in the San Francisco Gay Pride parade on June 29, 2003.These high school and some middle school students mingled alongside openly nude men and topless women as well as proponents of sado-masochism. Simulated sex acts were performed along the parade route, and signs like “Sodomize me, it’s legal!” celebrated the recent Supreme Court decision overturning Texas’ sodomy law. Police stood quietly by and made no attempt to arrest the naked celebrants. The homosexual advocate group GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) brought many of the GSA members to the parade in a yellow school bus. The organization PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) also marched in the parade.

    7. At Murphy Junior High School in Stony Creek, NY (Long Island) in 2002, a middle school homosexual club was formed following an “outreach” effort by the homosexual club at the local high school. The author of a graphic homosexual novel called Rainbow Boys was invited to speak to the middle school group. This book includes graphic descriptions of heterosexual oral sex as well as homosexual anal sex between a 17 year-old boy and an adult male he recently met via the Internet. Parents and students who objected to the high school and middle school promotion of homosexuality were reportedly verbally harassed to the point of police involvement. As a result, the principal of the middle school and several teachers have reportedly left the school.

    8. At James Madison High School, Vienna, VA, students heard a homosexual man, formerly married with children but now living with a homosexual lover, speak at a school assembly in March 2003 on the need for homosexuals to be able to adopt children. The speech was part of “Sexual Equality Awareness Week.” One class called “Combating Intolerance” gave extra credit for attending presentations by PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays). No opposing viewpoint was offered to students. Reportedly, PFLAG brochures are distributed to guidance counselors at the school. (For a review of PFLAG’s acceptance of sexually deviant activities, see Mission America’s report, “The World According to PFLAG: Why PFLAG and Children Don’t Mix” at http://www.missionamerica.com .)

    9. The award-winning student news publication of Upper Arlington High School, Columbus, OH, published a ten page insert in April 2001 about “growing up gay.” It featured a detailed biography of a “gay” male student, including abuse by his father, and his visits to homosexual bars. Sidebar articles included one depicting Exodus International and ex-homosexuals as frauds, and repeating unsubstantiated claims about one man’s return to homosexuality, without contacting him for a statement. Another sidebar spoke glowingly about a local church which performed homosexual commitment ceremonies. Phone numbers and web sites supporting youth homosexuality were also published. One letter in opposition and a paid ad about coming out of homosexuality were the only opposing viewpoints offered in a later issue. Administration officials supported the publication’s right to publish this misleading material.

    10. In St. Paul, Minnesota, high school student Elliott Chambers was suspended for wearing a sweatshirt with the message “Straight Pride” and a drawing of a man and woman holding hands. He wore the shirt after witnessing the school’s heavy promotion of homosexuality, including the posting of numerous “safe zone” pink triangles in classrooms and offices throughout the school. The principal told Chambers and his parents they were “homophobes.” A U.S. District court ruled that Elliott could return to school and that his rights had been violated.

    11. In Arcata, California in 2002, a ninth grade class was instructed by a guest speaker from Planned Parenthood to form a circle. The speaker posed questions and students who responded affirmatively remained standing. When asked, “Do you have a religious belief about homosexuality that considers it a sin and wrong?” the remaining students were subjected to hostile follow-up questions. See Testimony of Student from Arcata

    12. At Pioneer High School in Ann Arbor, MI in 2002, a homosexual club demanded that the school’s Christian Club adopt a policy of “non-discrimination” based on sexual orientation, as the school itself had done. The Christian club refused, citing its religious beliefs and constitutional rights. After a threatened law suit by the Christian club, the homosexual club backed off. In addition, the school changed its policy.

    13. Over 100 “safe zone” pink triangles decorated the doors of classrooms and offices at a school in Olympia Fields, IL in 2002. These are used by homosexual activists to designate acceptance of homosexuality and by implication, to stigmatize those who object. School board members voted to have them removed after parent objections.

    14. Parent Mary Clossey complained about her son’s reading requirement at Newton North High School in Newton Massachusetts in 2001. It included the book, The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky which included passages on sex between a boy and a dog, man-boy sex, anal sex between boys, male masturbation and female masturbation with a hot dog. Her calls to the mayor were never returned and school officials were disrespectful, so she filed a criminal complaint against the teacher for corrupting a minor. But after trying repeatedly, she was never able to meet with the district attorney. Clossey discovered that the book was on a reading list given to every student. She received a letter from the district attorney informing her that the state’s schools and libraries were immune from laws relating to exposing children to pornography.

    15. School boards in Portage, MI and Winston Salem, NC both nixed adding “sexual orientation” to their school districts non-discrimination policies in 2002. Such policies, now in effect in many U.S. schools, have been used to force pro-homosexual clubs, curricula and events on schools.

    16. In the San Leandro CA school district, a married teacher won a case in 2002 defended by the National Education Association after he talked to his class about respecting “gays, lesbians and bisexuals.” Parents complained and the teacher was reprimanded. He sued and won the case based on his rights of free speech.

    17. Parent Debra Loveless of St. Louis sued Metro High School after trying to attend a school event sponsored by GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. Loveless was blocked from the school assembly and ushered out of the school by an armed official. She had already exempted her daughter from attending, but wanted to observe the content first-hand.

    18. After a bitter and controversial battle, the school district of Broward County, FL (Fort Lauderdale) voted in 2002 to allow the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network to provide tolerance training for psychologists, teachers and social workers at its schools over the next five years. (For more information about the sexually deviant practices accepted by GLSEN, see our paper, “Children At Risk,” on the Mission America web site at http://www.missionamerica.com .)

    19. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in Minnesota ruled in 2002 that Carla Cruzan, a teacher at Southwest High School, had to share a restroom with a cross-dressing male librarian. The male, David Nielsen, now goes by the name of Debra Davis. He wanted to be able to use the same general restroom as the female staff. Many of the female staff were reportedly unhappy with the arrangement, but Cruzan was the only one who sued. She was told by the court she should use a unisex single restroom if she preferred.

    20. In Wilmette, IL, middle school principal Donald Reed returned to school as Deanna Reed in the fall of 2001 after sex change surgery over the summer. Instead of dismissing the principal, the district retained him and held “counseling” opportunities for students and parents to smooth over the transition. A male art teacher in Eastchester, NY returned to school as a woman, and a Northbook, IL science teacher also had female-to-male sex change surgery before returning to her/his teaching post.

    Nationwide, reports of the suppression of religious freedom and parental rights are coming in as never before, all because educators too often try to mold youth attitudes regardless of what families believe. Many support the acceptance of homosexuality among students and faculty, and will ignore or even deliberately undermine community concerns.

    “Now available to California children:
    Heterosexuality Questionaire:
    When and where did you first decide you were heterosexual?
    Is it possible heterosexuality is a phase you will grow out of?
    Is it possible you are heterosexual because you fear the same sex?
    If you have never slept with someone of the same sex, how do you know you wouldn’t prefer that?”
    LAW OF THE LAND
    California Assembly passes ‘sex survey’ bill
    Will allow schools to teach controversial topics without parents’ OK

  27. #27 Jen Shroder
    August 6, 2004

    Then we also have this:
    Editor’s note: I called Mountjoy’s offices, these materials are STILL being used!

    Lawmakers ‘sanction’ use
    of district-approved ‘porn’
    Assemblyman decries ‘lewd and lascivious’ training materials promoting homosexuality

    By Diana Lynne
    © 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

    Instructions on homosexual sodomy and a glorified account of lesbian pedophilia are among the instructional materials approved by the Los Angeles Unified School District for use in “diversity” and “safety” programs being presented to elementary through high school students.

    The sexually explicit materials promoting homosexuality were highlighted late last week at a California State Assembly committee hearing. Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy, R-Monrovia, provided excerpts in support of his legislative bill AB 1326, which is aimed at prohibiting the promotion of homosexuality in public education. The measure was summarily defeated without discussion.

    “The material is being put forward under the guise of tolerance and diversity, but it’s inappropriate. It’s lewd and lascivious … and is darn embarrassing. Here I sit in my office reading my porn. It made me turn red, and I don’t easily turn red,” Mountjoy told WorldNetDaily. Mountjoy concludes the committee’s vote against his bill sanctions continued use of the material in public schools.

    Among the materials is a “Models of Pride II” reading list (see page 1 and page 2) consisting of “a few of the many titles that can help you deal with issues, and help parents understand and accept their gay and lesbian children.”

    “Young, Gay & Proud,” “One Teenager In 10: Writings by Gay & Lesbian Youth” and “Homophobia as Child Abuse” are three of the 27 recommended titles.

    “I challenge every parent and school board member to review these books and decide if they are appropriate for our children,” said Mountjoy, “If you have trouble finding them, contact the LAUSD. They can give you the names of the ‘adult’ bookstores they recommend.”

    In one excerpt from “Young, Gay, & Proud,” the author writes: “There are a lots of ways for gay men to have enjoyable sex. … It’s up to you to find out what you like and how you like to do it. … Jerking off is a fun, safe and healthy way for guys to enjoy our bodies and fantasies.” The author goes on to provide explicit details of how “gay men can make love.” A note of encouragement follows profanity-laced tips on performing anal sex: “You may have to practice a bit before it starts feeling really good.”

    In “One Teenager in Ten: Writings by Gay & Lesbian Youth,” 16-year-old Amy relates the blow-by-blow details of her sexual encounter at the age of 12 with her dance teacher, aged 23. The encounter reportedly happened at a hotel after the teacher “asked [her] to give a special dance presentation in another city” over the weekend. Amy praises her teacher for bringing her “out” and for the relationship that continued for three years following that encounter. The “very conservative Baptist” later explains that her “parents do not know or suspect” and states, “I think finding out that people think homosexuality is bad made me more firm in my desire to stay a lesbian regardless of what would happen to me.”

    A two-page magazine article displayed at Hollywood High School under the caption, “The Gay Rapper,” and obtained by WorldNetDaily is too profane and obscene to be quoted.

    “Oral copulation is a criminal offense. They’re condoning breaking the law,” Mountjoy stressed. Under California penal code section 286, sodomy with another person who is under 18 is punishable by imprisonment for a year, and sodomy with another person under 16 is a felony.

    “It’s more than amazing – it’s completely shocking, and every parent and grandparent should be outraged,” said Randy Thomasson, executive director of Campaign for California Families, one of three organizations that registered support for Mountjoy’s bill. “When asked whether to protect kids from being brainwashed to accept homosexuality and consider gay sex practices, [the Assembly Education Committee members] say, ‘no, we want homosexuality included in what every child should know.’”

    Repeated calls to the communications office for LAUSD for comment on the materials have not been returned.

    Thirty-nine groups opposed Mountjoy’s bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Anti-Defamation League, California Federation of Teachers, Planned Parenthood, the Sacramento and San Diego chapters of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network and nine other homosexual-advocacy organizations.

    The California Alliance for Pride and Equality argues, “This bill may be unconstitutional, as it is so vague and overbroad that it infringes upon the First Amendment right of students, teachers, and administrators alike. Gay/straight student alliance clubs will be barred from forming in violation of the First Amendment and federal Equal Access (20 U.S.C section 4071-4074) that establish the requirement of equal treatment for all non-curriculum related clubs.”

    Downs v. Los Angeles Unified School District

    The instructional materials promoting homosexuality came to light under court order in a federal lawsuit. In 1998, Special Education teacher Robert Downs raised objection to a hallway bulletin board posted by staff members each year at Doris S. Leichman High School filled with items promoting homosexuality in honor of district-designated “Gay and Lesbian Awareness Month.”

  28. #28 jen Schroeder
    August 6, 2004

    PART II

    “The display board consisted of clippings about homosexual partner benefits and depicting victories of homosexual rights [advocates]. … There was a picture of two homosexual men together calling them a family and one with children as family. … It was one-sided,” Downs told WorldNetDaily. When he complained to the principal, the teacher of 22 years was allowed to post opposing material on a bulletin board. But after the principal received staff complaints that his material was “disrespectful,” “offensive,” “upsetting,” “objectionable” and “derogatory,” he was ordered to take it down and threatened with disciplinary action.

    “They could just complain and I was ordered to remove mine … and I would complain about theirs and nothing would ever happen,” said Downs. “The principal said if I didn’t like it, I could walk with my head down. I’m not going to walk with my head down.” Instead, Downs sued, claiming his constitutionally protected free-speech rights were being violated.

    The district took the position that the bulletin boards were not free-speech zones but contained approved curriculum material. That argument prompted a court order for the district to produce everything posted on bulletin boards on schools throughout the district in observance of “Gay and Lesbian Awareness Month.” Four boxes of material collected from 50 of the approximately 650 schools in the district were produced.

    “There were ads for porn movies and where kids can go to see them and ads for sex boutiques,” describes Downs. “When we saw the filth, the free-speech issue was no longer important. Getting the filth out of the public schools [became] the focus.” The “filth,” however, was precluded from Downs’ court case but has been allowed in a sequel suit filed on behalf of a LAUSD student. That case is pending in the 9th Circuit Court.

    LAUSD’s legal department referred WorldNetDaily to its outside counsel for comment on the lawsuits. Calls to the law firm have not been returned.

    The school district prevailed in Downs’ suit with a summary judgment in its favor in district court, affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in September 2000. Judge Stephen Trott wrote the appellate court’s opinion that “We do not face an example of the government opening up a forum for either unlimited or limited public discussion. Instead, we face an example of the government opening up its own mouth: LAUSD, by issuing Memorandum No. 111, and Leichman High, by setting up the Gay and Lesbian Awareness bulletin boards. The bulletin boards served as an expressive vehicle for the school board’s policy of ‘Educating for Diversity.’”

    Promoting ‘diversity’ and ‘safety’

    The California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act of 2000 required the State Board of Education to revise state curriculum to “include human relations education, with the aim of fostering an appreciation of the diversity of California’s population and discouraging the development of discriminatory attitudes and practices. … Acknowledge lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender historical figures, events, concepts, and issues in the revisions of content standards and curriculum frameworks, when appropriate. Identify and expand the available lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender resources for school library materials. … Propose legislative or budget language to fund research of promising programs preventing discrimination, harassment and violence based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity.”

    The board cites studies indicating lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth to be at greater risk for being victimized and more likely to experience anxiety, low self-esteem, depression, to abuse substances and contemplate or attempt suicide. According to the California Alliance for Pride and Equality , “Students who describe themselves as lesbian or gay are five times more likely to miss school because of felling [sic] unsafe. Twenty-eight percent are forced to drop-out.”

    The 2000 statutes required schools to prevent any “hate-motivated incident,” which is defined as “an act or attempted act which constitutes an expression of hostility against a person or property or institution because of the victim’s real or perceived race, religion, disability, gender, nationality or sexual orientation. This may include using bigoted insults, taunts, or slurs, distributing or posting hate-group literature or posters, defacing, removing, or destroying posted materials or announcements, posting or circulating demeaning jokes or leaflets.”

    The 2000 statutes picked up where the 1999 Carl Washington School Safety and Violence Prevention Act left off, tapping into $100 million allocated by the legislature for “preventing and responding to acts of hate violence.”

    In addition to being bound by state statutes to promote homosexuality in its “diversity” and “safety” programs, schools face the threat of lawsuits by advocacy groups such as the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network if they fail to address “student-on-student abuse based on sexual orientation.” On its website, GLSEN applauds a “landmark settlement” received by a Pennsylvania ‘gay’ teen.

    Said Executive Director Kevin Jennings, “The court’s decision to award 19-year-old Timothy Dahle with a settlement of $312,000 to compensate for the pervasive anti-gay abuse he faced in the Titusville Area School District is breathtaking.” Jennings further concludes, “There are clear lessons to be learned by school administrators and staff … that teachers and staff take a risk – a risk that can have dire fiscal implications on their districts – when this kind of maltreatment goes unchecked.”

    There is evidence “diversity” programs that promote homosexuality are effective. A Hamilton College Gay Issues poll released in August finds two-thirds of high school graduates favor legal recognition of homosexual marriages, 71 percent believe sexual relations between same-sex adults should be legal, and 71 percent of graduates would allow ‘gay’ men to serve as Scout leaders.

    (from Jen) doesn’t it ever occur to anyone that the reason the suicide rates and drug abuse of gays is not because of the consensus of society but because of the unhealthy lifestyle, both physically and mentally? San Francisco, so proud of the gay population that to be straight is to be frowned upon, still shows high incidences of suicide and drug abuse among gays. God condemns homosexuality for a reason, it is HARMFUL, mentally, physically, spiritually and it defiles the land. Again, if someone insists on that lifestyle, that’s your choice. But DO NOT FORCE THOSE IDEAS ON OUR CHILDREN!

  29. #29 Jen Shroder
    August 6, 2004

    No attempts to recruit? Michael Swift wrote in the Gay Revolutionary, reprinted from the Congressional Congress:

    “We shall sodomize your sons, the emblems of your feeble masculinity of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups and in your movie theatre bathrooms, in your army bunk house in your truck stops, in your all male clubs and in your houses of Congress, wherever men are men together. Your sons will become the puppets of our bidding. We will recast them in our image and they will come to crave and adore us (sound like Romans 1?). We shall write poems of love between men, we shall stage plays in which men openly caress men, we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap superficial sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating in your cinematic screens. We shall rise in a vast private army to defeat you. We will conquer the world because warriors inspired by, and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible. The family unit, the spawning ground of all lies, betrayals, hypocrisy and violence will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens the imagination and curbs the free will must be eliminated. All churches that condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. One of the major requirements of a position of power in this new society will be the indulgence in this Greek passion and any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from positions of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.”

  30. #30 Jon Rowe, Esq.
    August 7, 2004

    Jen,

    That hodgepodge is really all over the place. It varies from the lunatic ravings of militant gay activists to wholly defensible statements and positions by rational supporters of equality for gays.

    That last statement in particular was written by an obnoxious activists who was just trying to get a rise out of rightwing crackpots like you and apparently it worked.

    As for the possibility of recruitment, I’ll defer to Ronald Reagan. From an article on Reagan and gays:

    “Reagan publicly demonstrated [his gay tolerant] outlook when he opposed Proposition 6, a 1978 ballot measure that called for the dismissal of California teachers who ‘advocated’ homosexuality, even outside of schools. Reagan used both a September 24, 1978, statement and a syndicated newspaper column to campaign against the initiative.

    ‘Whatever else it is,’ Reagan wrote, ‘homosexuality is not a contagious disease like the measles. Prevailing scientific opinion is that an individual’s sexuality is determined at a very early age and that a child’s teachers do not really influence this.’ He also argued: ‘Since the measure does not restrict itself to the classroom, every aspect of a teacher’s personal life could presumably come under suspicion. What constitutes ‘advocacy’ of homosexuality? Would public opposition to Proposition 6 by a teacher — should it pass — be considered advocacy?’

    That November 7, Proposition 6 lost, 41.6 percent in favor to 58.4 percent against. Reagan’s opposition is considered instrumental to its defeat.”

    Get it through your thick skull Jen: It’s not possible to “recruit” someone into homosexuality no matter how many ravings from militant gay activists you may reproduce.

  31. #31 Lynn
    August 7, 2004

    Jon,

    Jen is a gay basher. Pure and simple. I wonder why she is so afraid. Maybe she has had deep seeded questions about her own sexuality.

  32. #32 Jody
    August 7, 2004

    Do you think she stays up nights, imagining, over and over and over and over and over again, all of the “horrible” things she reads about?

    She’s scared because, year by year, acceptance and toleration of gay people, and the rejection of bigoted, 3rd Century BCE ideas of “normal” slip farther and farther away.

    Which isn’t to say more work still needs to be done. But comments like hers remind me of my great uncle’s rankings about the “communists, jews and n***” taking over the world.

    He used to be head of the local KKK chapter…

  33. #33 Jon Rowe
    August 8, 2004

    Thanks Lynn. For all of her fighting against Islam, if she were to look in the mirror she’d find that she has much in common (worldview) with those radical Mullahs.

  34. #34 Bill Ware
    August 8, 2004

    Jen,

    You completely miss the point about the “Heterosexuality Questionnaire”

    Gays are all too often asked:

    When and where did you first decide you were homosexual?
    Is it possible homosexuality is a phase you will grow out of?
    Is it possible you are homosexual because you fear the opposite sex?
    If you have never slept with someone of the opposite sex, how do you know you wouldn’t prefer that?”

    These all show ignorance and prejudice about being gay.

    To illustrate how this is so, the “Heterosexuality Questionnaire” is given out so that heterosexuals can see how utterly dumb these questions are when applied to their own orientation and are therefore equally dumb when asked of homosexuals.

    The questions are NOT supposed to be answered. In fact they CAN’T be answered. Stop asking gays dumb questions like these. That’s the point!
    B

  35. #35 jen shroder
    August 10, 2004

    Jon, a key word in your response concerning Ronald Reagan is “Prevailing”.

    He said it in 1976 and at that time there were many spin studies claiming “Prevailing” scientific opinion is that an individual’s sexuality is determined at a very early age and that a child’s teachers do not really influence this.’”

    After millions of dollars have been spent trying to prove this as fact, they haven’t been able to, they realized the opposite, it’s a CHOICE, you can allow yourself to explore those territories just like you can taking drugs, looking at porn, sado-masochism and even pedophilia. The sad part is that many confused adolescent boys have a homosexual experience and when their bodies respond (as any body often does when touched in certain ways) the believe after one experience they are gay. Boys who don’t have a father figure (record high percentage these days) also have confused feelings when given attention by older men. Now public schools are encouraging children to “try it” because gay activists threaten to sue if they don’t, if any child claims they were persecuted as a gay, and the school can’t prove that they’ve given pro-gay assemblies or the equivelant of, then the school is open to million dollar lawsuits.

    Comparing me to Nazis just because I strongly oppose teaching my sons to experience the joys of anal sex is a cheap shot and far from true. I’ve had close friends, (one exceptionally close) who were gay. I’d like to say I still do but my closest gay friends are dead from AIDS and the ones who aren’t are feared to be, the last anyone heard from them.

    So don’t tell me I hate gays. You have no idea what you’re talking about. My contentions are directed at public education and the gay activists forcing their agenda, just like Michael Swift quoted earlier. You say he’s a crackpot but MANY of the things he wrote have already come true. For a crackpot, he got a lot of it right. He wrote what would happen and it is.

    As for my being “fearful”, lol, there is a huge group of moms in my town that feel the same way I do, but when the news media rolled up, they ran. I get death threats, I’ve been hacked, I’ve been framed (I believe by the democratic party) and fortunately the FBI was able to verify I wasn’t guilty. There is a Palestinian website directing people how to look up my personal physical address…which changes. If I was “fearful”, I would have shut my mouth long ago.

    Nope, it’s only because I have complete faith in God and my eternal future that I’m able to ignore all the credible threats. Fearful? I don’t think so.

  36. #36 Ed Brayton
    August 10, 2004

    Jen-

    I’d like you to cite some of those studies that allegedly show that homosexuality is a choice rather than a genetic predisposition. I think you’re just blowing smoke on this one.

  37. #37 Jen Shroder
    August 12, 2004

    Ed, why does it appear that I’m blocked from an Aug 11 page where you make a lot of ridiculous claims? http://www.mblog.com/dispatches_from_the_culture_wars/

    What’s the matter, can’t take the heat?

    I don’t have time to really go over all of your claims, but a huge faux pas is that I wrote my clinton article long before Newsmax did. And a lot of the research you claim other authors didn’t do, is backed up at my extended Clinton article, which the one you quoted links to.

    And then, it appears you or one of the admins blocked me from responding. What’s the matter Ed, need a cup of coffee to respond on a fair playing field?

  38. #38 Lynn
    August 12, 2004

    Jen,

    You must be paranoid or very insecure. You obviously do not know Ed very well. He welcomes your idiotic comments. Each time you post something you prove what he says is true.
    You really should seek therapy.

  39. #39 Ed Brayton
    August 12, 2004

    Exactly what I was going to say, honey. I WANT Jen to keep commenting. The more she does, the more foolish she looks and the most entertaining it is.

  40. #40 Dan
    August 12, 2004

    Now public schools are encouraging children to “try it” because gay activists threaten to sue if they don’t, if any child claims they were persecuted as a gay, and the school can’t prove that they’ve given pro-gay assemblies or the equivelant of, then the school is open to million dollar lawsuits.

    This is such blatant horseshit that I almost fell out my chair. Ms. Shroder, please cite a credible source (e.g., not WorldNutDaily or some similar trash written by the likes of someone who wouldn’t know journalism if it bit him or her on the ass) demonstrating:

    1. That public schools are encouraging children to “try it,” where “it” refers to homosexual experiences or a homosexual lifestyle;

    2. That “gay activists” have threatened to sue a school district for failing to encourage children to try homosexual experiences or a homosexual lifestyle; and

    3. That a school district has been sued for being unable to prove that it has put on “pro gay” assemblies (or the equivalent of pro gay assemblies, whatever that means).

    Anyone this moronic should come with a warning sign.

    Ed, “Idiot of the Week” simply doesn’t capture the essence of this lack of cerebellar function. We need to start a contest to come up with an appropriate description. My suggestion: “EEG Flatliner of the Week.”

    On a more serious note, referencing the earlier posts discussing Ms. Shroder’s incoherent rants about the Northern District of CA case involving the Muslim role-playing exercises in a history class: I agree that the decision is likely to be reversed when it goes up to the Ninth Circuit or, if need be, to the Supreme Court. But has anyone else commented on the obvious hypocrisy of Ms. Shroder’s argument? Specifically, she complains about the teaching of Islam in a history class, but I saw no complaint about the teaching of the history of Christianity in the same (I think) history class. I read the slip opinion a couple of days ago, and I believe the teaching of Christianity is discussed at page 6 or 7. I’m not arguing that the teaching of either one is appropriate for a history class; I’m simply pointing out that Ms. Shroder is offended by the teaching of Islam, but apparently not by the teaching of Christianity. What a surprise.

    Note also the obvious contradition: Ms. Shroder argues that Islam shouldn’t be taught in a history class, but I’d be willing to bet she’d be among the first to argue in favor of teaching ID/creationism, or some variant of that theme (e.g., “teach the controversy,” “evolution is wrong,” etc.) in a science class.

    Of course, spotting the inconsistencies and hypocrisy in Ms. Shroder’s writings is rather like shooting deer at a petting zoo. It’s hardly sporting to go after someone on the lunatic fringe, but I suppose as long as she’s willing to serve it up, we can continue to have at it.