Skip to comments.New Law Redefines Gender in California Schools
Posted on 01/14/2008 9:05:22 AM PST by kellynla
Last Oct. 12, Californias Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law a controversial Democratic-authored measure, SB 777, that subtly redefines how sexuality and gender may be taught and dealt with in public schools.
This law had been held in abeyance until this month while conservatives were given 90 days to collect signatures to qualify a June ballot referendum that would let voters approve or overturn it.
On Thursday, the referendum deadline, activists acknowledged that they had fallen short, gathering only 350,000 of the 433,971 signatures required.
With the new law in effect, said referendum supporter Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Family Impact, conservative groups will now advance a ballot initiative to replace the most troublesome language of the new law in Californias education code.
San Francisco values should not be forced on every school district throughout the state, England told Newsmax.
Previous California law made it illegal for schools to offer instruction or an activity that reflects adversely upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin or ancestry.
State Senate Bill 777 revises this protected list to disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation. It also changes the words reflects adversely to prohibit instead any teaching or activity that promotes a discriminatory bias. The conservative ballot initiative, if qualified and passed by voters, would essentially restore the old legal language.
SB 777 critics claim that it could be used to prohibit, as discriminatory, textbooks that depict only a man and a woman as a married couple.
The new law erases the old definition of sex as entirely male or female and, say critics, could give students the right to decide for themselves what gender they are. This, say critics, could in theory allow a male who thought of himself as female to assert his right to shower with the girls.
Such concerns are balderdash, according to Democratic state Sen. Sheila Kuehl, chief sponsor of the new law. Kuehl, who succeeded radical Tom Hayden in this Malibu-Santa Monica legislative district, is one of five openly homosexual members of the California Legislature. In her earlier career as an actress, she became famous as Zelda Gilroy, madly in love with Dobie in the 1959-63 TV series The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis.
SB 777 certainly would not ban reference to mom and dad in the curriculum, Kuehl wrote in a Dec. 29 op-ed article.
Kuehl is correct, as the Claremont Institute reported, because facing controversy last September she removed from her bill the language that would have forbidden in public schools the use of mom, dad, husband and wife.
SB 777 does not create a radical new definition of gender that will allow boys and girls to shower together, wrote Kuehl, nor does it change the content requirements for textbooks and other instructional materials.
But, as legislative liaison Meredith Turney of Capitol Resource Institute testified last year, Los Angeles Unified School District has already implemented a policy that states a boy perceiving himself to be a girl may use the girls restroom and locker room. He may also participate in girls sports and other female-only activities.
According to Kuehl, her new law simply lists the currently prohibited bases of discrimination that have been the law since at least 2000 and the current definitions for those terms in one place for easy reference by parents and school administrators.
But Republican California state Sen. Tom McClintock sees a big difference between old laws that prohibit things that adversely reflect on certain groups and the new law that makes it illegal for schools to promote a discriminatory bias towards certain groups.
The old law was not violated if a school elected a prom king and queen, or if a transgender student felt uncomfortable in the boys locker room, or if a school celebrated Cinco de Mayo but not Bastille Day, according to McClintock. But under the new law legal action might be brought to redress all of these as promoting discriminatory bias.
SB 777 does open a door to vexatious litigation, wrote Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters last December. He described the new law as another troublesome step down the slippery slope of politics dictating what version of history and current events children should be taught . [L]awsuit-leery educators may see it as forcing them to censor or repress anything that even indirectly touches on sexual orientation in a way that someone somewhere might consider offensive.
Critics have described the new law as a way to impose the homosexual agenda on children as young as kindergarteners.
Heres a suggestion for the groups that opposed this new law: use it, wrote Senator McClintock last October.
After all, if courts begin ruling that exclusion is indeed a form of discriminatory bias which is clearly the intent of this bill there are no groups more excluded or less tolerated in the public schools today than evangelical Christians, orthodox Jews and traditional Catholics.
Another day, another reason why more & more people are home schooling their children!
Yet another reason why I will NEVER live in California. California has become the test state for everything liberal. And like a disease, these “ideas” will filter out to the rest of the country. Ugggghhhh!
I would impose an examination here. The exam would consist of several questions and a physical examination. The key question would be "Has your gender ever been altered surgically. Describe the nature of that alteration."
The physical exam would center on the genital area, the focus of which would be the discovery of "gender alteration." Examiners would be chosen carefully and would be expected to adhere to the dictum (no pun intended here), "We calls 'em like we sees 'em."
These people should be in an asylum. Why not let the students decide what species they are, next? Insanity is pandemic in this country.
Homosexuals need to keep in mind, however, that the good news of the gospel is not about how God despises same-sex sexual relationships. In fact, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 tells us that certain members of that church had been slaves to such relationships but had been cleansed in Jesus' name. So these former homosexuals had evidently repented and accepted God's grace to straighten their lives out.
Thank you for that post!
I’ve often wondered why homosexuals are referred to as “gay.”
Never heard of ANY homosexual being “gay.”
In fact, all the ones I hear & read about are some of the most miserable people on the planet!
OK, how's this for a fair solution. Students can decide what gender they are, but biology gets to decide what sex they are. And use of the facilities, assignment to gym classes, etc will be decided by sex, not gender.
I believe it was Cary Grant who first used the term in “Bringing Up baby”.
I don’t care if Moses “first used the term”;
it’s a misnomer. LOL
What a disappointment. What is even more frustrating is that if it had gotten the signatures and passed on the ballot, Equality California, Sheila Kuehl and the other pro-gay legislators, and the pro-gay minions in the Governor's office would have just passed the same dang law again! Just like the communists, these folks have infiltrated the depths of government at the local, state, and federal levels to advance their agenda. They need to be exposed, hounded, and voted out of office post-haste!
No, not "just like the communists"; this IS communism, which arose out of apostate Sabbateans in the eighteenth century (it was Moses Hess who taught communism to Marx, and the Bund der Gerechten who paid him to write the Manifesto). Specific to that group was the deliberate promotion of depraved Hellenistic sexuality. It wasn't until Gramsci embedded it in the Cultural Marxism of the early 20th Century that it became formally incorporated into communist policy as a way to destroy the bastion of Western Civilization: the nuclear family.
It is best to see communism as a symptom of a larger dilemma.
public school ping
Possible Another Reason to Homeschool ping.
Nope - this is a loony tune California thing..........
If the opponents of such nonsense are unable to counter it, as apparently they are, it is a California problem.
I love California. I have lived here all of my life. It is the most beautiful state in the country. My children are happy, healthy, and full of joy — and all of the families we are friends with (a LOT) have children who are the same way, for the most part. My children are being taught how to navigate their way around falsehood because I only teach them the TRUTH. That way, they will spot the lie very quickly (which they do. They come up with some very deep ideas all on their own this way.)
It’s a great place to live. I would recommend it.
Oh, BTW — I DID mention I homeschool all four of them, right? Yep...it’s the only way to live here. Tons of homeschooling families on every street around here now. People are leaving the public schools and even private Christian schools left and right. The kids P.E. coop class had a record number attend last semester (35) — this is K through junior high. Last week the spring semester class began — and they are overwhelmed with 55 homeschooled students — about 10 new families added in since last year. Parents are “getting it” — and kids are happier.
It’s great. I recommend it. I don’t even think about the sacrifice much. The benefits far outweight the cost. Did I mention I am also doing this SINGLE? Yep — totally single (so far)..but I think God is bringing us a husband/daddy soon.
(I adopted all four siblings thru foster care, and God provides all we need each week and each month. A single, loving, focused Christian Momma is better than leaving them in foster care, in limbo, and split up. God knows they need a Daddy — and he is on his way soon, I believe.)
I’ve pinged this topic more than once already.
That strategy only means that you will have to wait a few more years for the insane virus to reach you.
You will be assimilated ... eventually.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.