Posted on 05/13/2006 1:20:56 PM PDT by DBeers
Would the state of California "out" Abe Lincoln, now that a controversial biography has suggested that he not only changed the course of a nation but also shared a bed with men?
Would Eleanor Roosevelt be singled out not just for her seminal work pursuing the New Deal and fighting for human rights, but for her relationship with a woman?
Would Renee Richards, the tennis player who underwent sex reassignment surgery in 1975 and fought successfully to compete as a woman, merit mention in a history book?
On Friday, a day after the state Senate voted to require that the historical contributions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people be taught in California schools, the weight of practicality — how would it be accomplished? — settled in.
Many educators and activists found themselves in a briar patch of confusion — even those who believe that folding the concept of sexual orientation into the school curriculum would lead to greater levels of tolerance and acceptance.
The bill, which still needs the approval of the Assembly and the signature of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, would require schools to incorporate, in about six years, studies of the "role and contributions" made by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people to the "economic political and social development" of California and the United States.
~~ SNIP~~
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
This should drive the few remaining Christian families from the public schools.
Lets continue to study the role of men who prefer sex with other men and the spread of AIDS.
There's a worthy contribution ( sarc)
Is there any evidence Lincoln was gay?
As they continue not to teach and let judges say kids who can't pass the exam say it's unconstitutional. As Arnold says W's making a mistake putting the national guard at the borders and our children get shortchanged because of bilingual programs and sex-ed/tolerance.
Gay activists point to the fact that Lincoln shared a bed with a roomate for a time. This was a common practice of the time.
This doesn't mean he's gay.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. < /seinfeld>
That's it. I want all historical references to Bill Clinton to have to include HIS sexual activities as well. If taking it in the @ss is somehow relevant to whether some guy invents a better mousetrap, then everything Bill Clinton ever did should have to explain how he was a heterosexual predator and liked adultery more than dignity.
If the California legislature requires identifying those in history by their sexual preferences, will anyone complain if:
1. Someone teaches that Jeffry Dahmer was a gay cannibal?
2. The pedophile priests were all gay?
3. Hitler was bisexual?
4. Etc.?
or do the people in the legislature only want the person's sexuality identified as being gay, bisexual, transgendered, or whatever other queer categories exist if the person has dones something positive?
The war should be red hot in six years-so these liberal ideals will be shot down for several decades.
Ping
But every single interest group with a political agenda goes back in history and recasts every large historical figure to fit their agenda. All of them were gay, vegans, drug addicts or mentally ill. Or all of the above. These interest groups don't care about history, they just want to propagandized their pet issues (which are typically anti-social) and they will destroy the reputations of anybody in order make new converts.
Remember when the Clinton spin teams where all over the airwaves back in 98-99 telling us that every great figure in history had lied about things in their personal life? They smeared Washington, Lincoln, Hamilton, Jefferson and Franklin just to make Billyboy look less scummy. PETA even claimed that Jesus was a vegan and one activist 'historian' claims that Jesus was gay. Its virtually all crap every time you hear something new and it never has any historical significance even if the preposterous claims were true.
You know the parents are all demanding that homosexuality, prostitution, pimping, whoremongering, polygamy, fornication, adultery, blasphemy, anti-Christian bigotry, filthy language and selfishness be taught in the wonderful ecclectic Public School.
Just like the parents were up in arms and demanding that voluntary prayer, Christmas Plays, Christmas break, and Christmas music be outlawed from the Public Schools. (of course 99.9% of all parents made no such request but liked it how it was)
You know the liberals who run the government public school system, top down, could not care any less about what parents wanted.
These government school social engineers have a culture to artificially reshape.
Shouldn't they also teach about the great masochists of the world? It's a behavior. The womens' libs would hate that.
How much worse is it going to get, DB?
Sometimes I feel like *really* being a hermit - finding a cave 100 miles from any other humans and just engaging in devotions and prayer for the rest of my life.
Its completely based on the fact that when Lincoln was a circuit riding lawyer he shared a bed at local inns with other male guests. However what is being left out of the claim is the fact that this was common at the time on the frontier. Innkeepers packed people into rooms like sardines to make money. There was nothing sexual about this, so it proves nothing.
Shared a bed with another man?
Big deal-if you ever were young and traveled a lot with groups or camped out it was very likely you slept with someone of the same sex.
I know I did and nothing ever"happened"
At least anything I was AWARE of!
I heard yesterday on Fox that there is another part of the bill. It makes it "illegal" to print in textbooks anything negative about homosexuals!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.