Current Release: April 28th, 2009 | Vol. XXX Iss. 10

Sharing is not a problem in California

By Elizabeth Appleyard

eaappleyard@vwc.edu

On May 12, 2006 California State Senate passed Senate Bill (SB) 1437. According to California State Senator Tom Harmon, “this bill would require California schools’ textbooks to highlight the positive contributions of homosexual and transgender individuals to society and would prevent school textbooks, teaching materials, school-sponsored activities, and instruction from reflecting unfavorably upon a person based on their sexual orientation or actual or perceived gender.”

SB 1437 was passed by the Legislature, but was vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

However, on May 24, 2007 the California State Senate passed SB 777, seeking to ban textbooks, teachers and schools from any instruction that “reflects or promotes bias against” homosexuality, transgender, bisexuals or those with perceived gender issues. SB 777 has become an expansion of SB1437, and this time is not only effective for public schools, but for private schools as well.

With passage of this bill any teaching in support of the traditional family would be considered discriminatory. Not only would CA students from Kindergarten to 12th grade have their text books and lesson plans structured to uphold a manner adversely free of homosexual or other alternate lifestyle biases, but any school activity from sports to proms could also be in violation of the bill should they be deemed as a gender-specific activity.

In the Los Angeles Unified School District, the policies of this bill have already been put into effect. Therefore, in that district, any gender that identifies themselves opposite of what they appear may enter the opposing locker room and/or restroom. Should the bill pass, a potential state-wide requirement of gender-neutral bathrooms in the state’s schools could be issued. It could also result in a mandate to remove all references to “husband” and “wife” or “mom and dad” as the norm from all school textbooks.

So what now?

Well on Oct 12, 2007 Governor Schwarzenegger passed SB 777 making it an official state law.

So, no prom king or queen because that would be deemed gender specific. And I suppose that if little “Johnny” is feeling feminine this year that he can shower right next to “Susie” in the locker room. Oh and mom and dad, yeah, they are not words anymore.

I am all for freedom of speech and equal rights, but I also believe that these laws are starting to push the envelope.

I do not claim to be an expert on government policies or state legislation, but as a citizen of the United States I feel as though this bill would cause more harm than good. Not only is it a violation of religious beliefs and personal safety, but these terms “husband” and “wife” or “mom” and “dad” are historically embedded into our culture and represent relationships that are not going to dissipate because they disappear from text books. Learning about alternative lifestyles is not a horrible thing, but disregarding traditional lifestyles is not justifiable either. I can understand that with the change in times and the change in culture, as a society we are constantly updating our vocabulary, but to restrict an adolescent from learning about a traditional family is ludicrous.

Making it part of a lesson plan to educate children about the many other lifestyles in society is what we should be doing, not eliminating lifestyles. By permitting students to enter bathrooms and locker rooms of their desire, are we not opening doors for an even earlier start to sexual experimentation?

Discrimination is wrong and any decent human being knows that. But how are students ever going to know what discrimination is and that it is wrong unless we teach them about it. If we get rid of every discriminating thing that we ever read, watched, or saw we would be staring at a whole lot of white space.