SANTA ANA, Calif. — A federal court Thursday threw out a legal challenge filed against California’s constitutional amendment that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Alliance Defense Fund attorneys represent ProtectMarriage.com, the official proponent and campaign committee of Proposition 8, which was allowed to intervene as a defendant in the lawsuit in May.
…..
In December 2008, two men filed a lawsuit claiming that the California marriage amendment, which voters decisively passed as Proposition 8 in last November’s election, violates the U.S. Constitution. The two men obtained a “marriage” license in California during the short window of time in which such licenses were allowed to be issued to members of the same sex.
In its order (pdf.) dismissing the two men’s challenge to the amendment, the court wrote, “Proposition 8, as codified in Section 7.5 to Article I of the California Constitution, was recently held by the California Supreme Court to present no bar to the recognition of Plaintiffs’ marriage within California, as said marriage was performed before Proposition 8 was passed…. As Plaintiffs’ marriage is valid within California, they cannot present an injury with respect to the recognition of their marriage by the State of California…and, therefore, they do not have standing to pursue their claims against the State of California.” [...]
What a colossal waste of time and tax payers money.
Thanks to the leftist public education system’s curriculum of indoctrination, parental rights are systemically being ripped away from parents of young schoolchildren. This is not about teaching diversity and tolerance. That is their cover. Take my word. As with anything that falls under the umbrella of the LGBT agenda. No longer are parents in charge of their children’s sex education. The public school system has taken over. Why? Because of the intense push from LGBT activists and their leftist political allies. They want full unquestioned acceptance of their lifestyle. To become mainstream, to be seen as practitioners of a normal lifestyle choice. Which is one thing, but when it comes down to forcing LGBT sexuality upon young children that is where the line should be drawn.
God forbid a parent whose personal wishes are in opposition of the LGBT agenda try to fight back against the indoctrinational tide.
They’ll face being labeled as hateful bigots. And or will be told they have no say in the matter. Even through the court system. A parents personal and religious views are inconsequential to secular progressives and their anything goes societal outlook.
The latest travesty: Alameda Unified School District Adopts Lesbian, Gay, Transgender Education for Students as Young as Five Years Old
Five years old! Light years away from the age parents normally teach their children about sex. Many of the children in the Alameda Unified School District will learn about the homosexual, bisexual and transgender lifestyle BEFORE they learn of heterosexual behavior. They want to get their claws in them while they are still young and highly impressionable. And shape their minds and mold them into someone who would never question immorality of any sort. Regardless of what parents are trying to instill in them at home. This is a full frontal assault on the moral fabric of America, traditional family values and religious beliefs.
Providing yet another example of the threat that gay marriage and the gay agenda provides to school children and parental authority, the Alameda Unified School District last evening adopted a new curriculum, over the objections of hundreds of parents who testified at the board hearings. The newly adopted curriculum specifically elevates respect for gay, lesbian and bisexual students and their families over respect for diverse racial and religious backgrounds. “This is another wake-up call to every parent with children in the public school system,” said Ron Prentice, chairman, ProtectMarriage.com — Yes on 8. “Elementary school children will be instructed about homosexuality without their parents’ knowledge.” Prentice noted that the curriculum does not provide parents with any sort of opt-out right for their students, and will take affect in the form of six 45-minute lessons, one per year from kindergarten through fifth grade. “This is exactly what we warned voters about during the Proposition 8 campaign,” Prentice said. “While pro-homosexual activists deny any impact on children, local school boards and the State Legislature press for formal instruction in concert with the gay agenda. Opponents of Prop 8 claim we won the campaign based on lies and deceit, but just imagine how much worse these curricula would be if Prop. 8 failed and gay marriage was still legal.”
Course materials are also up for debate. Among those considered to be added to the curriculum, according to media accounts, is And Tango Makes Three by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell. The children’s book is about two gay male penguins creating a family and raising a female penguin, Tango. “The job of raising children belongs to parents and guardians,” said Prentice. “It is a parent’s responsibility to protect their children from inappropriate and biased content. With the Alameda School District’s decision to adopt pro-homosexual instructional materials, a parent’s job has become that much more difficult.” said Prentice. “By the school board’s decree, many public school children will be trained in beliefs that contradict those of the home. It is no wonder that home schooling and private education continues to grow in California.”
But at least the parents can chose to opt their children out of the discussions. Right? WRONG. The school district does NOT give them a choice.
“I believe these children are far too young to be learning about what these issues mean,” said Alaina Stewart, who has three children who attend elementary school in Alameda. “These are adult issues and they are being thrust upon the children.”
But the school board says otherwise, and its attorneys say that if the curriculum is adopted, the parents will have no legal right to remove their children from class when the lessons are being taught.
“By not allowing kids to opt out,” says David Kirwin, who has two children in the system, “the school district is violating a First Amendment right for those who have a religion that doesn’t support homosexuality.”
[snip]
“Under law, there are five categories of protected classes when it comes to discrimination,” explained Karen England, a spokeswoman for the Capitol Resource Institute, an organization that advocates conservative policy on social issues.
“The curriculum focuses on only one subgroup protected under anti-discrimination laws: sexual orientation.”
England said she believes Alameda’s curriculum committee has purposely excluded religion, even though it is one of the protected classes. “This indicates an agenda is being pushed, as opposed to an altruistic attempt to teach tolerance,” she said.[...]
How is it they get away without having to notify parents? Most school districts have to notify parents if their child may be involved in sex ed classes. So what is the problem? The LGBT lifestyle boils down to sex, right? Sure you may say it is not all about sex. Of course it is not. Many factors are involved. Although I disagree with their lifestyle, I am sure many in the LGBT community are decent loving people. BUT it is their sexuality by which they define themselves. They wear it on their sleeve. Their sexuality is the reason they may face bias. The reasoning behind the LGBT curriculum has placed in school systems in the first damn place.
Why do they get away with out notifying parents of a LGBT curriculum? This will show you how they have crafted a sneaky way around parental notification. Remember what I said about the supposed teaching of diversity and tolerances and how it is their cover? Be prepared to be astonished. Believe it or not, they claim any LGBT issues that are discussed in the classroom are not about sex. It is about tolerance. Unbelievable! Take away the sexual aspect from LGBT and what do you have? How can you teach on the topic of LGBT without sex being involved?! Impossible! LGBT – lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender describe various sexual identities.
In many school districts, there are guidelines about what classroom activities require parent/guardian notification. Most school districts do not have a requirement for notifying parents and guardians for lessons about respect and diversity. In fact, many districts require schools to be proactive in addressing bias and prejudice and ensuring students safety. Discussions related to sexuality and reproduction are examples of topics that often require parental permission.
But these topics are not a part of the curriculum advocated in It’s Elementary-Talking About Gay Issues In School. The focus of LGBT-inclusive education is to create respectful and welcoming learning environments for all children by communicating that LGBT people are part of our communities and that anti-LGBT discrimination is harmful to everyone.
Talking about LGBT issues is a discussion about people and families present in our communities, a struggle for civil rights and addressing bias-based bulling. None of these include talking about sex or human reproduction. Many educators once feared that the two were inseparable, and schools in the 1990s typically limited discussions about LGBT people to high school health classes. However, with the rapid growth of LGBT-headed families and the increasing visibility of LGBT issues in the media, children are learning about LGBT people at an increasingly younger age. It’s Elementary illustrates the use of age-appropriate vocabulary to talk with young people about LGBT issues, without talking about sex. By incorporating LGBT issues in the context of lessons about families, current events, literature and civil rights we can help prevent the stereotypes and misunderstandings that often develop.
You tell me how can a teacher possibly teach anti-discrimination of LGBT’s without the topic of sex coming up? Since their very existence is wrapped around their sexual orientation?
Equality For All Children provides talking points for those in opposition to this radical curriculum:
Schools should be safe for all children, including those with traditional views on sexuality, families, and marriage.
· There is an important difference between correcting bad behavior, such as bullying, and telling students that only one belief system about LGBT issues is accepted in school.
· California law guarantees equal protections to every LGBT student, every religious student, and so forth. Yet this curriculum focuses on two protected subgroups (sexual orientation and gender identity) — and it entirely excludes protections for religious children who disagree.
· The California Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act of 2000 (AB 537) added sexual orientation and gender identity to the protected characteristics in public education. Alameda Unified also has policies that explicitly prohibit harassment against LGBT students.
· AB 537 specifically says that “nothing” in this act “requires the inclusion of any curriculum, textbook, presentation, or other material in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution.”
· Alameda Unified needs to enforce the clear legal protections against harassment, which are found in state law and district policies. If enforcing the law requires additional training for teachers, the district should train them.
· The proposed LGBT curriculum is not necessary or mandated by the California Department of Education. None of the books in the proposed lesson plans is found in the state-approved California Reading Lists for kindergarten through fifth grade students.
· The proposed second grade textbook, And Tango Makes Three, was the most challenged book in 2008, 2007, and 2006, according to the American Library Association. Why is Alameda trying to mandate this book for all second grade children in the district?
· The LGBT curriculum teaches only one view — complete agreement — on controversial sexual issues. These are issues that most elementary aged children are not ready to deal with. Nor should they be forced to deal with them, especially without parental involvement.
· The district would refuse to respect the rights of parents, if the curriculum is passed, by not offering an opt-out. Schools do not own young children; parents have final responsibility and care for them. Parental decision making should be respected in Alameda classrooms.
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Curriculum Talking Points
Why was the curriculum introduced?
Alameda Unified School District Hot Topic LGBT Lesson Plans -Supplemental Adoption of Safe Schools Curriculum Addressing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
Proponents argue the curriculum is designed to prevent bullying and promote tolerance. However, noticeably absent from the curriculum is any references to the primary reasons for most bullying: race and physical appearance. Instead, the curriculum focuses almost solely on homosexuality. In fact, the AUSD web site refers to the curriculum as “LGBT Lesson Plans.”
As it is referred to on the Alameda Unified School District website: **Supplemental Adoption of Safe Schools Curriculum Addressing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity** Their words.
Does the curriculum address bullying?
Although the curriculum is being sold as a bullying-prevention course, there is no mention of bullying. Instead, the course features books such as Who’s in a Family and That’s a Family, which tell students they should agree with the homosexual lifestyle.
No famous minorities, no famous handicapped people, and no famous religious figures. Period. Who may have been the target of discrimination, intolerance and bullying during their lifetime yet persevered and became highly successful (famous) individuals.
ONLY Famous Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People.
I rest my case.
Update:
Capitol Resource Institute’s Karen England released a statement condemning the program and accusing the district of violating federal law. She said the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment governs any survey, analysis or evaluation given to students.
Under the regulation, parents must be notified and given an opportunity to opt-out, if the evaluation addresses topics such as:
* Political affiliations or beliefs of the student or the student’s parent;
* sex behavior or attitudes;
* religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or student’s parent, etc.
Contact information for the three members of the Alameda County Board of Education who voted for the LGBT curriculum is as follows:
Vice President Ron Mooney:e-mailor fax: (510) 522-6926
Trustee Tracy Jensen:e-mail, phone(510) 865-6350 or fax: (510) 522-6926
Concerned individuals may also call the U.S. Department of Education at (202) 260-3887 and ask officials to enforce the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment in Alameda Unified School District.
Hell hath no fury as a shrewish gay activist scorned…
Time to turn da table on da labels. Click to order logo'd items.
Aw…the heart warming intolerance of the demanders of tolerance. Perez Hilton is a spiteful intolerant heterophobe. He interjected his personal sexual orientation into the Miss USA pageant –WRONG.
When asked by judge Perez Hilton, an openly gay gossip blogger, whether she believed in gay marriage, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, said “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised.”
Not at all satisfied with Miss California’s (oh so politically incorrect) answer. Once the curtain was drawn on the Miss America pageant, Perez Hilton went on a tirade…. Meow!
Miss California Carrie Prejean Gay Marriage Comment Controversy … Perez Hilton Calls Contestant a “dumb b*tch What Ever Happened to World Peace? – Sacred Monkeys
[...] If one answers a contest question in an insightful and respectful manner, the position they take should be irrelevant. If such a position is an issue with a judge, then maybe they should not be a judge. If the Miss USAcontest has no issue with this then they have a flawed event with judges that have preconceived biases.
Perez Hilton calls Carrie Prejean a “dumb b*tch”, yet hates being called names himself. There is some rational LEFT liberal thinking. BTW, does he think Obama is a “dumb b*tch” as well seeing that he thinks marriage is between a man and a woman as well? [...]
The shrew just does not know when to stop. If Perez thinks for one second he is helping his “cause” he is a bigger fool than he looks. An ideal “poster boy” he’s not.
What he is — a run away whack job train.
Some class he’s got, using profanity like that. And after supposedly apologizing, he went back on it by invoking the c-slur. I think there’s grounds for a lawsuit here.
And FYI Perez apparently the majority of Californians (you know that big state on the left coast you call home) feel the same way as Carrie Prejean. Prop 8 went through twice now, did you hear me? TWICE! Of course you are aware of that and are taking it out on Miss California. Hissy fits are to be expected from such an intolerant misogynist immature heterophobe such as your self.
To top off his nasty attention ho sideshow, he took Carrie Prejean’s photo and added crudely drawn offensive imagery onto it.(NSFW)
H/T Old Atlantic Lighthouse
After a nauseating peek at Hilton’s site I found it to be some sort of warped trademark of his. The doodling of sexual imagery on celeb photos.
What is he 14?
Which begs the question, did Miss USA agent officials even bother to familiarize themselves with Hilton’s work beforehand? Gay or not a person of such serial ignorance had no business being a judge at the Miss USA pageant. Period.
Psst… Tweeters –@perezhilton
Speaking of Twitter & Perez (deranged-boy) Hilton
When YOUR “opinion” gets in the way of my rights, privileges and protections I’m supposed to smile and be nice? Hell no!
Let’s do the math, Miley is 16 and Perez is 31. And he has the nerve to judge her maturity level?
As if I need to post more…evidence of the zero minus level of Hilton’s maturity level at 31 yrs of age.
Again NSFW Perez new music video. A gagfest I will not link to. Copy/paste URL in browser if you are so inclined.
Yum yum yum! [Pre-Miss USA Pageant] Criss Angel gave Perez Hilton a shout out of major proportions! Not the type he so craves I dare say.
H/T The Movable Buffet
NORM – Vegas Confidential
As Angel was ending his magic show Friday at the Luxor, the “Mindfreak” illusionist gave a shout-out.
“I have to recognize someone special here in the house,” said Angel, according to a showgoer. “Perez Hilton, please stand up.
Perez Hilton smiled broadly and said, “Thanks for the free tickets.”
There’s buzz that Angel berated the blogger after his camp saw Perez Hilton’s Twitter site, which carried real-time comments lambasting the show, including “unbelievably BAD!” and “I would rather be getting a root canal.” [...]
Perez dude karma can be a bigger biatch than you. Fancy that.
Conservative girl next door. I am a pissed off red head.
Fear my wrath, or come along for the ride. Choose your side.
Free will, truth and the freedom of speech are my weapons of choice.
"...But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy."
- Flemming Rose
"lan astaslem"
I will not submit.
I will not surrender.
A Refresher Course...For Those In Denial
"Above all, the devil cannot stand to be mocked" - C.S.Lewis
Hell hath no fury as a shrewish gay activist scorned…
Entries (RSS)