Homosexual agenda advanced at Oak Park’s Beye Elementary School
UPDATE 2: I received a comment on my Thursday post, I hope to respond to the comment Monday.
I believe I received the following as an e-mail either late last year or early this year. I’m posting it tonight since it goes along with the content of what I have been discussing and while discuss in future posts.
“Homosexual Activists Exploit Oak Park’s Beye Elementary School
by Laurie Higgins, Director of IFI's DSA -Illinois Family Institute
It was only a matter of time before homosexual activism infected elementary education here in Illinois. This cancerous activism appeared during a recent Institute Day at William Beye Elementary School in Oak Park during which Oak Park resident and lesbian, Shannon Sullivan, who is the Executive Director of the Illinois Safe Schools Network, was invited to speak to the entire faculty.
During her biased presentation, Sullivan showed the film ‘That’s a Family’, which I too have seen. It was shown at a professional development workshop at Deerfield High School when I worked there, and it angered more than a few staff members. Our workshop was organized by our homosexual director of technology, which should help rest the silly claim that the sexual orientation of our educators is irrelevant.
‘That’s a Family’ implicitly espouses the offensive claim that families led by homosexuals are morally equivalent to those led by guardians, disabled parents, racial minorities, or heterosexuals. Some teachers at Beye are planning on showing this piece of political propaganda to their elementary students, citing the presence of families led by homosexuals in the Oak Park community as justification. But simply because a particular family structure exists does not require public educators either to discuss it or affirm it. Watch an excerpt from the film here.
Also, spend a few minutes wandering around the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance website to see how very busy Shannon Sullivan is in her efforts to use public schools as well as Illinois colleges and universities that train future teachers to promote her socio-political vision. Here’s just one of her efforts:
The P Project is a partnership between the Alliance and an advisory board of representatives from Illinois colleges and universities involved in pre-professional preparation of teachers, counselors and social workers. Gathering data on the status of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer (GLBTQ) issues in pre-professional education, The P Project aims to support Illinois colleges and universities in further inclusion of diversity issues into their curricula in more meaningful ways. For more information, or to join The P Project, please contact Shannon Sullivan.
In addition, on Tues, Jan.19 at 7:00 p.m., Sullivan will be presenting the ‘Welcoming Schools’ program to parents, which is a curriculum developed by the well-funded pro-homosexual political lobbying organization: the Human Rights Campaign (That last fact was omitted from the PTO newsletter).
According to the PTO newsletter, ‘it is important that all children attend schools in which they learn to appreciate and respect human differences .... [Sullivan] will discuss how ... parents can support Beye’s efforts to strengthen the approach to family diversity while lessening gender stereotyping and bullying.’
From this statement, astute readers can infer that Ms. Sullivan likely affirms both homosexuality and Gender Identity Disorder (aka ‘transgenderism’). ‘Lessening gender stereotyping’ is common code language for affirming transgenderism and transsexuality, which means that Ms. Sullivan likely supports the absurd notion that those people who experience Gender Identity Disorder, are actually born in the wrong body. Furthermore, she may want to use public education to affirm this radical, destructive theory to other people’s children.
‘Diversity’ simply means difference. There is nothing inherently positive about ‘diversity.’ (Also, there is nothing inherently positive about change. Change may be positive. Change may be negative. Change may be neutral. Barack Hussein Obama’s “change” is NOT change I’ll ever believe in!—my addition) ‘Family Diversity’ is a term that obscures the politically incorrect truth that not all family structures are worthy of appreciation or respect. Some differences are good, some differences are bad, and some are neutral. The forms of diversity of which Ms. Sullivan is enamored are, in the view of many people, profoundly wrong; and public schools have no right to use school hours, school resources, and public money to affirm Ms. Sullivan’s unproven, divisive theories to children. The administration has no right to impose these unproven, divisive, and often religious beliefs, on teachers through Institute Day presentations or any other professional development workshops that focus on ‘anti-bullying’ or ‘diversity.’ And administrators have no right to expect or compel teachers to share Sullivan’s subversive ideas with young children, many of whose parents have political, philosophical, moral, or religious beliefs that conflict with them.
There are increasing numbers of polyamorous families in this country. Are public schools going to seek to ‘approach’ that form of ‘family diversity’? Is everyone expected to respect and appreciate this family configuration simply because polyamorists have decided it’s worthy of respect? If children being raised in polyamorous families are mocked, are schools going to expose all students to anti-bullying curricula that affirm polyamory? Does disapproval of polyamory people or poly-households constitute ignorant prejudice and hatred?
The answer to all those questions—at least for now—is decidedly ‘no.’
Administrators would not feel compelled to affirm polyamory even to end bullying. They intuitively know that anti-bullying curricula that specifically mention polyamory would go much further than merely curtailing bullying; they would contribute to undermining the view that polyamory is immoral. This is precisely what homosexual activists know, and the naïve conservative community does not.
No—administrators would seek to find ways to curtail bullying while maintaining the view that polyamory is immoral.
Elementary schools should not in any context introduce homosexuality or Gender Identity Disorder to children. I would argue that schools that affirm either implicitly or explicitly the following ideas are engaging in irresponsible, unethical, presumptuous, and perhaps unconstitutional moral indoctrination:
1) The theory that homosexuality is ontologically equivalent to skin-color or race
2) The theory that homosexuality is morally equivalent to heterosexuality
3) The theory that families led my homosexuals are morally equivalent to families led by heterosexuals
4) The idea that moral disapproval of homosexuality constitutes ignorance, bias, prejudice, hatred, bullying, or harassment
5) The idea that expressions of moral disapproval of homosexuality should be prohibited”
“All District 97 taxpayers should be outraged by this egregious usurpation of public money (remember, taxpayers subsidized the Institute Day presentation) and class time to advance the social, political, moral, and philosophical views of Ms. Sullivan, the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance, and the Human Rights Campaign.
Beye parents should give explicit instructions to their children’s teachers that under no circumstances should their children be exposed to any resources, activities, or classroom discussions that address homosexuality or Gender Identity Disorder.”
“Concerned taxpayers, parents, future parents, and especially fathers, need to respond to this insidious attempt to capture the hearts and minds of children. ‘Safe schools’ initiatives are the Trojan horse for getting subversive theories on the nature and morality of homosexuality into our schools. Those who support these initiatives never reveal that the means by which they seek to curtail bullying is by eradicating the true belief that homosexuality is immoral.”
Support IFI’s Division of School Advocacy!
Would you prayerfully consider pledging a monthly gift of $25 or more to support this important division of IFI? A promise of this kind will help us form a strategic plan that budgetary constraints often makes impossible. You can become a Sustaining Member with automatic monthly deductions from your checking account or credit card. Click HERE to access the Sustaining Member form.
If a monthly pledge is not feasible at this time, perhaps you could send a one-time, tax-deductible gift. Click HERE to donate today!
If you believe in the mission and purpose of Illinois Family Institute, please send your most generous contribution today. IFI is supported by voluntary donations from individuals like you across the state of Illinois.
Donations to IFI are tax-deductible.”
UPDATE 2: I received a comment on my Thursday post, I hope to respond to the comment Monday.
I believe I received the following as an e-mail either late last year or early this year. I’m posting it tonight since it goes along with the content of what I have been discussing and while discuss in future posts.
“Homosexual Activists Exploit Oak Park’s Beye Elementary School
by Laurie Higgins, Director of IFI's DSA -Illinois Family Institute
It was only a matter of time before homosexual activism infected elementary education here in Illinois. This cancerous activism appeared during a recent Institute Day at William Beye Elementary School in Oak Park during which Oak Park resident and lesbian, Shannon Sullivan, who is the Executive Director of the Illinois Safe Schools Network, was invited to speak to the entire faculty.
During her biased presentation, Sullivan showed the film ‘That’s a Family’, which I too have seen. It was shown at a professional development workshop at Deerfield High School when I worked there, and it angered more than a few staff members. Our workshop was organized by our homosexual director of technology, which should help rest the silly claim that the sexual orientation of our educators is irrelevant.
‘That’s a Family’ implicitly espouses the offensive claim that families led by homosexuals are morally equivalent to those led by guardians, disabled parents, racial minorities, or heterosexuals. Some teachers at Beye are planning on showing this piece of political propaganda to their elementary students, citing the presence of families led by homosexuals in the Oak Park community as justification. But simply because a particular family structure exists does not require public educators either to discuss it or affirm it. Watch an excerpt from the film here.
Also, spend a few minutes wandering around the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance website to see how very busy Shannon Sullivan is in her efforts to use public schools as well as Illinois colleges and universities that train future teachers to promote her socio-political vision. Here’s just one of her efforts:
The P Project is a partnership between the Alliance and an advisory board of representatives from Illinois colleges and universities involved in pre-professional preparation of teachers, counselors and social workers. Gathering data on the status of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer (GLBTQ) issues in pre-professional education, The P Project aims to support Illinois colleges and universities in further inclusion of diversity issues into their curricula in more meaningful ways. For more information, or to join The P Project, please contact Shannon Sullivan.
In addition, on Tues, Jan.19 at 7:00 p.m., Sullivan will be presenting the ‘Welcoming Schools’ program to parents, which is a curriculum developed by the well-funded pro-homosexual political lobbying organization: the Human Rights Campaign (That last fact was omitted from the PTO newsletter).
According to the PTO newsletter, ‘it is important that all children attend schools in which they learn to appreciate and respect human differences .... [Sullivan] will discuss how ... parents can support Beye’s efforts to strengthen the approach to family diversity while lessening gender stereotyping and bullying.’
From this statement, astute readers can infer that Ms. Sullivan likely affirms both homosexuality and Gender Identity Disorder (aka ‘transgenderism’). ‘Lessening gender stereotyping’ is common code language for affirming transgenderism and transsexuality, which means that Ms. Sullivan likely supports the absurd notion that those people who experience Gender Identity Disorder, are actually born in the wrong body. Furthermore, she may want to use public education to affirm this radical, destructive theory to other people’s children.
‘Diversity’ simply means difference. There is nothing inherently positive about ‘diversity.’ (Also, there is nothing inherently positive about change. Change may be positive. Change may be negative. Change may be neutral. Barack Hussein Obama’s “change” is NOT change I’ll ever believe in!—my addition) ‘Family Diversity’ is a term that obscures the politically incorrect truth that not all family structures are worthy of appreciation or respect. Some differences are good, some differences are bad, and some are neutral. The forms of diversity of which Ms. Sullivan is enamored are, in the view of many people, profoundly wrong; and public schools have no right to use school hours, school resources, and public money to affirm Ms. Sullivan’s unproven, divisive theories to children. The administration has no right to impose these unproven, divisive, and often religious beliefs, on teachers through Institute Day presentations or any other professional development workshops that focus on ‘anti-bullying’ or ‘diversity.’ And administrators have no right to expect or compel teachers to share Sullivan’s subversive ideas with young children, many of whose parents have political, philosophical, moral, or religious beliefs that conflict with them.
There are increasing numbers of polyamorous families in this country. Are public schools going to seek to ‘approach’ that form of ‘family diversity’? Is everyone expected to respect and appreciate this family configuration simply because polyamorists have decided it’s worthy of respect? If children being raised in polyamorous families are mocked, are schools going to expose all students to anti-bullying curricula that affirm polyamory? Does disapproval of polyamory people or poly-households constitute ignorant prejudice and hatred?
The answer to all those questions—at least for now—is decidedly ‘no.’
Administrators would not feel compelled to affirm polyamory even to end bullying. They intuitively know that anti-bullying curricula that specifically mention polyamory would go much further than merely curtailing bullying; they would contribute to undermining the view that polyamory is immoral. This is precisely what homosexual activists know, and the naïve conservative community does not.
No—administrators would seek to find ways to curtail bullying while maintaining the view that polyamory is immoral.
Elementary schools should not in any context introduce homosexuality or Gender Identity Disorder to children. I would argue that schools that affirm either implicitly or explicitly the following ideas are engaging in irresponsible, unethical, presumptuous, and perhaps unconstitutional moral indoctrination:
1) The theory that homosexuality is ontologically equivalent to skin-color or race
2) The theory that homosexuality is morally equivalent to heterosexuality
3) The theory that families led my homosexuals are morally equivalent to families led by heterosexuals
4) The idea that moral disapproval of homosexuality constitutes ignorance, bias, prejudice, hatred, bullying, or harassment
5) The idea that expressions of moral disapproval of homosexuality should be prohibited”
“All District 97 taxpayers should be outraged by this egregious usurpation of public money (remember, taxpayers subsidized the Institute Day presentation) and class time to advance the social, political, moral, and philosophical views of Ms. Sullivan, the Illinois Safe Schools Alliance, and the Human Rights Campaign.
Beye parents should give explicit instructions to their children’s teachers that under no circumstances should their children be exposed to any resources, activities, or classroom discussions that address homosexuality or Gender Identity Disorder.”
“Concerned taxpayers, parents, future parents, and especially fathers, need to respond to this insidious attempt to capture the hearts and minds of children. ‘Safe schools’ initiatives are the Trojan horse for getting subversive theories on the nature and morality of homosexuality into our schools. Those who support these initiatives never reveal that the means by which they seek to curtail bullying is by eradicating the true belief that homosexuality is immoral.”
Support IFI’s Division of School Advocacy!
Would you prayerfully consider pledging a monthly gift of $25 or more to support this important division of IFI? A promise of this kind will help us form a strategic plan that budgetary constraints often makes impossible. You can become a Sustaining Member with automatic monthly deductions from your checking account or credit card. Click HERE to access the Sustaining Member form.
If a monthly pledge is not feasible at this time, perhaps you could send a one-time, tax-deductible gift. Click HERE to donate today!
If you believe in the mission and purpose of Illinois Family Institute, please send your most generous contribution today. IFI is supported by voluntary donations from individuals like you across the state of Illinois.
Donations to IFI are tax-deductible.”
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:24 AM
2 Comments:
Why aren't homosexual people and/or families worthy of respect? Do you have an objective reason for this belief or is it ground in your religious belief with is not a legitimate grounds for public policy, particularly public policy that might affect people who do not share your political beliefs.
I won't address the merits (or lack thereof) of your post, but please be advised that you've misused the term "polyamory." It has a very specific meaning first coined in 1990. Polyamory is a mutually consensual arrangement among all partners that at least one of the partners also experiences loving, caring sexual intimacy with more than one person. But you (and a few other christianist writers) attempt to use "polyamory" as a catchall phrase that suggests any form on non-monogamy or sexual alternative lifestyle. You undermine your argument and demonstrate your ignorance when you fail to use proper terminology.
Post a Comment
<< Home