Sweeping powers go to Kevin Jennings and Kathleen Sebelius?
Talking Points
“School Non-Discrimination Act of 2010,” HR 4530
An Assault on Genuine Child Safety and Common Sense Morality
Sweeping “gay rights” powers over local schools to be given to federal bureaucrats like Kevin Jennings and Kathleen Sebelius
Why be concerned about a new bill in Congress, H. R. 4530? Because it is an attempt to install a massive, federal homosexual agenda in schools.
1. H. R. 4530, introduced by Democratic Colorado congressman Jared Polis, with 65 co-sponsors, proposes “to provide a comprehensive Federal prohibition of discrimination in public schools based on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.” Harassment or violence against public school students over alternate lifestyles is the excuse for this broad proposal. Yet such violence is not the widespread problem being claimed in this bill. Hard data continues to be missing. Where it does occur, incidents can be dealt with effectively under existing school policies, or if needed, local and state criminal laws. The goal should be protecting all students for all reasons, not just those involved in certain special-status behaviors.
The purpose of this bill is not what is being stated, but is quite simply to mandate in public schools one acceptable viewpoint on the issue of homosexuality, using purported violence or harassment as the rationale, and the power of the feds as the hammer. The goal is to silence those who may warn about or object to student expression of homosexuality or gender confusion. Such warnings might literally save a child’s life.
2. Federal governmental intrusion and sweeping new unregulated powers in what are local and state matters are proposed in this bill. Enforcement will primarily be through federal agencies, which will craft new regulations to back up this bill’s provisions with the President’s approval. Can you spell “czar”?
Founder of the radical homosexual group GLSEN, Kevin Jennings, as head of the “Safe and Drug Free Schools" office at the Department of Education, and secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius (a supporter of “gay” rights when she was governor of Kansas), can create pro-homosexual programs and policies to their hearts’ delight if this bill passes. If a school receives federal funds from one of these agencies or any other, it is subject to the new rules that agency devises to conform to this bill. And states can be held liable for violations, so state governments will have incentive to put pressure for compliance on local schools.
It doesn’t get much more fascist than this! It’s a sexual revolutionary’s dream.
Disputes will be turned over to congressional committees for investigation, and what can local citizens do? Bring a lawsuit. Redress is primarily through the courts.
3. The phony concept of “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered” identity is the shaky foundation of this bill.Are certain kids different types of humans ? No. There is no science to back up the existence of a “gay gene” or anything like it, and it is very harmful to label and stereotype young people with questionable lifestyles and high-risk behaviors. People are never locked biologically into the chosen behaviors of homosexuality or gender change, which are as inappropriate for children as they are for adults. To fix the identity of a harmful practice on a child severely compromises the child’s future, is emotionally and psychologically damaging, and amounts to a form of child endangerment.
4. One claim is that students are “deprived of equal educational opportunities,” and experience high absentee and drop-out rates and other self-destructive behaviors when they identify with homosexuality or cross-gender expression. Where’s the inequality in education, unless self-imposed? And where incidents of self-harm are foreseen, is the solution to lie to kids about these lifestyles? No—- we must not toss aside facts and common sense. The solution is to tell kids the truth about the long-term risks and realities, and then offer counseling involving parents. Why would an 11- year- old girl insist she’s a lesbian? Shouldn’t this send up red flags, if we really care about her future? Such false and risky inclinations should not be “empowered” but consistently discouraged. Students should be steered away from these practices, not toward them.
5. There is no constitutional right to homosexual behavior or cross-dressing as stated in this bill. Some see a “right to privacy” in the Constitution, which is not one of its amendments. But even that wouldn’t cover what’s being proposed. This bill is an attempt at installing a very public declaration and public affirmation of verifiably high risk practices and, if engaged in at all, private matters. If the ACLU tries to invent such a constitutional right, wiser heads should work against such a move to protect children.
“Equal protection” under the 14th Amendment also does not apply. All students have equal protection now, just not for highly questionable behavior. Would students who are obese have the right to proclaim this a “right” under “equal protection” so that any school nutrition programs would then become “discrimination”? These are behaviors, not simply viewpoints. Homosexuality and cross-dressing are not intrinsic to a certain subset of humans and are totally dissimilar to something fixed, like race.
6. Federal civil rights statutes have correctly declined to cover the advocacy-devised terms of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” since these are changeable and morally-debatable behaviors. Americans should continue to prevent activists from installing these false classifications.
7. The proposed “safe environment” in schools “free from discrimination” over “sexual orientation” or “gender identity,” is an attempt to establish objection-free speech codes regarding immoral and child-unfriendly lifestyles and behaviors. Free speech, religious beliefs, and even valid health education are all gravely threatened by this bill.
8. Prohibiting discrimination based on “perceived sexual orientation” or “perceived gender identity” is also a feature of this bill. This can only be described as a massive intrusion on freedom of conscience, speech and religion. In practice, it would be the “thought police” on steroids.
9. “Verbal” incidents are considered “harassment” under this bill. What happens to the rights of students, teachers, parents and school staff to be able to disagree with homosexuality and cross-dressing? What happens to children who experiment with these high-risk lifestyles when no one was able to warn them?
10. The definition of “student” under this bill seems to encompass even part-time students, which may cover many home-schoolers.
11. The proposed law prevents “retaliation” against those who make reports based on this law. The only exception seems to be if information reported was known to be false. So —- teachers can fearlessly become watchdogs who report student disagreement with the approved views. And are peers going to be empowered to monitor language, speech, discussions that might be critical of homosexuality?
Does this sound like an educational institution that is (a) authentically protecting children from harmful behavior and (b) is truly respectful of positive, child-friendly ideas and practices? Or does this sound like an oppressive institution where no one wants their children educated?
12. In summary, this is an attempt to promote sexual deviance and its expression and silence those who want to protect children from such corruption.
PLEASE CALL YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE regarding this outrageous, child-endangering bill.
Also, contact members of the House Education and LaborCommittee
Text of H.R. 4530 may be accessed HERE or HERE.
Print Article
