No opting out of pro-gay school propaganda

[Nathair/|\]

If your child attends school in Vallejo, California, he will watch pro-gay propaganda videos whether you like it or not.

Forced by the ACLU to provide "mandatory diversity training" to students and faculty, the Vallejo Unified School District isnow showingall students "anti-bullying" films produced by a homosexuality affirming San Francisco group called GroundSpark. Among other topics, the films discuss same-sex relationships.

Read more:No opting out of pro-gay school propagandahttp://www.wnd.com/?pageId=235989#ixzz1G46Kk7Pz

[MorningStar]

Did the curriculum come from the organization called GLSEN?

[frankenstein]

there is an opt-out, its called "Tell you son/daughter to walk out of school, then sue the school/district when your son/daughter is suspended" While I can understand a District making an agreement for its staff, I see no reason why a school district can enter a legal settlement which forces students to do something.

another option is to wear "Be Happy, Not Gay" t-shirts, which the 7th Circuit has said is protected speech.

from the 7th Cir.

[A] school that permits advocacy of the rights of homosexual students cannot be allowed to stifle criticism of homosexuality. The school argued (and still argues) that banning

[TAO]

there is an opt-out, its called "Tell you son/daughter to walk out of school, then sue the school/district when your son/daughter is suspended" While I can understand a District making an agreement for its staff, I see no reason why a school district can enter a legal settlement which forces students to do something.

I really hope it doesn't move to my school district... else I'll be forced to do this =/.

[CQUIRK]

That's the Bay Area for you.

This doesn't surprise me at all one bit; in fact I'm surprised that it didn't happen sooner.

Thank God I moved out of California.

[Blossom]

This is going to sound terribly harsh, and it is. Years ago when my daughter was a student at a university (no names), a gay group pushed "diversity training" on the school. This was supposed to be mandatory but my girl claimed a religious aversion to this type of "training" and got out of it without any problems.

Sorry, we were Baptists at the time.

But that gay group was quite bothersome, even demonstrating and carrying signs around the student union there. My daughter was quite annoyed by the whole thing.

Gays need to get out of the schools and take whatever their stupid issues are to the courts and the government and any other body who will listen to them.

Personally, I have no use for the whole mess. I have one bedroom to focus on: mine. That is all there is to it.

Blessings,

Blossom

[USU78]

We moved from grossly dysfunctional Vallejo in 1960, hard upon several major race riots in high schools from Crocket on the West to Berkeley on the East, two of which nearly took my father's life. I learned to despise the place while being roughed up on the play grounds of Cooper School on account of my blond hair, blue eyes and Mormonosity.

And I'd rather go back to those miserable days and go through it all again rather than see the children of Vallejo be sexually exploited in this fashion.

[Jeff K.]

It was in the agenda of GLAD since last year. They even had a website up showing how they would force schools and parents to do this. I even brought it up here, and of course it was dismissed by the usual suspects. Wonder if they'll acknowledge their error as to the agenda now? Or admit to their own dishonesty on the subject matter?

[LDSToronto]

another option is to wear "Be Happy, Not Gay" t-shirts, which the 7th Circuit has said is protected speech.

[A] school that permits advocacy of the rights of homosexual students cannot be allowed to stifle criticism of homosexuality. The school argued (and still argues) that banning

[USU78]

It was in the agenda of GLAD since last year. They even had a website up showing how they would force schools and parents to do this. I even brought it up here, and of course it was dismissed by the usual suspects. Wonder if they'll acknowledge their error as to the agenda now? Or admit to their own dishonesty on the subject matter?

Good luck with that, Jefe

[Jaybear]

Imagine that a school district teaching students not to engage in bullying.

Shocking.

But look at the bright side. You can use this as a teaching moment to remind children that the homos are trying to take over the world and need to stopped.

[Jeff K.]

Imagine that a school district teaching students not to engage in bullying.

Shocking.

But look at the bright side. You can use this as a teaching moment to remind children that the homos are trying to take over the world and need to stopped.

Imagine a school district teachings kids to embrace gay sex.

(edit: I have seen the lesson plans, it does advocate for gay sex with a "try it to know for sure" message)

Look on the bright side. This is a teachable moment. They can learn to follow society and the world and disregard the commandments.

[Jaybear]

Imagine a school district teachings kids to embrace gay sex.

(edit: I have seen the lesson plans, it does advocate for gay sex with a "try it to know for sure" message)

CFR. I have seen you "summarize" or "restate" my words far too many times to take you at face value.

[frankenstein]

Good God, is this *really* how the LDS church teaches you to behave?

H.

can you elaborate please? I do not understand what you mean?

[blueadept]

That's the Bay Area for you.

This doesn't surprise me at all one bit; in fact I'm surprised that it didn't happen sooner.

Thank God I moved out of California.

I'm not surprised either...

The gay agenda is what forced the Catholic Diocese of San Francisco to close all of its adoption agencies years ago.

I'm actually thankful that LDS adoption agencies won't have to follow that same course of action in the Bay Area.

[mercyngrace]

Homeschool.

The ultimate opt-out.

[LDSToronto]

Imagine a school district teachings kids to embrace gay sex.

(edit: I have seen the lesson plans, it does advocate for gay sex with a "try it to know for sure" message)

Look on the bright side. This is a teachable moment. They can learn to follow society and the world and disregard the commandments.

First, I want to see *exactly* what the lesson plan says. C F R.

And second - you do know that your kids will "try it" if they desire it, right? Not much you can do about that. Sure, you can heap religious guilt on them, which will only damage them and force them away from you. But, ultimately, you can't determine their sexuality for them.

My kids' schools are designated 'safe places' for LGBT kids - kids can escape judgment and abuse by approaching any teacher or administrator, and the school board has an active anti-discrimination/anti-abuse/anti-hate campaign to educate kids and parents.

I think you've characterized the program fairly - it teaches kids to embrace homosexuality as a normal behaviour and to accept those that are homosexual. Thank goodness, because, by the reaction of some on this board, it is needed.

H.

[LDSToronto]

can you elaborate please? I do not understand what you mean?

You said:

"a school that permits advocacy of the rights of homosexual students cannot be allowed to stifle criticism of homosexuality. The school argued (and still argues) that banning

[krose]

First, I want to see *exactly* what the lesson plan says. C F R.

Count me in as well.

I mean... seriously. World Net Daily?

[Jeff K.]

CFR. I have seen you "summarize" or "restate" my words far too many times to take you at face value.

I can't they recently took the lesson plan off the website. My fault really, when I commented in a GLAAD website that I found it to be reprehensible stating that you should be gay before you decide whether its god or not. They removed it. But did not change their tactics.

[frankenstein]

You said:

"a school that permits advocacy of the rights of homosexual students cannot be allowed to stifle criticism of homosexuality. The school argued (and still argues) that banning

[Jeff K.]

GLAAD website is not world net daily. Just because people who don't like the church can't handle the criticism doesn't mean much. Generally the group has been somewhat shallow in its attacks on the church, criticizing for anything and praising nothing. It pretty much tells us what they are like and how basically disengenuous they are in their arguments.

[Jeff K.]

I do not support bullying or discrimination, I support the free expression within the confines of the Law.

They don't teach that in Canada. You aren't allowed to play certain Dire Straits songs because they are hate speech you know.

Free speech is of a somewhat secondary nature in that nation.

[krose]

In the United States, free speech, means, free speech, US Citizens can say just about anything without recourse, so long as it is not fighting words; defamatory..., or words that could cause immediate panic i.e. yelling "fire" in a crowded building when the is no fire.

Or it is considered by some to be "obscene."

[LDSToronto]

LDSToronto, a person wears a "Be Gay, and Proud" t-shirt, another person wears "Be Happy, Not Gay". who is discriminating against who?

I do not support bullying or discrimination, I support the free expression within the confines of the Law.

I think the point that is being missed is that this is not a freedom of expression issue. Of course it's a legal issue whether one can wear a shirt with either slogan. I happen to interpret one of the slogans as an expression of pride and solidarity amongst a class of people, and the other to be an expression of intolerance of a class of people.

The point is, regardless of freedom of expression and First Amendment rights, it is not morally right to wear a shirt that signals intolerance of gay people. Simply put, I don't believe that the motivation to wear such a shirt would be in harmony with the values the LDS church and the values Jesus teaches.

H.