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.

If you live in New Hampshire, promotion of homosexuality and transgenderism could be coming to a classroom near you.

 That’s because liberal legislators and gay activists in New Hampshire are dead set on pushing through a state law that calls for school districts to include those themes in curricula.

 And yet again, this is being done in the name of “safety” and preventing bullying.

Not only does this proposed legislation, H.B. 1523, mandate that all school districts insert the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression” into their bullying policies, but it also calls for schools to  integrate those policies  into curriculum.

So in one fell swoop the state legislators plan to give themselves the power to micromanage school discipline policies and lesson plans.

While we agree that bullying is a serious concern and should be strongly prohibited in schools, we believe this can be done without sexualizing and politicizing the entire school environment.

 That’s why Kevin Smith, Executive Director of Cornerstone Policy Research, offered the New Hampshire House Education Committee alternative wording that would have provided blanket protection against bullying to every child. He argued that all children should be equally protected against bullying for any reason—“regardless of whether they are gay, straight, overweight, etc.”

But to no avail. The Education Committed ignored his suggestions and others like it. Over the next two weeks, starting this Thursday, members of the Committee will begin voting on the issue. So stay tuned.

New Hampshire is just one of several states that have come under pressure recently to pass pro-gay provisions making it easier for homosexual activist groups to get their messages into schools and circumvent parental notification requirements.

To learn more about pro-gay bullying policies and what you can do to protect your schools, check out this fact sheet.

This week, kids in public schools across the land are participating in yet another event sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). But this time the event in question—No Name-Calling Week—is aimed primarily at elementary and middle school kids.

While No Name-Calling Week does have some laudable goals, such as “eliminating harmful name-calling,” unfortunately, the event also emphasizes the usual homosexuality indoctrination that has made GLSEN infamous. 

The truth is, you don’t have to sexualize the school environment to teach kids to respect one another. One program that does an excellent job of doing that without capitulating to a political agenda is Rachel’s Challenge.

Rachel’s Challenge is a character-based program for K-12 students that teaches students to relate to one another with kindness and compassion. It is based on the life of Rachel Scott, the first victim in the Columbine school shootings. So if your public school is struggling with how to address this issue, this might be a good option.

Meanwhile, if you’ve discovered that your child’s school is celebrating GLSEN’s No Name-Calling Week, you can learn facts about the actual reading materials and lesson plans in our “Indoctrination by Any Other Name” commentary.

Yesterday, I wrote about the Safe Space Kit that GLSEN wants to send to every middle and high school in the nation. The kit tells educators to use GLSEN’s controversial book list, which promotes sexually graphic content to kids.

But wait, there’s more.

In addition to the book list, the kit gives educators further information for sexualizing the school environment and undermining parental rights.

Let’s just look at a few examples:

• The kit gives educators a “Checklist” to ensure they’ve done enough to sexualize the school environment  (in their words, make it “LGBT-inclusive,” meaning lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender, and we’re still waiting for more letters of the alphabet to be added.)

Suggestions include to implement “a gender-neutral dress code,” “gender-neutral” bathrooms, curriculum infused with homosexual, bisexual and transgender themes, Valentine’s Day celebrations with same-sex couples, in addition to prom and homecoming events that “allow for gender-neutral alternatives to ‘King’ and ‘Queen.’ ” 

• Teachers are instructed to avoid using words like “husband” and “wife” in the classroom and to “avoid gendered pronouns” like “he” and “she.” And to “Promote LGBT events throughout the school…”

So basically, if GLSEN has its way, the concept of ‘male’ and ‘female’ and traditional marriage—and even basic English language pronouns—will be rendered absolutely meaningless to the average public school student.

• GLSEN also wants to undermine parents’ role as the primary nurturers and protectors of their children. For instance, the “safe space” kit makes it clear that 1) teachers are to encourage an environment where kids can “come out” to them and discuss their sexual problems, but that 2) teachers are not to share this information with parents or authorities.

“Let the student know that the conversation is confidential and that you won’t share the information with anyone else, unless they ask for your help,” instructs the GLSEN kit. (Hmm, this sounds suspiciously similar to “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings’ reported response to a teenager who confessed risky behavior.)

Forget about the parents—but “be prepared to refer them to a sympathetic counselor, a hotline, your school’s GSA or an LGBT youth group or community center.”

In other words, teachers are supposed to send your kids, without your knowledge, to left-wing, radical gay-activist groups in the community who will most likely tell them that sexual experimentation is normal and to be expected.

What was that about a “safe space” again?

Warning: Graphic content discussed below.

Come what may, GLSEN—the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network—seems determined to promote sexually explicit content to our school children.

There’s been a public outcry in recent weeks over books GLSEN recommends for kids as young as middle-school age—which graphically describe things like teen-adult sexual interactions in parks and public restrooms.

Despite all this, the organization is stubbornly continuing efforts to push this material into public schools.

Consider GLSEN’s current plea to help it win $1 million from Chase Bank’s Community Giving charity competition. (The bank is allowing social networkers to vote for their favorite charity to win the money.)

GLSEN has announced that if it wins the money, it will use it to send a “Safe Space Kit” to “to every middle and high school in the country.” 

So, just what is in this “Safe Space Kit”? Among other things, instructions to educators to “use GLSEN’s BookLink …  to find appropriate books for your curriculum. … to find grade-appropriate literature for your school library.”

Yup, you got it. The same exact book list that has such “grade-appropriate” offerings as Queer 13. This book, which GLSEN thinks is appropriate for 7^th graders, includes a detailed and extremely disturbing description of a boy being raped by an older man. Afterward the boy exults about how “The whole world of rest-room sex had opened itself up to me.” And that’s just one of the many graphically lewd anecdotes in this book and others on the list.

GLSEN may deem this “grade-appropriate” for 7^th graders. But the majority of U.S. citizens and responsibly thinking parents don’t. And they are outraged. But sadly, GLSEN and its founder—the Obama administration’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings—remain deaf to the outcry.

Yet more evidence revealing the dark side of GLSEN–the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network—has surfaced. (GLSEN is the group founded by President Obama’s “safe school’s czar,” Kevin Jennings.)

At issue this time is a GLSEN fundraiser featuring a theatrical play called Santa Claus is Coming Out!

GLSEN’s fundraiser invitation says the play depicts “Santa in his heartfelt struggle to reconcile his romantic relationship with Italian toy maker Giovanni Geppetto.” Pictures on a Web site promoting the production depict Santa in not-so-subtle sexually suggestive situations. The play also mocks those who support traditional values.

It’s sad that GLSEN, which claims that it wants to protect kids, has chosen to use a fundraising tool that perverts the innocence of Christmas and sexualizes the longtime, child-revered icon of Santa Claus.

Public comments made by the play’s writer and performer, Jeffrey Solomon,  provide more enlightening insight into the true agenda of homosexual activists and groups like GLSEN.

In recent interviews, Solomon explained that he “was inspired to write Santa Claus is Coming Out by his research into the parents’ rights movement to keep gay issues out of the classroom.”  He said the central message of his play is “a challenge to speak truthfully to children.” What is his version of “speaking truthfully?” Consider this anecdote Solomon shared:

I was dressed as Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer, and I had a sign saying ‘Rudolph Supports Sexual Diversity.’ And the owner of the pharmacy on Commercial Street came out [shouting]. ‘I’ve got kids inside. Get out of here. They’re asking questions. I don’t want to see that. I don’t want to see that sign.’ … We love this lie of Santa Claus and when we mess with that ‘they’ [the anti-gay activists] get very upset. The same summer I was promoting the play, and I had the poster ‘Santa Claus is Coming Out.’ A straight couple with a very young boy about 7 asked me directions, and the kid was kind of looking at the poster. Suddenly, the mother clenched her hands over his eyes as I was giving them directions, and she held them there the whole conversation. And it’s very funny. In both these instances, the play is playing out in front of me.”  (“Santa Claus is Coming Out: An Interview with Actor-Writer Jeffrey Solomon,” by Deirdre Donovan, Nov. 29, 2009, TheaterScene.net)

Clearly homosexual activists like Solomon have no qualms about using shock tactics to expose children to homosexuality.  And it’s sad that GLSEN promotes these tactics.  Apparently, GLSEN wants to have it both ways: On one hand, it wants to be perceived as a mainstream group for public schools that’s worthy of parents’ trust. On the other, it wants the freedom to desensitize kids and attack parents’ God-given rights to protect their innocence.

The American Library Association (ALA) claims its annual Banned Books Week—being celebrated right now in public  and school libraries nationwide —is about “the freedom to read” and “open access” to ideas that are “unorthodox or unpopular.”

This provides an excellent opportunity for social conservatives to challenge the ALA to uphold its own principles. You can do that by simply going to your community library, or school library, and donating books that communicate a Christian and/or socially conservative perspective on hot-button issues like abortion and homosexuality.

Donating books is also a great way for your family to act as the “salt and light” in your community by giving others access to a redemptive perspective. Even though Banned Books Week officially ends after Oct. 3—your family can donate books any time of the year!

For  tips on how to donate books that offer alternative viewpoints, as well as information exposing the truth about ALA’s “banned books” claims, visit our new resource page.

As part of its new “ThinkB4YouSpeak” campaign, GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) is encouraging educators to display print ads that discourage kids from using the insulting phrase, “that’s so gay.”

While I completely agree that this and other demeaning phrases are wrong and should never be used, I am amazed at GLSEN’s apparent blindness to its own advice to “think before you speak.”

One of the ads GLSEN wants teachers to display, for instance, features a boy with the words, “That’s so ‘Jock who can complete a pass but not a sentence.’ ” At the bottom, in small print, it says “Think that’s mean? How do you think ‘that’s so gay’ sounds?”

Another displays a teenage girl and the words “That’s so ‘cheerleader who like can’t like say smart stuff.’ ” Yet another one features a slam on a “gamer guy who has more videogames than friends.”

So basically, GLSEN has insulted entire segments of the population in an effort to teach people not to insult homosexuals. (Read about some of the backlash here.)

To me, this reveals the faulty thinking at the heart of group-identity politics—which teaches that people deserve to be protected because of certain traits or associations, rather than the simple fact that they are human beings created by God with inherent worth and dignity. We see this same faulty thinking reflected in many so-called school bullying polices, which single out some groups of people as more worthy of protection than others. 

There’s been a growing movement afoot for states to “voluntarily” adopt national curriculum standards. So far 47 states have signed up (the holdouts are Alaska, Texas and South Carolina).

“Voluntary” is a subjective word, since it’s becoming obvious how the Obama Administration intends to use federal funding as a stick to force contrarians into line.

While this is a concerning trend, it’s not really time for flashing sirens yet—because, so far, academics are still fighting amongst themselves over who exactly should have input into the final standards and what they should look like. It remains to be seen whether the states can agree.

So I guess you could say the threat level is yellow.  In the meantime, we can look to England for some insight into where this might lead.

In 1989, England implemented a national curriculum with a call for uniformity on core subjects. But what started as core standards, now includes compulsory sex education classes that teach kids about homosexuality and same-sex unions.   Apparently, faith-based schools are not exempt—they’ll have to engage in controversial teaching, while explaining that it “runs contrary to their religious beliefs.”

Others experts have expressed concerns that politically correct agendas are edging out core subjects and that student performance on national tests has stalled in recent years.

So before we embark on another failed experiment, perhaps we should learn a lesson from our friends across the ocean.