Skip to content

All Schools Will be Required to Promote Homosexuality

 

DIANA writes:

May I suggest your readers take some time to read about the Student Non-Discrimination Act. Under the benign language of “non-discrimination,” the federal government will be able to force schools to accept the behavior of flamboyant, gender-nonconforming kids as normal. So, if a school administrator disciplines a boy who is wearing eyeliner and swishing around in a skirt, he will be fired, and the kid will be able to camp it up in school. The U.S. is bankrupt, our white middle class is shrinking, and yet our Congress wastes its time with legislation like this. Can you imagine Congress sponsoring legislation like this during the Depression, or the 1950s – or even the 1960s?

I am becoming extremely anti-American as a result of things like this. Not against the real country, but against all the powers that be in our country, including the Republicans. They are really no better than the Democrats. How can any of us but sympathize with foreigners who detest the ‘Americanization’ of their culture? Perhaps what they have is no better, but they have a right to their own damnation.

Laura writes:

Eugene Delgaudio, president of Public Advocate of the U.S., calls the legislation, which was introduced by Rep. Jared Polis last year, the Homosexual Classrooms Act and is sponsoring the Protect Our Children’s Innocence Petition to stop it. He points out that the bill would ”exempt homosexual students from punishment for propositioning, harassing, or even sexually assaulting their classmates, as part of their specially-protected right to ‘freedom of self-expression’ [and] force private and even religious schools to teach a pro-homosexual curriculum and purge any reference to religion if a student claims it creates a ‘hostile learning environment’ for homosexual students.”

 

                                                                    — Comments —

Diana adds:

I looked up the bill’s sponsor, one Jared Polis of Colorado. I’d never heard of him before.

Not surprisingly, he is a gazillionaire, and also not surprisingly, he is openly homosexual. He is also a “gay parent.” He and “partner” procured, or bred via AT, a son.

Where’s the mother? Let’s keep asking these uncomfortable questions until we get answers.

There are things that truly exceed my mental capacities. I can understand women supporting “gay rights” if they are sufficiently naive and deluded. I cannot for the life of me understand women who
support a form of reproduction that so degrades women. I’m clueless. What is your take?

Laura writes:

It’s no different from approval of abortion, which is so degrading to women. The important thing in the mind of women who support these things is that women have “freedom.” This so-called freedom is utterly misnamed. When we exercise the right to destroy ourselves and others, in what sense is that freedom

Robin writes:

Isn’t this character [Polis] the same one who helped author the most recent version of the ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) bill? I have lost track of the status of this bill; did it pass? When my State was still Blue, I remember writing my representative in Madison and getting a scathing response about Gay Rights. Hopefully that has changed a bit with a more conservative Governor and legislators. 

In any event, I remember ENDA vividly. Although it is my personal nightmare to ever enroll my children in a public school, I certainly don’t want to bury my head in the sand and pretend that these things won’t affect my children’s peers. ENDA was appalling to me, in particular, because parents had no recourse against the placement of a transgendered teacher – all because the confused, sexual mutant teacher now had a “protected class” status. How could anyone ever agree that it is okay for a transsexual or transvestite to be in authority over other people’s children? 

God help us. Now we want to protect the young and confused seed of this perversion. Our nation’s children will be surrounded by the homosexual agenda on all sides, by both authority and peer.

Buck writes: 

Diana writes: “I am becoming extremely anti-American as a result of things like this.”

NO! You are not anti-American. You are reacting and thinking as an American. The United States is no longer a majority American nation. It is simply and increasingly the United States Formally of America (USFA); a country that has within in it a small, withering American nation that is trying to survive within the new collection of uni-cultured mini-nations of aliens and newborn “citizens,” taken residence here, within America’s historical borders. Please, refer to yourself as an American and make that distinction whenever you can. Either you are an American, or you are simply a citizen of the United States and a creature of modern liberalism.

Laura writes:

Great point.

Diana writes:

“Diana writes: “I am becoming extremely anti-American as a result of things like this.”

“NO! You are not anti-American. You are reacting and thinking as an American. “

My response:

Thanks! I needed that!

But – having clarified this, I should say that I am now opposed to the spreading of contemporary American values abroad. I’ve done my traveling, and I know that sophisticated European culture used to be way more decadent than what the U.S. had to offer, but it never had the reach and power that contemporary American culture has. Fellini films from the 60s or the 70s were decadent and a-moral, but who saw them? A minority of the self-styled elite. It is the horrible genius of American culture, broadcast to the farthest reaches of the world, to wrap up decadence in seeming normality.

Soon we will be seeing the mainstreaming of male homosexuality in big budget feature films, and its promotion on the Oscars. We’re not there quite yet. Television, yes. Theatre, yes. But feature films, no. It will come. We had a succession of Best Actor Oscars given to black actors, and loads of parts given to black actors that should have been given to white actors. Next will come Oscars given to openly homosexual actors, and parts made over for them. Mark my words.

Mrs. M. writes:

Thank you for alerting your readers to H.B. 998. I called my Representative’s office right after I skimmed the legislation to ask him to not support it. Reading the bill’s content sickened me.

Buck writes:

At the risk of being a pest, I’d like to reinforce what I mean. Diana writes: “I should say that I am now opposed to the spreading of contemporary American values abroad.”

I wouldn’t call them contemporary American values. I’d call them modern liberal values. They are un-American. They are the “values” that Americans rail against. 

Traditional values are American values, and they do exist, as exemplified by The Thinking Housewife, within our beleaguered American nation. These are the values that America used to be admired for, within and without, and the reason that the rest of the informed world once deemed America to be so special. We no longer spread American values. We’re struggling to salvage them here.

KB writes:

This [enforced promotion of homosexuality] is inevitable. Where this ends up is, normal people will retreat further and further into their homes and cede the public sphere to the barbarians. It’s already happening due to the wildings; white people either move out or stay home when there is no choice. It’s already happening due to feminism; guys prefer Xbox to associating with uninteresting, ugly women. We have the Internet, Netflix, Xbox. Most of normal society is in some transitional phase of checking out. 

Michael S. writes:

I note that Mr. Jared uses his mother’s maiden name as his surname, and uses his father’s last name as his “middle” name.

Alissa writes:

KB wrote:

Where this ends up is, normal people will retreat further and further into their homes and cede the public sphere to the barbarians.

KB has a point. If people can’t fight the enemy then they will insulate themselves from them and seek separation whenever possible. They will tune out. Can’t shop in the shopping mall? Order online. Don’t like the gargabe in entertainment and on the news? Give it up (e.g. get rid of TV, unsubscribe from certain channels, don’t go to cinemas, boycott programs, write letters of concern, turn it off). Don’t like the public schools (and perhaps even private schools)? Homeschool. Don’t like your neighbors, their habits and moral belief systems? Move away and go to a more like-minded new neighborhood.

Regarding Diana’s point about the spread of American liberalism, I’m vacationing in the U.S. right now but I live in a non-Western country and I can attest to this. Right now, my country is starting to have women’s rights organizations, human rights organizations, enviromentalists and so many other ills. I wouldn’t even see them ten years ago when I was a child. I’m fearful for the future. It’s like watching a slow-motion long-term collapse. You know what will happen but you just can’t look away and feel powerless to stop it. In fact, as an English non-native speaker, I learned English through immersing myself in entertainment. The professors in school teaching English were only moderately effective and, sad to say, were nothing compared to the power of entertainment.

Diana writes:

KB is completely right. This retreat reminds me of what happened in the prime crime years in NYC, especially what happened to Central Park. A friend is mugged and you avoid that part of the Park. Then another friend is mugged somewhere else, and you avoid that. Little by little, the territory is ceded to the barbarians.
 
But territorial analogies only go so far. We got Central Park back and it’s now a surprisingly safe place. What happens to a society when, as you put it Laura, “sordid knowledge” is enthusiastically diffused? How do you rid your mind of “sordid knowledge”?
 
What happens to the sensitive psychology of a growing adolescent boy when he’s taught in a school that anal intercourse is normal? Every time he touches a woman he will think of this. He’s poisoned for life.
 
That’s what the homosexualist movement has done. Once their poison is injected into the body politic, there’s no cleaning it out. Please convince me otherwise. I would love to be argued out of this.

Jeremy writes:

I assert that our country has become cause for shame—for the paradoxical fact that it is now a land where there is no shame. In recent decades, Bill Clinton, Michael Vick, Jesse Jackson, and notable others, have repeatedly proven to me that major figures may commit acts of outrageous, sometimes unspeakable, deceit—without then having to step down from public life (and further financial benefit) as a result of perhaps psychopathic actions.

Skeptical of the term psychopathic? Consider merely the three men mentioned above: A U. S. President lying under oath to a grand jury . . . a dog torturer as an athletic hero . . . a minister committing adultery that results in pregnancy—none suffered the full, justifiable censure that any sane society should respond with.

But this is a land of free citizens, isn’t it? Therefore, we apparently have the country we deserve.

 

 

Share:EmailFacebook7Twitter0Pinterest0Google+0