Posted on 03/29/2002 3:07:26 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
A pro-family group founder and talk show host is urging parents not to send their kids to public schools in California for fear they could be corrupted by a pro-homosexual agenda.
"In the state of California ... if I had a child there, I wouldn't put that youngster in a public school," Focus on the Family founder James C. Dobson told his radio audience on March 28.
"I've been very careful not to be negative to the public schools, because there are many Christian teachers that are struggling mightily to do what's right," he said. "But given the fact that in every classroom in the state, for 13 public school years, they're being taught homosexual propaganda and these other politically correct, post-modern views.
"I'm going to get hit for [saying] that," Dobson acknowledged.
His recommendation drew praise from the Alliance for the Separation of School and State.
"With today's courageous and insightful statement, Dr. Dobson joins the millions of Americans who have already discovered that the public schools have become government indoctrination centers which are no place to train new generations of freedom-loving Americans," said Marshall Fritz, president of the Alliance.
"Dobson is so significant," said Fritz, noting that Dobson's broadcast is heard by 200 million people daily in over 100 countries. "This could open up debate much wider."
Dobson's organization has been critical of the California legislature and governor for passing legislation that will "devastate children in the state's public schools and harm family life in the state."
Focus on the Family last year singled out ten "radical bills" that would "require teachers to tell children that homosexuality is normal and that anybody who objects is hateful.
"If these bills are passed, homosexual activists will likely use California's schools to destroy the Christian ideas about sexuality that parents teach at home," warned the group in June 2001.
Regarding schools, Focus on the Family criticized state-passed bills that extend "hate crime" policies to public and some private schools; use school-based health clinics to allegedly refer children as young as 12 for birth control, abortions, drug and alcohol and mental health counseling "all without parental notification or permission;" and define harassment to mean talking about moral objections to homosexual behavior.
Tom Adams, administrator for California's department of education "curriculum frameworks," said he was unaware of any pro-homosexual curriculum being taught in the state's public schools.
But, said Adams, parents do have recourse for changing curriculum they don't like, other than taking their kids out of public schools.
"When it comes to the adoption of instructional materials, a person can apply to be a reviewer, because we not only have teachers and scholars ... but we do have members of the public," he said. The state board chooses reviewers, based on an applicant's professional qualifications and commitment to the review process.
Members of the public can submit public comments to the state board and attend public hearings on school curriculum. "The curriculum commission also has to have two public hearings on instructional materials, so anybody can come in there" and speak their mind, said Adams.
The state board of education has all say on final curriculum guidelines and adopting instructional materials, he said. But "we make sure that when we develop curriculum ... that it's all done in a public process; there's plenty of time for public comment," said Adams.
"We do what we can to make sure that no one is not heard," he said.
Former presidential candidate and talk show host Patrick Buchanan was the guest on Dobson's Thursday radio show. He agreed with the host that parents should take their kids out of California public schools.
"Anyone who teaches a child that homosexuality is a moral, natural and healthy lifestyle is lying to that child," said Buchanan. "You're exactly right. You should not let your children be lied to by people in authority [in] the classroom."
Our introduction to public school was special education due to brain damage. It sounds like you're not working now- you can spend a LOT of time at the school, and you should. Watch them; they don't set goal for the kids, and they "poor baby" them- not a life skill.
Make sure your kids get challenged, not babysat, and don't be nice about it. I learned early on that being nice got my daughter sat in a corner, not worked with. The administration, especially, is awful. Most of the teachers my daughter had were decent, and really want to see the kids suceed.
My daughter's been out of special ed for a couple of years, will graduate next year, and start college after that.
What happens is that the parent agrees to services on the child's IEP(Individualized Education Plan) for which the school is paid handsomely by the government, but the amount of funds that go to the special needs kids is minimal. The remainder goes to the general fund. The SLP's and OT's are loaded to the max with children. One SLP I know manages 70 children a week. She has neither the skills to provide for them all, nor the stamina, let alone the paperwork involved.
The child, in this all too familiar case, gets services maybe for two 20 minute sessions per week. What with vacations and holidays and absences by the therapists and the child, when the child is not progressing as expected, the parent is told the child is either too deficient and give him a couple more years or ADD which means he needs medication, or "not trying hard enough".
The parent wastes these precious years of time when therapy is very effective by buying into the school's promise of help.
Don't be fooled by what the school says it is offering. More likely than not, your child will not receive the therapy he needs.
Straight from the NEA talking points. Parents, in fact, have almost no say in anything. The NEA rakes in over $240 million bucks tax free every year. The union can, and does, rig any election anytime and anywhere they chose. The NEA tells the DNC what to do.
Most of your articles are crimes against girls so it's interesting that you would point to them to bolster your anti-homo argument.
"anti-homo" Yeah right. Mentioning the fact that homosexuals do molest kids is "anti-homo" I get it. The articles are taken as they appear. Plenty of homosexual cases on my profile. They are the most vicious of all too. 400 charges in one case alone. An HIV infected teacher raping a 9 year old boy. And on and on (think Jeffery Dahlmer and John Wayne Gacey, homosexuals are in a class by themselves when it comes to sick twisted minds). But your logic is flawed anyway. What difference does it make how many cases there are in one group or another? That straight men rape kids doesn't mean it is OK for homosexuals to rape kids.
Think when you were 14, 15, 16, etc. Would you let someone "molest" you unwillingly?
The kids asked for it. Molesters say this all the time. Tell it to the judge.
And still we mislabel it "pedophilia".
You might. I don't. Sexual relations with older adolescents past puberty is accurately termed "hebophilia" or "ephebophilia." In the case of boys , it is homosexual molestation. The media uses the word "pedophilia" because they are, they think, protecting homosexuals. As if everyone doesn't know these are homosexual men preying on boys just over the age of puberty.
They are not there for the benefit of the child, they are there to collect a paycheck. (Not all of them, but that's a safe assumption to start with.) Treat them like that, fight for what your kids need.
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.