     WASHINGTON DC, June 24th (C-FAM) United States (US) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed a reception at the State Department, proclaiming that “human rights are gay rights and gay rights are human rights, once and for all.” The reception celebrated “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month,” as was officially proclaimed by President Barack Obama for the month of June, and follows a recent incident at the United Nations (UN) where U.S. representatives made loud demands for immediate action on accrediting a homosexual “rights” group to the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

     Secretary Clinton used her address at the reception as an opportunity to set forth a very explicit agenda of promoting the homosexual “rights” agenda throughout the world. “We are elevating our human rights dialogues with other governments and conducting public diplomacy to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons,” said Clinton. “Our Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor produces an annual Human Rights Report that include a section on how LGBT persons are treated in every country.” Additionally, Clinton noted that, “The Bureau of African Affairs has taken the lead by asking every embassy in Africa to report on the conditions of local LGBT communities. And I’m asking every regional bureau to make this issue a priority.”

     Demonstrating just how much of a priority this issue is, Clinton offered a few examples of US diplomats actively promoting homosexual “rights” agenda overseas. “In Albania, a young man named Klodian Cela recently came out on a popular television program called Big Brother. Soon after, our ambassador, John Withers, went on television to publicly express support for this man.”

     Earlier this month, at the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) Committee hearings where 19 UN Member States review applications from NGOs for accreditation with the UN, the application of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) provoked a fierce debate. After the Egyptian delegate posed questions for the group including concerns that IGLHRC position’s could threaten the rights to religious freedom and expression of individuals, the US delegate attempted to suspend additional review of the group by calling for an immediate vote to accredit the group.

     Egypt countered by observing that its questions had not been "answered in a straight way” by the group and asserting its right to have a full review process. Egypt then asked for a procedural “no action” vote to be taken on the US motion for an immediate vote. This procedural vote was carried by a majority of the members of the committee, leaving the US and other Western countries to issue strong condemnations of the committee and even individual members. Despite this outcome, some diplomats privately stated that the US and other Western countries would try to bypass the NGO Committee and call for a vote on the IGLHRC application at the upcoming ECOSOC meeting in July.

     Finally, President Obama, in his White House proclamation for Father’s Day this year, did not miss the opportunity to stress that “nurturing families come[s] in many forms” including children being raised by “two fathers.”

President Obama Proclaims Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month

We in Canada may have largely missed the import of the proclamation by President Obama of June, 2010, as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month" in the United States. The proclamation is a very open declaration of Obama's plans to further the goals of activists in those communities.

Here are excepts from the proclamation of May 28, 2010:

". . . This month, as we recognize the immeasurable contributions of LGBT Americans, we renew our commitment to the struggle for equal rights for LGBT Americans and to ending prejudice and injustice wherever it exists. . . ."

"Much work remains to fulfill our Nation's promise of equal justice under law for LGBT Americans. That is why we must give committed gay couples the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple, and repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. We must protect the rights of LGBT families by securing their adoption rights, ending employment discrimination against LGBT Americans, and ensuring Federal employees receive equal benefits. We must create safer schools so all our children may learn in a supportive environment. I am also committed to ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" so patriotic LGBT Americans can serve openly in our military, and I am working with the Congress and our military leadership to accomplish that goal. . . . ."

"NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2010 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. . . . ."

Williams Lake school district restricts anti-homophobia events

The president of the Williams Lake Gay Straight Alliance says she’ll risk suspension later this week in protest of School District 27 canceling an anti-homophobia event planned for this week at Columneetza Secondary School.

Lexi Saffel says she will participate in a gender bender day Friday, where students had been invited to dress as a member of the opposite sex.

“I don’t think it’s fair at all for the school district to cancel [the day],” Saffel says. “We’re not doing anything wrong as long as we dress in an appropriate manner for school.”

She expects at least 50 people to participate, despite being warned that it could lead to suspension. She says the students who plan to participate in gender bending day can’t be suspended, even though she says she was told otherwise.

“Technically, they’re not allowed to suspend us for wearing the opposite gender’s clothing, as long as it is in an appropriate tasteful manner,” Saffel says.

“There’s nothing in the dress code that says guys have to wear guys’ clothes and girls have to wear girls’ clothes.”

The gender bender day was cancelled Friday by the district, and an assembly planned for yesterday also didn’t occur. Saffel says the assembly would have featured herself and another student discussing their experiences with homophobia, and a video with students discussing discrimination against gay, bisexual, and trans-gendered people.

“I’m really disappointed — we don’t get to make as much of a difference as I was hoping,” Saffel says.

“The original reason we heard was that we were promoting gayness. I feel like what was behind (parent complaints) was homophobia.”

She says discrimination and homophobia are issues that need to be addressed at Columneetza and in Williams Lake.

School District 27 superintendent Diane Wright says there have been no discussions about suspensions in relation to gender bender day, which she confirms was cancelled.

She says it was cancelled after the school principal was made aware of how some students were planning to handle gender bending day on Friday.

“Some of the students were going to make a mockery of it,” Wright says, adding that she met with the president of the Cariboo Chilcotin Teachers Association, the teachers who were sponsoring the events, and the principal on Friday and discussed the issue.

Other events, including the assembly on Monday, a rainbow day on Tuesday — which would entail students wearing different colours — a walk Wednesday, and face painting and free hugs Thursday, are allowed to happen, as long as they don’t take place during class time, Wright says.

She says parents expressed concern with some events being held during class time, especially since exams are three weeks away.

She says some parents were also concerned about not being notified in advance of the activities that were planned at the school for anti-homophobia week.

“It’s important families have those discussions with their children and any topic that could be deemed sensitive.” . . . .

"Queer posters demand respect"

Sardis secondary Grade 12 student Brittany Sandve stands by her work—a series of posters depicting couples in gay, lesbian and bisexual relationships designed to raise awareness about sexual orientation issues and to combat homophobia at the school. She hopes to have the posters up around the school by next week.

Sardis secondary Grade 12 student Brittany Sandve stands by her work-a series of posters depicting couples in gay, lesbian and bisexual relationships designed to raise awareness about sexual orientation issues and to combat homophobia at the school. She hopes to have the posters up around the school by next week.

Cornelia Naylor/TIMES

"Let boys be girls." "It's OK to question." "You don't have to accept it, just respect it."

Cornelia Naylor, The Chilliwack Times

April 23, 2010

These captions on bright posters featuring images of gay, lesbian and bisexual couples are sure to raise a few eyebrows at Sardis secondary next week.

The work of Brittany Sandve, the school's Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) president, the posters are intended to raise awareness about sexual orientation and homophobia at the school. There are five in all depicting each of the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning) identities.

Based on photographs of Sardis GSA members, the images are stylized silhouettes of hugging couples. The boys' skin is hot pink, the girls' is shades of blue. "There was a lot of thought put in to it," said Sandve. Among other things, she hopes the posters drive home the fact that there are LGBTQ students at Sardis. . . .

[Read the whole article online.]

Angry parents plan sex-ed protest

Will Rally in Toronto May 10

From TheSpec.com

April 20, 2010

Carmelina Prete
Leaders of self-described "family-focused" groups are planning a protest in Toronto on May 10 to oppose the province’s new sex education curriculum.

But Premier Dalton McGuinty stands by the new curriculum . . .

Ontario elementary schoolchildren will learn more detailed sex education in earlier grades under a new province-wide curriculum that begins this September.

The revised curriculum, to be taught in all school boards in Ontario, also means for the first time, children will learn about "invisible differences" such as sexual orientation and gender identity in Grade 3.

In addition to learning about healthy relationships, self-esteem and the value of delaying sexual activity, students will learn about some potentially controversial issues such as:

* In Grade 6: personal pleasure in masturbation, vaginal lubrication and wet dreams.

* In Grade 7: sex acts such as oral sex and anal intercourse.

Some parents and educators don't support such explicit teachings about sexuality.

Protest details are not yet available. For more details about the group protesting the curriculum, visit www.stopcorruptingchildren.ca

- With files from Canadian Press

Excerpts from the 2010 Physical Education and Health curriculum document for teachers:

Grade 3: Describe how visible differences ... and invisible differences (e.g., learning abilities, skills and talents, personal or cultural values and beliefs, gender identity, sexual orientation...) make each person unique, and identify ways of showing respect for differences in others

Teacher prompt: “Sometimes we are different in ways you can see. Sometimes we are different in ways you cannot see – such as how we learn, what we think, and what we are able to do. Give me some examples of things that make each person unique.” (p.110)

Grade 6: Describe how they can build confidence and lay a foundation for healthy relationships by acquiring a clearer understanding of the physical, social, and emotional changes that occur during adolescence.

Teacher prompt: “Having erections, wet dreams, and vaginal lubrication are normal things that happen as a result of physical changes with puberty. Exploring your body by touching or masturbating is something that many people will do and find pleasurable. It is common and is not harmful and is one way of learning about your body.” (p.159)

Grade 7: Identify ways of preventing STIs, including HIV, and/or unintended pregnancy, such as delaying first intercourse.

Teacher prompt: “Engaging in sexual activities like oral sex, vaginal intercourse, and anal intercourse means that you can be infected with an STI. If you do not have sex, you do not need to worry about getting an STI.”(p.180)

[See the whole article on TheSpec.com ]

Day of Silence, Day of Truth Make Bid to Influence the Nation's Youth [in the U.S.A.]

[From CitizenLink, April 12, 2010]

by Kim Trobee, editor

'It's time for an honest conversation about the biblical truth for sexuality.'

One of the nation's largest gay-activist groups, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), is promoting its annual Day of Silence on Friday.

Daryl Presgraves, public relations manager for GLSEN, said the event encourages kids to take a vow of silence for the day to highlight what the group calls "safer" schools.

"What the Day of Silence does is it raises awareness about a pretty pervasive problem," he said. "Nearly nine out of 10 LGBT students tell us that they experience harassment at school."

But a closer look at the materials being distributed to educators and students shows there is more than an anti-bullying message being pushed.

For example, GLSEN's data sheet for kids called "How to Get What You Want—With an Ask!" encourages students to use the Day of Silence to get a "queer-friendly prom," as well as homosexual-themed books and teacher trainings in their schools.

Teachers are encouraged to discuss the Day of Silence with their students and observe five minutes of silence in the classroom as a show of solidarity.

Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family, said the event turns kids into political lobbyists for GLSEN's adult-driven agenda.

"We agree that every student should be protected from bullying and harassment," she said, "and that no student should be hurt or ridiculed, no matter who they are or what they believe. But parents need to be aware that the Day of Silence unnecessarily politicizes and sexualizes the school environment, paving the way for classroom lessons that advocate and normalize things like same-sex marriage and cross-dressing."

One alternative would be to allow kids to participate in the Day of Truth on Thursday.

The Day of Truth is sponsored by Exodus International and promotes a respectful dialogue among students on the issue of homosexuality. This year's theme is "Get the Conversation Started." Students will be handing out cards between classes that read:

"People with differing, even opposing viewpoints, can freely exchange ideas and respectfully listen to each other. It's time for an honest conversation about the biblical truth for sexuality. Let's get the conversation started!"

[The whole article from which the above was selected is found on CitizenLink.]

Ugandan social workers back anti-gay bill; Exodus opposed

[a selection published on the Exodus International website]

A recent article in the Baptist Press describes the difference of opinion between NASWU and Exodus International on the Uganda anti-gay bill.

By Erin Roach

March 30, 2010

"Although the NASWU seems genuinely concerned in helping those struggling with same-sex attraction, the organization fails to see that Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 -- as any legislation that criminalizes homosexuality -- does more to hurt than help homosexuals," Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, said.

"Exodus continues to urge Uganda's parliament to reject this hurtful legislation; we also ask the country's evangelical churches to take the lead in offering hope and healing to all people, regardless of their particular struggles."

In addition to prosecuting homosexual behavior, the proposed legislation would require pastors, missionaries, health care providers and counselors to report people suspected of such behavior. Last fall, Exodus wrote a letter to Uganda's president expressing disapproval of the legislation.

In the statement issued March 22, Chambers wrote, "Exodus International believes that every human life, regardless of an individual's sexual behavior, is of inestimable worth to God and that defending this principle is foundational in offering a Christian response to any issue.

...

'Anti-homophobia' conference seeks to mold narrow minds

School board rallies gay activists

The Vancouver Courier

Published: Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Ever wondered what a gay activist boot camp for kids looks like?

If so, hurry over to Queen Mary elementary in West Point Grey. It's a beautiful old brick building on Trimble Street, home to the purple and gold Royals--and today until 3 p.m--the Dare To Stand Out conference. Billed as a "youth leadership conference for LGBTQ youth and allies," the event welcomes roughly 120 high school students, Grade 8 to 12, from around the province.

During an interview last Friday, Stephen Mulligan, the school board's "anti-homophobia consultant" and driving force behind the conference, said most of the attending students represent student councils or Gay/Straight Alliance student groups. "It allows the kids to do some thinking and some planning of how they might take the information that they learn at the conference back to their school."

So what will the kids learn and take home? What lessons are the taxpayers paying for? According to the conference mission statement, organizers want to "plan a world without homophobia or gender stereotypes."

A world without gender stereotypes. Say it ain't so. I'll miss them. Millions rely on them. Western culture was built on them. But all good things must come to an end.

More importantly, organizers claim the conference targets bigotry--homophobia, to be exact. Obviously, any fruitful discussion about bigotry in public schools must include a diverse panel representing a wide array of cultural backgrounds. To promote tolerance and understanding, differing opinions must be discussed and respected. So who'll speak at the conference? Mulligan and company have compiled an impressive list of speakers, dubbed "advocacy heroes."

There's Janine Fuller, manager of Little Sister's sex shop/bookstore, whose scholarly knowledge of dildo history is sure to stimulate young minds. And Morgan Brayton, a columnist for gay newspaper Xtra! West, who in a 2006 column detailed her experience in a public orgy. Foul-mouthed lesbian comic Kimothy Shaughnessy will make an appearance, as will Vancouver Pride Society president Ken Coolen.

Not only is the speaker list inappropriate for young teens, but much like Coolen's stream of stereotypes on display each summer in the gay pride parade, it provides a narrow view of Vancouver's gay population.

Conference co-architect Jeremy Dias, an Ontario resident who parlayed a human rights commission complaint (and an eventual lucrative out-of-court settlement) into one of Ontario's most ubiquitous gay lobbying groups, will conduct a "panel discussion on ethnicity, religion and sexuality."

Oddly, Mulligan, the aforementioned anti-homophobia consultant, didn't know who'd join Dias on the religion panel. A pastor? Priest? Rabbi? Imam?

"No, not pastors," cautioned Mulligan. "I'm not sure exactly who makes up that panel."

Speaking of religion. Before the speakers take centre stage, Berend McKenzie, an actor/social commentator, will perform a one-man show in the Queen Mary gymnasium. McKenzie's no stranger to Vancouver crowds. His X-rated puppet show titled Get Off the Cross, Mary! ran at the 2007 Vancouver Fringe Festival. While details of the show aren't worth repeating, it featured raunchy re-enactments of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion . . .

Confused, I contacted school board chair Patti Bacchus, who quickly granted the conference her full--albeit somewhat blind--support. "I haven't looked at it in great detail, but I can tell you that the board is very supportive of the work Steve Mulligan and the folks he's working with are doing."

Indeed. Our democracy depends on citizen participation including organized political activism and advocacy--gay, straight, right wing, left wing, whatever. But there's no room in the public school system for an activist jamboree laughingly veiled as an anti-bigotry conference.

However, on the bright side, Dare To Stand Out offers a revealing glimpse inside the Vancouver School Board and another argument for private schools.

mhasiuk@vancourier.com

[You can read the whole of the immediately-above article in the online version of The Vancouver Courier.]

Dare to Stand Out Conference a Success--According to Pro-Homosexuality Activist Magazine

The "Dare to Stand Out Conference" was a success, according to the pro-homosexuality activist magazine Xtra (Vancouver section, online, March 26, 2020 edition).

The article, "Dare to Stand Out Conference a success" reveals that besides the Vancouver School Board, four other organizations (Day of Pink, Jer's Vision, Out in Schopols, and Qmunity Gab Youth) sponsored the conference. It also reveals that "Ten districts and four independent schools sent more than 200 students and teachers" to the conference, according to the Vancouver School Board's "anti-homophobia and diversity" consultant.

The According to Xtra, "Attendees had their choice of one of seven workshops: advocating for change; ethnicity, religion and sexuality; BC's queer history; challenging anti-queer bias; starting a gay-straight alliance; and games, dialogue and interactive theatre to challenge bias."

A Grade Eight Student who attended is quoted as saying:
"I'm going to stop people from ignoring us and I'm going to shove it in their faces and throw it in the air until we have pride flags on every street corner.

"I've never seen so many queer people all in the same area, all out there showing their colours. I'm going to try to work on our GSA because there aren't a lot of members. And our events like pink T-shirt day and Day of Silence aren't very well publicized. So I'm going to work on that."

Day of Pink, Jer's Vision, Out in Schools, Qmunity Gab Youth

Social justice dispute heads for full hearing

By Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver SunMarch 12, 2010

A discrimination complaint against the Abbotsford school district over its handling of a new social justice course, which included information about sexual orientation and gender identity, is headed for a full inquiry by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal.

In a decision released this week, the tribunal rejected a bid by the district to have the complaint quashed after it agreed in 2009 to allow students to take Social Justice 12, despite a community controversy over the subject matter. That was a reversal from September 2008, when it ordered W.J. Mouat secondary school to cancel the provincial course and offer a local substitute to the 90 students who had registered.

The substitute, Global Studies and Active Citizenship, was described by critics as a "watered-down" version of Social Justice 12 because it was similar, but excluded mention of sexual orientation, gender identity, homophobia or heterosexism. This year, Mouat students may take Social Justice 12 providing they have parental permission.

That requirement for permission was added to the discrimination complaint, filed originally in October 2008 by Murray and Peter Corren. Although the district argued that it was not unusual to seek parental consent for school activities, the Correns said Social Justice 12 is the only provincially approved elective with that stipulation.

After reviewing the arguments, tribunal member Tonie Beharrell issued a 19-page decision saying the district had failed to convince her that the Correns' complaint is groundless and said the matter can be resolved only through a full hearing that will consider all evidence from both sides.

Beharrell did order the Correns to reduce their claim to represent 19,000 Abbotsford students and parents, noting they had tried to contact the 90 students who had registered for Social Justice in 2008 but as of January had received consent from only 10. . . . .

In an e-mail Thursday, association president Rick Guenther said the grievance was filed after the district sent school principals a list of conditions under which Social Justice 12 could be offered. "As far as we could determine, no other optional Grade 12 class in the district has ever been subject to any restrictions of that sort," he said. "We contend that the restrictions create a discriminatory work environment." . . . .

Murray Corren could not be reached for comment; Peter Corren died late last year.

[Click here to go to the full version of the above article in The Vancouver Sun online.]

Parents pull kids from public schools over gender teaching. Concern over new policy misplaced, say proponents.

From MountainNews.com

By Gord Bowes, News Staff

News

Mar 04, 2010

Tricia Cooper says she removed her two children from the public school system because she could see increasing infringement on her parental rights.

As a family with strong religious beliefs, Cooper wanted to take her daughters out of an environment she feels teaches her something contrary to what she believes.

“My child should not be taught in junior kindergarten that a woman can love a woman or a woman can be a man,” the Hamilton resident told the Mountain News. “It’s really up to me in my home to provide that kind of information.”

. . . .

Ontario school boards are required to implement equity and inclusive education policies, covering everything from ethnicity and race, to classism and gender, by September.

Cooper, who enrolled her children in a Catholic school this year, said she and many other parents are concerned about the gender equity and sexual orientation portion of the Hamilton public school board’s policy, which they feel will permeate the entire curriculum.

Concern about the policy picked up steam last month when Hamilton Community News managing editor Mark Cripps wrote a column about a Hamilton public school board information sheet for teachers which some believe shows the board believes it can trump parental rights when it comes to teaching about sexual orientation.

The gender equity policy is still in draft form.

. . . .

[Read the whole article in MountainNews.com .

How to Respond to Teachers Pushing Pro-Gay Curriculum: Family Group Advises Parents

By Patrick B. Craine

February 19, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The B.C.-based pro-family group Parents for Democracy in Education (PDE) have released a set of answers that parents can provide to teachers who ignore their complaints about the spread of homosexualist “propaganda” through the curricula of Canada's schools.

The new document offers responses to a controversial new sheet that has been distributed to Canadian teachers, entitled “Objections to Anti-Homophobia Curriculum in Schools?” The sheet offers “quick responses” to common objections given by parents who object to the treatment of homosexuality in their child’s school curriculum.

This “quick response” sheet for teachers was published by the Hamilton Mountain News last week after it were leaked to a reporter with the paper by teachers in the Hamilton public school board. The same sheet was also distributed by the British Columbia Teacher's Federation, which led PDE to issue their response.

The teacher sheet advises teachers to tell parents who complain about pro-gay classes that they “do not condone children being removed from our classes when we teach about Aboriginal People, people of color, people with disabilities or gays and lesbians.”

In response, PDE suggests parents state, in part: “It’s really not relevant what you condone. These are not your children. We are their parents.” “Your teaching should be consistent with and supportive of family principles, not undermining those principles,” they add.

Further, they point out that the teacher should be told: “You're mixing unlike categories when you compare homosexuals to Aboriginals, people of colour, or disabled people.” “Race is not a behaviour,” they write. “Homosexuality is. Race is not injurious to the person’s own health and well-being; homosexuality is.”

The teachers' quick response sheet also advises teachers to tell parents: “You can teach your child your own values at home. Public schools teach everyone about respecting diversity and valuing everyone.”

In this case, PDE suggests parents remind teachers that they “cannot and must not use their authority to tell children their parents are wrong.” “That’s an abuse of authority that deserves dismissal,” they continue. “We agree children should be taught to respect diversity and value everyone — but that can surely be achieved without teaching that sexual perversions are meritorious and praiseworthy.”

Another response for teachers reads: “All children, including yours, have a right to an education free from discrimination.” PDE points out that in this response, “we have a logical error caused by propagandistic thinking.” “To learn to discriminate between what is right and what is wrong is an essential part of education,” they write.

Further, to teachers who argue that they have a duty to provide “accurate information,” PDE responds that the schools' “pro-‘gay’ propaganda is full of mis-information. It does not inform students of the very real and serious physical and mental health risks associated with homosexual behaviour.”

The full document, with end notes and supporting documentation, can be found here.

Feb 15, 2010 by Candi [from the Citizen blog Drive Thru]

President Obama Plans to Increase Controversial “Safe Schools Czar’s” Budget

Visit most public school libraries and you'll find an array of books that address the subject of homosexuality. Many include sexually explicit content, and some even include graphic images.

But if you're looking for a book that refers to the possibility that homosexuality can be "reversed," a Chicago-based group says your best bet is the banned books list.

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) says there's an entire community of people across the world who say that their sexual orientation changed from gay to straight. But they're not getting their message out, the group says, because libraries across the country refuse to carry literature that describes these experiences or any studies that support them.

So a book like "My Genes Made Me Do It!: A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation" — which argues that sexuality is shaped by a variety of factors, not just biological — can't get a spot on the school library shelf.

Neither can "You Don't Have to Be Gay," which describes author Jeff Konrad's struggle to overcome his unwanted same-sex attractions.

But "Baby Be-Bop," the coming-out story of a gay teen, which includes descriptions of his sexual encounters in bathroom stalls with men he never talks to, makes the stacks

[This article from October of 2008 has gained additional significance since the appointment of Jennings to head up "safe schoools" efforts for the U.S. federal Department of Education.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd been wondering what Kevin Jennings was doing these days. Jennings is the founder and long-time head of the radical homosexual group GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. GLSEN's mission has been to plant "gay" clubs and training programs in as many schools as possible. GLSEN now claims 4,000 "gay-straight alliances" exist, although this number is doubtful.

Certainly, there are way too many. The group's target has been to place these clubs in all U.S. schools, K through 12. If you think a kindergartener signing up for a "gay" club is ludicrous, you are not alone.

But Jennings has moved on to better things. He's now the Obama campaign fundraising co-chair for the "LGBT" community – that's "lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered." You can listen to Jennings lay out the rights-oriented rhetoric in two interviews with Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign, on the website "LGBT for Obama."

Their conversation, reviewing Jennings' record, dwells on preventing bullying of "gay" kids. Jennings constructed this Trojan horse for access to schools despite the ability of every community to punish school bullying without accommodating the "gay" agenda. This smokescreen hides the pornographic reality of GLSEN's "support" for kids under Jennings' leadership.

Remember the book "Queering Elementary Education," with the gushing blurb on the back from Obama's radical "social justice" colleague Bill Ayers? Well, the same book has a foreword written by Jennings. In researching GLSEN over the years, I've found horrific elements of what can only be called child sexual corruption. The more closely one reads the GLSEN material, the worse it gets.

Just about every type of sexual practice imaginable is apparently acceptable and even worthy of "celebration" by any age student or teacher as far as GLSEN is concerned. GLSEN also supports gender-distortion through cross-dressing, even for elementary school children.

Some of GLSEN's recommended reading material implicitly condones criminal sexual contact between adults with minors. Many such incidents are described in erotic and nostalgic passages. I've yet to see "warnings" about the episodes in these books, which surely mislead thousands of vulnerable kids. I wrote in detail about what I will share below in 2002, yet the books in question, and many more just as objectionable, are still offered by GLSEN for sale on its site.

The problem starts with Jennings' own writings in books like "One Teacher In 10." Jennings' dream world is one where openly "gay" teachers serve as role models who influence students' sexual conduct. In the first edition of this book, Jennings, a former teacher, relates his encounter with a homosexually inclined male student:

"Toward the end of my first year, during the spring of 1988, Brewster appeared in my office in the tow of one of my advisees ... to whom I had been "out" for a long time. "Brewster has something he needs to talk with you about," she intoned ominously. ... On a hunch, I suddenly asked, "What's his name?" Brewster's eyes widened briefly, and then out spilled a story about his involvement with an older man he had met in Boston. I listened, sympathized, offered advice. He left my office with a smile on his face. ... "("One Teacher in 10: Gay and Lesbian Educators tell their Stories," Alyson Publications, 1994.)

What did Jennings recommend to Brewster that brought a smile to his face? It sounds like he affirmed this teen/adult homosexual relationship, instead of contacting the boy's parents or the authorities. Is this just the kind of wisdom we hope Obama consultants use in formulating education policy? Child predators as implementers of "social justice," perhaps?

The book "Growing Up Gay/Growing Up Lesbian," recommended on the GLSEN website for kids in grades seven to 12, describes two 10-year-old boys in a very graphic sexual encounter (pp.99-100). In the same book, an adult man named Eliot reflects on his youth:

"My first experience was with a much older man, a friend of Derek's [his father]. ... When I was 15, he must have been 29, 30 ... I seduced him. ... It was a wild night. We did everything."

This is the dearest fantasy of pedophiles and pederasts – the pretense that the youth seduces them.

Another GLSEN recommended book, "Rainbow Boys," features an episode of homosexual sex between one of the main characters, a 17-year-old boy, and a 29-year-old man he has just met via the Internet ( p. 148). Again, a great influence for kids.

Fluid sexual activity and homosexual experimentation is another common theme in GLSEN-recommended books. "My sexuality is as fluid, infinite, undefinable, and ever-changing as the north-flowing river. ... Sexuality is not black or white ... it is gray. ... I know that defining myself is not so simple. ..." writes a 16-year-old in "Revolutionary Voices : A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology" (p.167). . . . .

I could go on and on, unfortunately. The GLSEN "Book Link" introduction states that the selections are recommended to "... empower our mission to ensure safe schools for all LGBT students."

So finally, then, this is what is meant by "safe schools": lots of weird, early sex by kids, some of it with adults.

Obama needs to remove Kevin Jennings immediately from this position. And voters need some answers to the following questions:

Does Obama believe children are "born gay" and should be able to declare this identity in grade school and join a "gay" club? Kevin Jennings does.

Does Obama believe consensual relationships between 15-year-olds and 29-nine-year-olds are OK? Jennings thinks so. (Some think Planned Parenthood does, too – another question for Obama.)

Does Obama believe a "safe" school is one where no one can criticize homosexual behavior? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe that, with the CDC reporting HIV rates rising around 12 percent per year for 13 to 24-year-old males who have sex with males (MSM), we still cannot tell our boys to abstain from homosexual behavior? Will he appoint clueless federal health officials? Kevin Jennings would approve.

Does Obama believe kids can decide at age 9 or 10 that they were born in the wrong body, want to switch genders and have schools support this disorder? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe [that] the Christian moral standard that homosexuality is wrong needs to be suppressed and depicted as "hateful" in the public square, including schools? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe that if same-sex "marriage" is legalized, this new "law" should be shoved down the throats of all children and their parents via social engineering in public schools? Jennings does.

Does Obama believe that "social justice" and "school reform" require students to not just tolerate, but approve of homosexuality and gender change? That the "yuck" factor simply will not be allowed, because it reflects bigotry? Jennings does. . . .

Linda Harvey is president of Mission America and author of the new book "Not My Child: Contemporary Paganism and the New Spirituality" (AMG Publishers).

SaveCalifornia.com has launched a new drive to protest a pro-homosexual bill recently signed into law.

Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, tells OneNewsNow he is calling for a boycott over a law designed to force students to honor a deceased homosexual activist. . ..

"With Harvey Milk Gay Day now the law for California government schools, and a handful of sexual indoctrination laws already existing that are in effect throughout the entire school year, parents have to at least boycott Harvey Milk Day or days or week," Thomasson urges.

The boycott, he says, needs to be established by parents to protect their children, but also to drive home a point that they do not want their children indoctrinated with a pro-homosexual philosophy. Thomasson feels that taking students out of the government school system is the only way to accomplish this protection. He adds that parents also need to be aware of the quality of education their children are receiving in California.

Thomasson reports that "on the academic chart, California is among the lowest academically in the country. On the sexual indoctrination chart, California leads the pack with Massachusetts following."

Given these statistics, the West Coast pro-family, pro-child organization hopes that the boycott will convey the message that time in the classroom should not be used in a way that might risk losing average daily attendance funds. In addition, Thomasson believes California parents need to be concerned enough about the welfare of their children to begin homeschooling or sending them to private or religious schools.

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done to Massachusetts

After the law giving the governmental stamp of approval to same-sex "marriages" was passed by the Canadian parliament, some who had fought against the measure
thought it was time to move on. But the introduction of that measure has profound consequences, particularly for the children and youth of our land. MassReisistance.org has put out a listing of consequences which they have seen for the American state of Massachusetts. A number of these consequences have already come to pass in British Columbia, either before or after the introduction of same-sex marriage by federal law. Other consequences are ones we may expect
--ones the citizens of tis province should be concerned about. The document referred to is at:
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.pdf .

President Obama Speaks at Gay-Activist Event

President Barack Obama spoke Saturday at the annual fundraiser for the gay-activist Human Rights Campaign (HRC).

"When you look back on these years," he said, "you will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognized relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman."

Obama promised that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the Clinton-era policy that allows gay men and women to serve in the armed forces as long as they don't reveal their sexual orientation.

Robert Knight, senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries, said the president is simply trying to please a powerful and vocal constituency.

"Homosexual activists learned long ago that if they scream loudly and often, they get more of what they want," he said. "So even if they get 95 percent of something, they say, 'What have you done for us lately'?"

The president also promised to pass hate-crimes legislation and repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

He said those who uphold marriage between one man and one woman, "hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes."

"That would be the Bible," said Knight. "All people who think it's normal and natural for marriage to be between a man and a woman, the president of the United States is saying that's old and outworn."

Obama Criticizes People with "Old Attitudes" in Keynote Speech at Homosexualist Dinner
Promises to repeal the "so-called Defense of Marriage Act"

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 13, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In his speech to the homosexualist Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Saturday evening, President Obama again professed loyalty to the homosexual agenda and criticized people who hold to "old attitudes" about homosexuality. The President also vowed to repeal the "so-called Defense of Marriage Act" and praised the U.S. House's approval of homosexual hate crimes legislation on Thursday.

Obama began his speech, which was interrupted numerous times by applause, by thanking the HRC for the invitation and "for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard in their jobs and care deeply about their families -- and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender."

"Despite the real gains that we've made, there's still laws to change and there's still hearts to open," Obama told the cheering crowd.

"There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors, even loved ones -- good and decent people -- who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; who would deny you the rights most Americans take for granted. And that's painful and it's heartbreaking."

The President's remarks reflect his statements while campaigning for the presidency last year, when, despite asserting that he believed marriage was "between a man and a woman," he simultaneously supported various aspects of the homosexual agenda. Similarly, in his speech Saturday, President Obama expressed warm support for granting homosexuals "the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country," while not specifically mentioning whether such couples should be granted the title of marriage.

On Saturday, President Obama called the movement's quest to normalize homosexuality on various fronts a quest for "basic equality."

Obama also praised the passage of homosexual hate crimes legislation in a House defense policy bill on Thursday, and said he was preparing to sign the law after it passes Congress.

In the course of the speech, Obama vowed to repeal the prohibition against open homosexuals in the military, and to support an "affirmative action" bill against employer discrimination in hiring homosexuals.

Addressing the lobby's concern over Obama's perceived lack of zeal in dismantling federal marriage laws and other such issues, Obama said Saturday: "I also appreciate that many of you don't believe progress has come fast enough. I want to be honest about that, because it's important to be honest among friends."

He assured the group that "my commitment to you is unwavering," and pointed out that he has called on Congress to "repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act."

The homosexual lobby was critical of the administration in May when the White House website removed all references to Obama's campaign promise to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the 1996 law that says that for federal law purposes marriage can only be considered as between a man and a woman. Obama says that he now favors dismantling DOMA by the legislative process rather than by executive fiat.

The President expressed broad support for HRC's mission to drastically alter America's cultural perception of marriage and the family.

"My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see ... a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman," said Obama.

"Our common ideals are a force far stronger than any division that some might sow," he concluded. "Day by day, law by law, changing mind by mind, that is the promise we are fulfilling."

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said that "the radical cultural changes that the President promised to this audience" were "shocking."

"What the President neglected to mention was that all of this will be forced on the American people who in the last election gave the President a mandate to fix the economy - not enact radical social policy changes such as allowing homosexuals to serve in the military," said Perkins.

"President Obama tried to hide his pro-homosexual agenda during the presidential campaign. With the election behind him and a liberal Congress beside him, he is now positioned to move forward an agenda with the ultimate goal of redefining marriage at the expense of religious liberty."

Though Obama appeared to throw his weight squarely behind the group's agenda, however, some homosexual commentators expressed dissatisfaction with the speech, saying that the President should have set a timetable for his proposed legislative maneuvers.

Andrew Sullivan, blogger for the Atlantic, wrote of the speech: "There were no meaningful commitments within a time certain, not even a commitment to fulfilling them in his first term; just meaningless, feel-good commitments that we have no way of holding him to. Once the dust settles, ask yourself. What did he promise to achieve in the next year? Or two years? Or four years? The answer is: nothing."

Firestorm Erupts over Obama's Education Appointee

'Parents should be most concerned about the harmful and radical policies he could enact today that would negatively impact public schoolchildren.'

CALIFORNIA SCHEMIN'
Lawmakers: Schoolkids must study 'sexual predator'
. . . .

Lawmakers in California have voted to pressure all schoolchildren in the state to study and "honor" the life and values of homosexual activist Harvey Milk, whose biography tells of sexual escapades, including relationships with young boys.

In addition, it was Milk who publicly advocated for the late Jim Jones, the leader of the massacred hundreds in Jonestown, Guyana, in 1978. Jones led the "Peoples Temple Agricultural Project," and in an audiotape of the deaths, described the 918 fatalities – mostly from drinking cyanide-laced flavored drink – as a "revolutionary suicide."

The California State Assembly now has passed a bill calling on all California public schools to hold an annual "day of significance" honoring the life and values of Milk. SB572 was approved on a 45 (all Democrats) to 27 (all Republicans) vote yesterday. . . . .

[The following excerpts from an article in the mainstream press tell only part of the story of the effect of reactions to the $400,000 Canadian federal government's contribution to "Toronto Pride.}

Backlash against Pride funding worked
[From The ChronicleHerald.ca]
STEPHEN MAHER LETTER FROM OTTAWA
Sat. Jul 25 - 4:46 AM

ON JUNE 15, Diane Ablonczy, the federal minister of state for tourism, was photographed with a group of drag queens as she presented $400,000 to Toronto Pride, a gay and lesbian festival . . . .

This angered evangelist preacher and activist Charles McVety, a longtime crusader against same-sex marriage, abortion and homosexuality. Mr. McVety launched a campaign on the Institute for Canadian Values website, under the headline Conservatives Announce New Program to Fund Sex Parades. . .

On July 6, Saskatchewan Tory MP Brad Trost told lifesitenews.com that Ms. Ablonczy had lost control of the tourism program after Conservative MPs objected to the grant to the Pride parade.

"The pro-life and the pro-family community should know and understand that the tourism funding money that went to the gay pride parade in Toronto was not government policy, was not supported by — I think it’s safe to say by a large majority — of the MPs. This was a very isolated decision."

Many Homosexual (and Similar) Events Reported
as Funded by the Canadian Conservative Government

REAL Women of Canada Sends a Strong Protest Against $400,000 Federal Government Donation to Gay Pride Parade

NGO in SPECIAL consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations

REAL Women of Canada is deeply offended that your government has given $400,000 of the taxpayers’ money to support the Toronto Gay Pride Parade in June 2009. According to newspaper reports, part of this funding was to be directed towards marketing and programming of the 10-day activity which, according to CTV.ca will “make sure that these events continue to be competitive on the world stage”. Why does your government regard this as significant?

The Gay Pride Parade is well known for its full nudity, open engagement in public sexual acts and its deliberate disregard of behaviour acceptable to most sectors of Canadian society. The parade is about hedonistic exhibitionism and narcissism, promoting a deadly form of sexuality. The parade is designed to shock and titillate and the week-long “celebration” has become an excuse for partying, drug use and promiscuity.

To argue that this grant has an economic and tourism benefit is to naively accept the homosexual propaganda that over a million individuals actually attend the event. This is not possible because, if this figure were correct, the crowds would have had to be 80 deep along the 3.1 kilometer parade route. This is an absurdity. The crowd density was, on average 4-6 people deep and the total number of people can be generously set, at most, at approximately 154,000 persons: far fewer than attend Toronto’s annual Caribana Parade each August. It is also highly questionable that the “celebrations” that week contribute millions to the economy, as alleged, as this figure again appears to be part of the air of unreality surrounding the event.

There can be no long-term stimulus by giving taxpayers’ money to homosexual groups. Such individuals do not make a substantive contribution to society by producing and raising children – essential for the future of our country. Instead, their high medical and social costs are not a public benefit. Canadian families are struggling in these difficult economic times, and a grant of this magnitude, to promote a hedonistic lifestyle, serves only to devalue their struggle.

The Conservative government’s decision to contribute to the promotion and marketing of the Toronto Gay Pride Parade condones the homosexual life style. It is an indication of your government’s abandonment of your political base. A low voter turnout in federal elections is already a concern, and this grant will only serve to exacerbate this problem for the Conservative government.

[The article immediately following is taken from the homosexual online publication Xtra.ca . Apparently pro-homosexuality activists are quite upset about proposals to have parents’ rights being enshrined in the Alberta Human Rights act. ]

The Alberta government has proposed a new law that gay and lesbian leaders say will seriously hamper teachers' ability to raise the issue of sexual orientation in schools.

"It's a huge step backwards," says Melissa Luhtanen, president of the Calgary Outlink Centre for Sexual and Gender Diversity. "It's really going to have an effect on Alberta, where issues are already hidden."

The Alberta government's Bill 44 proposes to enshrine the words "sexual orientation" in the province's Human Rights Act, making it the last jurisdiction in the country to do so. But at the same time, the bill proposes to allow parents to opt their children out of any lessons that involve religion, sexual orientation and sexuality.

"It seems they pandered to the rightwing by bringing in the parental rights clause," says Brendan Van Alstine, a social worker with the Pride Centre of Edmonton.

Luhtanen, a human rights educator with the Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre, says that the parental rights clause opens up a huge can of worms, because the government is proposing to add it to the Human Rights Act. That means teachers and school administrators could be hauled before a human rights tribunal if they talk about what some consider taboo subjects without parents' permission.

"Teachers won't be able to raise things on an impromptu basis and they won't be able to respond to kids who do, either," says Laurie Blakeman, a Liberal MLA from Edmonton who is leading her party's opposition to the bill.

"This clause starts to insert itself into biology, English literature and other subjects," she says. "It creates a problem for teachers who don't call a halt to discussions."

According to Luhtanen, it also creates a problem for teachers who avoid subjects like sexual orientation, especially when kids are subjected to homophobic bullying. As the mother of a grade one student, she wants her kid to learn that being gay is okay. "It puts schools between a rock and a hard place," she says.

For instance, Luhtanen's daughter's teacher encourages students to bring books to class, to read out loud to their classmates. Recently, her daughter brought One Dad, Two Dads, Brown Dad, Blue Dad to class. Luhtanen fears her daughter's teacher would think twice about reading that book to her class, if the new bill becomes law.

Organizations that represent Alberta educators are coming together in opposition to the bill. Already, the Alberta School Boards Association, the Alberta School Councils' Association, the College of Alberta School Superintendents and the Alberta Teachers' Association have all united in anger against the province's Conservative government.

"These are not usually groups who come together and support each other," says Blakeman. "It's quite remarkable." . . . .

What makes Luhtanen especially frustrated is that parents in Alberta already have the authority, under the province's School Act, to yank their kids out of lessons dealing with sexuality and religion. She doesn't feel it's necessary to add it to the Human Rights Act, where she doesn't think it will hold up in court, anyway.

"It will probably be overturned and thrown out," she says. "But that will take years."

In the meantime, Liberal and NDP opposition members are campaigning to stop the bill with a petition, an upcoming rally and proposed amendments. Blakeman says the government's move has caused its own caucus to become divided between Red Tories, who tend to be fiscally conservative but socially progressive, and rural MLAs, who preach so-called family values. . . . .

Commentary: American Psychological Association Changes Tune on Genetic Nature of Homosexuality

Commentary by A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH

May 13, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In 1998, the American Psychological Association (APA) published a brochure titled "Answers to Your Questions about Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality."

This particular document was ostensibly published to provide definitive answers about homosexuality. However, few of the assertions made in the brochure could find any basis in psychological science. Clearly a document anchored more in activism than in empiricism, the brochure was simply a demonstration of how far APA had strayed from science, and how much it had capitulated to activism.

The newest APA brochure, which appears to be an update of the older one, is titled, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality."

Though both brochures have strong activist overtones (both were created with "editorial assistance from the APA Committee on Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns"), the newer document is more reflective of science and more consistent with the ethicality of psychological care.

Consider the following statement from the first document: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality."

That statement was omitted from the current document and replaced with the following:

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles..."

Although there is no mention of the research that influenced this new position statement, it is clear that efforts to "prove" that homosexuality is simply a biological fait accompli have failed. The activist researchers themselves have reluctantly reached that conclusion. There is no gay gene. There is no simple biological pathway to homosexuality. Byne and Parsons, and Friedman and Downey, were correct: a bio-psycho-social model best fits the data.

On the question of whether or not therapy can change sexual orientation, the former document offered a resounding "no." However, the current document is much more nuanced and contains the following statement: "To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy (sometimes called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective."

Of course, no mention is made of the Spitzer research, the Karten research, or the recent longitudinal research conducted by Jones and Yarhouse -- all of which support the conclusion that some people can and do change.

Of the Spitzer research, psychologist Dr. Scott Hershberger (who is a philosophical essentialist on questions of sexual orientation) conducted a Guttman analysis of the study sample, and declared:

"The orderly, law-like pattern of changes in homosexual behavior, homosexual self-identification, and homosexual attraction and fantasy observed in Spitzer's study is strong evidence that reparative therapy can assist individuals in changing their homosexual orientation to a heterosexual one."

The Spitzer study found no evidence of harm. Neither did the Karten study, nor the Jones and Yarhouse study.

For the rest of this commentary please see the website of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality here:
http://www.narth.com/docs/deemphasizes.html

When the B.C. NDP calls for the removal of a Liberal election candidate because of “disturbingly homophobic comments,” it might be chalked up to politics as usual.

However, when the leading opinion shapers in the province echo those sentiments, it’s evidence that a sea change has occurred in terms of public support of homosexuality.

It’s also evidence that it may not be long before publicly stating elements of our faith becomes not just uncomfortable, but risky.

Liberal Maple Ridge – Mission candidate Marc Dalton, a teacher at Pitt Meadows Secondary School, made remarks about homosexuality in an e-mail 12 years ago.

At the time, the B.C. Teachers Federation was adopting a policy to eliminate “homophobia and heterosexism” in the public school system, and Dalton circulated a petition opposing the BCTF move.

He placed homosexuality in a category with gambling, abortion, adultery, and pornography as issues that “large segments of our society” don’t see eye to eye with.

The comments were resurrected during the current election coverage, and a media fire storm ensued. Dalton apologized for any pain he had caused and said he “wouldn’t use those words now.”

Those words, however, were enough to bring calls for his resignation and accusations of hatred against him in radio programs, letters to the editor, and by newspaper columnists who expressed dismay that anyone could hold such intolerant views, today or back then.

Dalton made it clear, 12 years ago and last week, that he believes in respect for others. He clearly distinguished between homosexuality as a lifestyle he couldn’t support, and homosexual people, whom he respects.

No matter. The sheer fact that he didn’t embrace all aspects of homosexuality was sufficient to haul him over the coals.

The Dalton incident came within days of a similar uproar at the Miss America contest, when contestant Miss California Carrie Prejean was asked her views on “gay marriage.”

In a very respectful manner, Prejean said she couldn’t support such unions because of her personal beliefs.

The reaction to her answer made the Dalton incident look like a tea party. The audience booed and contest judge Perez Hilton, known primarily for being a gay blogger, went to the Web and excoriated her with language leaving no question about what constitutes hate speech.

Next, a British MP made an on camera remark about the possibility of Prejean being murdered. Facetious or not, such remarks, like bomb jokes on an airplane, are distinctly unfunny, and a police investigation resulted.

So this is where we have arrived. A decades-long campaign to end hatred and unreasonable discrimination against homosexuals has morphed past “gay marriage” and into a doctrinaire age that brooks no criticism of homosexual behaviour. . . . . [Click here to read the whole of this article.]

Federal Bill Would Add Pro-Gay Policies to Public Schools

The following (about the day of silence) is from an American group, but the ideas may be applicable here.

The annual "Day of Silence," sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), will be promoted tomorrow in many public schools. This event encourages students to remain silent, by not texting or responding to anyone, including teachers, administrators, or students at school. GLSEN claims the event counteracts bullying, but it is merely promoting an anti-heterosexual viewpoint. Schools can teach students the value of respect without accepting GLSEN’s propaganda event. Many states, like Florida, for example, have laws that require abstinence-based education when sexuality is discussed, so the school cannot recognize the Day of Silence without promoting abstinence.

Parents can choose to keep their children home on the Day of Silence or support their children in a counter-observance of sexual purity. Liberty Counsel has a legal memorandum explaining how to protect schools from being hijacked by GLSEN’s political agenda. Student conduct causing a substantial disruption or material interference with school activities is not protected under the First Amendment. If a teacher asks a student a question during class, the student does not have a right to remain silent.

Please pray that students will be protected from forced indoctrination by GLSEN, especially next week, and that the truth will prevail.

Liberty Counsel is encouraging students to mount a counter-celebration to promote a positive message of purity on the Day of Silence. Students are encouraged to wear white and to distribute flyers promoting sexual purity whenever other students are permitted to distribute literature promoting the Day of Silence.

Please help inform as many people as possible by forwarding this Liberty Alert to your entire e-mail list of family and friends, and encourage them to subscribe.

Liberty Counsel does not charge clients for representation, so we depend on individuals, groups and churches who care about advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family. Liberty Counsel is recognized by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization that accepts tax-deductible donations. Donate or order resources from the Liberty Counsel online store.

Mathew D. Staver - Founder and Chairman
Anita L. Staver - President
Liberty Counsel - 1-800-671-1776
PO Box 540774 - Orlando, FL 32854

Catholic League President Urges Congress: Don't Let "Hate Crimes" Chill Religious Free Speech
Conservatives concerned that bill fails to define "sexual orientation"

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Catholic League President Bill Donohue issued an open letter yesterday to the U.S. Senate urging legislators to include protection for religious leaders preaching against homosexuality in the newly-introduced "hate crimes" legislation. Donohue added his voice to criticism from other conservative leaders who warn that the measure's current form threatens to chill free speech and give special protection to all forms of sexual deviancy including pedophilia, voyeurism, and exhibitionism.

"The driving force behind the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act is the desire to provide additional penalties to criminals who assault homosexuals because of their sexual orientation," wrote Donohue, referring to the legislation recently introduced by Senators Edward Kennedy and Patrick Leahy.

Setting aside the "propriety of hate crimes legislation in general," Donohue said, "the central problem with this bill is its chilling effect on religious speech."

"To be specific, the bill would criminalize religious speech that was critical of homosexuality if it were linked to a crime against a gay person." he continued. "How do I know this? Because when the bill was considered in the House, that is exactly what Rep. Louie Gohmert was told when he raised this issue.

"While assaulting anyone, independent of sexual orientation, is rightly considered a criminal offense, the prospect of criminalizing religious speech that proscribes certain sexual practices is beyond worrisome-it is downright dangerous."

Donohue pointed out that the bill's potential to chill free speech among clergy addressing sinful behavior "flies in the face of the spirit of the First Amendment."

"Surely there are ways to protect homosexuals from being singled out by anti-gay thugs without trespassing on the constitutional rights of priests, ministers, rabbis, imams and others," he wrote. The Catholic League president concluded by urging the Senate to include an amendment to the bill that would protect the speech rights of religious leaders.

Earlier in the debate Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Tex.) also voiced a concern shared by many conservatives, that the term "sexual orientation" remains undefined in the bill, which he says opens the legislation up to a broad interpretation. While there exists in law a strict definition of sexual orientation, Gohmert objected, "there is nothing in this bill that references the definitions in the Hate Crimes Statistical Act…it's not there. We asked that it be added so we could get a specific definition. It is not there."

Gohmert claimed that the lack of a definition left only "the plain meaning" of the term "sexual orientation," which he says could include "anything to which someone is orientated" - essentially protecting all forms of sexual aberration.

The Family Research Council is sponsoring a petition against the federal hate crimes bill (go to: http://www.fighthatecrimes.com/).

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality;
San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site

Want to Know How the British Columbia Teachers' Federation Advises Teachers to Deal with Parents who Object to the Pro-Homosexuality Program?

The BCTF has a web-page entitled "Objections to Antihomophobia Curriculum in Schools." A list of suggestions follows the sentence "Here are some quick responses for educators when talking to parents." Here is a sampling of parental statements under various headings and suggested responses to them (as downloaded April 26, 2009):

"Parent Rights"

Religion and Cultural Objections

Sexuality

Age Appropriateness

“Gay and Lesbian Educators” Resource (Listed by Government for Social Justice Twelve Course) Peddles Propaganda in the Name of Education

The Gay and Lesbian Educators handbook entitled Challenging Homophobia in Schools has now acquired additional importance, since it is listed by the British Columbia Ministry of Education as a resource for the Social Justice Twelve course instituted as a result of the Corren Agreement.

Some years ago we had an opportunity to review the first (2000) edition. Looking over the second (2004) edition, one notes some changes. The second edition does not have an introductory commendation by Svend Robinson, though he is acknowledged in the later edition as having had a part in the development and production of the first. No doubt there are other changes. But what characterized the first edition also characterizes the second: a lack of scholarship in a book being promoted as an educational resource, and propaganda masquerading as education.

Once again, for example, there is a list headed “Famous Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Persons.” Among those listed is “Augustine (Saint) – (354 – 430) English Roman Catholic Bishop, Religious Writer.” (For some reason, almost all nouns in the list are capitalized.) (Probably the handbook authors picked up on something Augustine of Hippo wrote in his Confessions regarding his life before conversion, and confused him with the Augustine who was a missionary to the Anglo- Saxons.)

Also included in the list is David, who is described as “Israeli King, Biblical Lover of Jonathan.” The lack of evidence for the assertion regarding David may be an indication of a similar carelessness regarding the truth in the selection of many of the other names on the quite extensive list. Also listed are William Shakespeare, Leonardo da Vinci, and Popes Benedict IX, John XII, Julius III, Leo X, Paul II, and Sixtus IV.

No specific references are given for the particular people listed, though sources are given at the end of the list. These sources include a work called Outstanding Lives: Profiles of Lesbians and Gay Men (M. Bronski, editor) and Who’s Who & Who’s Gay—Alphabetical Listing (Internet, December, 1997); also The Unofficial Gay Manual (Dilallo, Kevin & Jack Krumholtz).

It would appear that the authors of Challenging Homophobia in Schools have left few stones unturned in the attempt to carry out their avowed aim of creating a “K to 12 resource . . . to aid in the support of, and education about Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender youth and families.” (title page). One needs to examine the book as a whole to get the full impact of the authors’ intentions. All we can do is give examples illustrative of those intentions and the authors’ methods. In the “Background” section of this work, pages 49 – 56, is a chart entitled “The Impact of Systemic Oppression.” In this chart, under the heading “Institution” are listed the sub-headings “Social System, Values and Beliefs,” “Family,” “Education,” “Religion,” “Legal,” “Health," “Economics,” and “Media.” Opposite “Religion,” in a column headed “Homophobia and Heterosexism,” is written “-only heterosexual unions acknowledged by most religions” –an apparent reference to the teaching that marriage is a male-female union.

Challenging Homophobia in Schools is indeed intended for the whole range of grade-school. For example, an outlined lesson on “Celebrating Same-Gender Families” (“Lessons,” pp. 11-12) is intended for Kindergarten to Grade 3. The teacher following the lesson plan will read his or her class the books One Dad, Two Dads, Brown Dad, Blue Dads and ABC—A Family Alphabet Book. Among the suggested activities connected with the lesson is the following: “Ask your students to think of things that they like to do with their mom(s) or dad(s). Generate a class list together. Have them imagine double these good times if they had two moms or two dads.” (The mathematics seems a bit odd here.)

A lesson for students in Grades 8 to 12 is entitled “Queerly Canadian Role Models” (Lessons, pp. 63-66). Associated with this is a sheet of “Queerly Canadian Identity Cards,” featuring the names of such luminaries as Libby Davies, James Chamberlain and Murray Warren, and Svend Robinson.

The examples given in this article do not enable a full analysis, but convey some of the flavour of this handbook. What is needed is ongoing research by a group of people to determine the nature of the resources listed by the Ministry of Education as the effects of the Corren Agreement work their way through the curricula of many subjects as new courses are introduced and existing ones are revised. What is also needed is a concerted effort to recommend educational resources that will indeed educate rather than propagandize; that will meet the undoubted needs of a generation of children and young people who can only suffer confusion from the flood of inaccurate information and biased expression of opinion which is being let loose upon them.

For an extensive analysis of the first edition of Challenging Homophobia in Schools, see Challenging Homophobia in Schools: A Critical Review by Chris Kempling, M.Ed., M.A., R.C.C., reproduced at the end of this page.

Kari Simpson seeks human rights ruling against BC government, BCTF and Murray Corren

VANCOUVER , March 16, 2009 — Kari Simpson, well-known social activist and host of RoadKill Radio.com today filed a complaint with the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal against the B.C. Ministry of Education, the B.C. Teachers’ Federation and Murray Corren for discriminating against those who suffer from homosexuality and other dysfunctional sexual orientations, by failing to provide needed services, including psychological help. “This complaint is about helping the hurting” says Simpson.

In her complaint Simpson states: “The B.C. Ministry of Education has failed to provide funding and access to relevant counseling strategies within the public education system for B.C. students suffering from sexual identity disorders and crisis.

“Sexual re-orientation therapies have helped thousands of individuals to recover from such dysfunctional orientations. It is common and accepted knowledge that sexual identity confusion is often the result of childhood trauma and/or family dysfunction. B.C. students should not be denied access to effective psychological help for such conditions.

“School counselors are being denied the tools to be effective advocates for students in need of sexual re-orientation help, and they should have access to resources and training that will equip them to properly counsel students.”

Ms. Simpson continues: “The B.C. Teachers’ Federation blatantly continues to actively discriminate against students within the B.C. public education system by publishing, promoting and adhering to a policy that denies students important psychological help. BCTF Policy 12.25 states that the BCTF is opposed to:

“(b) referring students to therapists who promote and practice reparative therapy.”

Murray Corren recently published (December 9, 2008) this discriminatory statement on a blog in the Vancouver Sun. He states (under “Your Comments”): “One would hope, of course, that the kind of counselling being offered to students as regards sexual orientation would be supportive, and not intended to ‘cure’ LGBT students. The BCTF has policy which specifically prohibits school counselors from employing ‘reparative therapy’ or referring students for such treatment.”

Simpson goes on to advise the BCHRT that: “The situation is on-going. The Ministry of Education does not provide training or funding to school counselors to effectively help students suffering from dysfunctional sexual orientations whose origins are founded in, or in part result from family dysfunction, trauma and child sexual abuse.

“The BCFT policy discriminates against these students, who need psychological help, by publishing and promoting opposition to such therapy, based on an antiquated and propagandistic view of homosexuality.

“Teachers and counselors should have access to scientific and proven therapies, and should not be ignorant about issues relating to the origins of homosexuality.

“Murray Corren is a gay propagandist, and he is provably aware of some of the factors associated with the origins and factors that contribute to homosexuality; he has admitted that his own childhood experiences compare to identifiers that are common to the family dysfunctions associated with dysfunctional homosexuality. Murray Corren should be prohibited from discriminating against others who are in need of help.”

1. That the B.C. Ministry of Education provides funding in the amount of $20,000.00 to a 7-member committee, with Kari Simpson as Chair. Other members to include: two mental health professionals associated with and recognized by NARTH (the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), two parents, a school counselor, and a teacher. This committee will develop a resource guide for school counselors and educators to facilitate a scientific and therapeutic understanding of the issues involved in homosexuality, instead of relying on the gay propaganda that ignores the facts and simply perpetrates the myths associated with ‘gay’ politics and political privilege.

2. Further — this guide will provide a list of agencies and other resources, to ensure that students needing psychological help will not be denied.

3. Further — On-going funding in the amount of $10,000.00 each year to ensure that current training is received and developed within the BC public education system, to help students in need of psychological care associated with sexuality identity confusion and dysfunctional homosexuality.

4. Further — that the BCTF forthwith rescind its policy of opposing re-orientation therapy for those suffering from a dysfunctional sexual orientation.

5. Further — that Murray Warren make a public apology for his socially unjust and harmful comments, and receive sensitivity training; and that he further be made to pay $5000.00 to Kari Simpson for the harm and hurt he has inflicted on those suffering and needing help. Kari Simpson, on behalf of those discriminated against, will use the $5000.00 to purchase important resources for teachers, schools and public libraries that factually debunk the myth and propaganda about gender identity confusion.

“It’s to ensure those who are suffering from dysfunctional homosexuality and/or sexual identity confusion and/or other psychologically problematic sexual orientations are not denied help by those who, because of their sexual politics, seek to selfishly, hatefully and ignorantly discriminate against a group of people who would benefit from re-orientation therapy.”

More information about this complaint can be heard on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 at 7:30 pm (PST) at www.roadkillradio.com

British Columbia Teachers' Federation Promotes Day of Silence in BC Schools.
Parents for Democracy in Education Calls on Parents to Keep Students Home April 17th [2009]

On April 17th, 2009, parents in some schools in British Columbia may expect that the "Day of Silence" will be promoted and recognized. "The BCTF supports provincial student and teacher participation in the Day of Silence project," we are informed on the BCTF website: What is the "Day of Silence"? Well, the "Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network" describes it in the following terms:

    The Day of Silence, a project of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), is a student-led day of action when
     concerned students, from middle school to college, take some form of a vow of silence to bring attention to the name-calling, bullying and
     harassment -- in effect, the silencing -- experienced by LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) students and their allies.

The day provides a ready opportunity to engage students in the work of propagandizing their fellow-students. Of course name-calling, bullying and harassment should not be endured by any students, but by exclusively singling out students who self-identify as lesbian, gan, bisexual, and transgendered, sympathy for the pro-homosexual caused is generated, and this sympathy is used to promote homosexual behaviour as nomal and acceptable, against the beliefs of parents of traditional moral beliefs.

Parents for Democracy in Education, a British Columbia organization, is calling on parents to iwthdraw their children from schools where the "Day of Silence" is being recognized. A newsletter issued by the group states:

[The following news release, which we have slightly abridged, is most revealing for what it says about the plans of the pro-homosexuality activists who are using "social justice" to promote their agenda. --Editor of this website]

Feb. 20 and 21, I attended the first “Social Justice conference” staged by the BC Teachers’ Federation at University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotford.

Although the stated purpose of the conference was to show teachers how to approach the Social Justice 12 curriculum adopted under BC’s Corren Settlement Agreement, an underlying purpose was clearly revealed by a graphic of a staircase, distributed by the BCTF in its information packages: the goal is to move students’ attitude towards LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered and questioning) people beyond “tolerance” to “acceptance”—and then further along to “support,” “admiration,” “appreciation” and finally “celebration” of deviant sexuality.

Most Canadians have never seen what constitutes “celebration” of homosexuality; but our big cities’ annual “Gay Pride” parades clearly show the reality: public nudity (partial and/or total), simulated fornication, lasciviousness—and open mockery of traditional morality.

This exposure of the BCTF’s real goal—to manipulate the attitudes of students until the “Prescribed Learning Outcome” of celebration is attained—reveals that the teachers’ union is actually in violation of its own code of ethics, which forbids using the classroom for indoctrination.

What has given the BCTF this extraordinary power to manipulate the attitudes of BC’s children? The cowardice of a pusillanimous government, and especially of two cabinet ministers—Education Minister Shirley Bond and Attorney-General Wally Oppal—who reached a secret agreement with two homosexual activists without ever allowing debate in the Legislature.

Those same ministers have consistently resisted efforts by parents’ groups to have a countervailing voice in the education of their children on sensitive topics.

This BCTF conference similarly lacked any opportunity for input from parents who want to resist manipulation of their children’s curriculum to make acceptance of homosexuality a goal.

The February conference was the first of four planned to train BC teachers how to implement the Correns’ ‘Social Justice 12’ curriculum. It did not deal with the companion—and more radical—teacher’s guide Making Space, Giving Voice, which the Correns were able to force on a supine Ministry of Education. Making Space, Giving Voice instructs teachers how to make every subject, at every level from Kindergarten to Grade 12, ‘gay’-friendly.

In one workshop, a teacher suggested that if a student says his or her parents disapprove of homosexual behaviour, he (the teacher) deflects the comment by saying, “Well, different people have different ideas about sex.”

“That won’t accomplish the kind of change we need,” said . . . . a professor in the Department of Social, Cultural and Media Studies at UFV. “Students feel silenced by that kind of comment. ‘What does everybody think?’ is a bigoted comment. We need to decide who we want silenced.”

So such students are to be told that their parents’ ideas are wrong. Perhaps not all parents: Prof. Dow repeatedly identified “Evangelicals and Fundamentalists” as the perceived problem.

That theme recurred in several sessions. The result of the BCTF’s unilateral advocacy that “gay is good” can only be to drive a wedge between children and their parents. And the long-term social result of that alienation would be worse than the problems they are trying to correct.

However, the BCTF apparently operates on the assumption that they are in possession of an absolute truth—even though peer-reviewed science has discredited every claim of discovery of a “gay gene”; and even though medical studies indicate that homosexual behaviour shortens life expectancy dramatically. To “true believers” in the BCTF dogma, such facts are apparently irrelevant.

Their position is essentially religious—a fact that was vividly highlighted by a teacher who said in a Friday workshop, “I don’t think I can teach this without being converted.”

The conference was lamentably short on factual information—but presenters were quite willing to reiterate falsehoods, like the “10 percent myth”, based on the discredited 1948 and 1953 Reports of self-styled “sexologist” Alfred Kinsey. (Kinsey alleged that 10 percent of the population is homosexual; however the 2003 Canadian Community Health Survey showed that only one percent of the population identify themselves as homosexual.)

Dr. Judith Reisman, in her book Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences, revealed that Kinsey’s “research” included criminal sexual abuse of infants, and that a substantial part of his survey population was drawn from prison inmates and ‘gay’ bars—but they were represented by Kinsey as typical of the whole population. Kinsey himself was a homosexual who died from orchitis, an inflammation of the testes often caused by excessive sexual self-abuse.

The conference was not without merit: participating teachers were given some useful tips on correcting students who use slurs or bully other students.

But the underlying theme—BCTF’s absolute certainty that only their pro-‘gay’ dogma is correct, and they have the right to impose it on BC’s children because “we’re professional educators”—was terrifying: such use of government power to compel conformity is the very essence of fascism.

Ron Gray is a former journalist (Vancouver Sun, Chilliwack Progress, BC Report, Fiji Times, Richmond Review) and was a member of the founding administration of Fraser Valley College, the forerunner of University of the Fraser Valley. He is currently Vice-President of Parents for Democracy in Education.

From latest GLBT Youth Commission meeting: Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health funding homosexual / transgender movement in schools - to make up for budget cuts!

The madness continues. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) is giving full support to the homosexual / transgender movement in Massachusetts schools, according to DPH Commissioner John Auerbach (who is "married" to another man).

The DPH has given $150,000 of its budgeted money to the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender (GLBT) Youth to make up for the $150,000 which the Governor cut from the Commission's $850,000 budget in October because of the massive budget crisis in Massachusetts. In other words, money which was meant for public health is now being diverted by the DPH to homosexual programs in the schools.

The Mass. Dept. of Public Health will also begin pushing acceptance of "transgenderism" and will even begin bringing transgender people into its leadership roles.

(Ironically, less than a month ago the DPH issued a report linking homosexuality with health problems and destructive behavior.)

This was all revealed at the public meeting of the Mass. GLBT Youth Commission last Monday evening, Dec. 15.

The article immediately following, from a Vancouver, British Columbia, publication by and for homosexuals, illustrates better than anthing else we have seen, how, under cover of the concept of "tolerance" (one that can be a noble word in its meaning in our society), pro-homosexuality indoctrination can take place and is taking place in our schoools. Sections and words bold-faced have been marked for emphasis by the editor of this BC Parents and Teachers for Life website. For anyone not fully convinced of the importance of our confronting the pro-homosexuality program in the schools, this article is a must-read.

Five and a half years ago, I became principal of the West End's Lord Roberts Elementary School and its annex. I was ecstatic.

Lord Roberts on Bidwell St has all of the elements I love in a school community: a multicultural population, inner-city funding and programs, bright students, involved parents with high expectations and a dedicated, diverse staff. However, having spent a week at the school in April 1998, I harboured no illusion that I was in for an easy ride.

First, there was the story of the rainbow flag. To celebrate the opening of the school's new playground, the principal who preceded me ordered several flags. Unwittingly, one of them was a rainbow flag.

A few hours after it was raised there was an uproar in the parent community and a Grade 7 student started a petition to remove it. Due to parental pressure the flag was taken down.

Then there was the story of the photo exhibit called All Kinds of Families. For one week, photos were displayed in the main hall depicting families of various ethnic backgrounds, single parents, and same-sex parents. Parents raised concerns yet again.

Staff decided to tackle the issue head-on. That's when I made my entrance.

We began with a two-day staff retreat featuring presentations by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC (GALE). We decided each teacher would lead a class meeting to discuss name-calling. If students did not bring up homophobic names, the teacher would. So began our journey from tolerance to celebration.

That fall, we developed a Code of Behaviour for the school. While it did not directly address sexual orientation, it did highlight respect for all people and the importance of honouring diversity. This allowed staff to begin classroom discussions around the question of what constitutes diversity and to take those discussions beyond race into sexuality and family composition.

Having facilitated the development of a Code of Behaviour in three other schools, I knew the process was as important as the product. The involvement of students, staff and parents is crucial, as is the ritual of yearly review, editing and recommitment.

In the last few years, our September Signing Ceremony has evolved into a joyous celebration. Students, staff and parent representatives sign the Code each fall in a school assembly to indicate their commitment to its stated values for the coming year.

The assembly ends with staff members presenting an energetic dance to "We Are Family" which invariably causes a barely contained riot of student applause.

It is obvious to students that staff care for and respect each other and have fun working together. The Code is illustrated by the Respect Mural on the gym wall facing Bidwell St, which provides a daily reminder to all.

In order to gauge the Code's success, we then designed a Respect Rubric (one of those charts with the word "respect" spelled out down the left side and attributes beginning with each letter described and assessed on the right). Teachers and parents use the rubric each term to evaluate student growth in social responsibility. Students use it as a self-evaluation tool.

We also made it school-wide policy to include anti-homophobia lessons within discussions of diversity at all grade levels, starting in Kindergarten. Picture books depicting all kinds of families provide an effective way to broach the topic in the primary grades.

. . . .

Recently, Lord Roberts celebrated Pride Week, planned by the newly formed school Pride Committee, a group of gay and straight staff members. "You Can Be Anyone You Want to Be" by the Flirtations was played over the public address system, the rainbow flag was raised in the playground, open classroom discussions took place without giggles, and anti-homophobia posters featuring a gay staff member and his partner were displayed. There were no complaints from students, parents, or community.

We have come a long way at Lord Roberts. Both gay and straight staff members now feel it is a gay-friendly school. All our gay and lesbian staff are out to colleagues and most are now out to students and parents, as well.

Though diversity is a part of every community, I feel that directly addressing homophobia is especially crucial in a West End school if we are to truly honour all members of our local community.

I commend the ongoing leadership of gay and straight staff and parents that has brought us to this point. It is my privilege to have been part of the continuing journey from tolerance to celebration.

There have been bumps in the road. There may be more to come.

The Vancouver School Board's anti-homophobia policy provided me with welcome ammunition to back up my personal beliefs when addressing parent concerns. The government's new Grade 12 elective Social Justice course is another positive initiative that will hopefully be chosen by future leaders.

. . . . I

Patti Shales Lefkos was principal of Lord Roberts Elementary School and Lord Roberts Annex for the past five and a half years. She retired in December 2005 after 36 years in education.

School holds surprise 'Gay' Day for kindergartners
Parents outraged at public elementary's secretive 'coming out' event

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Some parents are shocked to find their children are learning to be homosexual allies and will participate in "Coming Out Day" at a public elementary school tomorrow – and they claim the school failed to notify parents.

One mother of a kindergartner who attends Faith Ringgold School of Art and Science, a K-8 charter school in Hayward, Calif., said she asked her 5-year-old daughter what she was learning at school.

The mother also said a Gay Straight Alliance club regularly meets in the kindergarten classroom during lunch.

According to a Pacific Justice Institute report, Faith Ringgold opted not to inform the parents of its pro-homosexual activities beforehand. The school is celebrating "Gay and Lesbian History Month" and is in the process of observing "Ally Week," a pro-"gay" occasion usually geared toward high school students.

The school is scheduled to host discussions about families and has posted fliers on school grounds portraying only homosexuals. According to the report, a "TransAction Gender-Bender Read-Aloud" will take place Nov. 20. Students will listen to traditional stories with "gay" or transgender twists, to include "Jane and the Beanstalk."

An Analysis of Some Aspects of the Social Justice Twelve Course
as approved by the British Columbia Ministry of Education

The Social Justice Twelve Course is one striking illustration of the Education Ministry’s lack of positive response to the concerns so many have expressed about the Corren Settlement Agreement and its results.

In the first place, this unresponsiveness was shown in the way in which the draft curriculum for the new Social Justice Twelve course was released.The Settlement Agreement with the Correns¹ states: “Prior to release of the Social Justice 12 Response Draft for public review and response, the Respondent [the Ministry] will provide the Complainants [the Correns] with a draft of the sexual orientation/gender identity portion for their review, and will make revisions as appropriate in light of the comments received. The Complainants may consult experts, on a confidential basis, to assist them in providing such comment.” We note the fact that this consultation with the Correns was to take place before the draft course was released to the general public. (Settlement Agreement, Section 3A)

Though a pilot version of the new course was to be completed on or before June 30, 2007, the draft program or draft “Integrated Resource Package” (IRP) for the course was withheld from public review till August 1, 2007. This was in spite of the fact that the draft course was to be used as a pilot course the next month. This late release in the summer of 2007 meant that already in September of 2007 some students would be exposed to this course before those who might be critical of the course had a proper chance to review it and ask for changes.

When we looked at the draft course, the first startling fact we noted was that it failed to include information on recommended learning resources for the course. In fact, we were told that these would not be available until the final publication of the IRP. In other words, the general public had no input into the selection of recommended learning resources, in contrast of course to the role of the Correns. Since the nature of recommended learning resources can, to a large extent, determine the nature of the course, this means that the general public was excluded from providing input regarding a very important aspect of the course.

An examination of the approved Social Justice 12 course now published reveals that grave concerns about the course which were expressed following the release of the draft course are still justified.

It may be important to note that this is an elective course so far, but this does not mean that we should be unconcerned about it. The nature of the course, as we shall see, is such that it lends itself readily to the introduction of propaganda, and this indoctrination could create a cadre of student activists who in turn could influence a whole school.

Under “Considerations for Program Delivery,” on page 16 of the approved IRP for Social Justice 12, we read this curious sentence: “Ensure students are aware that their parents may have access to the schoolwork they create only insofar as it pertains to students’ progress.” We cannot help but wonder, "What does this mean?" Does this mean that certain assignments (given though not counted for assessment) are to be kept secret from parents? If so, what type of assignments would they be?

On page 21 of the approved IRP, under “Prescribed Learning Outcomes,” we read: “Prescribed learning outcomes are content standards for the provincial education system; they are the prescribed curriculum. Clearly stated and expressed in measurable and observable terms, Prescribed Learning Outcomes set out the required attitudes, skills, and knowledge – what students are expected to know and be able to do – by the end of the specified course.” We should note that not only are measurable and observable skills and knowledge prescribed, but attitudes as well. Students, then, are expected to have certain attitudes. What attitudes are these, and what are the consequences for those students who fail to develop them and thus fail in this respect to have the prescribed learning outcomes?

Under “Student Achievement: Key Elements,” in the subsection “Defining Social Justice, “ the following is given in the set of indicators which may be used to assess student achievement: “Students who have fully met the Prescribed Learning Outcomes are able to identify and define a range of concepts and terms of social justice (e.g., ableism, ageism, anthropocentrism, colonialism, consumerism, cultural imperialism, dignity, discrimination, diversity, economic imperialism, economic liberalization, empowerment, equality, equity, ethics, extremism, fairness, feminism, fundamentalism, genocide, globalization, hate crime, hegemony, heterosexism, homophobia, human rights, humanitarianism, humility, inclusion, individual responsibility, marginalization, misogyny, oppression, peace, persecution, power, prejudice, privilege, racism, sexism, speciesism, stereotype, stewardship, systemic, transformational leadership, truth, value, worth.)” (p. 34)

It is worthwhile to examine the definition of these terms in the “Glossary” which accompanies this curriculum (on pages 49-54). (There was no glossary in the draft version of Social Justice 12.) According to this glossary, “diversity refers to the ways in which people within a society differ from each other. Some of these differences may be visible (e.g., race, ethnicity, sex, age, ability), while others are less visible (e.g., culture, ancestry, language, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, socioeconomic background). Honouring diversity is based on the principle that, if these differences are acknowledged and utilized in a positive way, it is of benefit to the quality of life for all in society.”

We would agree that many differences can be “acknowledged and utilized in a positive way,” but there is surely a danger in not recognizing that some characteristics may actually be harmful and not capable of being so utilized.

In the definition of “homophobia” we read that homophobia is: “a fear, dislike, or hatred of homosexuality or homosexuals, or of people or behaviours perceived to be homosexual.” We are further informed that “Homophobia manifests itself as prejudice, discrimination, harassment, and/or acts of violence. Homophobia can exist at personal, institutional, and societal levels. Also transphobia: fear, dislike, or hatred of transgendered or transsexual people. See also heterosexism.” Here we have adopted the usual stereotype used by pro-homosexuality activists that those disliking homosexuality will demonstrate “prejudice, discrimination, harassment, and/or acts of violence.” “Heterosexism” is defined as “the assumption that heterosexual orientation is better than other sexual orientations and therefore deserving of public acceptance and legal privilege.”

The term “two-spirited” is listed as “a modern term for a traditional North American Aboriginal concept implying a masculine spirit and a feminine spirit in the same body. Two-spirited individuals were found in many, if not most, pre-contact Aboriginal communities, and played important societal roles within communities. There are terms for these individuals in the various North American Aboriginal languages, and their social function varied from nation to nation. In present-day parlance, two-spirited is also used to refer to gay, lesbian, and bisexual Aboriginal people.” (The authority for the statements about pre-contact aboriginal communities is not given.)

It is only fair to say that many of the other definitions in the glossary are unobjectionable. When matters of sexual orientation are defined, however, we can see the distorting influence of the Corren Agreement.

Under the heading “Recognizing and Analysing Social Injustice” (p. 40), a suggested achievement indicator is that students should be able to “apply principles of social justice to analyse specific historical and contemporary examples of injustice in Canada related to . . . people who are LGBT (e.g., criminalization, institutionalization, marriage, adoption, employment discrimination, spousal rights, immigration, censorship, hate crimes, school safety).” Here it becomes obvious that the until-recent limitation of the official use of the term “marriage” to male-female unions is to be regarded as an injustice, as is the denial of adoption rights to homosexuals. Will students be expected to also regard as unjust, religious teachings which limit marriage to the union of man and woman?

In the subsection on “Recognizing and Analyzing Injustice” (pp. 24-25), we are told that one of the prescribed learning outcomes is that students will be expected to describe social injustice based on certain characteristics. These characteristics are to include age, marital or family status, mental or physical ability, nationality or "rationality," political affiliation, race and ethnicity, religion and faith, sex, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. (p. 23). While the list is suggestive of many topics worthy of consideration by students, one wonders what descriptions of social injustice in certain of these categories will be considered acceptable. For example, will a student be expected to describe same-sex marriage as a move towards justice when discussing marital status and sexual orientation? Such questions become particularly relevant when we read (on Page 40) that students will be expected to apply principles of social justice to analyze specific historical and contemporary examples of injustice in Canada related to . . . people who are LGBT (e.g., criminalization, institutionalization, marriage, adoption, employment discrimination, spousal rights, immigration, censorship, hate crimes, school safety)” (emphasis supplied by the present writer). On Page 41 we are told that students should be able to “identify legislation and public policies that relate to human rights in Canada” and an example of legislation given in the Civil Marriage Act.

This would certainly indicate that students are expected to regard as an injustice the limitation of the legal definition of marriage to opposite-sex couples: a definition only recently jettisoned.

Serious questions arise regarding the many concepts that may be inculcated in this course and regarding the attitudes students are expected to adopt when we consider that students are to be expected to “analyze the social justice implications of legislation, public policy, and other forms of government action in Canada with specific reference to . . . ” (and among the legislation included is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the BC Human Rights Code, and the Civil Marriage Act), the.Human Rights Code

Students will also be expected to assess the contributions of particular individuals and groups who are identified with struggles for social justice. What individuals and groups will they be expected to assess the contributions of? After all, those whom some would regard as identified with a struggle for social justice others will regard as working for social injustice. While practically all in our society might regard Wilberforce as an example of someone working for social justice (the abolition of the slave trade and of slavery), others would be much more controversial. For example, pro-abortion supporters would regard Morgentaler as having worked for social justice, but pro-lifers would regard his work as a source of grave injustice.

Since, as we have seen, the prescribed learning outcomes include attitudes, what is to be the fate of the student who does not share the teacher’s attitude toward particular concepts of social justice? Such a student may find his or her achievement is rated low at the end of the course, unless he has changed his attitude under peer or teacher pressure during the year.

Although the Social Justice 12 course as outlined in the approved IRP will deal with many topics worthy of students’ consideration, it is, due to bias and lack of specified direction, a course which allows for the possibility of gross abuse on the part of the teacher who might choose to use it to propagandize for his own particular viewpoint. We have not had the time or resources to examine these learning resources for this course, but the process by which they were added without being open to criticism from the public leads to the possibility that they could, combined with the prejudice of a teacher who acts as a propagandist, result in a course that distorts the whole consideration of social justice in the services of a radical agenda,

¹ Settlement Agreement between Murray Corren and Peter Corren (Complainants) and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Ministry of Education (Respondent). The Agreement was signed on April 8, 2006. A copy can be viewed at
http://www.bcptl.org/corren_settlement_agreement.htm#agreement .

The two men responsible for the creation of a new social justice course for B.C. high school students have filed a human-rights complaint against the Abbotsford school district for its decision not to offer the course this year.

Murray and Peter Corren say the district discriminated against students at W. J. Mouat secondary when it cancelled Social Justice 12 despite more than 90 students wanting to take it. They've asked the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal to intervene.

Social Justice 12, an elective for senior students, was created as a result of a contract the province signed with the Correns in 2006 to end a long-standing human rights complaint that the curriculum discriminated against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students. .

Earlier, Education Minister Shirley Bond said boards have a choice about whether or not to offer elective classes, but Murray Corren said the Abbotsford situation is different because the course was offered and then pulled. "It would have been an entirely different matter if the course had never (been) offered," Murray Corren added. .

[Click here to read the whole of this article on the Vancouver Sun online.]

Gay-friendly high school may open here in 2010

PRIDE CAMPUS | Would provide 'heroes,' seek to combat bullying

A "gay-friendly'' Chicago public high school that will weave gay and lesbian "heroes" -- from James Baldwin to Gertrude Stein -- into its curriculum was among 20 new school proposals unveiled Wednesday

The Pride Campus of Social Justice High School would be open to all students citywide but would provide a safe, "gay-friendly'' atmosphere to combat the high bullying, dropout and depression rate many gay and lesbian students experience nationwide, advocates say

In U.S. history and other classes, "gay and lesbian historical figures'' would be taught so gay youth "have heroes,'' said Bill Greaves, Chicago's liaison on issues affecting the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

"We will teach the history of all people, but we are just going to make sure these people are not invisible in that history,'' said Greaves, part of the Pride Campus design team.
[Click here to read the whole story online.]

"Class surprises lesbian teacher on wedding day"

Jill Tucker, Chronicle Staff Writer

A group of San Francisco first-graders took an unusual field trip to City Hall on Friday to toss rose petals on their just-married lesbian teacher - putting the public school children at the center of a fierce election battle over the fate of same-sex marriage.

The 18 Creative Arts Charter School students took a Muni bus and walked a block at noon to toss rose petals and blow bubbles on their just-married teacher Erin Carder and her wife Kerri McCoy, giggling and squealing as they mobbed their teacher with hugs.

A parent came up with the idea for the field trip - a surprise for the teacher on her wedding day.

"She's such a dedicated teacher," said the school's interim director Liz Jaroslow.

But there was a question of justifying the field trip academically. Jaroflow decided she could.

"It really is what we call a teachable moment," Jaroflow said, noting the historic significance of same-sex marriage and related civil rights issues. "I think I'm well within the parameters."

Nonetheless, the excursion offers Proposition 8 proponents fresh ammunition for their efforts to outlaw gay marriage in California, offering a real-life incident that echoes their recent television and radio ads.

"It's just utterly unreasonable that a public school field trip would be to a same-sex wedding," said Chip White, press secretary for the Yes on 8 campaign. "This is overt indoctrination of children who are too young to have an understanding of its purpose."

The trip illustrates the message promoted by the campaign in recent days, namely that unless Prop. 8 passes on Nov. 4, children will learn about same-sex marriage in school.

"It shows that not only can it happen, but it has already happened," White said.

California Education Code permits school districts to offer comprehensive sex education, but if they do, they have to "teach respect for marriage and committed relationships."

On Friday, McCoy and Carder, both in white, held hands on Newsom's office balcony overlooking the rotunda and recited their vows.

After traditional photos, the two walked out City Hall's main doors where the students were lined up down the steps with bags of pink rose petals and bottles of bubbles hanging from their necks. McCoy, a conferences services coordinator, was in on the surprise and beamed as the children swarmed around Carder.

The two said they have participated in the campaign against Proposition 8 and planned to travel around San Francisco on Friday afternoon in a motorized trolley car with "Just Married" and "Vote No on 8" banners.

"This is one girl I can honestly say deserves happiness, and it came in the form of Kerri," said Carder's friend Dani Starelli.

Creative Arts administrators and parents acknowledged that the field trip might be controversial, but they didn't see the big deal. Same-sex marriage is legal, they noted.

"How many days in school are they going to remember?" asked parent Marc Lipsett. "This is a day they'll definitely remember."

"She's a really nice teacher. She's the best," said 6-year-old Chava Novogrodsky-Godt, wearing a "No on 8" button on her shirt. "I want her to have a good wedding."

The students' parents are planning to make a video with the children describing what marriage is to them.

As is the case with all field trips, parents had to give their permission and could choose to opt out of the trip. Two families did. Those children spent the duration of the 90-minute field trip back at school with another first-grade class, the interim director said.

"As far as I'm concerned, it's not controversial for me," Jaroflow said. "It's certainly an issue I would be willing to put my job on the line for."

"Gay" Sex Kills
"In light of the irrefutable medical facts, it should be considered criminally reckless for educators to teach children that homosexual conduct is a normal, safe and perfectly acceptable alternative form of sexual expression (or 'sexual orientation'). "

Commentary by J. Matt Barber

April 21, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Can you imagine officials at a middle school, junior high or high school setting aside a day to promote "tolerance" for heavy smoking and drinking among children? How about a day where teachers encourage kids to "embrace who they are," pick up that crack pipe and give it a stiff toke?

Neither can I. The public would go ballistic, and for good reason.

But that hasn't stopped officials in thousands of schools across the country from promoting other politically correct and socially "in-vogue" behaviors that - both statistically and manifestly - are every bit as dangerous as the aforementioned frowned-upon behaviors.

That's exactly what the homosexual activist "Day of Silence" is all about - advancing, through clever, feel-good propaganda, full acceptance among children of the homosexual lifestyle.

Just the Facts Ma'am

By recently admitting that "HIV is a gay disease," Matt Foreman, outgoing Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, acknowledged what the medical community has known for decades: the homosexual lifestyle is extremely high-risk and often leads to disease and even death.

In fact, multiple studies have established that homosexual conduct, especially among males, is considerably more hazardous to one's health than a lifetime of chain smoking.

To the consternation of "gay" activist flat-earthers and homosexual AIDS holocaust deniers everywhere, one such study - conducted by pro-"gay" researchers in Canada - was published in the International Journal of Epidemiology (IJE) in 1997. (see the study here: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/26/3/657.pdf )

While the medical consensus is that smoking knocks from two to 10 years off an individual's life expectancy, the IJE study found that homosexual conduct shortens the lifespan of "gays" by an astounding "8 to 20 years" - more than twice that of smoking.

"[U]nder even the most liberal assumptions," concluded the study, "gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871. … [L]ife expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men."

This morose reality makes a strong case for a fitting redefinition of so-called "homophobia," that being "Homophobia: The rational fear that 'gay sex' will kill you!"

The fact that we don't have mandatory surgeon general warnings on the side of condom wrappers is a testament to the power and influence wielded by the radical homosexual lobby. (Warning: Male-male anal sodomy has been proven to shorten your lifespan by up to 20 years.)

Not surprisingly, that same homosexual lobby and its codependent enablers in the mainstream media moved quickly to sweep the IJE study under the rug. Under tremendous pressure, the researchers who conducted the study even jumped into the political damage control fray issuing a statement which read, "[W]e do not condone the use of our research in a manner that restricts the political or human rights of gay and bisexual men or any other group."

Yeah, so?

Of course, that's all just worthless fluff. All the political spin in the world doesn't change reality, nor does it eliminate the study's disturbing conclusions or practical implications. The research left ZERO wiggle room for anyone who would argue that homosexuality is a "perfectly normal and healthy alternative sexual orientation."

The risks associated with homosexual conduct are so drastic, in fact, that U.S. health regulations prohibit men who have sex with men (MSM) and women who have had sex with MSM, from even donating blood.

Consider that, according to the Food and Drug Administration, MSM, "have an HIV prevalence 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first time blood donors and 8,000 times higher than repeat blood donors."

Adults and children who engage in homosexual conduct, especially males, are also susceptible, at an astronomical rate, to nearly all other forms of sexually transmitted disease (STD). For example, the Hepatitis B virus is about five to six times more prevalent among "gays," and Hepatitis C is twice as common.

But perhaps most shocking are today's syphilis rates among homosexual men and adolescents. A recent study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that although homosexuals comprise only a fraction of the population (one to two percent), they account for an epidemic 64 percent of all syphilis cases.

The "Day of Silence"

In light of the irrefutable medical facts, it should be considered criminally reckless for educators to teach children that homosexual conduct is a normal, safe and perfectly acceptable alternative form of sexual expression (or "sexual orientation").

But instead, the "gay" lifestyle is vigorously promoted in our public schools. Sexually confused children who suffer from gender identity disorder and same-sex attractions are told to "embrace who they are," and are encouraged to entertain deviant and dangerous sexual temptations. "But always use a condom!" liberal educators bellow. (Forget that condoms have a perilously high failure rate and are incapable of preventing numerous STDs such as the HPV virus.)

On April 25, 2008, the pro-homosexual indoctrination of your children comes to a boil. Homosexual activists and like-minded liberal educators will be pushing the so-called "Day of Silence" on kids in thousands of schools across the country.

The "Day of Silence" (DOS) is organized by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), one of the most militant and well-funded of the powerful homosexual pressure groups. DOS purports to confront the alleged systematic harassment and bullying of children who self-identify as homosexual, bisexual or "transgender." (For a sampling of the kinds of things GLSEN teaches children, click here: http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=2580&department=CFI&categoryid=papers#fistgate ; Be warned, though. It's pretty graphic.)

To be sure, bullying and harassment should not be tolerated against anyone, anywhere for any reason, and those who engage in such activities should be firmly disciplined. However, DOS has very little to do with "bullying" and has everything to do with propaganda.

During DOS, children and teachers are encouraged to disrupt the school day by refusing to speak, in a show of support to self-described "gay," "lesbian," "bisexual" and "transgender" students. Kids are additionally taught that Biblical truth, which holds that human sexuality is a gift from God shared between husband and wife within the bonds of marriage, is "homophobic," "hateful" and "discriminatory."

Our schools are supposed to be places of learning, not places of political indoctrination. It's the height of impropriety and cynicism for "gay" activists and school officials to use good-hearted but misguided children as pawns in their attempt to further a deceptive, highly controversial and polarizing political agenda.

DOS is pure, unadulterated propaganda and, based on the medical science, amounts to nothing short of educational malpractice. With liberal school officials in tow, these militant homosexual activists are brazenly circumventing and abusing parental authority to further this dangerous political agenda. DOS is also a slap in the face to the many students with traditional moral values.

So, it's time for the "Day of Silence" to finally live up to its name. It's time for these radical adult activists to be silent in our children's schools.

And you can to do something to help.

At DOS-participating schools all over the country, parents are joining with dozens of pro-family organizations, such as Concerned Women for America (CWA), in a "Day of Silence Walkout." They're keeping their kids home from school on DOS as a show of protest. (For more information visit http://www.missionamerica.com ).

Parents and children are also strongly encouraged to participate in the Alliance Defense Fund's non-disruptive "Day of Truth," which will follow DOS on Monday, April 28, 2008. (For more information visit http://www.dayoftruth.org ).

Children are impressionable. Their young minds are fresh clay ready for molding, and these adult homosexual activists know it. Your child's spiritual, emotional and physical well-being belongs in your hands, not in the hands of liberal activists and elitist educators with a deceptive and destructive political agenda.

It's time to shatter the silence with truth.
_________________

Matt Barber is one of the "like-minded men" with Concerned Women for America. He is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law and serves as CWA's policy director for cultural issues.

The following is from "Silencing homophobia",: an article that appeared in "saanichnews.com" (April 22, 2008):
"The silence is spreading.

"Donning colourful masks, pins and armbands, hundreds of secondary students across Greater Victoria kept silent in support of their gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered classmates on Wednesday. . . . .

Reynold’s has a very active gay-straight alliance group, whose members have put up anti-homophobic posters and murals throughout the school.

“Homophobia in our school is still a big deal but it’s not as big a deal as the racism and ablism (against special education students),” said Reynold’s student Marissa Johnston.

“We have same-sex couples who are out and walk around the school holding hands. If anyone said anything... people know not to say anything.”

The Greater Victoria School District was the first in the province to develop a homophobia policy and action plan, five years ago. . . . ."

British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life has received the following news release from the Catholic Civil Rights League, and passes it on for the information of our readers.

Western Contacts
Sean Murphy (BC & Prairies) ccrl-west@shaw.ca Tel: 604-485-9765
Ed De Vita (BC Lower Mainland) edevita@shaw.ca Tel: 604-430-9596

[The following, from the Catholic Civil Rights League, Western Region, summarizes a more comprehensive document available online at the URL given.]

A Critical Review of British Columbia MInistry of Education Guidelines Embodied in the Teachers' Manual
Making Space, Giving Voice

1. Making Space, Giving Voice proposes an ideology that identifies autonomy as the essential characteristic of the human person, teaches that human relationships and social justice depend primarily upon a balance of power, and denies the distinction between authority and power. This ideology is fundamentally flawed. It may account for some human failings, but it cannot comprehend man’s highest aspirations. It provides an unsatisfactory preparation for life in a liberal democracy.

2. The goal of Making Space, Giving Voice is to require students to affirm the moral and social acceptability of any and all sexual lifestyles presented to them. These include not just homosexuality and bisexuality, but "transgenderism" and a kaleidoscopic mix of purported "identities" and "orientations." Ministry of Education policy requires that all be portrayed in a positive light. "Acceptance" is presented as a moral, social and legal obligation imposed by the requirements of social justice. To require this is a direct attack on natural marriage, a fundamental human institution. Moreover, this kind of instruction presumes and even requires the suppression of critical thinking, the estrangement of many children from their parents and cultural and religious communities, and a continuing exploration of sub-cultures and activities beyond the experience of children and even most adults.

3. Making Space, Giving Voice is not part of the official curriculum, but, as a policy document, it establishes norms for state schools. It authorizes the introduction of " non-heterosexual realities" into every subject in the curriculum from Kindergarten to Grade 12, not excluding mathematics, entirely at the behest of the teacher, without consultation with parents, and even over their objections. It may be cited to justify professional persecution of non-conforming teachers and the withdrawal of state funding for non-compliant independent schools.

4. Notions of " diversity," "identity" and "culture" advocated by Making Space, Giving Voice do not withstand critical analysis. It draws false analogies and fails to make important distinctions and omits information relevant to informed decision making. At one point it is seriously mistaken about matters of public record, while at another it requires a polemical interpretation of complex and controversial information. Some sample lesson plans are ideologically driven, tendentious and, occasionally, seem less than honest.

5. The kind of social justice instruction proposed by Making Space, Giving Voice can only be accomplished at the expense of core curriculum subjects, since there is not sufficient time to meet core learning outcomes and also deal adequately with social justice topics and related issues. The imposition of an ideological straitjacket on some subjects, like English and literature, is spiritually and intellectually impoverishing.

6. The approach taken by Making Space, Giving Voice is openly authoritarian and includes elements that are characteristic of education in a totalitarian state: isolation of students from parents, destruction of natural marriage and natural family, and a methodology calculated to destroy the capacity to form and maintain convictions that are not approved by the state.

7. The development of state schools has, incidentally, provided the state or other powerful interests the means to bring their power to bear on fundamental freedoms. The Corren Agreement demonstrates the need to develop defences against the coercive potential of state education. This may require substantial changes to the scope of the powers and responsibilities of the Ministry of Education, as well as other reforms. Ultimately, the preservation of democratic freedoms may require the separation of school and state.

DEERFIELD, Ill., March 6 /Christian Newswire/ -- North Shore Student Advocacy has learned that Deerfield High School, in Deerfield, Illinois, is offering the books "Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes" (Part One & Two) -- laced with graphic sexual content, including gay sex, pervasive expletives, religious denigration and mockery -- in English classes this spring . . . .

"After almost 15 years of school advocacy and reviewing many objectionable books and curricula, I have never seen anything this vulgar and harmful to students," says Lora Sue Hauser, Executive Director of North Shore Student Advocacy. "Parents, taxpayers and concerned citizens must force themselves to read these excerpts, as horrific as they are, so you know what kids are being exposed to. The school justifies this egregious choice because of its themes of hope. Evidently, all great literature with themes of hope have already been exhausted so teachers need to start offering pornography. We say - enough."

North Shore Student Advocacy (NSSA) was made aware of these books last fall when a parent complained. The books were part of required reading until NSSA filed a formal complaint with the school, asking the books to be reviewed and removed. The school decided to remove the books from required reading but continued to offer them in the classroom as an optional title. "Optional Title," according to the principal, means that the student may select the books to study with peers and be guided by the teacher.

Deerfield High School has had a long history of presenting inappropriate curricula to students. Last year, teachers made Freshman students sign a "Confidentiality Agreement" in a class where they were allowing presentations by homosexual and transgendered students.

Court: No Opt-out of Homosexual Indoctrination in Class for Massachusetts Parents
Parents vow to appeal decision all the way to the US Supreme Court

BOSTON, MA, February 2, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A federal appeals court panel has upheld a Massachusetts policy of indoctrinating elementary school students with pro-homosexual attitudes without their parents consent.

The three judge panel ruled that a lower court decision was correct when it denied parents the right to remove their children from such classes, while admitting that the purpose of the literature to which their children were being exposed was to influence children to "tolerate" gay marriage.

"It is a fair inference that the reading of King and King was precisely intended to influence the listening children toward tolerance of gay marriage," the court admits. "That was the point of why that book was chosen and used."

However, in the appeals court's opinion, this doesn't mean the children were being indoctrinated with anything. "Even assuming there is a continuum along which an intent to influence could become an attempt to indoctrinate, however, this case is firmly on the influence-toward-tolerance end. There is no evidence of systemic indoctrination. There is no allegation that Joey was asked to affirm gay marriage. Requiring a student to read a particular book is generally not coercive of free exercise rights."

The book referred to by the panel, "King and King", depicts a "prince" who isn't interested in a princess, but instead is "in love" with the princess' brother. Their "love" is portrayed in a sympathetic manner, and the two "marry" each other. They are shown kissing on the lips at the end of the book, which was read to second graders in 2006 in Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington, Massachusetts.

Two families complained to the school district, which responded that the school district was not obligated to advise families about such matters, and would not allow parents to opt-out. David Parker and other parents with children in the school district responded by filing a federal civil rights lawsuit. After the suit was dismissed by Federal District Judge Mark L. Wolf in early 2007, the parents appealed. Now, the Federal appeals court has rejected their appeal.

However, the families are determined to press on all the way to the Supreme Court, which is the next step in the appeals process. "We are fully committed to go forward," Jeffrey Denner, lead attorney of the Parker legal team, told the pro-family group Mass Resistance. "We will continue to fight on all fronts that we need to."

"This ruling will surely embolden and enable the schools even more on this if it's not fought," said Parker. "There's going to be an accountability, you can count on it."

Denner told Mass Resistance that he is not discouraged, recalling the St. Patrick's Boston Parade case in the 1990s, in which parade organizers sued to vindicate their right to exclude homosexuals from the event. Although local, state, federal circuit court and appeals court judges ruled against them 17 times, they eventually won their case before the Supreme Court, successfully defending the right of Americans to organize themselves according to their convictions.

An object lesson in free speech and democracy

Douglas Todd, Vancouver Sun
[The article from which the following excerpt was taken, though not as a whole sympathetic to the traditional moral view of homosexual behaviour, is nevertheless important for highlighting the attempt to close off critical comment on the subject.]

I have long appreciated Balwant Singh Gill's honesty -- even though it's now landed him in trouble.

As one of the most prominent "moderate" Sikh leaders in Canada, Gill has been interviewed by the mainstream media hundreds of times. He always bravely speaks his mind, even in the face of threats from "fundamentalist" Sikhs.

In late November, I again appreciated Gill's forthrightness when he agreed to be interviewed for The Vancouver Sun's five-page package, "Canada's Changing Moral Landscape," based on an Angus Reid poll. Gill, who says he speaks for 39 Sikh temples, responded frankly when I asked him (and a variety of other Canadians) about hot-button moral issues -- including prostitution, abortion, sex outside marriage, illegal drug use, and, of course, homosexuality.

Kaboom! Gill's comments "unleased a firestorm" within the country's gay and lesbian community, according to a Jan. 2 article in Xtra West, a long-standing homosexual publication.

"I hate homosexuality," Gill told me on the telephone three weeks before the morality package ran. "Most Sikhs believe homosexuality is unnatural and you can't produce kids through it. And, secondarily, no major religion allows it."

I told Gill at the time he was being very blunt. The long-time Sikh spokesman didn't backtrack.

Gill has not been as frank lately. He's "apologized" on CBC radio and, according to Xtra West, has been widely chastised by the ethnic media.

But, mixed in with his regret, Gill has publicly wavered about what he told me. As well, he's been saying he doesn't remember when the interview took place. That vagueness permitted some to claim to the media that Gill made his homosexuality comments three years earlier. Sheesh.

Xtra West has been among those correcting such false statements. But the red herring about the timing of the interview has fuelled the dangerous accusation The Sun went out of its way to target Sikhs as homophobic.

Some suggested The Sun was being "racist" in the way it handled the national morality poll, which indicated immigrants are making the country more morally conservative.

It was important to publish Gill's beliefs because they are real. Such views, which he said are widespread among Sikhs, need to be held up to the light. The usual champions of political correctness called for police to investigate Gill, to charge him with a hate crime. But they would have only been able to make a case if Gill had said, "I hate homosexuals." Which he didn't.

In a free country, we have to live with how some of the 40 per cent of Canadians who find homosexuality morally unacceptable might "hate homosexuality." We can't legislate what people feel. Canadians have the right to hold offensive views about minorities -- so long as they don't actively discriminate against them.

Other Canadians, meanwhile, have the right to tell people with harsh beliefs exactly why they believe they're wrong.

I also reject the accusation from some minority-group activists that The Sun was being racist by highlighting Gill's remarks and citing data suggesting rapid immigration, particularly from Asia, might be causing British Columbians to lose their reputation as laid-back, freedom-loving liberals.

Chicago Board of Ed Sued for Teacher Allegedly Showing 'Brokeback Mountain' in Class

Fox News online, May 13, 2007

A girl and her grandparents have sued the Chicago Board of Education, alleging that a substitute teacher showed the R-rated film "Brokeback Mountain" in class.

The lawsuit claims that Jessica Turner, 12, suffered psychological distress after viewing the movie in her 8th grade class at Ashburn Community Elementary School last year.

The film, which won three Oscars, depicts two cowboys who conceal their homosexual affair.

Turner and her grandparents, Kenneth and LaVerne Richardson, are seeking around $500,000 in damages.

"It is very important to me that my children not be exposed to this," said Kenneth Richardson, Turner's guardian. "The teacher knew she was not supposed to do this."

According to the lawsuit filed Friday in Cook County Circuit Court, the video was shown without permission from the students' parents and guardians.

The lawsuit also names Ashburn Principal Jewel Diaz and a substitute teacher, referred to as "Ms. Buford."

The substitute asked a student to shut the classroom door at the West Side school, saying: "What happens in Ms. Buford's class stays in Ms. Buford's class," according to the lawsuit.

Richardson said his granddaughter was traumatized by the movie and had to undergo psychological treatment and counseling.

In 2005, Richardson complained to school administrators about reading material that he said included curse words.

"This was the last straw," he said. "I feel the lawsuit was necessary because of the warning I had already given them on the literature they were giving out to children to read. I told them it was against our faith."

Messages left over the weekend with CPS officials were not immediately returned.

by Jennifer Mesko, associate editor, CitizenLink e-mail,, May 11, 2007

Nearly a month after the Day of Silence and Day of Truth, controversy continues.

Sophomore Oleg Manzyuk and many of his friends stayed home from San Juan High School on April 18, the Day of Silence. On that day, homosexual students and their supporters wore tape over their mouths in protest.

Two years ago, the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) established the Day of Truth - April 19 this year - to express a Christian perspective. Nearly 7,000 students participated in the third-annual Day of Truth.

But Oleg wasn't in class that day either; he and about a dozen others were suspended by the Citrus Heights, Calif., school for wearing T-shirts with Scripture verses addressing homosexuality. In four California districts, at least 150 students were suspended.

"It was my idea for the shirt," Oleg said. "Some of the gay students wore shirts (with rainbows and mentions of gay sex), and they were not suspended. That's just ridiculous. They're showing their opinion; so can we."

The girl who wore the gay-sex shirt was suspended three days later.

Trent Allen, director of information for the San Juan Unified School District, said any shirt that creates an "atmosphere of intimidation" is not OK. "Students on both sides of the issue who are wearing shirts that do not continue the conversation in an educational manner" are asked to remove the shirts or turn them inside out.

The suspensions on the Day of Truth were expunged, but there were more suspensions in the weeks that followed. Protests outside some schools continued this week.

"We fully support both sides to have a discussion, as long as it doesn't disrupt the educational process," Allen said.

The students opposed to the gay agenda contacted Kevin Snider, chief counsel at the Pacific Justice Institute.

"Our position is that any of the shirts that are out there are lawful to wear," he said. "It doesn't mean they are necessarily seemly, or for ministry purposes. They are engaging in expressive conduct that is legal.

"It would be completely inappropriate for the government to ban speech that speaks to moral issues."

Snider has advised the students to stop wearing the shirts. Instead, the district, parents and lawyers have been meeting to find middle ground.

"Parties can either negotiate a middle ground," he said, "or it would be appropriate to go into the courts. We need to go forward in a logical manner. We need to aggressively either pursue negotiations or go to court."

David French, senior counsel for ADF, said there are two considerations in the T-shirt cases: legal equality and substantial disruption.

"If the school is going to allow one side unfettered free speech on the issue of homosexuality," he said, it has to let the other side speak, too. A high school cannot say speech is creating a "substantial disruption" just because one person is offended, he said.

"Just getting your feelings hurt is not disruptive to the educational process."

Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family Action, agreed.

"While we would encourage students to always use compassionate and respectful message on their T-shirts, the sad thing is, these kids shouldn't be having to deal with homosexual politics in their public schools at all," she said. "If schools are going to insist on allowing adult agendas to be promoted in their hallways and classes, then the least they can do is give equal access and equal respect to religious students' point of view."

The next Day of Silence is just about 340 days away.

"This would all be settled without a Day of Silence," Oleg said. "It's a promotion of homosexuality and the homosexual lifestyle. I don't want that showcased at school."

YouTube Pulls Videos Showing Homosexual Indoctrination of Elementary School Children

By Hilary White

CAMBRIDGE, MA, April 26, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A video has been removed that was posted to the online video service, YouTube, showing teachers using homosexual materials in class to promote the normalization of homosexuality to young children.

The film, “It’s Elementary”, was made in 1996 by Women’s Educational Media, a San Francisco-based group that claims the film “has served as a catalyst for schools all over the world to become more proactive in addressing anti-gay prejudice in the classroom.”

The link to the site on YouTube where the video was, now carries a message saying, “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Women's Educational Media.”

The videos [however] were cached on the website of Mass Resistance, a pro-family lobbying organization.

The video can be viewed at
http://www.massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html

Note by editor of this BC Parents and Teachers for Life website: Since the above was posted, it has been revealed that the original posting on YouTube was done by someone who holds reprehensible views on other matters--views with which wse would not want to be associated. This, however, does not change the fact that the excerpts from "It's Elementary" are ones that parents ought to be familiar with. Actually, the excerpts from the viewing guide to "It's Elementary" published by "Women's Educational Media" contain far more explicit evidence of the propagandist nature of the film.

Examples from the "Synopsis of the Film" in this viewing guide give the flavour of the film, and indicate how it can be used for pro-homosexuality propaganda:

"Lesson #5: Photo Text Exhibit: Love Makes a Family. A principal explains her decision to display the photo exhibit of families with gay members, the controversy that ensued with mixed reactions from parents, and her reasons for going ahead. Children view the exhibit with serious interest; a veteran teacher learns from their response."

"Lesson #8: Volunteer Speakers’ Presentations. Two gay young adults talk about their own lives, then open the session for earnest questions that demonstrate students’ lack of information and their desire to learn about what it means to be gay or lesbian. Speakers clarify that the purpose of their visit is not to discuss their sex lives. Students comment afterward on stereotypes they had believed but now understand aren’t true"

"The Controversy. Angry demonstrators quote the Bible, and the principal asserts the need for tolerance and mutual respect that cuts across religious lines."

AFA Warns Parents to Keep their Children Home from School
on 'Gay Day' of Silence, April 18

The American Family Association (AFA) is alerting parents about a "Day of Silence" - sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) -- to take place in many schools across the country on Wednesday, April 18. The AFA is encouraging parents with children in those schools participating in the "Day of Silence" to keep their students at home on that day. GLSEN says they promote this "Day of Silence" to protest alleged oppression of homosexuals. In 2006, over 4,000 junior highs, high schools, and colleges participated in DOS, according to GLSEN."

Many school district superintendents, principals, and faculty members also endorse, promote or allow DOS -- subjecting traditional students to pro-"gay" activism that violates their religious beliefs and right to a non-politicized education.

"Students in our public schools should not be subjected to indoctrination and pressure from administrators, teachers, students, and especially homosexual activists," says AFA chairman Donald Wildmon. "These school sanctioned activities promote intolerance and bigotry toward any student who holds a Biblical view of the dangerous and unhealthy lifestyle."

According to GLSEN, on last year's Day of Silence, over 500,000 students nationwide were confronted with mute homosexual peers and "allies" wearing stickers and passing out cards, which stated (in part):

"... My deliberate silence echoes that silence, which is caused by harassment, prejudice, and discrimination. I believe that ending the silence is the first step toward fighting these injustices. Think about the voices you are not hearing today. What are you going to do to end the silence?"

For a complete list of the schools planning to participate in DOS, visit http://www.missionamerica.com/agenda.php?articlenum=68.

Connecticut High School Agrees to Allow Day of Truth

The principal of Danbury High School in Connecticut agreed Wednesday to allow a student to promote and participate in the Day of Truth -- but only after receiving a letter from the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF). The school initially had prohibited the student from taking part.

The school has endorsed the pro-gay Day of Silence on April 18, but officials told Rosemary Shakro she could not invite a speaker to a club meeting or post signs concerning the counter-event scheduled for the following day.

The principal called the Day of Truth too "controversial" and also prohibited "anti-homosexual" speech.

Matt Bowman, an attorney for ADF, said the letter to the principal simply explained Shakro's rights so the school could correct its error.

"According to the law, a school cannot allow students to promote one viewpoint and then prohibit promotion of another viewpoint," he said. "School officials also cannot ban speech just because they think it's unpopular or controversial."

"The Day of Truth is an opportunity for Christian students to respectfully present a different viewpoint than students participating in the Day of Silence."

The free Adobe Reader is required to view this document. You can download it here.

Gay Lawmaker Pushes Bill to Muzzle Schools

Legislation would silence any curriculum that reflects adversely on homosexuality.

But parents don't have a right to opt their children out of an inclusive education, regardless of whether or not it collides with their religious or moral values, counters James Chamberlain of the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC.

Just as a classroom teacher won't condone a racist parent for rejecting positive images of people of colour in a book, the same holds true for a parent who presents a homophobic objection, Chamberlain explains. Parents shouldn't have the right to opt out simply because it's a message they don't want their child to hear, he adds.

"It's a message of inclusion and tolerance, and the Supreme Court of Canada was really clear with that in the case Murray Corren, myself, and three other litigants took to the court a few years ago with the Surrey book issue. Sometimes the messages we teach children in school do collide with home values. That's called cognitive dissonance. It's just part of education," Chamberlain says.

By Gudrun Schultz

OTTAWA, Ontario, February 27, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Ontario private schools are coming increasingly under the lens of homosexual activist groups for "homophobic" teaching stemming from the schools' primarily religious foundations, a report in Ottawa's homosexual news media indicated earlier this week.

In an article warning about the increasing trend toward private and religious schools in the province, Ottawa's Capital Xtra objected to religious schools that teach children "only their own values."

The article quotes Tony Lovink, a homosexual . . . teacher . . . , as saying, "All private schools tend to be at least implicitly homophobic. And I would say all religiously formed independent schools are definitely homophobic."

The Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Ontario said they were concerned the provincial ministry of education wasn't "exerting more control" over the curriculum used by private religious schools. Unless a school wants to grant students government-recognized Secondary School Diplomas, Ontario private schools are free to use their preferred curriculum. Even schools that do grant the government diplomas may teach any additional material they choose, so long as the required curriculum is covered.

As well, the CLGRO objected to provincial standards that permit private schools to hire teachers based on the school administration's own qualification requirements.

In October 2006 the Quebec government ordered private Christian schools in the province to begin teaching sex education and Darwinism in compliance with the provincial curriculum, threatening schools with closure if they failed to comply.

Dr. Janet Epp Buckingham, then-director of law and public policy with the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, told LifeSiteNews at the time that parents’ right to educate their children in accordance with their religious beliefs is protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In 1986 the Supreme Court ruled that although an Alberta pastor who was running a school out of the basement of his church did have to license the school, the provincial government had to provide reasonable accommodation for religious belief.

The court ruled that the province must “‘delicately and sensitively weigh the competing interests so as to respect as much as possible the religious convictions as guaranteed by the Charter,’” Dr. Epp Buckingham quoted.

In an ongoing battle over homosexual content in BC public school curriculums, parents are struggling to gain assurance from the school board that they may withdraw their children from pro-homosexual content in the classroom.

Homosexual activists Murray Corren and Peter Corren were granted an unprecedented say over the development of new pro-homosexual content in the provincial curriculum, as part of settlement in a human rights lawsuit against the province's Liberal government in June 2006. The agreement also introduced a policy that would prevent parents from withdrawing their children from the classroom when the material was being taught.

The Catholic Civil Rights League is continuing efforts to ensure all 60 BC school boards acknowledge parents' rights to oversee the education of their children.

See related LifeSiteNews coverage:

Quebec Government Forcing Evangelical Private Schools to Teach Sex Ed, Darwinism
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06102404.html
Gov't Agrees to Mandatory Homosexual Curriculum with No Opt-Out for Students or Parents
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06060101.html
B.C. School Boards Refuse to Assure Parents of Right to Oversee Children’s Education
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07010804.html

[Note by editor of this BCPTL website: In British Columbia, the Education Minister has assured independent schools that they are not subject to the provisions of the Corren Settlement Agreement. They are thus apparently protected for the time being. We cannot, though, precluded possible lawsuits from pro-homosexuality activists that might challenge the protection afforded by independent schools.]

Gay Pressure Threatens Counseling
by Wendy Cloyd, assistant editor, Family News in Focus
[February, 2007]
Task force will review "appropriate therapy practices.”
Politics over Science

Under pressure from homosexual activists, the American Psychological Association (APA) plans to re-examine its policy on therapy for gay men and women seeking change.

At least two homosexual groups--the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute (NGLTF) and PFLAG (Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbian and Gays)—want the APA to get tough on anyone who tries to help gays change.

The groups “came to us and said from their perspective issues related to reparative therapy are still very important issues that affect the well-being of lesbian, gay and bisexual people," Dr. Clinton W. Anderson, director of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual concerns office at the APA, told CitizenLink. "They said, 'We think it would be a good idea if you took another look at it.' "

The APA is inviting nominations for a five-member task force to consider the issue.

Anderson said he isn't sure if there will be a panel member appointed to represent homosexuals who have successfully sought change.

"What we will do is look to see who is nominated," he said. "I believe that there will be a strong concern to have on the task force people with substantive expertise about the population you're talking about -- people who know the scientific and clinical literature very well; people who have both research and clinical understanding."

Dr. Warren Throckmorton, associate professor of psychology and fellow for psychology and public policy at Grove City College, said the APA is responding to pressure, not science.

"The reasons they recommended it was for political reasons, not for scientific reasons," he said. "They didn't refer to new research, or new studies -- they referred to new policy statements from other groups."

The APA already stands against therapies that treat homosexuality as a mental illness, Throckmorton said. If the group yields to demands from PFLAG and NGLTF and comes out against reparative therapy, discontented gays will have fewer options.

"What we're talking about is the right of clients who are unhappy with their feeling (of same-sex attraction)," he said. "Those people have the right to seek therapy to help them live the way they want to live -- the way they value."

Alan Chambers, a former homosexual and president of Exodus International, an ex-gay organization, said reparative therapy isn’t harmful. In fact, he said he's all the better for having gone though it.

“What I found in my life is that I had lasting change, a change in identity and something that I don’t feel tempted to be involved in homosexuality at all,” Chambers told Family News in Focus. “It took probably eight years for me to find freedom from the attractions and the desires that really held me captive for decades. But I believe that I have a heterosexual identity.”

Family News in Focus Correspondent Steve Jordahl contributed to this report.

Gay Student 'Weddings' Anger California Parents

A version of the essay immediately below was refused for publication by the Briltish Columbia Teachedrs' Federation'sTeacher Newsmagazine. So here is the essay that B.C. teachers were not given the opportunity to see.

The Goose, the Gander and the Elephant
Sean Murphy, Director
CCRL Western Region

Introduction
This essay responds to a column by a homosexual activist published in the magazine of the British Columbia Teachers’ Federation.

Writing in Teacher Newsmagazine in the garb of a "guardian of public education," Murray Corren urges his colleagues to assert their "professional autonomy" and "fend off" parents who refuse to allow their children to participate in classes for reasons of conscience or religion. He asks, “Whose worldview should we privilege and whose should we censor? Who should decide what gets taught and what doesn’t?”¹

For an answer to this question, one has only to look at Mr. Corren's private agreement with the provincial Ministry of Education. It awards him and Peter Corren privileged status in the development of public education policy and curriculum.² The agreement was signed secretly, includes a provision for continuing secrecy,³ and was kept secret for over a month after it was signed.⁴ The first part of the agreement is intended to prevent objecting parents from removing their children from Kindergarten to Grade 12 classes when "queer-positive" lessons are taught.⁵

Clearly, it is Mr. Corren’s worldview that is privileged. Those who disagree with it will be censored, and a coterie of ‘professionals’ who share his views will decide what gets taught.

For example, the Ministry of Education called an invitation-only meeting to discuss the proposed grade 12 ‘social justice’ elective with the Correns and others deemed worthy of consultation, like the BCTF and the SPCA.⁶ Representatives of the province’s religious traditions were not invited; groups opposed to the Corren agreement and concerned about curriculum revisions were deliberately excluded. The President of the BC Civil Liberties Association - one of the select invitees - sniffed that such groups “should not be contributing to any dialogue on education reform."⁷

Everyone is equal in public education, it seems, but some are more equal than others.

In the light of all of this, it is tempting, as Mr. Corren parades in his robes of office as a “guardian of public education,” to observe that the emperor has no clothes. But one does not do so. Instead, one humours his claim to the guardian of public education, on the condition that he admits that he shares the office with fellow citizens - including those who disagree with him. But his assumption of guardianship over other people’s children warrants a different response.

The Minister of Education is not the source of parental authority, nor is a teaching degree or professional certification the source of a teacher's authority as it relates to the educational and moral formation of students entrusted to them. Quite the reverse: the authority of the Minister, teachers and administrators with respect to students is delegated to them by parents, a delegation reflected in the traditional statement that teachers act in loco parentis.

Parents do not surrender their authority to the state, to a union, to a profession or to special interest activists when they entrust their children to a public school system. They remain the primary educators of their children, and this primacy is not only in order of time and importance, but in order of authority, regardless of religious affiliation. It cannot be suppressed by the Corren’s private agreement with the government, nor by fiat of the Ministry of Education.

Moreover, citizens do not surrender freedom of conscience, religion, thought and belief as a condition of attending a public school. No direction from the Ministry of Education and no private agreements with special interest activists can relieve teachers, administrators and school districts of their responsibility to accommodate these fundamental freedoms. Were that the case, it would give them the power to override the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a power which has been granted only to parliament and provincial legislatures. There is also the issue of international agreements, to which Canada is a signatory.⁸

Of course, it can be awkward to apply these principles in practice. Mr. Corren asks if the “sensitivities” of one parent should determine what novels are used in a public school classroom. Clearly not: no more than Mr. Corren’s sensitivities should force curriculum revisions on the entire public school system. If sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, his private contract with the government is markedly inconsistent with his scornful rhetoric about the sensitivities and religious beliefs of “a small segment of the parent population.”

Once more, everyone is equal in public education, but some are more equal than others.

Still, the question remains. How should a teacher respond if parents refuse to allow their children to participate in lessons or classes “mandated” by the curriculum?
Mr. Corren urges his colleagues to ”take a stand” and invite the objectors to avail themselves of “other educational options,” ignoring the fact that home-schooling is unrealistic for many families, and other alternatives may be unavailable. This could be remedied by increasing support for charter and independent schools so that parents in such situations would have a real choice, but, in the meantime, his solution remains unsatisfactory.

More to the point, Mr. Corren’s answer - “my-way-or-the-highway” - is a wrong answer that comes of asking the wrong questions. His questions do not lead to an enlightened response to the dilemma posed by profoundly divergent worldviews reflected in the classroom. Rather, one should ask how a state educational system can respect differences among families with diverse moral and religious outlooks while developing broadly acceptable curriculum standards.

That different parents have different moral or religious outlooks does not make it impossible for a state educational system to respect those differences while developing broadly acceptable curriculum standards. If, despite appropriate consultation, the standards are unacceptable to some parents, they can be accommodated by acknowledging their authority to withdraw their children from the objectionable lessons or classes. Alternatively, discussion between the parents concerned and school authorities may yield other acceptable solutions. What Mr. Corren thinks of their solutions is unimportant.

The accommodation of religious and conscientious conviction is not merely possible; it is a legal obligation that binds teachers and school districts to the point of undue hardship. Mr. Corren's call to teachers to "take a stand" against the accommodation of religious beliefs is, arguably, a statement of an intention to discriminate, something forbidden by Section 7(1)a of the BC Human Rights Code. So, for that matter, is the Ministry’s ‘clarified’ Alternative Delivery Policy and the letter from the Deputy Minister of Education quoted by Mr. Corren. Both of these, by the way, are products of his private agreement with the government.⁹ An uninformed reader would be unaware of this, since Teacher Newsmagazine does not follow the practice of professional journals that require disclosure of an author’s ‘competing interests.’

Turning to Mr. Corren’s assertion (backed by the Deputy Minister) that students from objecting families “are not exempted from meeting the prescribed learning outcomes,”it is time to introduce the elephant in the room.

It is almost unheard of for students in Kindergarten to Grade 8 in British Columbia to be "held back" (fail a grade) because they have not met prescribed learning outcomes. Whether or not they meet curriculum standards for reading, writing, mathematics, socials, or any other subject, students pass from one grade to the next until the end of Grade 8. Only in Grade 9 are students required to meet a minimum standard in order to pass a subject, and, even then, a mark of 50% is all that is needed. This may or may not reflect an achievement of half the learning outcomes, but it does indicate that something substantially less than the full complement is acceptable. Further: students in British Columbia are not suspended or expelled from school for failing to do assignments or participate in a class activity.¹⁰

Thus, if a Kindergarten to Grade 8 student does not meet a prescribed outcome related to Mr. Corren’s “queer-positive” curriculum for reasons of conscience or religion, that would not justify holding the student back or imposing other penalties for non-compliance, since that is not done in any other subject. Similarly, there would be no justification for failing or penalizing a Grade 9 to 12 student in similar circumstances who was otherwise meeting the course standard.

To sum up: Mr. Corren’s appeal to his colleagues to refuse to accommodate freedom of conscience, religion, thought, opinion and belief is an invitation to engage in wrongful discrimination that is likely to embroil them in confrontation and even litigation, all in the service of his personal agenda and his private contract with the government. It is inconsistent with respect for authentic pluralism in a liberal democracy, and it is not in the best interests of students, parents or teachers.

1. Corren, Murray, “A censor? Who, me?" ” Teacher Newsmagazine Volume 19, Number 4, January/February 2007 Accessed 2007-01-31.

3. “Subject to any public statement made pursuant to Article 5 of this Agreement, anything said by a participant or any information or documents exchanged during any meetings or discussions covered by this Agreement are confidential, except to the extent to which the parties agree, or may be required by law.” Article 9, The Agreement.

4. "The parties will attempt to negotiate a mutually agreeable public statement about the terms of resolution of the complaints. If such agreement cannot be reached on or before May 31, 2006, the parties may issue their own respective public statements. The parties further agree that they will not publicly discuss the settlement of the complaint, including the terms of settlement, prior to May 31, 2006." Article 5, The Agreement.

5. “Ultimately, the most frequent reason for parents to opt their children out of classes had to do with any discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity and same-sex parents,” Murray Corren said. “We felt it was extremely important for the ministry to delineate exactly where this policy applies and where it doesn’t.” Smith, Charlie, "Correns unfazed by right-wing backlash." Georgia Straight, 9 November, 2006. Accessed 2007-01-29.

"There's no point in us making the curriculum more queer-positive if people can take their kids out." Peter Corren, quoted in Luymes, Glenda, "Hooky touted for anti-gay parents: Trustee claims Education Ministry policy on opting out takes away 'freedom'". The Province, 12 September 12, 2006

6. Steffenhagen, Janet, “Activist wants animal rights taught in B.C. schools: 'Speciesism' is a prejudice too, says humane society.” Vancouver Sun, 25 September, 2006

7. Hasiuk, Mark, “Concerned Parents accuse ministry of discrimination.” The Vancouver Courier, 4 October, 2006

8. “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education thatshould be given their children.” (From Article 26 - United Nations, Universal Declaration on Human Rights – 1948). “The best interests of the child shall be the guiding principle of those responsible for his education and guidance; that responsibility lies in the first place with his parents.”(From the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child, Principle 7)

9. “The Respondent [Ministry of Education] will amend the Policy to state expressly that the Policy applies to Health and Career Education K-7, Health and Career Education 8 and 9, and Planning 10 and not to any other IRPs; and that it applies only to the Health curriculum organizer of each of these three IRPs and to no other curriclum organizers. The Respondent will draft a letter to all public School Board Chairs and school district Superintendents (“Letter”) that will be copied to the BC School Trustees Association, BC School Superintendents Association, BC Principals’ and Vice-Principals’ Association, BC Teachers’ Federation and the BC Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils that will clarify the true nature and limited reach of the Policy. The Respondent will provide the amended draft Policy and the draft letter to the Complainants [the Corrrens] for their review on or before July 15, 2006. The Complainants will provide their comments on the . . . Policy and . . . Letter on or before August 1, 2006. The Respondent will finalize the wording of the Policy and the Letter, and will implement the Policy and send out the Letter, with copies of each to the Complainants, on or before September 15, 2006.” Article 1B, The Agreement.

10. The statement reflects the usual practice. It is contrary to Ministry of Education policy to have students repeat a year before Grade 4. “In Grades 4 to 12, the decision for a student to advance or repeat a grade or course will be made in the best interest of that student by the teachers, parents and the school principal. In making placement decisions, those involved should consider the available research, the age of the student, and the intervention support available.” Ministry of Education, K-12 Education Plan: Placement Accessed 2007-01-03. See also Ministry of Education, K-12 Education Plan: Letter Grades and Symbols Accessed 2007-01-03; Provincial Letter Grades Order Accessed 2007-01-03; BC Ministry of Education, Special Program Branch, Focus on Suspension: A Resource for Schools (1999) Accessed 2007-02-03.

The practice may explain an observation made by Project Literacy in Victoria, BC. Many of their clients report “that they have reached a grade level in school that is significantly higher than their skill set actually reflects.” One young man who had reached Grade 9 or 10 had about a Grade 4 reading level, and he was unable to write in cursive script; he could only print. In its presentation to a legislative committee, Project Literacy cited a study indicating that “about 20% of Canadians have lower literacy skills than their education level might indicate.”
Project Literacy Victoria, Presentation to the Select Standing Committee on Education, Victoria, BC (26 April, 2006) Accessed 2007-02-07.

This 'right' for gays is an injustice to children

By Roger Scruton
From Telegraph.co.uk, updated 28/01/2007]

Western societies have, in recent decades, undergone a radical change in their attitudes to homosexuality. What was once regarded as an intolerable vice is now regarded as an "orientation", no different in kind, though different in direction, from the inclinations that lead men to unite with women, and children to be born. This radical change began with the decriminalisation of homosexual conduct, and with a growing readiness not just to tolerate homosexuality in private, but to talk about it in public. We saw the emergence of the "public homosexual", the flamboyant propagandist for that "other" way of life who, like Quentin Crisp, tried to persuade us that "gay" is after all the right description. There followed the movement for "gay pride" and the "coming out" of public figures —to the point where it is no longer very interesting to know whether someone is or is not of the other persuasion.

For the most part, the people of this country have gone along with the changes. They may not be comfortable with its more demonstrative expressions, but they are prepared to tolerate the homosexual way of life, provided it keeps within the bounds of decency, and does no violence to fundamental norms. However, this attitude does not satisfy the activists. For to tolerate is to disapprove. It is only when conduct offends you that you need to exercise your toleration, and the activists want people to treat homosexuality as normal. Through the slippery notions of discrimination and human rights, they have used the law to advance their agenda. Homosexuality is now treated by the law as a tendency comparable in almost every way to heterosexuality, so that any attempt to distinguish between people on grounds of their "orientation" — whether as applicants for a job, or as recipients of a privilege — is regarded as unjust "discrimination", comparable in its moral heinousness to discrimination on grounds of race or sex.

On the whole we have accepted that laws against discrimination might be needed, in order to protect those who have suffered in the past from hostile prejudice. Every now and then, however, we wake up to the fact that, although homosexuality has been normalised, it is not normal. Our acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle, of same-sex couples, and of the gay scene has not eliminated our sense that these are alternatives to something, and that it is the other thing that is normal. This other thing is not heterosexual desire, conceived as an "orientation". It is heterosexual union: the joining of man and woman, in an act which leads in the natural course of things not just to mutual commitment but to the bearing of children, the raising of a family and the self-sacrificing habits on which, when all is said and done, the future of society depends. The propaganda that has tried to rewrite heterosexuality as an "orientation" is really an attempt to persuade us to overlook the real truth about sexual union, which is that it is, in its normal form, the way in which one generation gives way to the next.

This truth is recognised by all the great religions, and is endorsed in the Christian view of marriage as a union created by God. This explains, to a great extent, the reluctance of religious people to endorse gay marriage, which they see as an attempt to rewrite in merely human terms the eternal contract of society. To put it in another way, they see gay marriage as the desecration of a sacrament. Hence the growing conflict between the gay agenda and traditional religion, of which the current dispute over "adoption rights" is the latest sign. According to the Christian perspective — and it is one that is shared, I believe, by Muslims and Jews – adoption means receiving a child as a member of the family, as one to whom you are committed in the way that a father and mother are committed to children of their own. It is an act of sacrifice, performed for the benefit of the child, and with a view to providing that child with the normal comforts of home. Its purpose is not to gratify the parents, but to foster the child, by making him part of a family. For religious people that means providing the child with a father and a mother. Anything else would be an injustice to the child and an abuse of his innocence. Hence there are no such things as "adoption rights". Adoption is the assumption of a duty, and the only rights involved are the rights of the child.

Against that argument the appeal to "anti-discrimination" laws is surely irrelevant. The purpose of adoption is not to gratify the foster parents but to help the child. And since, on the religious view, the only help that can be offered is the provision of a real family, it is no more an act of discrimination to exclude gay couples than it is to exclude incestuous liaisons or communes of promiscuous "swingers". Indeed, the implication that adoption is entirely a matter of the "rights" of the prospective parents shows the moral inversion that is infecting modern society. Instead of regarding the family as the present generation's way of sacrificing itself for the next, we are being asked to create families in which the next generation is sacrificed for the pleasure of the present one. We are being asked to overlook all that we know about the fragility of homosexual partnerships, about the psychological needs of children, and about the norms that still prevail in our schools and communities, for the sake of an ideological fantasy. . . . . [Click here to read the whole article.]

• Roger Scruton is a writer and philosopher. His website is www.roger-scruton.com

Schools that fail to show enthusiasm in rooting out prejudice against homosexuals should be reported to the police by pupils and parents, a Home Office report recommended yesterday.

It called for parents and children to identify schools that ignore "homophobic" language in the playground and teachers who produce "homophobic" lessons.

And it called for head teachers to bring lessons about "homophobia" on to school timetables and to involve their pupils in gay "awareness weeks".

The advice from Home Secretary John Reid's officials comes at a time of deep concern among churches that new gay rights laws due next spring will bar traditional teaching on sexual morality in schools and force them instead to include gay rights dogma in lessons. [Click here to read the whole article on "thisislondon.co.uk" .]

Egale Leader Looks for Classroom Victories

Egale Canada is a lobbying group for “gay,” lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered activists.

Kaj Hasselriis, formerly of Canadians For Equal Marriage, interim executive director of Egale, recently made this significant statement:.

"I think that Egale has been very associated in the public with legal issues, and it will continue to be — and there have been good reasons for that association because of the victories we've had in this country and at the Supreme Court level and at Parliament Hill. But there are all sorts of other victories that won't come in the courtroom, they'll come in, let's say, the classroom. It's important for us to look at how we will make the next gains for [queer] equality in Canada." [quoted in: “Long struggle back for Egale,” by Marcus McCann, Capital Xtra, Thursday, December 21, 2006.”]

Schools Withhold Sad Facts About Homosexual Lifestyle
By Rick Fitzgibbons

Teachers are being irresponsible when they teach that homosexuality is a healthy lifestyle.

Tuesday, 24 October 2006 - When parents in the Philadelphia School District received an official calendar recently marking October as Gay and Lesbian History Month, they were confronted with a trend that is gathering momentum in many countries. In Victoria, Australia, family groups are up in arms over instructions to celebrate homosexuality in the classroom to counteract "homophobic bullying". Something similar is happening in England, where new sexual orientation laws may force primary school teachers to make books such as Hello Sailor and Daddy's Roommate available in class.
     Challenges to these moves are occurring in forums ranging from school board meetings to the courts, but parents are losing ground. And yet, says a psychiatrist who specialises in this field, the health and even the lives of their children may be at stake. In this interview with MercatorNet, Richard P. Fitzgibbons MD explains why -- and what can really help children vulnerable to same-sex attraction.

* * * * *

MercatorNet: Any health intervention these days requires informed consent. Does this apply to the promotion of homosexuality in schools?

Rick Fitzgibbons: It's a matter of great concern that educators are presenting homosexuality and same sex attraction to young people as a healthy lifestyle when the medical literature shows it is not. Numerous studies show an inability to maintain a commitment, rampant promiscuity and resultant serious depressive illness. In his book, The Sexual Organisation of the City, E. Laumann reported that among homosexuals in five urban areas the average length of a relationship was six months. M. Xiridou in 2003 reported that a long-term relationship among those he studied was 18 months, and overall they had an average of 18 to 26 partners per year. Consequently, due to AIDS and other diseases sexually active homosexual and bisexual males can lose up to 20 years of life expectancy.
     The inability to maintain commitment and promiscuity contribute to sadness, anger and mistrust leading to hopelessness and suicidal ideation. Many studies also demonstrate that these conflicts lead to a high prevalence of abuse in same sex relationships which is not communicated to students. In 1999 three very well-designed studies were published in the Archives of General Psychiatry -- one from New Zealand, one from the Netherlands and one on twins. These showed there is a much greater prevalence of psychiatric disorders among homosexual population -- more than six times the general risk of suicide among young adults.
     Dr John Diggs has assembled overwhelming medical evidence on the serious health risks of the lifestyle in his article, "The Risks of Gay Sex". And yet young people are not being informed about this. They are being denied the truth. Instead, they are told being homosexual is as normal as the heterosexual lifestyle. It really seems that educators are teaching bad science and that political correctness is trumping science here.
     Now, it's not clear whether teachers are bound by informed consent principles legally, but school psychologists certainly are. I would say the schools, particularly school psychologists, are very vulnerable to litigation if they don't inform young people, as well as principals and school superintendents, about the serious health risks associated with the homosexual lifestyle. Some people are working to warn national organisations of school psychologists of their liability if they fail to provide informed consent to students. . . . .

MercatorNet: Is there a problem with a young person's identifying as gay or lesbian while still in high school? Can same-sex attraction be a phase or a fad at this age?

Dr Fitzgibbons: Yes, there is a fair amount of research showing that same-sex attraction (SSA) is not something that is locked in at a certain stage, but it can be fluid and actually change over the course of a person's life. But young people are being told by educators, the media and health professionals that SSA is genetic so they will be that way for the rest of their lives. In fact, there is no proof that it's genetic. If it were, then all identical twins should be completely concordant for homosexuality, and no study has shown more than 50 per cent concordance. Last year the first genome scan of male sexual orientation was published in Human Genetics (No. 116) and the conclusion was there is no genetic basis.
     The thing that troubles me greatly is that in asking young people to embrace a particular identity at an early age they're denying that child the right to self-knowledge. It's easier to think, "Oh, I have same sex attractions," rather than, "I was deeply lonely for a male friend when I was growing up," or, "I was too afraid to trust men, to trust my father."
     Another issue is the danger of entering a relationship where you use another human being as a sexual object. A utilitarian sexual philosophy permeates the homosexual lifestyle, as evidenced by numerous studies which document a high level of promiscuity, and it can be very traumatic for a young person to be repeatedly used sexually by another person. Ultimately this trauma can lead to severe depressive illness and even suicidal ideation and excessive anger with abuse of others in the lifestyle.

MercatorNet: One reads various claims about the prevalence of homosexuality in the population. A Philadelphia group said 5 to 6 per cent. What does the research show?

Dr Fitzgibbons: Numerous international studies put it at 1-3 per cent. In a study of 5,898 adults in the Netherlands by T. Sandfort only 2.1 identified themselves as homosexual. Among 15,705 adults with a median age of 35, B. Cochran found less than one per cent were homosexual: 0.99 per cent of males and 0.75 of females. . . . .

MercatorNet: Even in adult life can one's sexual attraction can be changed successfully?

Dr Fitzgibbons: Yes it can. The major evidence here is Robert Spitzer's study published in the Archives of Sexual Behaviour, October 2004. This is very significant because Spitzer led the taskforce which removed homosexuality from the diagnostic manual of psychiatry in 1973. Thirty years later he was going to a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in Washington where there was an attempt to pass a resolution that no one should be allowed to treat patients with unwanted SSA. Outside there were people who had overcome their same sex attractions who were picketing and he walked over and talked to them. They said, "Study us." Spitzer, a professor at Columbia University, said, "All right, I'll study you." Among 200 men and women out of the lifestyle at least five years, he found 61 per cent of the males and 44 per cent of the females met criteria for good heterosexual functioning. His conclusion was that people have the right to pursue their heterosexual potential.
     My own clinical experience is this. If there's significant self-knowledge, forgiveness of offenders in one's life and a spiritual component to the treatment, as there is in the treatment of compulsive behaviours in substance abuse disorders -- in Alcoholics Anonymous, for example -- we find the emotional pain that causes the SSA can be healed. A person thinks he is powerless over his emotional pain and compulsive behaviours, turns them over to God and begins to practice meditation -- which is also used now in the treatment of hypertension and coronary artery disease -- for 15 minutes twice daily, with the help of a spiritual director.
     It's a process in which the adolescent or college student works at understanding those who have hurt or rejected him, and works at forgiving them. Then, as well, if they can grow in the sense that God is a loving Father and Christ is their friend and brother, the inner emptiness can be filled, the loneliness healed and the confidence strengthened. No longer does the person feel angry with his father or peers for not building or for damaging male confidence. Instead, he appreciates that his male gifts and identity are special, God-given and meant for a particular mission in life.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons is a psychiatrist and Director of Comprehensive Counselling Services in W. Conshohocken, Pennsylvania and was a major contributor to Homosexuality and Hope, published by the Catholic Medical Association of the United States.

[Click here to read the whole article of which the above selection is an abridgement.l

Comment from Mission America on the article immediately below: “Note that part of the settlement includes an ‘anti-bullying’ program, which will no doubt teach all students to accept homosexuality.”
"Long Battle Over Gay Club In Georgia School Nears End”

[From the pro-homosexuality website “365Gay.com” 12/23/2006]

(Cleveland, Georgia) A battle over the formation of a Gay Straight Alliance at White County High School that has raged on for nearly two years is almost over with a reported agreement in principle that the school district will implement an anti-bully program and pay about $170,000 in legal fees to the American Civil Liberties Union. Both sides must still sign off on the agreement and it must be approved [by] the judge.

In July a federal judge ruled that the high school must allow students in the gay-straight alliance club to meet on campus. U-S District Court Judge William C. O'Kelley said that the school cannot deny the GSA, called P.R.I.D.E., equal access or a fair opportunity to conduct meetings on school premises during noninstructional time.
O'Kelley said that school officials had violated the Federal Equal Access Act by barring the group from meeting on campus, while allowing other non-curricular clubs to do so. His ruling also said that the school cannot discriminate against student groups on the basis of the religious, political, philosophical or other content of their speech.

In February 2005 students were told they would be allowed to organize thne Gay-Straight Alliance, which later became Peers Rising In Diversity Education, P.R.I.D.E.. About two weeks later about 250 angry parents attended a White County school board meeting to protest the club and the board decided to ban all non-academic clubs.
The move staved off a threatened suit by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the students, but when some of the non-academic clubs began holding meetings on school property and have their meetings promoted during morning announcements the ACLU filed a federal discrimination suit.

Judge Kelly's ruling settled part of the lawsuit with charges the school district had turned a blind eye to widespread systemic bullying of LGBT students to be resolved. The agreement reached this week between the district and the ACLU ends that phase of the dispute.

While neither side will comment officially on the terms of the settlement until it is signed sources close to the district tell the White County News Telegraph that it provides for payment of the ACLU legal fees estimated at $168,000, $10,000 to the student plaintiffs, and implementation of the anti-bully program.

Radical Homosexual Groups Approved by UN
with Bush [Administration] Support

"Life Views"
British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life Website

Exposing and Opposing the Pro-Homosexuality Agenda

US Administration Launches All-Out International Homosexual “Rights” Offensive

Williams Lake school district restricts anti-homophobia events

"Queer posters demand respect"

Cornelia Naylor/TIMES

"Let boys be girls." "It's OK to question." "You don't have to accept it, just respect it."

Cornelia Naylor, The Chilliwack Times

Excerpts from the 2010 Physical Education and Health curriculum document for teachers:

Day of Silence, Day of Truth Make Bid to Influence the Nation's Youth [in the U.S.A.]

Social justice dispute heads for full hearing

President Obama Plans to Increase Controversial “Safe Schools Czar’s” Budget

Parents face prosecution over 'gay' education class protest

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done to Massachusetts

President Obama Speaks at Gay-Activist Event

Firestorm Erupts over Obama's Education Appointee

A "Safe" Place for Kids to Learn Homosexual Sex

Federal Bill Would Add Pro-Gay Policies to Public Schools

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality;
San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site

"Parent Rights"

Religion and Cultural Objections

Sexuality

Age Appropriateness

Gay couple files human-rights complaint against school board

Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun

Gay-friendly high school may open here in 2010

PRIDE CAMPUS | Would provide 'heroes,' seek to combat bullying

An object lesson in free speech and democracy

Douglas Todd, Vancouver Sun
[The article from which the following excerpt was taken, though not as a whole sympathetic to the traditional moral view of homosexual behaviour, is nevertheless important for highlighting the attempt to close off critical comment on the subject.]

Texas Psychiatrist Questions
Sex Reassignment Surgery

PRESS RELEASE

American Psychological Association
Appoints Gay Activists to Monitor
Reorientation Therapy

Connecticut High School Agrees to Allow Day of Truth

Gay Lawmaker Pushes Bill to Muzzle Schools

Gay Student 'Weddings' Anger California Parents

This 'right' for gays is an injustice to children

"Life Views" British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life Website

Exposing and Opposing the Pro-Homosexuality Agenda

US Administration Launches All-Out International Homosexual “Rights” Offensive

Williams Lake school district restricts anti-homophobia events

"Queer posters demand respect"

Cornelia Naylor/TIMES

"Let boys be girls." "It's OK to question." "You don't have to accept it, just respect it."

Cornelia Naylor, The Chilliwack Times

Excerpts from the 2010 Physical Education and Health curriculum document for teachers:

Day of Silence, Day of Truth Make Bid to Influence the Nation's Youth [in the U.S.A.]

Social justice dispute heads for full hearing

President Obama Plans to Increase Controversial “Safe Schools Czar’s” Budget

Parents face prosecution over 'gay' education class protest

What Same-Sex "Marriage" Has Done to Massachusetts

President Obama Speaks at Gay-Activist Event

Firestorm Erupts over Obama's Education Appointee

A "Safe" Place for Kids to Learn Homosexual Sex

Federal Bill Would Add Pro-Gay Policies to Public Schools

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality; San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site

"Parent Rights"

Religion and Cultural Objections

Sexuality

Age Appropriateness

Gay couple files human-rights complaint against school board

Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun

Gay-friendly high school may open here in 2010

PRIDE CAMPUS | Would provide 'heroes,' seek to combat bullying

An object lesson in free speech and democracy

Douglas Todd, Vancouver Sun [The article from which the following excerpt was taken, though not as a whole sympathetic to the traditional moral view of homosexual behaviour, is nevertheless important for highlighting the attempt to close off critical comment on the subject.]

Texas Psychiatrist Questions Sex Reassignment Surgery

PRESS RELEASE

American Psychological Association Appoints Gay Activists to Monitor Reorientation Therapy

Connecticut High School Agrees to Allow Day of Truth

Gay Lawmaker Pushes Bill to Muzzle Schools

Gay Student 'Weddings' Anger California Parents

This 'right' for gays is an injustice to children

"Life Views"
British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life Website

U.K. Teaches 11-Year-Olds about Homosexuality;
San Francisco Schools Launch Pro-Gay Web Site

Douglas Todd, Vancouver Sun
[The article from which the following excerpt was taken, though not as a whole sympathetic to the traditional moral view of homosexual behaviour, is nevertheless important for highlighting the attempt to close off critical comment on the subject.]

Texas Psychiatrist Questions
Sex Reassignment Surgery

American Psychological Association
Appoints Gay Activists to Monitor
Reorientation Therapy