Democrats Declare Gender War… Again!

Gender Based titles – “Mom”, “Dad”, “Prom King”, “Prom Queen” – Removed from California Textbooks and Schools

I looked into this in early 2006, Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed the original bill, and will hopefully do the same with this one. Which is why even a liberal Republican like Arnold is so important to have as Governor rather than, say, a Bustamante. The original bill, as well as this new one, was sponsored by Democratic state Sen. Sheila Kuehl, a lesbian and a member of the California Legislative Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender Caucus.

The original bill, SB 1437, would have prohibited teachers, school districts, textbooks and instructional materials from presenting anything that "reflects adversely upon persons" because of their "sexual orientation." The bill also would have prohibited instructional materials containing "sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda" regarding homosexuality. Presumably, that would have prevented materials from saying that homosexuality is anything but natural.

A section of the bill requiring the teaching of "gay history" was stripped weeks ago in hopes of making the bill less controversial and more acceptable for Schwarzenegger….

Free Republic Article

I wrote on this in the second part of a blog under my “legal” category of my site. I will post just a few snippets here. I want everyone here reading to understand that these issues are being put forward by Democrats. If the Democrats take control of the country – hypothetically – you would see all gender roles and designations changed to neutral designations. And similar to Canada, if a preacher taught from Romans chapter 1, he or she could be thrown in jail. The 9^th District Court of Appeals even looked into gender designations as hate-crimes (see below). This is insanity folks. Period.

From My Blog: Some Not So Politically-Correct Rantings

The next “hot-button” issue that will start – and has started – in California is that of “gender issues.” Men, who feel as if they are really a woman can, under California law, use a women’s restroom. Or a man may dawn women’s cloths if he so desires, and an employer cannot tell this person to alter their habits. In fact, if an employee of a California business see’s a man enter a womans restroom, he cannot ask the person to not do so, it could be a potential lawsuit… even if the restrooms are multiple stalled kinds. This is forcing businesses to simply make single occupancy restrooms for both employees as well as customers.

Some articles on AB 196, AB 606, and SB 1437. (PDF Document on AB 196 from the Transgender Law Center) Companies in California, especially in the San Francisco area should have a game plan in place on how to handle these situations, because the way some people try and get social change today is NOT through voting, but through lawsuits. And many “gay action” websites call for creating legal situations….

…The Assembly approved the bill in April by a vote of 41 to 34, the minimum needed to pass. The state Senate, led by Democrats, followed suit earlier this month with a vote of 23 to 11.

The new law, which provides an exemption for religious groups, makes California the fourth state to bar discrimination on the basis of "perceived gender," behind New Mexico, Rhode Island and Minnesota….

……A special session of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is being held today at the Stanford University Law School where lawyers are arguing whether the words "natural family, marriage and family values" constitute "hate speech" that could intimidate city of Oakland workers….

…AB 606 would give inappropriate, draconian power to the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction to unilaterally withhold state funds from California school districts that don't promote transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality according to his arbitrary 'standards,'" stated an e-mail from the group. "This horrible bill essentially mandates the trans-bi-homosexual agenda in curriculum, textbooks, presentations and more. And because two-thirds of a school districts' funds come from the state, AB 606 would interrupt and destroy the academic learning of millions of California schoolchildren if schools 'don't comply….

Now there is a new drive to get this (these) bill[s] passed. Rewriting them and trying again will bring California to the forefront of the progressive movement. You must contact your representatives and state assembly men and women to fight this (these) craziness.

Capital Resource Institute

The most outrageous homosexual-indoctrination bill California has yet to see is currently awaiting a vote by the full senate.

SB 777 forcibly thrusts young school children into dealing with sexual issues, requiring that homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality be taught in a favorable light.

Not only does SB 777 require that classroom instruction and materials promote and embrace controversial sexual practices, it also bans school-sponsored activities from "reflecting adversely" on homosexuals, bisexuals, and transsexuals.

What exactly does this mean for California's school children?

SB 777 will transform our public schools into institutions that disregard all notions of the traditional family unit. It scorns all religious and moral teaching that is contrary to its agenda, regardless of what is taught in the home by the child's parents.

The practical implications of SB 777 could include the following:

Textbooks would have to be rewritten to eliminate references to the traditional family-or at least give equal time and preference to homosexual roommates as is given to a man and woman in a committed marriage relationship. References to "mom and dad" or "husband and wife" could be banned as discriminatory.

*Gender-neutral bathrooms could be required, to accommodate those students who are confused about their gender identity.

*Cheerleading and sports activities would not be permitted to have gender distinctions.

*Schools could be prohibited from having a "prom king and queen," to avoid showing bias based on gender and sexual orientation. Or, schools could be required to crown a female "king," which is something that nearly happened at Fresno High School when transgender student, Cinthia Covarrubias, born a female, decided she would run for prom "king" instead of queen. The issue became moot when Ms. Covarrubias was not elected by the student body.

*Teachers might be barred from stating their support for traditional marriage. AIDS statistics, including disproportional infection rates in the homosexual community, could be considered taboo.

"Pushing this radical homosexual agenda in California schools will stifle the truth in favor of political correctness and will inevitably conflict with the religious and moral convictions of both students and parents," said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute. "The full ramifications of this sweeping legislation could affect the entire nation as most textbook companies tailor their material to their number one purchaser: California."

You can go to the source itself to study what they are pushing for: Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Students’ Rights in California Schools. Taken from the Transgender Law Center