Superintendent of Schools gives truth behind Angels of America situation . . . and is attacked on a personal level

One of the main things that causes me and others to want to beat our heads against a brick wall is the insistence of the anti-gay industry to engage in lies even after the truth has been revealed, explained, told, etc.

It has to do with plain stubborness and a desire to be right even when you are wrong.

Consider the nonsense published on the Americans for Truth (in name only) page by one Laurie Higgins, a person in the middle of the Deerfield High School controversy.

A little recap first: Laurie, Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber and other members of the anti-gay industry have been telling lies about a reading assignment in Deerfield High School.

They claim that the school is "exposing" students to "racist pornography" by having them read the Tony and Pulitzer Prize-award-winning play Angels in America. The claim is even punctuated by portions of the play cherry-picked to induce shock and rage.

Of course Ms. Higgins and others sounding the alarm minimize other details about the moral panic they have caused.

Such as the book is offered as an "option" in a senior AP Literature Class. And that parents had to sign permission slips in order for their children to be able to read the book

But I guess to them, facts are irrelevant when you are trying to stamp out "godlessness."

Anyway, the Superintendent of Schools, George Fornero, has responded to the allegations in an excellent letter.

Higgins has taken it upon herself to tear apart this letter, including making snide comments about Fornero's sexuality.

But in doing so, she reveals the recklessness of herself and her cause.

Let's look at some choice bits along with my take on what they mean:

Fornero: Students studying the play are second semester seniors in Advanced Placement English.

Higgins: (Translation: “We save the most offensive tripe for the most intelligent.”)

My take: Well that was a mature way to start a conversation Ms. Higgins.

Fornero: The College Board oversees all Advanced Placement testing; the class syllabus, including all readings was approved through the Board’s audit process.

Higgins: (Translation: “Of all the readings offered through the College Board, we’re including the most offensive.”)

My take: Why should Ms. Higgins rely on facts when hyperbole seems to work so much better.

Fornero: Parents received information about Angels in America that specifically addressed the mature content and potential for offense.

Higgins: (Translation: “We’re using the inaccurate euphemism ‘mature’ for the more accurate term “obscene.” Reality: The use of obscene language represents the very antithesis of maturity. It is intemperate, puerile language. In addition, the information given parents did not adequately convey exactly how obscene and perverted the material is.)

My take: please note that Higgins sidestepped the fact that parents were told about the book. I doubt that she has any idea as to what was sent out to parents explaining the book. And I really don't think she cares.

Fornero: Parents were asked to make an informed decision about the text their child would read. Two viable choices were presented: Angels in America and Albert Camus’ The Plague. They were also given the option of having their students read both texts. Letter to parents requested that they provide permission for their student to read the selected text(s).

Higgins: (Reality: Many parents have neither the time nor interest in reading read the entirety of Angels in America; This teacher is much beloved by students, and teens are rebellious, therefore, even parents who don’t want their children to read Angels may feel the force of social pressure, compelling them to allow their children to read the provocative, controversial text. The school has potentially set parents up for conflicts with their own children.”)

My take: Are there any facts behind Ms. Higgins's claim? Where is the proof behind her charges? She is speculating that parents did not sit down with their children to discuss whether or not they could read this book. As seen by the post yesterday (if it turns out to be accurate), there was at least one case where the parent and the child did talk about the book and its subject matter. And I am sure that there were others.

Fornero: Excerpts taken out of context from the play by NSSA are being used to diminish the work’s social and political themes.

Higgins: (Reality: There is no context that can justify or render acceptable the teaching of the most extreme violations of decency and truth that occur in this play. Put another way, can the administration or school board imagine any text in which the sexual vulgarity, obscenity, profanity or sacrilege is so extreme or offensive that its very presence would render a text unsuitable for teaching, no matter what positive elements may also be present? Or will positive literary elements always trump issues of obscenity, profanity, and sacrilege? Are administrators saying they will never, under any circumstances take into account the nature and extent of obscenity, profanity, and sacrilege?)

My take: So if I cherry picked portions of the Bible that talked about castrations, mutilations, rapes, and genocide, would Ms. Higgins be on my side? I really doubt it.

Fornero: According to Lake County State’s Attorney Mike Waller, the reading and discussion of the material is not a violation of the obscenity laws, or any other laws, of the State of Illinois.

Higgins: (Reality: The fact that it may not technically violate obscenity laws does not mean it is not obscene. I guarantee that if I start using Kushner’s language in the writing center where I work, or if students start using it in their classrooms, faculty members and administrators will curtail it due to its obscene nature. And if I or students refuse to cease and desist, we will be disciplined.)

My take: When this controversy started, the organization speaking out against the book (NSSA) said that the State Attorney General's office did say it violated obscenity laws. When Waller said this was not true, the group quickly changed its tone. Not quick enough for other anti-gay industry sites to stop claiming that the book violated obscenity laws, however.

So in one corner, we have an excellent, very thorough letter explaining the entire situation. And in the other, we have bad refutations that reveal the shrill nature of not only the person responding but the parties who have started this entire nonsense.

The sad thing is that new lies are being told. Town Hall columnist Mike Adams claimed that 14-year-olds are being required to read Angels in America:

Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Illinois, recently assigned the pornographic book “Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes” to students as young as 14 as a required reading. Somehow they didn’t expect parents to be offended by its graphic sexuality and overt racism. But, of course, they were. And that is why I am proud to report that the school has decided to make the reading “optional” over-riding the gay teacher’s original intentions.

And this lie is being repeated on other sites

Deerfield High School did nothing wrong, so I doubt that there will be any dismissals. However, I cringe to think that somewhere down the road, Matt Barber, Peter LaBarbera, or other members of the anti-gay industry will be able to refer to the situation and lie about it unchallenged.

It underscores that these groups and the folks behind them aren't interested in truth or values. Only power and control.

If this isn't the case then why did they rely on hyperbole, distortions, and misdirections to make their case.

Not very Christian, is it?

One more thing. If Ms. Higgins reads this post, I would suggest to her that she read yesterday's post from a student attending the AP Literature class.

She could learn a little something about maturity.

Youth speak out about Sally Kern and Deerfield High School . . . and outclasses the adults

Oklahoma Representative Sally Kern is still getting no defense from anti-gay industry members such as Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber. This silence is interesting since (as seen in yesterday's post) it was their words she used in making her claims, including the one that homosexuality is worse than terrorism and Islam.

You will remember how Peter LaBarbera rushed to Fort Lauderdale mayor Jim Naugle's defense when he made controversial statements about the gay community.

Hell, Janet Folger even gave Naugle an award.

Meanwhile, there is an excellent letter from a senior in an Oklahoma high school addressed to Kern. This student lost his mother in the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing. The letter has not been verified as legitimate. If this letter turns out to be legitimate, it is a powerful indictment on Kern's ignorance.

Part of the letter reads as follows:

You represent a district in Oklahoma City and you very coldly express a lack of love, sympathy or understanding for what they've been through. Can I ask if you might have chosen wiser words were you a real Oklahoman that was here to share the suffering with Oklahoma City? Might your heart be a bit less cold had you been around to see the small bodies of children being pulled out of rubble and carried away by weeping firemen?

I've spent 12 years in Oklahoma public schools and never once have I had anyone try to force a gay agenda on me. I have seen, however, many gay students beat up and there's never a day in school that has went by when I haven't heard the word **** slung at someone. I've been called gay slurs many times and they hurt and I am not even gay so I can just imagine how a real gay person feels. You were a school teacher and you have seen those things too. How could you care so little about the suffering of some of your students?

The entire piece is here.

And yesterday, I received a comment from someone who claims to be a senior attending Deerfield High School and a member of the AP class embroiled in the Angels In America controversy.

If this post is accurate, then this student puts the entire situation in perspective:

I am in the AP English class in question and have chosen to read the book.

Many of the articles make a fuss about how this book was "required reading." What they fail to point out is that there is ALWAYS the opportunity to opt out of reading a book if you or your parents are truly offended by it. It's not well-publicized, but it's there.

Some articles went as far as to say that forcing this book on us was "child abuse," which I think is patently ridiculous.

1. This cannot be child abuse because we are not children. Everyone in the class is eighteen or close to it. We can see similar things in R-rated movies; why can't we read about them in a class where we can discuss them in a mature and intelligent manner? If we are of legal age to vote for president and to die for the country, I should think we are capable of deciding what we believe and what we want to read.

2. If parents are trying to protect us from the issues discussed in the book, they must know that their efforts are doomed to fail. We all know that homosexuality and racism exist, and any parents who think their darling angel couldn't possibly have used or at least hear the "objectionable language" need to pull their heads out of the sand. These issues are out there, and refusing to let us read this book in class will not change that. If anything, more of us are likely to go out and read this book just to see what all the fuss was about.

For those have or are tempted to connect this to the SAGA Advisory pannel and say that the school is forcing homosexuality down our throats, I disagree. The freshmen are not asked to agree with the panel members and their decisions. They are asked to respect them, as we are asked to respect all of our peers. My English teacher has not told us his views on homosexuality, much less tried to convince us to agree with him. The hate mail he has received is unjustified.

Because we were not allowed to read the book without having a parent sign the permission form, I talked with my mom about the book. Our conversation was very short. She told me that I was eighteen and could make my own decisions. I wish all parents--not to mention the NSSA--had as much faith and respect for their children.

My hat goes off to these two youngsters. But it's also sad when the young act more mature than adults.

Short post today - This brother's tired

My mother got her cast removed today.

For those not keeping up with this situation, my mother broke her ankle in two places two months ago.

It has been an interesting two months as she was confined to a wheelchair and I learned how to cook her version of soul food.

Ewwww.

Seriously though she now goes through rehabilitation in order to learn how to walk with the pins the doctors put in her ankle.

We always need your prayers.


Sally Kern - too hot to handle?

Is it just me or is no one in the religious right rushing to defend Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern's comments.

Short from very few right wing blogs, I have yet to see any major religious right group sound the alarm about "freedom of speech."

There is nothing from the Focus on the Family, Concerned Women for America, and even One News Now.

Hell, I expected our friend Peter LaBarbera to say a little something.

Apparently he is too busy telling lies about the upcoming Day of Silence.

How convenient.

Could it be that they are scared to defend Kern's comments for fear of being asked about whether or not they agree with her comments regarding gays indoctrinating two-year-olds and homosexuality being worse than terrorism and Islam (and by the way, I neglected to mention how she insulted Islam).

Or could it be that the anti-gay industry actually has a sense of shame and realize that maybe their comments and propaganda can go too far?

What do you think?

UPDATE: One of my biggest bone of contentions over this entire thing was Rep. Kern not being asked to provide proof of her claims. Well now she has.

She gave KSBI-TV "proof" of her claims:

KSBI-TV received copies from Representative Kern of what she calls proof of a homosexual agenda. A document and links to some of those are below.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=68553

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=68457

So her proof are links from the anti-gay news site, One News Now.

Are we really surprised?


One more thing

I neglected to mention that I made additions on my Anti-Gay Lies and Liars webpage. The additions include incidents from last year and this year (featuring our favorite state representative at the moment.)

Check it out and tell me what you think.

We've been here before - Sally Kern

By now everyone knows about Oklahoma Representative Sally Kern's diatribe of lies against the lgbt community.

Let me tell you all how this is probably going to end:

Us gay folks are going to focus on calling Kern a homophobe for what she said but we won’t focus on the specifics of how she is lying.

Kern is going to hide behind the first amendment probably because no one is going to ask her just where did her information come from.

The religious right is going to try and make her a martyr. It’s not unusual for them. Lies and distortions are what they deal in.

Who is going to say "SALLY KERN, THESE ARE THE WORDS COMING OUT OF YOUR MOUTH. LET'S SEE THESE FACTS YOU ALLUDED TO ABOUT GAY PEOPLE."

We all recognize those claims from Kern’s mouth. The lies about gay men and children, the lies about the alleged "gay life span;" they are the lies the anti-gay industry have been throwing at us for years. And no matter how many times these lies are discredited, they are still useful.

Let’s face it. No matter how Kern tries to make herself seem innocent, the fact of the matter is she referred to discredited work. And people need to know that. It probably won’t change some minds but I have a feeling that quite a few won’t exactly feel comfortable with a legislator who cites bad studies about gays.

Especially when that legislator has a history of targeting gays with her bills.

How often does this sort of thing happen across the country? How many legislators are privy to bad information about the gay community via religious right propaganda.

And how often do we NOT engage in “show us where you get your facts from” campaigns. This is what needs to be done in situations like this.

By calling people names and not showing just why they are wrong in their claims, we help out the enemy. When people are angry, they tend to react rather than proactive.

And almost every time a situation like this happens (i.e a legislator attacks the gay community via anti-gay industry propaganda) we tend to react angrily. We aggressively write letters and have marches.

Meanwhile the offending legislator tends to act all innocent and superior.

“I am only debating the issue,” he or she would say, “I am only using my First Amendment Rights.”

It was done in the case of Ft. Lauderdale mayor Jim Naugle and it will be done here.

Rep. Kern was not speaking impromptu. She did not just think of this information out of thin air. Someone fed this woman the information which she is now repeating.

And when we attack those sources, we get to the true root of the lies and the words that causes fear and murder.

And by the sources, I mean the propaganda movies from American Family Association, the pseudo-scientific papers from Concerned Women for American, Family Research Council, and the Traditional Values Coalition, the astroturfing groups pretending to be "parents' rights organizations" across the country.

All have a hand in manufacturing the lies that came from Kerns's mouth. And all must be made accountable.

Update on the Deerfield High School situation - The things the anti-gay industry omitted in their hyperbole

This is from an article by the Lake County News Sun regarding the controversy surrounding Angels in America and Deerfield High School. I bolded the more interesting parts:

North Shore Student Advocacy called for School District 113 Superintendent George Fornero, Deerfield High School Principal Sue Hobson, and all involved teachers to resign or be fired by the School Board.

The group claimed a victory when, after its complaints, the school district made "Angels" an "opt in" book rather than required reading in the Advanced Placement English literature course. Parents and students have to opt in to read that book, "The Plague" or both . . .

Lora Sue Hauser, executive director of NSSA, complained that the book is replete with profanity, overt racism, an explicit description of a sex act involving Mother Theresa, and vivid depictions of sodomy.

"After almost 15 years of school advocacy and reviewing many objectionable books and curricula, I have never seen anything this vulgar and harmful to students," Hauser said.

She said NSSA also talked to the Lake County state's attorney's office and claimed that office concurred that the play violated the state's obscenity statute prohibiting adults from "distributing harmful material to minors.

State's Attorney Michael Waller disputed that claim, saying it did not violate any criminal statute.

Carol Votsmier, school spokeswoman, said there was a problem with NSSA extracting passages of the play out to illustrate vulgarity.

The book and the class curricula were approved by the Advanced Placement College Board, she added. The students who "opted in" for the class will not be reading it until April. The class is limited to seniors, and 51 signed up to take it, but not all have made their choice of one or both books.

Votsmier said the play also has been taught in Highland Park High School.

The school district and NSSA clashed last year over a freshman orientation session where students talked about bullying and other issues and included gay students relating their experience in high school.

Matt Barber, director of cultural issues with Concerned Women for America, said his jaw dropped when he read the book.

"This isn't a First Amendment issue. This is about school officials betraying the community trust. Heads need to roll here. Assigning this racist, pornographic smut to high school kids is nothing short of child abuse," Barber said.

Votsmier said no one has been asked to resign, and there have been no voluntary resignations. She said the teacher of the course feels the students have the maturity and thoughtfulness to read this book and learn from it .

Let's clear up a few things:

No one is required to read Angels in America.

By offering it, Deerfield High School is not breaking any laws.

The class in which the book is offered is an AP class limited to seniors.

The book and the class curricula have been approved by the Advanced Placement College Board.
Now tell me something - just who is pushing a negative agenda? Is it Deerfield High School or someone pushing the following headlines:

Taxes provide free porn to teens

Deerfield High School Promotes Porn

Deerfield High School outside Chicago Offers Homosexual Pornography To Students

My friends, hyperbole and truth just don't mix.

The anti-gay industry beats up on Deerfield High School (again)

Last year (last year this month in fact), members of the anti-gay industry attacked a high school in Illinois, claiming that not only was it "indoctrinating" students into homosexuality, but also that it was "forcing" students to sign a confidentiality agreement to keep said indoctrination from being found out by their parents. Here are the facts:

At Deerfield High School, there is a program that is geared to helping students adjust to high school. One component of this program is a panel discussion that includes speakers from the school's gay/straight alliance. These students talk about such things as being bullied because of their orientation.

Parents were able to opt their children out of the program.

The alleged "confidentiality agreement" was an agreement between the students that they would not discuss the program with other students who did not attend. The agreement said nothing about keeping details from parents. It is as follows:

Confidentiality

Every person keeps what comes up in class confidential, unless it is dangerous to do so - that is unless a situation in class requires us to get outside help.

We do not repeat what someone says in class outside of class except if we have permission of the person that said it.

We will not continue a conversation outside of class without permission from all the people that were involved during the class.

Bottom line: What happens in our classroom stays in our classroom.

Exceptions to the confidentiality in which case (the teacher's name - I will not repeat it) will get outside help are:

If someone in the class reports being hurt;

If someone reports that they are hurting someone else; or

If someone reports that they are hurting or want to hurt themselves

The agreement was a part of a larger list of rules those participating in the program agreed to follow. Other rules included courtesy and respect for other expressed opinions.

Now omitting (who are we kidding - ignoring) these facts, Peter LaBarbera and other members of the anti-gay industry made a huge stink. As far as I know, their lies didn't get far.

So apparently they rested for a year and began attacking the high school again about another matter:

Deerfield High School outside Chicago Offers Homosexual Pornography To Students

And what is this pornography you ask?

Why it's the Pulitzer Prize, Tony Award, and Emmy Award winning play by Tony Kushner, Angels in America.

Neither Peter nor the group he is supporting in this matter (North Shore Student Advocacy) is giving details as to what exactly is going on. All they are saying is that the school is giving homosexual pornography to students via English classes.

Which is ironic because they are encouraging parents and others to write in to complain based on the miniscule degree of information they are providing them.

And to back up their "claims," they have included graphic portions of the play.

It reminds me of what young girls used to do to Judy Blume's Forever when I was in middle school.

Angels in America is not pornography. It is a thought-provoking moving series of plays about the beginning of the AIDS crisis. And the only problem Peter and company have is with the gay aspect.

In digging more, I found the following information:

The books were part of required reading until NSSA filed a formal complaint with the school, asking the books to be reviewed by committee. The committee decided to remove the books from required reading but continued to offer them in the classroom as an optional title. “Optional Title,” according to the principal, means that the student may select the books to study with peers and be guided by the adult, male teacher. A parental permission slip will be required but without full disclosure of the sexually explicit content. This conclusion is unacceptable to the complaining parent and to NSSA. They are asking that this pornographic book be removed from curriculum completely.

After contacting the State’s Attorney’s office of Lake County, Illinois, they deemed the books “obscene” according to Illinois obscenity laws, violating the “distributing harmful materials to minors” statute. But, state and federal obscenity laws exempt schools and libraries under “affirmative defense” so it becomes impossible to prosecute a teacher or school.

So apparently Peter and company didn't let folks know that the books are optional titles. Can you say censorship?

What's next? To Kill a Mockingbird because it contains racism? Or how about The Chocolate War because of it's unhappy ending?

No doubt folks will try to use this to not only censor high schools but to attack lgbts yet again.

To me, that is the real travesty.

I commend Deerfield for standing firm last year and I hope that the high school will not be bullied this year.

UPDATE: I have just rejected a comment by someone who thought it was thought-provoking to post the graphic comments of Angels in America I alluded to earlier in this post.

I rejected it for two reasons. First, the attempt to get a viceral reaction from me is immature.

The second and most important - to illustrate just why the moral panic over this situation is not necessary. Just as I was able to reject those comments, students were not required to read Angels in America. It was an option.

Again, I repeat, no one was forcing the students to read Angels in America. That's the beauty of this country. No one can force you to do anything you don't want to do.

So to that poster who tried to leave the comment - nice try.

First the good news

We now break from the madness of the anti-gay industry for a nice moment of lucidity:

Apparently the word has come down that the Columbia City Council (located in South Carolina - where I currently reside) has unanimously passed ordinances that prohibits discrimination in housing and public accomodations on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The laws were presented and passed with very little opposition.

In other words, the Columbia City Council passed a law that keeps people from being discriminated against when they are seeking a place to live or eat, etc.

There was no talk about "being forced to accept homosexuality."

There was no talk of "men and pedophiles invading women's locker rooms and restrooms,"

There was no talk of "churches beinig forced to rent to or hire 'she-males' and 'drag queens.'

This, my friends, is what America is all about.

Now the other stuff

According to goodasyou.org, anti-gay industry groups are banding together to protest the upcoming Day of Silence. They are even encouraging parents to keep their children home on this day.

What I want to know is whatever happened to that lovely bullshit they called "The Day of Truth."

This was an attempt to combat the "Day of Silence ." School children were encouraged to "tell the truth about homosexuality."

Of course this translates to reciting anti-gay industry propaganda about gay men and short life spans, probably a little dash of "lesbians have a problem with alcohol and domestic violence," with just a hint of "according to prominent researchers Paul Cameron and John R. Diggs . . ."

Apparently their lies weren't working in that avenue so they are taking a different road. Hopefully it will end up at the same place.

And finally . . .

Box Turtle Bulletin is reporting that Glenn Stanton from Focus on the Family is distorting scientific views.

And this just in . . . the sun is yellow.

Seriously, a Focus on the Family newsletter item said the following:

Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family, said there’s a clear consensus among anthropologists.

“A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female,” he said. “Those two parts of humanity join together, create new life and they both cooperate in the legitimization of the child, if you will, and the development of the child.”

Now we all know the first rule of dealing with the anti-gay industry. When they make a claim, check on it because it's, more than likely, a misrepresenation or an out-and-out lie.

Well Box Turtle Bulletin did check on Stanton's claim. The site checked with an actual anthropologist.

To read what they found, click here.

This incident will definitely go onto my other site, Anti-Gay Lies and Liars (shameless plug ahead). I will be updating it this weekend.