NationStates Jolt Archive

I am so sick of my state's legislature trying to play this politically correct bs all the time! Kids should never be subjected to this!

Californian's need to know what is going on right now! there are three bills that have been passed by the senate that would force homosexuality, bisexuality, and transexuality on children in public schools grades K-12. thats right, kids as young as 5 and 6 would be subject to this legislation. there is no reason kids that young need to be taught about sexual orientation!

You can help Veto these bills!!! Call the Governor's office at 1-916-445-2841. You wont even have to talk to anyone!

the phone recording will go something like this,

A. "to continue in english push 1" so push 1

B. "Is this in regards to a legislation bill?" yes, press 2

C. Option 1 will be for SB 1437, Option 2 will be for AS 606.

D. After selecting either SB 1437 or AS 606 it will ask if you are in favor or against. Push 2 to let the governor know that you are against these bills!

to do this for both bills will require 2 separate phone calls but since they only take like 30 seconds each that shouldn't be a problem...right!

here is a description of these bills from www.savecalifornia.com (which by the way is a great website!!!)

~HMC~

AB 606 would authorize the California Superintendent of Public Instruction to arbitrarily withhold state funds (around 2/3rds of a school districts budget) from any district that does not adequately promote transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality in its school policies. AB 606 repeals the current state law prohibiting transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual curriculum from being forced upon local schools, and authorizes the state Superintendent to develop new curriculum that affirms transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality in all its forms.


AB 1056 spends $250,000 in taxpayer dollars to promote transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual lifestyles under the banner of tolerance education in 10 school districts, thus creating a model pilot program for the rest of the state.

SB 1437 expressly prohibits textbooks, instructional materials, and school-sponsored activities from reflecting adversely on transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality. Instructional materials could no longer talk about married husband and wife without also talking about "gay marriages." Sex education assemblies would have to include information on sex changes (to avoid reflecting adversely).

This trio of sexual indoctrination bills, combined with the hammer of the California Department of Education, would greatly interrupt schools' educational priorities which obviously should be reading, writing, and computing. Clearly, SB 1437, AB 606 and AB 1056 would make California schools trans-bi-homosexual indoctrination centers!

This should be in General and not "Got Issues"...

Someone took "Got Issues" too literally...

Does the Governor care that I'm not in California?

*Gets idea to spam Arnie*

Teaching reality in schools?! HO DEERZ.

Maybe you should move from california to alabama or kansas?

Maybe you should move from california to alabama or kansas?

Or Iran.

Teaching reality in schools?! HO DEERZ.
Well, in fairness, sex education at 5 or 6 is a bit young, no matter what orientation they're talking about.

Although I suspect the fact that it's homosexual education is what's bothering the OP the most.

Oh no! They're teaching tolerance! BLASPHEMY!!

Is there a way you can phone in support?

Even from outside the US?

hooray beer!

Well, in fairness, sex education at 5 or 6 is a bit young, no matter what orientation they're talking about.

Although I suspect the fact that it's homosexual education is what's bothering the OP the most.

I knew about homosexuality by 1st grade, cause I had a pseudo-boyfriend.

hooray beer!
This is a total thread hijack, way off topic and completely irrelevant. Nice job!

Well, in fairness, sex education at 5 or 6 is a bit young, no matter what orientation they're talking about.

Its not sex education. Its a matter of saying "Sometimes a man loves a man and its okay" or "some kids have 2 daddies".

Although I suspect the fact that it's homosexual education is what's bothering the OP the most.

Well, you teach your kids about Santa and the Tooth Fairy, might as well teach them about things that, you know, exist.

Well I just called and said I approved of all 3 bills!

Apparently, they don't care that you're not in California.

I called using Skype. :D

Well, in fairness, sex education at 5 or 6 is a bit young, no matter what orientation they're talking about.

Although I suspect the fact that it's homosexual education is what's bothering the OP the most.

I doubt they are really goign to start sex education at that age. They are probably just makign sure that they dont teach discrimination to them and allow books like King and King or whatever its called. You know, where it doesnt always have to be a prince and princess kissing at the end.

My guess is that isn't even remotely what those bills say.

Or Iran.
Has nothing on Kansas.

This is a total thread hijack, way off topic and completely irrelevant. Nice job!


Thanks, I was tryign to think of something significant but pancakes.

Clearly, SB 1437, AB 606 and AB 1056 would make California schools trans-bi-homosexual indoctrination centers!

i love rightwing nutjobs!

Yes, I'm sure they're trying to make kids become homosexual, bisexual, and transsexual. I'm utterly convinced that those descriptions that say they are "promoting" different sexual orientations is accurate...

Oh wait, believing that wouldn't be very smart.....

Let's see:

The first bill (SB) basically bans the use of educational materials that are discriminatory against people on quite a few bases - including sexual orientation. In other words, you can't use instructional materials in class that teaches intolerance towards such groups. OH NOES!
It also allows for age appropriate discussion of the impact of various minorities on economics and politics. In other words, teaching kids about the world around them. OH NOES!

The second, AB 606, bans discrimination in the schools and sets up a policy by which complaints can be made. OH NOES!! We won't let them give the gays F's for being gay!

The third, much like the first, doesn't even focus on issues of sexual orientation. It simply sets up a program in which some schools will incorporate into their social studies/history courses a "tolerance education" curriculum. Students will basically be expected to learn to respect other people (OH NOES!), especially those who have been marginilized in history. This includes "actual or perceived gender,
ethnic group identification, race, national origin, religion, mental
or physical disability, sexual orientation, immigrant status,
familial status, or association with a person or group with one or
more of these actual or perceived characteristics."

In other words, respect each other! OH NOES!


Interestingly enough, promotion of any given sexual orientation or gender is not mentioned. Instead, not being a dick to someone because of their sexual orientation or gender is suggested. ON NOES!

Direct from the horse's mouth:

AB 606 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0601-0650/ab_606_bill_20060628_amended_sen.html)

SB 1437 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_1401-1450/sb_1437_bill_20060501_amended_sen.html)

AB 1056 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_1056&sess=CUR&house=B&author=chu)

*makes Robin Williams impression*

[Whisper]"Shh... There's a gay mafia!"
"The Mauve Hand!"

I don't understand why people are upset with The Truth!....
Some people are gay, and we have to live with that fact. God forbid we start teaching children to be tolerant of dissenting views, that would be heresy!

*Begins committing heresy*

More power to them.

Some people are gay, and we have to live with that fact. God forbid we start teaching children to be tolerant of dissenting views, that would be heresy!

Not "heresy." "Indoctrination."

Apparently teaching children about homosexuality translates, in the minds of certain people, to teaching them to be homosexual.

Note that they have no problem with such "indoctrination" when it amounts to teaching gays and lesbians to be heterosexual, but since when has hypocrisy stopped these fools?

Has nothing on Kansas.

Well, homosexual acts warrant death in Iran, they dont in Kansas...yet.

Well, in fairness, sex education at 5 or 6 is a bit young, no matter what orientation they're talking about.

Although I suspect the fact that it's homosexual education is what's bothering the OP the most.

Sex education can't start early enough. Keeping the kids uninformed is what puts them at risk.

Sex education can't start early enough. Keeping the kids uninformed is what puts them at risk.
My dad gaves me my first sex talk when I was 4 years old... and honestly? Know when I had my first sexual encounter? I think I was like... 20 years old, and the person I had my first sexual encounter with, I'm still with today and will be marrying.

Well, homosexual acts warrant death in Iran, they dont in Kansas...yet.
No, but they bring out the right-wing idiots in throes. (Note: this is only the idiots, not the smart right-wingers).

Oh no! They're teaching tolerance! BLASPHEMY!!
gee... if a child that young goes to church with their parents people would be crying "Indoctrination!" yet being taught sexual orientation at that age is teaching tolerance... :rolleyes:

gee... if a child that young goes to church with their parents people would be crying "Indoctrination!" yet being taught sexual orientation at that age is teaching tolerance... :rolleyes:
I know. It's the double standard at work and both camps love playing that card.

gee... if a child that young goes to church with their parents people would be crying "Indoctrination!" yet being taught sexual orientation at that age is teaching tolerance... :rolleyes:

The kids are being taught about homosexuality, bisexuality, transexuality, as well as heterosexuality.

Are the kids in your scenario also being taken to Covens, Mosques, Synagogues, and Temples?

*makes Robin Williams impression*

[Whisper]"Shh... There's a gay mafia!"
"The Mauve Hand!"

arn't they the group that goes to the home of some guy that pissed them off and rearraings thier funiture?

The kids are being taught about homosexuality, bisexuality, transexuality, as well as heterosexuality.

Are the kids in your scenario also being taken to Covens, Mosques, Synagogues, and Temples?
I think that church is being used as a gernic term to cover all of those.

I think that church is being used as a gernic term to cover all of those.

I didn't want to assume. So I asked.

The kids are being taught about homosexuality, bisexuality, transexuality, as well as heterosexuality.

Are the kids in your scenario also being taken to Covens, Mosques, Synagogues, and Temples?


Or at least taught the different alternatives and being told not to discriminate against them.

i think that its the parents right/responsibilty to teach there kids about sexuality not the governments

i think that its the parents right/responsibilty to teach there kids about sexuality not the governments

That would be fine; in fact, preferable. But far too many parents don't bother. Some because they can't be arsed to take interest in their children's education, others because they buy into that whole "if kids know what sex is, they'll have sex" BS.

The kids are being taught about homosexuality, bisexuality, transexuality, as well as heterosexuality.

Are the kids in your scenario also being taken to Covens, Mosques, Synagogues, and Temples?
indoctrination is still indoctrination, no matter what's being taught.

Or at least taught the different alternatives and being told not to discriminate against them.
my Baptist Church didn't teach me to hate any other Religion... in fact, we didn't touch upon other religions at all.

I called and put in my support. Go California!

gee... if a child that young goes to church with their parents people would be crying "Indoctrination!" yet being taught sexual orientation at that age is teaching tolerance... :rolleyes:

And yet, there isn't a single thing in any of these bills that involves "teaching sexual orientation." Even if it were possible to "teach" a sexual orientation, the bills don't advocate it.

my Baptist Church didn't teach me to hate any other Religion... in fact, we didn't touch upon other religions at all.

What kind of a Baptist church did you go to then? Mine kept telling us that the Catholics,Mormons, and anyone who wasn't Baptist/Methodist (we had a "community" church) was wrong. Of course a Baptist Church isn't going to touch on things that interfere with its beliefs. :rolleyes:

What kind of a Baptist church did you go to then? Mine kept telling us that the Catholics,Mormons, and anyone who wasn't Baptist/Methodist (we had a "community" church) was wrong. Of course a Baptist Church isn't going to touch on things that interfere with its beliefs. :rolleyes:
I guess one that cared more about getting the word out about love and peace than one of hate. :)

Sexual orientation, in terms of gender roles, begins at a very young age, with many children feeling 'different' from the rest of their gender in early childhood. it is extremely important for their mental well-being, that they are educated in these areas.

I think 5 years old is a bit young.. they started in on us with the the sex-ed at about age 9 or 10 and most of it went over our heads. I even had unrestricted access to cable T.V. and still didn't follow most of the lecture.. :p

So I say, save a few bucks and earmark those school days for something a bit more useful until the kids get older. Unless we're really fearing an epidemic of unwed 5-year old mothers.. :rolleyes:

my Baptist Church didn't teach me to hate any other Religion... in fact, we didn't touch upon other religions at all.

I'd regard that just as much of a problem as not teaching kids about other sexual orientations.
I went to Catholic school and we were taught about other Christian denominations, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism as well as some smaller sects.

Teaching only one perspective is not teaching, it's indoctrination as you present it as the one and only option.

I think 5 years old is a bit young.. they started in on us with the the sex-ed at about age 9 or 10 and most of it went over our heads. I even had unrestricted access to cable T.V. and still didn't follow most of the lecture.. :p

So I say, save a few bucks and earmark those school days for something a bit more useful until the kids get older. Unless we're really fearing an epidemic of unwed 5-year old mothers.. :rolleyes:



Really? I understood "the birds and the bees" at six, and more than just "babies come from mommy's stomach."

I am so sick of my state's legislature trying to play this politically correct bs all the time! Kids should never be subjected to this!

Californian's need to know what is going on right now! there are three bills that have been passed by the senate that would force homosexuality, bisexuality, and transexuality on children in public schools grades K-12. thats right, kids as young as 5 and 6 would be subject to this legislation. there is no reason kids that young need to be taught about sexual orientation!

You can help Veto these bills!!! Call the Governor's office at 1-916-445-2841. You wont even have to talk to anyone!

the phone recording will go something like this,

A. "to continue in english push 1" so push 1

B. "Is this in regards to a legislation bill?" yes, press 2

C. Option 1 will be for SB 1437, Option 2 will be for AS 606.

D. After selecting either SB 1437 or AS 606 it will ask if you are in favor or against. Push 2 to let the governor know that you are against these bills!

to do this for both bills will require 2 separate phone calls but since they only take like 30 seconds each that shouldn't be a problem...right!

here is a description of these bills from www.savecalifornia.com (which by the way is a great website!!!)

~HMC~

AB 606 would authorize the California Superintendent of Public Instruction to arbitrarily withhold state funds (around 2/3rds of a school districts budget) from any district that does not adequately promote transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality in its school policies. AB 606 repeals the current state law prohibiting transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual curriculum from being forced upon local schools, and authorizes the state Superintendent to develop new curriculum that affirms transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality in all its forms.


AB 1056 spends $250,000 in taxpayer dollars to promote transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual lifestyles under the banner of tolerance education in 10 school districts, thus creating a model pilot program for the rest of the state.

SB 1437 expressly prohibits textbooks, instructional materials, and school-sponsored activities from reflecting adversely on transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality. Instructional materials could no longer talk about married husband and wife without also talking about "gay marriages." Sex education assemblies would have to include information on sex changes (to avoid reflecting adversely).

This trio of sexual indoctrination bills, combined with the hammer of the California Department of Education, would greatly interrupt schools' educational priorities which obviously should be reading, writing, and computing. Clearly, SB 1437, AB 606 and AB 1056 would make California schools trans-bi-homosexual indoctrination centers!

Ages 5-6 is a little young. My concern would be how it's taught. If the teachers are allowed to be straightforward and objective and just teach the facts (i.e. sexual orientations exist and this is what they are. If you want to know what's moral, it's not the job of the state to teach that, that's your parents' job). The problem is most parents don't want to touch the subject and the state would be just delighted to teach morality because it's a way to gain power, in the long run, over the minds of the people (this is how the church does it), and I object to anything that gives the state any more power than it already has.

There will be no escaping this kind of thing no matter where you go.

my Baptist Church didn't teach me to hate any other Religion... in fact, we didn't touch upon other religions at all.

Except for that bit where everyone who worships a different god is a sinner and secretly worshiping Satan . . .

I'd regard that just as much of a problem as not teaching kids about other sexual orientations.
I went to Catholic school and we were taught about other Christian denominations, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism as well as some smaller sects.

Teaching only one perspective is not teaching, it's indoctrination as you present it as the one and only option.
well it can be seen as that. However, unless your pastor/priest was well versed in Buddism, Islam, Judasism, Hinduism and other Religions, how can you honestly know that he was not spreading propaganda or misconceptions about those Religions?

one can teach tolerance without singling out one subject, or one topic. infact, one can teach tolerance without even giving much information on other points of views.

Except for that bit where everyone who worships a different god is a sinner and secretly worshiping Satan . . .
nope. There was no calling people of other faith, satan worshippers in my old church.

Except for that bit where everyone who worships a different god is a sinner and secretly worshiping Satan . . .


Or anybody who worships the same God, but has different traditions...

I am so sick of my state's legislature trying to play this politically correct bs all the time! Kids should never be subjected to this!

Californian's need to know what is going on right now! there are three bills that have been passed by the senate that would force homosexuality, bisexuality, and transexuality on children in public schools grades K-12. thats right, kids as young as 5 and 6 would be subject to this legislation. there is no reason kids that young need to be taught about sexual orientation!

Ever thought about moving to Kansas? I think with your POV, you would fit in very nicely with the Kansas legislature.

I still cannot see how educating people on homosexuality is forcing homosexuality on them.

Ages 5-6 is a little young. My concern would be how it's taught. If the teachers are allowed to be straightforward and objective and just teach the facts (i.e. sexual orientations exist and this is what they are. If you want to know what's moral, it's not the job of the state to teach that, that's your parents' job). The problem is most parents don't want to touch the subject and the state would be just delighted to teach morality because it's a way to gain power, in the long run, over the minds of the people (this is how the church does it), and I object to anything that gives the state any more power than it already has.

There will be no escaping this kind of thing no matter where you go.
Niggers exist, and it's okay if you hate their black useless asses :rolleyes:. Can't have the state saying that niggers are equal to the master race.

That would be fine; in fact, preferable. But far too many parents don't bother. Some because they can't be arsed to take interest in their children's education, others because they buy into that whole "if kids know what sex is, they'll have sex" BS.

But don't parents and not the state have the right to make that decision?

Ages 5-6 is a little young. My concern would be how it's taught. If the teachers are allowed to be straightforward and objective and just teach the facts (i.e. sexual orientations exist and this is what they are. If you want to know what's moral, it's not the job of the state to teach that, that's your parents' job). The problem is most parents don't want to touch the subject and the state would be just delighted to teach morality because it's a way to gain power, in the long run, over the minds of the people (this is how the church does it), and I object to anything that gives the state any more power than it already has.

There will be no escaping this kind of thing no matter where you go.

Very well said. How it is taught is the key. If they want to make the kids aware that there is more than one sexual orientation that might be OK. However, if they theach that these other orientations are good or bad that is would not be good. In other words, do not make any moral judgements, leave that to the parents.

I am so sick of my state's legislature trying to play this politically correct bs all the time! Kids should never be subjected to this!

Californian's need to know what is going on right now! there are three bills that have been passed by the senate that would force homosexuality, bisexuality, and transexuality on children in public schools grades K-12. thats right, kids as young as 5 and 6 would be subject to this legislation. there is no reason kids that young need to be taught about sexual orientation!

You can help Veto these bills!!! Call the Governor's office at 1-916-445-2841. You wont even have to talk to anyone!

the phone recording will go something like this,

A. "to continue in english push 1" so push 1

B. "Is this in regards to a legislation bill?" yes, press 2

C. Option 1 will be for SB 1437, Option 2 will be for AS 606.

D. After selecting either SB 1437 or AS 606 it will ask if you are in favor or against. Push 2 to let the governor know that you are against these bills!

to do this for both bills will require 2 separate phone calls but since they only take like 30 seconds each that shouldn't be a problem...right!

here is a description of these bills from www.savecalifornia.com (which by the way is a great website!!!)

~HMC~

AB 606 would authorize the California Superintendent of Public Instruction to arbitrarily withhold state funds (around 2/3rds of a school districts budget) from any district that does not adequately promote transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality in its school policies. AB 606 repeals the current state law prohibiting transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual curriculum from being forced upon local schools, and authorizes the state Superintendent to develop new curriculum that affirms transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality in all its forms.


AB 1056 spends $250,000 in taxpayer dollars to promote transsexual, bisexual, and homosexual lifestyles under the banner of tolerance education in 10 school districts, thus creating a model pilot program for the rest of the state.

SB 1437 expressly prohibits textbooks, instructional materials, and school-sponsored activities from reflecting adversely on transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality. Instructional materials could no longer talk about married husband and wife without also talking about "gay marriages." Sex education assemblies would have to include information on sex changes (to avoid reflecting adversely).

This trio of sexual indoctrination bills, combined with the hammer of the California Department of Education, would greatly interrupt schools' educational priorities which obviously should be reading, writing, and computing. Clearly, SB 1437, AB 606 and AB 1056 would make California schools trans-bi-homosexual indoctrination centers!

My only complaint is that sexual labels like 'homosexuality', 'heterosexuality' and 'bisexuality' have a bad habit of pigeonholing young people into believing that sex is some sort of lifestyle choice and they must pick one.

Sexual orientation is nothing more or less than a learning experience that adolescents should be encouraged to explore without bias.

Other than that, I'm all for these bills because to teach that any specific sexual orientation is any more right or wrong than any other is offensive to me.

Well I just called and said I approved of all 3 bills!

Apparently, they don't care that you're not in California.

I called using Skype. :D

YAY! :D

Or Iran.

Maybe Lebanon would work, but avoid Turkey...

Does anyone here have a reliable, unbiased source that gives what percent of the population in the United Sates is homosexual, lesbian, or transgendered?

Does anyone here have a reliable, unbiased source that gives what percent of the population in the United Sates is homosexual, lesbian, or transgendered?

No. Nobody does. :p

But even if they did, how would you factor in the fact that a large number of otherwise heterosexual or homosexual people have experimented and/or changed orientation during their lifetime?

No. Nobody does. :p ...SNIP...


You could be right but here is what I came up with from Google. It's a pretty good discussion with some references that don't appear to be biased.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=478685

But don't parents and not the state have the right to make that decision?



Quite so. I'd go so far as to say they have a duty to do so. So then parents need to get off their asses and actually parent. And if they choose to keep little Billy and Susie ignorant, they'll have no one to blame but themselves when Billy knocks Susie up. And if they choose to be homophobic, and pass that along to their kids, they'll have no one to blame but themselves when little Jimmy commits suicide because he's afraid to tell mommy and daddy he's gay, or when little Bubba, Jr. goes to jail for beating a gay man to death " 'cause he looked at me funny." Conservatives prattle on and on about "big government" taking rights away from citizens, but I can't help but notice that a) they don't mind telling consenting adults what they can or can't do in their own bedrooms, or who they can or can't marry, and b) bitching about "your rights as a parent" doesn't often mean they can be bothered to exercise their "rights", much less take on their responsibilities. If you're not talking to your children about these issues, you're doing your children a disservice. Teaching your children tolerance is not mandatory, but you then need to accept any negative consequences brought about by that decision, and perhaps it would be better to stop bitching about your rights being usurped if you're not willing to extend rights to anyone you disagree with. After all, if you have a right to live and not be singled out for discrimination, so does everyone else. Libertarianism is fine, unless one falls into the trap of thinking that any one person is more entitled to rights, dignity, and respect than anyone else. The California Legislature isn't taking parents' rights away, it's stepping in because parents are too lazy to do their jobs as parents, and/or they're afraid to level with their children because "sex is dirty".

I think 5 years old is a bit young.. they started in on us with the the sex-ed at about age 9 or 10 and most of it went over our heads. I even had unrestricted access to cable T.V. and still didn't follow most of the lecture.. :p

So I say, save a few bucks and earmark those school days for something a bit more useful until the kids get older. Unless we're really fearing an epidemic of unwed 5-year old mothers.. :rolleyes:

If you would bother reading the bills, you would realize that they have nothing at all to do with sex-ed, or teaching it to 5-year olds.

I doubt they are really goign to start sex education at that age. They are probably just makign sure that they dont teach discrimination to them and allow books like King and King or whatever its called. You know, where it doesnt always have to be a prince and princess kissing at the end.
You mean they actually produce children's books that have men kissing?

What a bunch of sickos.

You mean they actually produce children's books that have men kissing?

What a bunch of sickos.
Yes. Because two men fighting or killing each other is perfectly aceptable material for 5 years old, but two men kissing? WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?

We all know violence is manly. That's why it's okay for two men to be doing it