DriveThru – Get What You Need

The battle’s not over yet, but there are signs that New Hampshire legislators are finally starting to hear the voices of concerned citizens—who are fed up with having their parental rights robbed in the public schools.

This week members of the New Hampshire House Education Committee appeared poised to vote for a bill that would have resulted in the promotion of homosexuality and transgenderism in the classroom.

This was being done under the cover of a so-called “anti-bullying” measure that, if passed, would force all local school districts to add special protections for things like “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression”—and also would go so far as to stipulate that all schools promote these themes in their curriculum.

But New Hampshire citizens sent a loud, resounding message, which boiled down to: NO YOU DON’T. NOT IN MY KID’S CLASS.

Responding to a call to action from the pro-family group Cornerstone Policy Research, they flooded committee members with emails. As a result, during a subcommittee vote, legislators unexpectedly changed course—voting instead for blanket language providing protection to all students against bullying for any reason.

This is a more fair and reasonable approach to the problem of bullying because it provides equal protection to all kids–without allowing the issue to be hijacked by gay activist groups who use it as a tool to sexualize and politicize classrooms.  

But this is only one step in the battle. The new language must still be approved by the full Education Committee (as early as next week). And a liberal legislator is already threatening to insert the objectionable language back into the bill when it comes before the New Hampshire House.

We’ll keep you updated–and you can keep making your voice heard! Because it does make a difference.

Warning: Graphic content included below.

In states where gay activists are pushing hard to legalize same-sex marriage, we keep hearing the same claim: This will not have an impact on our public schools.

That claim is simply untrue, and we need look no further than Massachusetts for evidence to the contrary.

Massachusetts was the first state to legalize full-fledged gay marriage. Not long after it was legalized, National Public Radio (NPR) featured an interview with an eighth-grade teacher, Ms. Allen, who was exuberant about her new-found freedom to talk about homosexuality in the classroom.

“In my mind, I know that, ‘OK, this is legal now.’ If somebody wants to challenge me, I’ll say, ‘Give me a break. It’s legal now,’ ” she told NPR.

The NPR reporter went on to explain that due to the gay marriage debate, Allen now discusses “gay sex” with students “thoroughly and explicitly with a chart.”

Allen explained in detail exactly how she explains this chart to kids: “All right. So can a woman and a woman kiss and hug? Yes. Can a woman and a woman have vaginal intercourse?, and they will say no. And I’ll say, ‘Hold it. Of course, they can. They can use a sex toy. They could use’—and we talk—and we discuss that. So the answer there is yes.” (From: "Debate in Massachusetts over how to address the issue of discussing gay relationships and sex in public school classrooms,” All Things Considered, National Public Radio, Sept. 13, 2004.)

It’s also disturbing to hear what’s happening at the elementary level in that state. Consider the parents in Lexington, Massachusetts, who complained that their kindergarten and second-grade age kids were exposed to storybooks introducing them to the idea of homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

Even more concerning were the school officials’ response to those parental concerns, as reported by The Associated Press: “Officials there say that since same-sex marriage is a part of life in Massachusetts, it comes up naturally and it’s impossible to notify parents every time the issue is discussed.”

“It certainly strengthens the argument that we need to teach about gay marriage because it’s more of a reality for our kids,”  Lexington Schools Superintendent Paul Ash said. (“Gay Marriage Foes Face Issue in Schools,” Associated Press, May 5, 2006.)

In light of these facts and public news accounts, is there really any serious question that legalizing gay marriage will tangibly and concretely affect our public schools? It’s simply disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Disappointing news this week: After vetoing the same bill last year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger caved to political pressure and signed the “Harvey Milk Day” measure into law. On May 22, Harvey Milk’s birthday, schools are now asked to “conduct suitable commemorative exercises.”

Does California really need yet another conduit for homosexual activism in the classrooms? According to a San Francisco Chronicle article, the homosexual advocacy group Equality California was a major backer of the law—and is now planning to “develop curriculum for schools and teachers to use on Milk’s birthday.”

Equality California describes itself as the “largest statewide lesbian, bisexual, transgender-rights advocacy organization in California.” This is concerning: Taxpayer-funded classrooms should not be hijacked by adult, special-interest groups.

As we’ve covered in previous blogs, this law is disturbing on many levels: Not only does it represent an irresponsible use of government resources, but it also puts the state in the position of honoring someone whose behavior does not provide the healthiest role model for school kids.