Sex education and other things . . .
Thanksgiving is over and the Christmas season is here. I am happy to report that Operation Save America's boycott of Wal-Mart was a big bust. From what I understand, they only boycotted in a few places and many were not responsive to their message.
They didn't even bother to boycott at any Wal-Mart in South Carolina, which I am kinda upset about. This state seems to always miss the fun.
Now the Christmas season is here, which means it is time for the phony "War on Christmas," brought to you by the anti-gay industry in yet another attempt to spin a conspiracy theory that "nameless, Godless hordes" are attempting to take the "Christ" out of Christmas.
For a good perspective on what utter nonsense this is, I turn to my friend Joe Brummer - (http://joebrummer.com/WordPress/)
Now in Maryland, there is a situation that has been taking place for a long time regarding objections to sex education. The Washington Blade gives a good cover to this story - (http://www.washblade.com/2006/11-24/news/localnews/curriculum.cfm)
But to make a long story short, it is basically the same problem when it comes to sex education and homosexuality. Anti-gay industry groups do everything they can to see that homosexual orientation is either not covered in sex education classes or covered in a way that they see fit, which generally is:
homosexuality is a "dangerous lifestyle" that should be avoided because gay men have lots of anal sex and it causes them to get diseases, take drugs, and engage in all sorts of evil behavior.
In this particular case, anti-gay industry members have helped some form a group called Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum.
CRC is yet another group attempting to force their negative view of the gay community on others. A good look at their resource page tells the entire story - (http://www.mcpscurriculum.com/resources_related_links.shtml)
The grubby hands of our friend Peter LaBarbera and other assorted so-called "pro family" groups are there. Some of their links are filled with errors. For example:
A. 15 Good Reasons to Oppose ‘Sexual Orientation’ (Homosexuality) Codes in Schools.
This piece, linked from the CRC webpage is from our friend Peter LaBarbera. Even the title is a distortion. No school operates a "sexual orientation" code. I am not even certain that this phrase even exists. From the onset, it is plainly seen that LaBarbera is engaging in propaganda and fear tactics. This is further demonstrated when one reads the piece.
His first point is a distortion:
"Homosexual behavior is wrong (and illegal in some states) . . ."
The first problem with this is that LaBarbera has not established what exactly is "homosexual behavior." Secondly, he is incorrect about the legality of it. Clearly LaBarbera is leading the reader to think that "homosexual behavior" is a description involving solely sexual behavior. His piece was written in 2002 (before Lawrence vs. Texas) made sodomy laws illegal. But even if somehow Lawrence vs. Texas had ruled the other way, his assertion of homosexual behavior being illegal is incorrect. Most of the sodomy laws had to do with sexual acts, heterosexual or homosexual, and not whom the acts were being committed with.
LaBabera continues his distortions with point two:
"Homosexual actions are unhealthy - especially for males. Like smoking, alcohol, and drug abuse, they should be discouraged. Dangerous behavior that shortens a person’s life should never be promoted to impressionable students."
Again, LaBarbera does not give a description of what exactly are "homosexual actions," leading the reader to think that "homosexual actions" can only be defined by sexual behavior by two people of the same gender. Also, his second point regarding "homosexual actions" shortening a person’s lifespan is an out and out distortion. No legitimate researcher has ever said that homosexuality shortens someone’s lifespan. The Centers for Disease Control has gone on record saying that they have never conducted studies saying that homosexuality "shortens" someone’s lifespan. - The Washington Blade, June 17, 2005
The only two sources LaBarbera and his groups can cite comes from a distorted Oxford study (http://ije.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/30/6/1499) and a discredited researcher by the name of Paul Cameron (remember him). Among other things, Cameron had his membership in the American Psychological Association taken away because he was found guilty of distorting the work of other researchers.
The rest of LaBarbera’s piece is just pure propaganda. He throws out incredibly bizarre hypothetical situations but does not quantify them with proof as to whether or not they will ever take place.
This is the caliber of "responsible curriculum" that CRC wants to force on Maryland.