Posted on 07/11/2011 3:43:22 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
The California state legislature has passed a book-banning law. Nobody is calling the book ban a book ban because the books the book ban bans offend homosexuals.
If the legislature had extended legislative protection to the hurt feelings of, say, Mormons or evangelical Christians, then everyone would have agreed that it’s a book ban. But it doesn’t, so don’t call the book ban a book ban. You just might get banned, too.
The legislation, awaiting the signature of Governor Jerry Brown, decrees that localities in America’s most populous state “shall not adopt any textbooks or other instructional materials for use in the public schools that contain any matter reflecting adversely upon persons on the basis of…sexual orientation.” The legislation further enjoins school boards to adopt materials that discuss the “role and contributions” of “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans.”
And what do “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans” believe their “role and contributions” to be?
Playwright Larry Kramer claims that Abraham Lincoln was “a totally gay man.” As he once rationalized to Salon.com, “So much of the history that is shoveled into the world is bullshit—we really have to invent our own.” Clarence Tripp, whose sexual exploits were constrained neither by taboos about the same sex nor by taboos against different species, came to a similar conclusion about the 16th president in a Simon & Schuster-published book. Paul Russell listed Socrates, St. Augustine, and William Shakespeare as part of his “Gay 100.”
It’s apparently “in” to come out—even several millennia after the fact. But being gay presumably has something to do with liking other gays, not with gays liking you. What evidence is there for the homosexuality of Socrates, St. Augustine, or Lincoln that is half as compelling as the evidence for the homosexuality of everyone who labels them gay?
In literature, some out-there homosexuals also see in-closet homosexuality where the uninitiated don’t. Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer? Tom Buchanan and Nick Carraway? Prince Hal and Falstaff? Various academics have discovered a sexual element in these literary relationships that has escaped the notice of exactly everybody prior to the 1960s. Were they that ignorant or are we?
One can easily see how California’s interest-group edict could similarly twist biology, health, and other subjects. The law puts feelings before facts.
It’s an invitation to defect from the public schools and a provocation against the captive audience that can neither afford the expense of private schools nor the time to home school. Like religion, teaching morality is better instructed in the home than in the schoolhouse.
Homosexuals exist. From Alexander the Great to John Maynard Keynes to James Baldwin, gays and lesbians have left an imprint on the world in which we live, discussions of which should be neither outlawed nor mandated. Though this bill represents an aggression against that massive portion of California parents who wish to shield their children from, rather than expose them to, sex, this topic could certainly be discussed intelligently among upperclassmen in a high school.
Too bad this bill isn’t about starting a conversation. It’s about stopping one.
Thirty-three-years ago, an equally harebrained scheme sought to empower California school boards to fire homosexual teachers. Ronald Reagan, despite gearing up for a run for the Republican presidential nomination, offended much of his conservative base by vocally opposing the Briggs Initiative. The ballot measure thankfully lost. Reagan thankfully won the presidency.
Jerry Brown, Reagan’s Golden State gubernatorial successor who again finds himself in Sacramento, today appears in an analogous situation. A special-interest group in his party wishes to curtail freedom in the name of community standards. Banning unpopular books, like firing unpopular teachers, is a bad idea. Whether Brown remains a captive of his party’s special interests, or, like Reagan, transcends them on behalf of freedom, remains to be seen.
More modern figures who indisputably did engage in homosexual behavior, were also married (to a person of the other sex) and engaged in heterosexual behavior.
Oscar Wilde was married to Constance Lloyd, and they had two sons. The Episocopal bishop in New Hampshire, the Rev. Gene Robinson, was married and likewise had two children with his wife. New Jersey governor Jim McGreeey married twice and had children with both of his wives, before he famously announced he was gay.
Which raises many questions, including:
Are all sexual behaviors the basis of an identity group and a claim of historic "specialness" in the California school system?
Will there be multiple study units to recognize the cultural contributions of, say,
-Polygamists as such? (Lots of them, and many of them Biblical.)
-Celibates as such? (A big roster of greats here, many of them in the Catholic Church.)
-Adulterers as such? (A huge list... and for so many centuries disrespected, misunderstood, and in the closet!)
-And even, married heterosexual people as such? Are the public schools going to be fully invested in Married Hetero Studies? Great Married Heteros of America? Married Hetero History Week?
If the California public schools are going to "recognize" people's historic achievements mainly in sexual categories, it's going to be increasingly complicated to put together a curriculum.
Poor students. Of course, the fact that so many of them are illiterate simplifies things considerably.
More thought crime laws.
Hey, I thought it was N-word Jim who was supposed to be the gay one.
"Come on back to the raft, Huck honey!"
Maybe, but what possible benefit would there be? And why would homosexuals want to be associated with a destructive butcher like Alexander, a destructive hack economist like Keynes, or the unreadable James Baldwin?
End Near for Zimbabwe's Last White Farmers
They failed to see the writing on the wall
Yeah, buddy, that's his own hair.
That little faggot's got his own jet airplane.
That little faggot, he's a millionaire.
*whew* Nothing like reciting a few banned lyrics to make one feel like a real rebel. Let 'em come and get me. I won't teach their view of history, except to point out the dangers involved with the gay lifestyle. GRID, anyone??
Fur shur the kids studying ONLY IN SPANISH have a tremendous advantage. As usual they won’t have to put up with any of this cr*p.
I give a damn. Along with the majority of sane minded people here in California. We do our damnest to fight the liberals, the illegals, and the freaking weirdos in this state. Unfortunately, when the shit birds in Los Angeles and the idiots in San Francisco and Marin County cheat and lie their way to winning most elections by using union thugs and union money, there's not a hell of a lot we can do to win. When a governor gets elected to his third term, which is really illegal, even in this state, what the hell can we do. All I can say is thank God I'm not from or in New York and Illinois.
Mark for later.
You seem to forget from where FR originates.
Brokeback River?
California is our second Homosexual State after Massachusetts. These states have systems run by and for homosexuals. Thewre will be others. For a group so small in number they wield a tremendous amount of power.
At some point most of the states will be Homosexual States, like California and the first one, Massachusetts. When that happens the Nation will be effectively a Homosexual Nation. Of course the likelihood is that Islam will abort the Homosexualization of America with its own apparently irresistible program.
Great News! As a private school teacher I am in favor of this as it will drive more and more kids out of the public schools and into the private ones! Also, this will help to undermine the almost complete power of the Teacher’s Union. Today they are the power drivers in California Politics. They are so leftist they go way pass Marx and more Maoist/Stalinist today. They elect our people because they can buy TV time for 30 second spots—these are where the sheeple get their voting orders.
Let’s start burning books. Why wait!!?
Until they outlaw the private ones. They will probably make the private ones use the gay indoctrination too
“Well Lancey, I give a damn.”
And so do I. You know, it’s just a TINY minority imposing this garbage. Sure, California has a lot of minorities...enough to make them a majority. But do Mexicans, Chinese, Blacks, and others REALLY love the gay lifestyle? I would argue that they have more problems with that crap than most blue-blooded honkies.
...and it is up to the REPUBLICANS to point that out. We managed to bring the blacks on board to (try to) overturn gay marriage - we should be able to EASILY bring other minorities to the party.
...of course we’ll have to being will to try first, as they will NOT come to us on their own.
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.