« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


CA parents give kids course in reactionary extremism

by Jeremy Hooper

Truant-1-2A Southern California grandmother is encouraging California parents to keep their children home from school tomorrow and Thursday (11/28 & 29) in protest of the recently-passed measures that encourage LGBT acceptance in the state's public educational institutions. This from California's so-called Campaign For Children and Families:

Igniting the boycott is Joy Stutz of Southern California, who's deeply grieved about new laws that require every child in government-run schools to receive positive instruction about transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality beginning in January 2008.

"A two-day boycott is doable for most parents, and will launch a much-needed revolution against these atrocious new laws," Stutz said. "Remember, it only takes a spark to get a fire going."

::sigh:: Yes Joy, it does only take a spark to get a fire going. Also, it only takes a torch-wielding mob to burn down the school buildings. But that doesn't make either of those fires right!

CCF goes on to say in their release:

The California government school system stands to lose around $100 in average daily attendance funds each day that you keep your child home or do homeschooling or enroll in private school. California state law says children can have three unexcused absences per year without parents being sent a truancy notice; however, this is rarely enforced. To effectively show their displeasure, parents participating in the Nov. 28 and 29 boycott should inform the school why they're protesting AFTER, not before, the two days' absence.

Join the Nov. 28 and 29 boycott led by California parents and grandparents. At the same time, make a plan to rescue your children from the government school system by homeschooling or by enrolling them in private school. This is a critical, urgent matter. SB 777 and AB 394 go into effect in January.

"Rescue your children"? You mean by teaching them that treating gay people with respect is a reason for protest?! Uhm, no, sorry CCF. There is one mentality from which children need to rescued, and it is certainly not the one that views equality and diversity as a good thing!

Honestly, we don't even know what else to say on this. If you are the sort of person who is going to pull your kids from school because "smear the queer" is becoming a less popular sport, then nothing we say is likely to change your mind. So have it. Home school your kids. Keep them sheltered from the gay storm. Perhaps in doing so, you'll create public schools in which such protections will be less necessary in the first place.

PROTECT YOUR KIDS: Nov. 28 and 29 'public' school boycott [CCF]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

I homeschool my kids and am currently in the process of coming out. I know many families who homeschool who are open and welcoming people. The loud homeschoolers who choose to homeschool for religious reasons do not represent the majority of us, though they are the most vocal segment of homeschoolers. It may not seem like it, but there are very many gay friendly homeschooling families, and some of them are even christians (the good kind!)

Posted by: sam | Nov 27, 2007 12:52:29 PM

Thanks, Sam. It is true that the public face of homeschooling is being overtaken by the social conservatives. But I think most of us understand that there are many other kinds of families who utilize this worthy option.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Nov 27, 2007 12:58:50 PM

This woman provides all the more reason why our 4th grader will be in school on the 28th/29th. We're pretty dang happy with the public school system here in SoCal. Now, if we could just get the kid to understand that what he does in 4th grade can affect him for the rest of his life...err...wait, damn, I'm starting to sound like me dad.


Posted by: Jonathan | Nov 27, 2007 1:26:27 PM

I am a protestor and I think this is redicolus, if I dont want my children to learn about homosexual lifestyles, I have all the reasons to be against it. If you want to chose that lifestyle go ahead, but be like in army - "dont ask, dont tell"

Posted by: alex | Nov 29, 2007 12:44:22 AM

Well Alex, if you DO decide to homeschool, please be sure to teach your children that ridiculous is spelled with an "i".

Posted by: G-A-Y | Nov 29, 2007 8:22:23 AM

I teach my kids to respect everyone, and not to fear people who are different. At the same time I teach them what the Bible says about deviant sexual practices. Am I a hater?

Posted by: tim | Nov 30, 2007 2:41:52 PM

Tim: Nobody used the word "hater" to refer to those who make what is, in our opinion, a wrong-headed decision to teach their children that gay people are wrong. Please don't argue against a point that was never made.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Nov 30, 2007 4:01:19 PM


I wasn't arguing a point - I was really asking if the people here make that jump. See, you and I could be friends because you understand that we simply disagree. There are people who are intolerant of opinions different than theirs, and this is what I think 777 is all about. It is an effort to force pro-gay opinions on kids from kindergarten up - in other words, brainwashing.

Posted by: Tim | Dec 4, 2007 2:47:46 PM

Tim: This issue is that religious condemnation of gay folks (which you highlight in your first comment) is not acceptable teaching in a public school. Non-harassment and non-discrimination of gay folks is. Gay kids are realistically teased and bullied, and gay lives are routinely stigmatized due to long-held religious persecution. The measures in California work to eliminate problems that NO ONE should tolerate!

Posted by: G-A-Y | Dec 4, 2007 3:05:22 PM


No, you're not going to put words into my mouth. I never used the word "condemnation". Neither have I expressed tolerance for teasing, bullying or stigmatizing - in fact, as I said, I teach my kids to treat all people with dignity and respect - and to especially look out for and protect those who are different or put upon.

And I agree that teaching religion is not acceptable in a government-run school. I also agree that it is important to teach non-discrimination. But do we really need to be teaching about homosexuality in ELEMENTARY school? To a kid that doesn't even know about sex, that's an assault on his mind, and completely unnecessary.

It's very simple. 777 infringes on my right to instill MY values in MY kids. Do you understand that? I am raising these kids. Not you. Not Mark Leno. MY wife carried them. Not Shiela Kuehl. They're not going to hate you. But they are going to know the truth.

Posted by: Tim | Dec 4, 2007 5:31:17 PM

Tim: Nor am I trying to put words into your mouth. And I never said you used the word "condemnation." I was merely referring to your Biblical-based comment about "deviant sexual practices," and saying that such is not an acceptable teaching in public school.

Nobody is trying to tell you how to raise your kids. Nobody is trying to stifle your religious freedom. They simply want to teach the simple fact, which is that LGBT do exist. It's not about sex, but rather orientation. Kids understand love from their earliest days. And by letting kids know that some people do, in fact, love members of the same sex, they are simply expanding the long-taught Princess and Prince Charming model.

You say you want your kids to know the truth. Well, LGBT people are part of the world's truth.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Dec 4, 2007 5:59:10 PM

Yeah, that's not gonna work. The problem is that under this law all aspects of LGBT life are to be portrayed in a positive light, and that's not compatible with the truth. I won't be selective about this - I believe the pros and cons should be taught regardless of subject matter. And we should leave the sex stuff out until at least Jr. High.

Posted by: tim | Dec 4, 2007 6:10:52 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails