Should Gays be Favored in California History Education? (sb1437 passed the state Senate May 06)?

Question

It may sound like an urban legend prank, but sb1437, the Homosexual Curriculum Education Bill, passed the state Senate in May '06.

The state Senate's analysis is as follows:
DIGEST: This bill prohibits instruction, or the adoption
of any instructional material, that reflects adversely on
persons due to sexual orientation. This bill also adds the
age appropriate study of the role and contributions of
people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender to the
social science course of study that covers the contribution
of men, women and groups to development of the state and
nation.

Gays must be highlighted, K-12... only in an artificially positive light.

Truth? Illegal!

For details read this S.F. Chronicle article:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/21/EDGKAIHFFT1.DTL&feed=rss.dsaunders

Then email Arnold w/your thoughts: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/

It's on its way through the Assembly, and could land on the Governor's desk soon.

Answer 1

I think it's absolutely ridiculous! The fact that a historical figure was gay is hardly relevant to their contribution to history, unless it specifically has to do with gay rights. As an educator, I feel it is appalling to expect us to incude this in the curriculum, furthering the agenda of gays and lesbians. It has absolutley no place in our schools. If we're going to keep religion out, then this too must follow.

Answer 2

So in other words it's saying you can't teach kids that gay is bad. It's not necessarily saying that you HAVE to teach them it is good. They is only, from what I've read there, an age appropriate look at a social group in society, that is seperate because of the way society has treated them in the past, and their contribution to your history.

Seeing as that being gay isn't a bad thing, and is a normal part of what can make up a person, why should it be taught that gay people are bad?

Oh, and it's also teaching that GLBT people can be contributing members of society. In a subject about how different social groups contribute to society. This is fantastic, because it's absolutely true.

But I understand why you are upset, because teaching this stuff will work against you trying to tell kids that gay people are disgusting and wrong. Ever heard of the seperation of church and state. The only thing you have against sexuality is religion, which shouldn't be recognised by your government in regards to issues of society, except to ensure the freedom of a person to believe what they like.

This bill wouldn't make schools tell people they have to agree with people being gay. It's just showing contributions of gay lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people to society. It does stop schools from telling kids that gay is wrong though, which is as it should be. Imagine a school telling kids that being a Jew is wrong.

Answer 3

It does not matter to me. I do not have Gay dar so how could they say I have discriminated against them one way or another. If i encounter any that feels the need to tell me they are gay, in the course of doing business of any kind, the business that I do with that individual will stop immediately, because such Information is inappropriate in a business setting. Thus it shall be.

Answer 4

It just says that schools can't teach history that puts down Gay people just because they were Gay. It must cover thier contributions regardless of thier sexual preference. Whether or not you like gay people, I think that's fair. Don't you?

Answer 5

So you would rather present gays in a bad way just because they are gay?

If it keeps us revealing true but disturbing facts about a person because they are gay, it is wrong. Other than that I don't see a problem.

Answer 6

it sounds crazzy but I beleave it after the uprore here there is a difference between not being pregodiced and promtting as better and the government stat seem unable to tell between them . it is wrong to show hate to homesexuals but not right to show it as better than hetrosexuals either it seems almost they are prejodiced against none gay people

Answer 7

No one group should be favored over another except for that of the illegals and they should not be favored at all

Answer 8

If you can leave the state!
I fear for anyone who has to be here!

This states only hope is that most of it sink into the sea!

Answer 9

I wonder if a similar bill regarding Christianity was proposed, you'd still find it so objectionable?

Answer 10

It doesn't sound like they are being favoured but being treated equally and realistically as with heterosexuals, I guess you'd prefer that they be vilified & defamed!