Posted on 12/17/2001 6:58:12 AM PST by maximus@Nashville
Mary Clossey's children see no American flags at school to remind them that it is their safety that young men are risking their lives to defend. Rather, her daughter and other pupils are filed into an auditorium to hear a speaker liken the U.S. military to terrorists. For years the Newton, Mass., public schools have blithely violated a Massachusetts law that the flag be on display in every classroom. On the other hand, there are many flags on display if you count rainbow flags that symbolize a gay-friendly environment. When Clossey enrolled her son in Newton North High School's reading program little did she know that the teacher had bragged in the Boston Globe (July 8, 2001) of quietly introducing homosexual and transsexual subjects into his classes. The teacher, Michael Kozuch, handed out The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky with instructions to write an essay on it. What literary "treats" did Kozuch consider mandatory for other people's children? Sex between a boy and a dog, man-boy sex, anal sex between boys, male masturbation and female masturbation with a hot dog. By chance Clossey opened the book her son brought home. But what came after that shock was worse: She encountered public officials who saw protective parents as obstacles. Clossey called her mayor. He never called back. Calling school officials, she says she encountered "arrogant disrespect for parents." So she filed a criminal complaint against the teacher for corrupting a minor. Even Boston's hard-line pro-homosexuality newspapers and TV stations couldn't sit on this. But the complaint went nowhere. It emerged that Kozuch was not acting alone. The book was on a reading list given to every student. Urged by other furious parents, Clossey went to the local prosecutor. But the receptionist had been warned to expect her, according to Clossey. She waited and waited, but was not allowed to speak to her district attorney. After parents discovered the book, Newton North High School educators removed it from class discussion but refused to remove it from the reading list. Alert parents already knew the high-school language department, on one pretext or another, had showed Ma Vie en Rose, an R-rated film about a "homosexual" child. Pupils learned how "Ludo enjoys being a girl. Borrowing mommy's red high heels, her lipstick, her earrings … yummy!" Trouble is, 7-year-old Ludo is a boy, even if he is pretty in pink. Freshmen learn about masturbation and sodomy in a required course that uses street language, as if proper vocabulary would ruin the educational experience. A large mural in a corridor depicts two girls holding hands, reading something called "Romea and Juliet." Is Newton a rogue town? In nearby Brookline a transsexual told first-graders how his penis was cut off and he became a woman. With no sense of irony, the Globe called it "sex-change counseling." Parents, never notified, had to comfort their terrified children. Ashland children were instructed to play homosexuals in a skit. As reported in the Middlesex News on April 1, 1994, one boy's line was: "It's natural to be attracted to the same sex." Girls were told to hold hands and pretend they were lesbians. As reported widely in Massachusetts in 1992, at a required assembly in Chelmsford, an instructor used four-letter words describing the joys of anal and oral sex. The children then licked condoms. Framingham pupils found themselves answering this Orwellian questionnaire: "1. What do you think caused your heterosexuality? 2. When did you first decide you were heterosexual? 3. Is it possible heterosexuality is a phase you will grow out of? 4. Is it possible you are heterosexual because you fear the same sex? 5. If you have never slept with anyone of the same sex, how do you know you wouldn't prefer it? Is it possible you merely need a good gay experience? 6. To whom have you disclosed your heterosexuality? How did they react? 7. Why are heterosexuals so blatant, always making a spectacle of their heterosexuality? Why can't they just be who they are and not flaunt their sexuality by kissing in public, wearing wedding rings, etc.?" In Lexington, a parent discovered that her 13-year-old could borrow a book telling how gay men at the opera can socialize with "the backs of their trousers discreetly parted so they could experience a little extra pleasure while viewing the spectacle on stage." Her school purchased it with health funds. A prominent psychiatrist says the sex-ed curricula at these schools can lower children "to the level of animals" and inflict lasting harm. "Massachusetts schools' systematic promotion of homosexuality and promiscuity fosters sexual confusion and experimentation," says Nathaniel S. Lehrman, former clinical director of the Kingsboro Psychiatric Center in New York. "They dilute and trivialize [the capacity for] faithful sexual passion which should [later] be the cement of these children's marriages. Unstable youngsters may become particularly vulnerable to homosexuals who actively recruit them." Some teachers all over North America quietly are mainstreaming homosexual behavior to children as young as 5 years old. As widely reported, on "Gay Days" classes are cancelled and students led to compulsory activities where homosexuals explain their "lifestyles." The mind-control techniques are straight from Soviet schools. Officials often confront parents who express anger, telling each parent, "You're the only one who complained." The implied message: "It would be unconstitutional to teach Judeo-Christian morality. So we're obliged to teach its polar opposite." Samuel Blumenfeld, a much-published author on education, says many school superintendents implicitly assert "that children (are) owned by the state." Compelling evidence from Massachusetts: Silver Lake's freshman health text says: "Testing your ability to function sexually and give pleasure to another person may be less threatening in the early teens with people of your own sex." And, "You may come to the conclusion that growing up means rejecting the values of your parents." Pupils were ordered to keep the book at school and never take it home. Needham High School violated the parents'-rights law by concealing from parents a schoolwide assembly in which a girl described her first lesbian kiss and rhapsodized about lesbianism. Teachers continued the discussion in homeroom. They also broke the law by failing to tell pupils of their right not to attend. Later, the gay club's faculty adviser announced, in poor English, that parents' decisions to remove their children next year would not be honored, as the "assembly (taught no) moral or religious beliefs." After a "Homophobia Week" of mandatory assemblies in Beverly, a 14-year-old told her father he was a "homophobe." She had learned that homosexuals have a right to marry and adopt children. Parents were not notified. A boy wrote to a local paper: "I felt disturbed and nauseated. I witnessed biased testimonies by gays and the public mocking of a priest in our auditorium." A Beverly parent removed a child after discovering the content of a four-day "sexual-harassment" program that replaced algebra. The teacher encouraged the pupil to come back, saying, "Your parents don't have to know." In Manomet, a health instructor passed out material that an eighth-grader said violated his parents' beliefs. "If you have any trouble with your parents, tell me and I'll handle them," the instructor replied. A Newton principal refused to remove children from the condom-distribution program, telling their parents, "It's too important." Local media cover such stories reluctantly, with headlines such as "Local Mother Angered by Sex Ed." They treat not the provocation, but the reaction, as newsworthy. Imagine this back-page headline informing the public of Watergate: "Partisan Democrats Criticize White House." In the July 8, 2001 Globe article headlined "More schools tackling gay issues," Kozuch discussed his efforts to use schools to shape children's views of homosexuality under the radar screen of parents. "It's low key," he said. "The point is that we want to treat (bisexual, homosexual and transsexual) issues in a way that's matter of course." Giving gay pornography to other people's children didn't used to be called "treating issues," say critics. And who told schools to "tackle" anal sex? "Where the radical homosexual movement is gaining control of curricula the citizenry must stop schools' systematic sabotage of children's moral development," says Lehrman, former chairman of the Task Force on Religion and Mental Health of the New York Federation of Jewish Philanthropies. Some militant homosexuals increasingly feel "called' into teaching the way other people are called to be missionaries. "Tolerance" programs claiming to support gay children (gay children?) provide cover for introducing obscene material and guiding troubled pupils toward homosexuality. The self-righteous comments of some educators suggest they see innocence as a thing to crush. A child not knowing about sodomy, they feel, is a thing to be corrected. Every child has a right and a need to know what homosexuals do to each other's bodies — and be told it is equivalent to Mommy and Daddy's marriage. "Leave no child behind." Blumenfeld wrote of the 19th-century establishment of Massachusetts' universal state education that fierce resistance by parents and voters was overcome only by a solemn oath by the state to confine itself to academic matters. The right of parents to guide the moral training of their children was guaranteed. But that was back when children belonged to their parents. Clossey got a letter from the district attorney informing her that Massachusetts schools, libraries and museums are immune from laws against exposing children to pornography. It's time to make it a federal felony to crush the innocence of children, with punishments trebled for "educators." John Haskins is executive director of the Parents' Rights Coalition (www.parentsrightscoalition.org). E-mail him at john@parentsrightscoalition.org.
Thanks to REPUBLICAN Governor Weld and his REPUBLICAN successor Cellucci.
I wonder what will be the increase of funding for pederasty and other sexual deviations?
Can you imagine? A government going back on its solemn commitment! What are things coming to?
I've said it before: the so-called "gay rights" activists are not civil libertarians even in the smallest respect, but totalitarians. This article proves that the public education system is rapidly becoming a mere tool for the "sodomization" of society, and not just in Massachusetts either--witness the recent "gay-friendly" educational curricula laws passed in California. Parents shouldn't be forced to send their kids to school just so their minds and bodies can be preyed on by privileged "gay groups" and their "educational" enablers. School choice must be implemented, and NOW!
How about putting in paragraph breaks?
Oh ya, that will do it.
I think you`ll find it going on everywhere.
WELCOME TO FAGACHUSEXS
.....says it all.
The information in the following links may be useful:
HOW TO PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN FROM PRO-HOMOSEXUALITY PROPAGANDA IN SCHOOLS:
"There are many actions parents and pro-family activists can take to protect children from pro-homosexuality propaganda in schools..."
First AIDS Education, Then "Safe Schools," Then Gay Advocacy
Bump to *Homosexual Agenda bump list
Nope. That is the domain of the State. If you don't like they way they do things in Taxachusetts, move to Texas.
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.