Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Pro-homosexual anti-bullying bill would bully students, teachers and parents.

Homosexual activists are at it again. They're pushing a bill SF 971/HF 1198 which would replace Minnesota's anti-bullying policy, which requires school districts to develop policies addressing all forms of bullying, with one giving specific protections to homosexuals, bisexuals, transvestites, etc. The goal of this policy isn't to address and stop all forms of bullying, something all people can agree with. Rather it seeks to insert "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" into the law so homosexual activists can then pressure school districts to introduce pro-homosexual, anti-bullying programs into the schools. This is a thinly disguised effort to promote acceptance of homosexual marriage, homosexual behavior and gender identity.

An example of this effort is the "Welcoming Schools" curriculum, a Human Rights Campaign creation, currently being pushed in Hale Elementary School in Minneapolis. HRC is the nation's largest homosexual advocacy group. The curriculum is billed as an anti-bullying program which
seeks to address “family diversity, including LGBT families, and it addresses anti-gay bias within discussions of bullying”.

An example of their efforts is trying to
“expand student’s notions of gender appropriate behavior” through such books as "King and King”, a fairy tale of two princes who fall in love, kiss and get married. This book is targeted at kids five and six years of age. You don't think this is trying to indoctrinate kids? It also seeks to evaluate and assess kids beliefs by having them regularly answer the question: “I used to think, but now I know….”


This bullying bill is merely an effort to bully parents and teachers into silence and have kids embrace the homosexual agenda.


3 comments:

Troy said...

The obvious alternative it that we should have no policy and laws regarding this, and remove religion from a protected class. That way, we are all treated equally under the law, like the framers of our constitution desired.

Chuck Darrell said...

Troy,

You are suffering from a revisionist view of constitutional history. You should sue your highschool for academic fraud. Go read "Original Intent" by David Barton.

Chuck

mom said...

Chuck... you have a very revisionist view of what the differences between fact and opinion.


This whole argument is just an attempt to use religion to normalize faith based terrorism.

The real issue is that we are educated to the fact that there nothing wrong with being gay, then perhaps gay marriage will be leagal.

for that I have some questions.

If marriage is to be between a man and a woman

If the purpose of marriage is to have children

If marriage is a 'religious' institution ordained by God

then do opponents of gay marriage suggest that we should we also outlaw heterosexual athiest marriages, or all marriages performed outside a religious sactuary?