Opponents of Calif gay history law seek referendum Read more: http://www.adn.com/2011/07/26/1986454/opponents-of-calif-gay-history.html#ixzz1THWjiMn4

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Well, yes, but not along the lines you are thinking of. The lines are not about skin color like they once were, they are more ideological. The left feels threatened by those they consider the bigots on the right, yet most on the right don't care, except for a few loons that nobody wants to be associated with. However, the left seems to revel in their purity of purpose, although if they would just STFU, nobody would really notice, except their kids, that would stop be embarrassed by mom(s) and/or dad(s), and/or new mom who used to be old dad.

As far as the original topic, I think the US pays too much attention to who is attracted to what. If two guys want to swap spit, no big deal. But, do we have to know that some great orator was as ####### as a three dollar bill if it didn't seem to matter in his public life? Don't sweep the issue under the carpet, but don't elevate it to the point that it obscures a man's true talents, or evil deeds. For someone like Harvey Milk, his being a homosexual was relevant. The fact that Edgar wore dresses late at night doesn't change the fact that he used the FBI to affect American politics. Which is the more important lesson to learn in history?

Well said.

For some reason the freaks and the "friends of freaks" want to shove their bs in every ones face. I don't want those people near or around my kids and I for dmn sure don't want them being taught how one dude porking another had some great impact on US history.

[Zero Sum 305]

see the blue... hopefully it helps.

Yes, lets take those points one by one:

10 to 1 others aren't going to admit they are racists either. Sit down and talk to the younger generation. Get a feel on how they 'feel' about the 'black community' especially. It's not a pretty picture. Not one that anyone would dare want to see. We're not talking about people you think could be bigots and racists either. We're talking your average, run of the mill young adult who's been surrounded by the part of society that keeps beating into his/her head that certain 'communities' need to be treated a certain way. Perhaps it's not true racism, but it's a huge resentment that comes out as racism.

That's why you can't rely on conjecture alone.

Then again you once again are asking to generalize an entire generation. Why do you miss this?

I assume you make this claim having sat down and spoken to this entire younger generation as a sociologist and drawn a grand conclusion that is truly pessimistic. Most others would call it paranoid.

You need to substantiate these 'feelings' you're getting from these young adults. And specify exactly who they are, because its only been asked several times before in order to help you try to make sense of your own claims.

You know what I mean here on segregation. From the way we treat certain communities in regards to welfare versus actually helping them get on their feet, to letting violence be the way out for many helpless youths.... It's alive and well, and in many ways just as bad as it was supposed to have ended long ago.

So its an economics issue. Now ask who is doing most of the mouth frothing about wanting to take away any kind of 'teach them how to fish' (not 'give them the fish') assistance. Think specifics here.

access equality exists. However we still act today like it's not. It's not about telling the bigots in society that, it's about telling people who have turned into bigots/racists or just those who are resenting the fact that people of a certain community are treated differently by law. We've tried that before and it didn't work, yet we still practice it today and it's failing in creating equality, because at the end of the day, it's truly not equal.

The very nature of having access equality virtually guarantees that hard work will result in equal access. This is certainly not the case throughout history and is something that indeed has improved to this day. I am inclined to agree with your position that it may exist. At least legally, it does. Realize then who has always been opposed to such legislation, in addition to those that have decided to 'get some payback' for past wrongs by becoming themselves part of the problem by becoming bigots themselves in the contextual, not the semantic. Yet these I dare say in guessing, are very much more less in number than those in the original group that to a high degree, are very careful to express their bigotry for knowledge they are in the minority. Because they are cowards.

There's a difference in "differences in activity" and "differences in look." The problem comes when you focus on differences in look. Visual imagery is everything in society. Not to everyone, but the vast majority.

Indeed. This becomes apparent in self-segregation. As in, people will stick with their own perceived kind. And this is something innate in our species; while not as large a problem now as it was in the past, where that innate self-segregation was often associated with hatred that is frankly very difficult to spot now.

The difference in look, as you call it, includes more than what is seen. It includes behavior (such as the characteristic flamboyancy gays sometimes are stereotyped to display), culture (language, food, etc), and race (obviously). Focusing on these things during, say, your African American History month, is not a negative, but something that enriches people that can accept diversity as a positive. It is unfortunate one would rather focus on the negative aspect as one detrimental to the unity of a society... and that is something where that person merely needs to grow up and mature a little bit in realizing that even after all the differences are added up, we are all still human beings.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

This is what amazes me. What's to explain? If a rock falls out of the sky...it falls out of the sky. If someone has some mental health issues...they have mental health issues.

Again, and not to be crude...but more like blunt to the blind on here...if some chick or some guy wants to hump or be humped by someone of the same sex...somethings fcked up there imo. It gets even worse when they let these "people with issues" adopt kids. Kind of like Michael Jackson and his "Play Land".

I mean were any of us here born yesterday?

Why does it matter to you? If they are doing it in your presence, just reach into your pocket, and give them the money for cab fare and a hotel room. Stop being so cheap!

[Zero Sum 305]

Well said.

For some reason the freaks and the "friends of freaks" want to shove their bs in every ones face. I don't want those people near or around my kids and I for dmn sure don't want them being taught how one dude porking another had some great impact on US history.

Its the same as when people ask you about how homosexual sex affects you personally. Unless you watch gay porn or are a voyeur, you really shouldn't be seeing it. Therein lies your insane definition of 'freak'... Which is really odd.

As for your kids and having this agenda shoved down their throat, don't move to California.

Still ignoring the law though. I can re-post it in case you were too angry a few pages back.

Nowhere in the law does it promote gayness. But by now its obvious you are only trolling for reactions- and I think those reactions are intended to violate the TOS here.

I will also ask you again, are you a bigot?

[Zero Sum 305]

It was only on page 3.

BILL NUMBER: SB 48 CHAPTERED

BILL TEXT

CHAPTER 81

FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE JULY 14, 2011

APPROVED BY GOVERNOR JULY 13, 2011

PASSED THE SENATE APRIL 14, 2011

PASSED THE ASSEMBLY JULY 5, 2011

AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 29, 2011

INTRODUCED BY Senator Leno

(Principal coauthor: Senator Kehoe)

(Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Ammiano, Atkins, Gordon,

and Lara)

(Coauthors: Senators Alquist, Hancock, Lowenthal, Pavley, Price,

and Yee)

(Coauthors: Assembly Members Allen, Blumenfield, Fong, Galgiani,

Hayashi, Huffman, Bonnie Lowenthal, Mendoza, Portantino, and Yamada)

DECEMBER 13, 2010

An act to amend Sections 51204.5, 51500, 51501, 60040, and 60044

of the Education Code, relating to instruction.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 48, Leno. Pupil instruction: prohibition of discriminatory

content.

Existing law requires instruction in social sciences to include a

study of the role and contributions of both men and women and

specified categories of persons to the development of California and

the United States.

This bill would update references to certain categories of persons

and additionally would require instruction in social sciences to

include a study of the role and contributions of lesbian, gay,

bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with disabilities, and

members of other cultural groups, to the development of California

and the United States.

Existing law prohibits instruction or school sponsored activities

that promote a discriminatory bias because of race, sex, color,

creed, handicap, national origin, or ancestry. Existing law prohibits

the State Board of Education and the governing board of any school

district from adopting textbooks or other instructional materials

that contain any matter that reflects adversely upon persons because

of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin, or

ancestry.

This bill would revise the list of characteristics included in

these provisions by referring to race or ethnicity, gender, religion,

disability, nationality, and sexual orientation, or other

characteristic listed as specified.

Existing law prohibits a governing board of a school district from

adopting instructional materials that contain any matter reflecting

adversely upon persons because of their race, color, creed, national

origin, ancestry, sex, handicap, or occupation, or that contain any

sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda contrary to law.

This bill would revise the list of characteristics included in

this provision to include race or ethnicity, gender, religion,

disability, nationality, sexual orientation, and occupation, or other

characteristic listed as specified.

Existing law requires that when adopting instructional materials

for use in the schools, governing boards of school districts shall

include materials that accurately portray the role and contributions

of culturally and racially diverse groups including Native Americans,

African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, European

Americans, and members of other ethnic and cultural groups to the

total development of California and the United States.

This bill would revise the list of culturally and racially diverse

groups to also include Pacific Islanders, lesbian, gay, bisexual,

and transgender Americans, and persons with disabilities.

Existing law provides that there shall be no discrimination on the

basis of specified characteristics in any operation of alternative

schools or charter schools.

This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that

alternative and charter schools take notice of the provisions of this

bill in light of provisions of existing law that prohibit

discrimination in any aspect of their operation.

This bill also would make other technical, nonsubstantive changes.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 51204.5 of the Education Code is amended to

read:

51204.5. Instruction in social sciences shall include the early

history of California and a study of the role and contributions of

both men and women, Native Americans, African Americans, Mexican

Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, European Americans,

lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with

disabilities, and members of other ethnic and cultural groups, to the

economic, political, and social development of California and the

United States of America, with particular emphasis on portraying the

role of these groups in contemporary society.

SEC. 2. Section 51500 of the Education Code is amended to read:

51500. A teacher shall not give instruction and a school district

shall not sponsor any activity that promotes a discriminatory bias

on the basis of race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability,

nationality, sexual orientation, or because of a characteristic

listed in Section 220.

SEC. 3. Section 51501 of the Education Code is amended to read:

51501. The state board and any governing board shall not adopt

any textbooks or other instructional materials for use in the public

schools that contain any matter reflecting adversely upon persons on

the basis of race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability,

nationality, sexual orientation, or because of a characteristic

listed in Section 220.

SEC. 4. Section 60040 of the Education Code is amended to read:

60040. When adopting instructional materials for use in the

schools, governing boards shall include only instructional materials

which, in their determination, accurately portray the cultural and

racial diversity of our society, including:

(a) The contributions of both men and women in all types of roles,

including professional, vocational, and executive roles.

(b) The role and contributions of Native Americans, African

Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders,

European Americans, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender

Americans, persons with disabilities, and members of other ethnic and

cultural groups to the total development of California and the

United States.

© The role and contributions of the entrepreneur and labor in

the total development of California and the United States.

SEC. 5. Section 60044 of the Education Code is amended to read:

60044. A governing board shall not adopt any instructional

materials for use in the schools that, in its determination, contain:

(a) Any matter reflecting adversely upon persons on the basis of

race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, sexual

orientation, occupation, or because of a characteristic listed in

Section 220.

(b) Any sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda

contrary to law.

SEC. 6. It is the intent of the Legislature that alternative and

charter schools take notice of the provisions of this act in light of

Section 235 of the Education Code, which prohibits discrimination on

the basis of disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity,

religion, sexual orientation, or other specified characteristics in

any aspect of the operation of alternative and charter schools.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Teaching about racial minorities in history hasn't eliminated racism. Teaching about women in history hasn't eliminated sexism. Teaching about gays will probably make people aware that there are lot more fvcked up males in the world than they once believed there were.

[Zero Sum 305]

Teaching about racial minorities in history hasn't eliminated racism. Teaching about women in history hasn't eliminated sexism. Teaching about gays will probably make people aware that there are lot more fvcked up males in the world than they once believed there were.

Perhaps by having more tolerance of homosexuality, they will be able to be out in the open, with decreased hiding in sham marriages with increased opportunities of offspring ready to 'come out of the closet' later on. Tolerance is ironically, a homophobe's ally in terms of reducing homosexual offspring in the human population. Go figure.

Homosexuality has been around since humans started having sex.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

And, they have been rejected for about as long.

Homosexuality has been around since humans started having sex.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Homosexuality has been around since humans started having sex.

Stop thinking in black and white. Human sexuality is a spectrum.

And, they have been rejected for about as long.

Some places and times, yes. Other places and times, such behavior was accepted as normal.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Its the same as when people ask you about how homosexual sex affects you personally. Unless you watch gay porn or are a voyeur, you really shouldn't be seeing it. Therein lies your insane definition of 'freak'... Which is really odd.

As for your kids and having this agenda shoved down their throat, don't move to California.

Still ignoring the law though. I can re-post it in case you were too angry a few pages back.

Nowhere in the law does it promote gayness. But by now its obvious you are only trolling for reactions- and I think those reactions are intended to violate the TOS here.

I will also ask you again, are you a bigot?

You might want to debate this with fishdude or at least direct your messed up post to him.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gay+parades&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=2229l4657l0l5092l11l10l0l0l0l0l1291l4226l5-1.3.1l5l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=1440&bih=775&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi <---- Your going to tell me kids don't see this #######?

It's people like you that make me sick to my stomach. Your saying that people that live in California their entire lives and who don't want their kids to be subjected to that giant mental issue known as homosexuality should move to another state????

What about the kids who are adopted by these nuts? How's a kid supposed to explain to his/her class mates that he doesn't have a real mom, just a guy who pretends to be his mommy but is actually his biological father, and the guy he's getting buggered by is his/her ..what ..dad or step dad?

Or maybe they say yes this is my mom/dad? You are the type of person who could give two sh*ts less about children as long as you can shove your your type of sick and demented values in someones face. Iv'e seen your kind time and time again and it makes me sick.

Seriously...direct your pathetic bs post to someone else on here, but spare me the bs.

Edited July 28, 2011 by Why_Me

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Stop thinking in black and white. Human sexuality is a spectrum.

Some places and times, yes. Other places and times, such behavior was accepted as normal.

That didn't last long.

[SMOKE 1,426]

does anyone else find this a little odd? the same people that are against any god being part of school curriculum, are all for homosexuality being part of school curriculum....just thought i'd share my observation w/ the group.

[Zero Sum 305]

And, they have been rejected for about as long.

Not as much as today, thankfully. Humanity on the whole is maturing, to say the least. Happens with time.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That didn't last long.

Roman Empire? Feudal Japan?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Sorry to say, there is nothing odd about it. When you worship yourself, you can do no wrong.

does anyone else find this a little odd? the same people that are against any god being part of school curriculum, are all for homosexuality being part of school curriculum....just thought i'd share my observation w/ the group.

Roman Empire? Feudal Japan?

Both over.