Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California's Book Ban (Gay Agenda Advancing Gloriously in the Grade Schools)
Human Events ^ | 07/11/2011 | Daniel J. Flynn

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, “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.

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: bookban; bookbanning; caglbt; calegislation; gaystapo; homosexualagenda; moralabsolutes; sexualindoctrination
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last


21 posted on 07/11/2011 5:55:47 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up." ~ Lily Tomlin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Ronald Reagan was every bit as gay as Abraham Lincoln then?

22 posted on 07/11/2011 6:59:24 PM PDT by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; 185JHP; 230FMJ; AFA-Michigan; AKA Elena; Abathar; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; ...
Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Mrs.Don-o did the comments. In-san-i-ty. Get your kids out of CA public screwels NOW!!!!

23 posted on 07/11/2011 7:32:04 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o


24 posted on 07/11/2011 8:41:40 PM PDT by PALIN SMITH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Poor students. Of course, the fact that so many of them are illiterate simplifies things considerably.

And the fact that teachers teach *this* and not reading, writing and arithmetic is going to assure that they'll likely stay illiterate.

25 posted on 07/11/2011 8:49:05 PM PDT by babyfreep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL
I agree BobL. It surprises me that the Mexicans are more free spirited than I expected. I would have thought, most Mexicans are hard core Catholics thus being against gay marriages. What really bothers me is the Catholic Church seem to be moving to the left on this issue. I was raise Catholic and when I got older and wiser, I left the Catholic Church. I'm still a Christian but no where near as left as the Church.
26 posted on 07/11/2011 10:24:22 PM PDT by Nitehawk0325 (I have the right to remain silent, but I lack the ability...........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Homosexuals exist. From Alexander the Great

Sorry, but despite the propaganda that began to circulate 100s of years after his death it is very doubtful that ol Alex was homosexual. He had two wives at least, a very long term mistress and a number of short term mistresses. While you can explain the wives and their kids as political the mistress is a little harder to explain if he was into men. At most he was mildly bi-sexual.

He did have close male friends, this used to be considered normal before the 1960s. After that men were not suppose to have any close male friends, just guys that you watched games with and never, ever talked to.

I will not get on my soap box about how that has damaged the modern male physic but IMHO between that and the lack of fathers in the home it is a wonder that there are as many stable strong men around as there are.

27 posted on 07/11/2011 10:43:52 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (I have no time to worry about turbot, a parrot is eating my house)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
Here's what I don't get: homos and their enablers will swear up and down that all manner of ancient and venerable personages were homosexuals, and that their homosexuality should be understood/valorized in exactly the same manner as a 21st century equivalent. Yet the exact same people, when confronted with crystal clear condemnations of homosexuality in the Bible, will insist that Paul et al couldn't possibly be talking about "committed, loving homosexual relationships." Even a local ministry leader here at my university, who is otherwise fairly conservative and generally Biblical in his views, has bought into the crap that the Bible never mentions "orientation" and thinks that the church should fall all over itself apologizing to homos for "treating them badly." Pisses me off.
28 posted on 07/11/2011 11:00:16 PM PDT by sthguard (The DNC theme song: "All You Need is Guv")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Nitehawk0325

Well just like teachers unions, the church is a reflection of its members - it’s up to them to stand up and be counted.

But, bummer.

29 posted on 07/12/2011 1:16:26 AM PDT by BobL (PLEASE READ:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sthguard

But it does. What we call “orientation” the Bible calls “temptation.”

30 posted on 07/12/2011 3:08:59 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Pray (Pray!) Oh yes we Pray (Pray!)-- You've Got to Pray Just to Make it Today. --MC Hammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson