We’ll be posting more on this story, so stay tuned…

——————————

Excerpted from Parents Fume Over Salacious Sex Lesson, by Tracy Dell’Angela, published Mar 10, 2007, by Chicago Tribune:

8th graders forced to read graphic material aloud in the classroom

Excerpted from School Tells Kids to Hide Pro-“Gay” Propaganda from Parents, published Mar 13, 2007, by Concerned Women for America:

In a shocking and brazen act of governmental abuse of parental rights, Deerfield High School (DHS) in Deerfield, Illinois, has required fourteen-year-old freshmen to attend a “Straight Gay Alliance Network” (GSA) panel discussion led by “gay” and “lesbian” upperclassmen during a “freshman advisory” class which secretively featured inappropriate discussions of a sexual nature in promotion of high-risk homosexual behaviors.

Not only has DHS required that its young and impressionable freshmen be exposed to radical homosexual propaganda, the school has further required that students sign a “confidentiality agreement” promising not to tell anyone — including their own parents — about the discussion.

Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues with Concerned Women for America (CWA), said of the scandal:

“This is unbelievable. It’s not enough that students at Deerfield High are being exposed to improper and offensive material relative to unhealthy and high-risk homosexual behaviors, but they’ve essentially been told by teachers to lie to their parents about it.

“This goes to the heart of the homosexual agenda. The professional propagandists in the ‘gay-rights’ lobby know the method all too well. If you can maintain control of undeveloped and impressionable youth and spoon-feed them misinformation, lies and half-truths about dangerous, disordered and extremely risky behaviors, then you can control the future and ensure that those behaviors are not only fully accepted, but celebrated. That’s what homosexual activists from GSA are attempting to do, and that’s what DHS is clearly up to as well.”

Dr. George Fornero, superintendent of DHS’ Dist. 113, told CWA that the district “made a mistake” by requiring children to sign the confidentiality agreement and that it would be entirely aboveboard and honest with parents in the future. However, as Barber noted, the damage has already been done: “Until DHS and other government schools across the country are made to stop promoting the homosexual agenda, kids will continue to be exposed to — and encouraged to participate in — a lifestyle that places them at high risk for life-threatening disease, depression and spiritual despair,” said Barber.

Remarkably, even after the school district’s surreptitious actions were exposed, parents were nonetheless told that they were not welcome to sit in on the “freshman advisory” and were not permitted to have access to materials used in compiling its activist curriculum.

Excerpted from School Accused of Promoting Homosexuality, by Lisa Black, published Mar 7, 2007, by Chicago Tribune:

Some parents have accused Deerfield High School of promoting a homosexual agenda by allowing gay students to speak before freshman classes about their personal experiences, cite research and invite questions.

Taking place in classrooms this week, the panel sessions are scheduled during a class called freshman advisory, which seeks to help students adjust to high school. The class is mandatory, but parents can choose to remove their child on days the lessons concern them, school officials said.

But Deerfield resident and parent Lora Sue Hauser, who heads a group called North Shore Student Advocacy, wants to see the panel discontinued, saying it delves into complex issues of sexuality that are better addressed by parents and trained counselors. She said the panel is one of several ways that Deerfield High and other schools treat homosexuality as morally acceptable without presenting the viewpoints of those who disagree.

“The school makes heterosexuality and homosexuality equivalent, and our country is deeply divided on that,” said Hauser, who said dozens of parents belong to the advocacy group but fear they will be labeled as haters or religious fanatics if they speak out.

“You can’t dump that on a 14-year-old,” Hauser said. “These are really difficult waters to navigate.”

Continue reading at Chicago Tribune…

Recall AFTAH’s exclusive special report on the Homosexual Sex Worker Panel at “Creating Change”…

On Feb 12, 2007, at the historic College of William and Mary in Virginia, here’s what one sex worker “artist” presented to an audience of over 400:

…Jo Weldon shared her story of how a stripper job helped pay her way through college and graduate school.

Why would any institution of higher learning encourage students to imagine sex work — ie, prostitution — as a possibility for their lives?  This is not “controversial” — it’s corrupting.

TAKE ACTION — For a complete listing of other universities which have or plan to host this travesty, click HERE. If you are a current student or tuition-paying parent, an alumnus or a donor, please make your objections known to the university president.  Complain to your elected officials about the misuse of your hard-earned tax dollars to pay for this presentation at public universities.

——————————

Excerpted from College of William and Mary Hosts Sex Worker Show on Campus, published Feb 23, 2007, by FOX News:

The same college that recently removed a traditional cross from the campus chapel allowed a controversial sex workers’ show to come give students an event complete with stripteases, feather boas and sex toys.

The College of William and Mary in Virginia last week hosted a Sex Workers’ Art Show for a crowd of more than 400 in an auditorium in the University Center, reported The Virginia Gazette. Another 300 people were turned away.

…Money to host the event came out of student activity fees…

“I think it’s a totally inappropriate use of student funds,” Ken Petzinger, a physics professor, told the Gazette. “It’s in conflict with other values the college has.”

President Gene Nichol issued a statement saying: “I don’t like this kind of show and I don’t like having it here … But it’s not the practice and province of universities to censor or cancel performances because they are controversial.”

Continue reading at FOX News…

On Feb 12, 2007, the Desert Dispatch reported that Barstow High School now has a “GSA” (“gay”-straight alliance). The article notes that initially no teacher was willing to sponsor the group until English teacher Rebekah Michelson unfortunately agreed to serve. Richard Reeb, former Barstow College professor and blogger for The Claremont Institute, penned the following response to the story…

——————————–

Excerpted from Barstow High School Needs to Think Twice About Gay Club, by Richard Reeb, published Wed Feb 14, 2007, in Desert Dispatch:

…This week we learn that advocates of homosexuality, under the guise of protecting students with real or imagined inclinations in that direction against school yard bullies and “intolerance” generally, are forming a gay club at Barstow High.

Notwithstanding the purported popularity of these groups on California’s high school campuses, it is a mistake to permit those pushing sexual perversion on our state to exploit the innocence of high school students and the misguided “tolerance” of Barstow High School teachers and administrators.

…The new club’s prospective faculty advisor made a remarkable statement that captures the ambiguity – and the dangers – of introducing young persons in the throes of raging hormones to an unnatural way of life.

“They’re unformed clay, and they’re trying to figure out who they are and how they want to live,” she said. “My goal is to provide a safe environment where kids can be social.”

Now if these Barstow teenagers are “unformed clay,” what sense does it make to encourage them to reject the example and the precepts of their parents and their society, and to experiment with ideas and (inevitably) practices which can confuse them pretty thoroughly? We are constantly told that our teenaged children are “sexually active,” whether their parents know or approve or not, so steering them toward same-sex intimacy in theory means encouraging it in practice.

Also noteworthy is the guiding hand of Carolyn Laub, founder and executive director of the Gay-Straight Alliance Network, a California-based nonprofit umbrella group for GSAs around the state. This puts the lie to the claim that the students themselves were somehow the instigators of club formation. Ms. Laub says she has formed 600 clubs at more than 40 percent of California high schools. Barstow finally got “discovered.”

We know that advocates or enablers of sexual perversion, which they euphemistically refer to as “diversity,” mean for their fellow citizens not merely to “tolerate” it but to “celebrate” it. After all, from their point of view, they have nothing to apologize for. Indeed, critics of their “lifestyle” are the ones who have some explaining to do. Nothing but bigotry or religious fanaticism could possibly explain opposition to our public schools sanctioning “gayness.”

It is amazing that Laud and other professional advocates cite the federal Equal Access Act in support of their right to form gay clubs on high school campuses. But we should remind ourselves that the actual origin of that act, signed by President Clinton, was to protect the rights of religious organizations to meet on campus after gay clubs had already formed.

…In plain words, gay clubs are part of a movement which is not only pushing homosexuality on vulnerable teenagers but openly hostile to Christian groups that still follow the Biblical teaching that homosexuality is an “abomination.” Their object is not to strike a blow for free speech but to eradicate from public discourse the viewpoint that homosexuality is morally wrong.

That is the “ball game.” …Today’s “uncloseted” homosexual advocates and practitioners will not rest until all of us agree that denying the distinctive sexual wellsprings of our nature is right and maintenance of traditional marriage and family is wrong.

It is too bad that Barstow Unified School District trustees have given sanction to this “gay” club. Parents should register their protests and take advantage of what moral virtue still remains in this community to stop the club in its tracks.

Dr. Richard Reeb taught political science, philosophy and journalism at Barstow College from 1970 to 2003. He is the author of “Taking Journalism Seriously: ‘Objectivity’ as a Partisan Cause” (University Press of America, 1999).

“For many weeks prior to the February 27, 2007 school board hearing, community activist James Hartline begged and pleaded for Christians to come and stand up for the kids who are being exposed to the pornography of the San Diego Gay Pride events. Hundreds of San Diego pastors received emails from Hartline. Not one pastor showed up.“

“Out of the 1,700 churches in San Diego County, not one pastor showed up…”

An Action Alert from our friend, James Hartline:

If there hadn’t been any witnesses, most people would not have believed what the superintendent of schools for the San Diego Unified School District told a packed audience during a February 27, 2007 school board meeting. In response to complaints that an elementary school in San Diego, California was exposing small children to pornographic imagery when marching the kids in the San Diego Gay Pride Parade last year, school superintendent Carl H. Cohn stated, “We investigated these concerns and did not find any parents who have a problem with their kids in the gay pride parade.”

Cohn’s response came after James Hartline, a local community activist and child protection advocate, issued a stinging speech condemning the school board’s refusal to stop the children from marching in the parade under the banner of the San Diego Cooperative Charter School. Joining Hartline were eleven other supporters including attorney Robert Sutton and his wife Kim Tran, a Republican candidate for the California State Assembly. In his speech, Sutton likened the battle to save kids from the “gay pride” onslaught to that of the struggle to free the slaves during the 1800’s. Ms. Tran, a mother of five children and numerous foster children, is especially outraged that small children are being marched in a parade that openly displays xxx porn companies and male prostitutes. “I cannot believe that this school board doesn’t do anything about what this charter school is doing to these little children. It is so heartbreaking,” cried Tran.

Excerpted from Homosexual Activists Consider Targeting Private Christian Schools for “Homophobia”, by Gudrun Schultz published Feb 27, 2007, by LifeSite News:

Want provincial ministry of education to exert “more control” over curriculum and staff hiring

Ontario private schools are coming increasingly under the lens of homosexual activist groups for “homophobic” teaching stemming from the schools’ primarily religious foundations, a report in Ottawa’s homosexual news media indicated earlier this week.

[WARNING: The following link to the original story in a pro-homosexuality
publication is accompanied by extremely offensive advertising.]

In an article warning about the increasing trend toward private and religious schools in the province, Ottawa’s Capital Xtra objected to religious schools that teach children “only their own values.”

The article quotes Tony Lovink, a homosexual Christian teacher in the Ottawa public school system, as saying,

“All private schools tend to be at least implicitly homophobic. And I would say all religiously formed independent schools are definitely homophobic.”

[Note from AFTAH: Based on Scripture, we contend that it is not possible
to simultaneously engage in homosexual behavior and be a faithful Christian…
but change is possible in Jesus Christ.]

The Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Ontario said they were concerned the provincial ministry of education wasn’t “exerting more control” over the curriculum used by private religious schools. Unless a school wants to grant students government-recognized Secondary School Diplomas, Ontario private schools are free to use their preferred curriculum. Even schools that do grant the government diplomas may teach any additional material they choose, so long as the required curriculum is covered.

As well, the CLGRO objected to provincial standards that permit private schools to hire teachers based on the school administration’s own qualification requirements.

Continue reading at LifeSite News…

Lexington, Massachusetts, School Superintendent Paul Ash tells taxpaying parents:

“When anybody’s been willing to listen to me I say, yes, you do have rights. You can choose not to send your child to a public school. But you don’t have the right to tell us what we can teach or not teach unless you want to run for school committee, find a majority of the members of the school committee and then hire a superintendent who’s consistent with that philosophy. But as an individual citizen you don’t have the right to tell a first grade teacher what to teach or not teach,” said Ash. “But I must tell you that the parents’ rights argument resonates with a lot of people in America.”

as quoted in Lexington School Superintendent Paul Ash, published Dec 27, 2006, by the pro-homosexuality Bay Windows