• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CA Senate bill mandates gay history in schools

Temporal

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
3,691
Reaction score
2,243
Location
Everywhere and Nowhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110414/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_history_calif_schools said:
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people would be added to the lengthy list of social and ethnic groups that public schools must include in social studies lessons under a landmark bill passed Thursday by the California Senate.

If the bill is adopted by the state Assembly and signed by Gov. Jerry Brown, California would become the first state to require the teaching of gay history.

Supporters say the move is needed to counter anti-gay stereotypes and beliefs that make children in those groups vulnerable to bullying and suicide.

Opponents counter that such instruction would further burden an already crowded curriculum and expose students to a subject that some parents find objectionable.

The legislation, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Mark Leno of San Francisco, passed on a 23-14 party line vote. It also would add disabled people to the curriculum.

The bill gives school districts flexibility in deciding what to include in the lessons and at what grades students would receive them.

But starting in the 2013-14 school year, it would prohibit districts and the California Board of Education from using textbooks or other instructional materials that reflect adversely on gay, bisexual and transgender Americans.

Appealing to colleagues for support, Leno said gay children still struggle routinely with verbal and physical abuse at school, even though society is more accepting than when he was a gay youth in the 1960s.

"We are second-class citizens and children are listening," he said. "When they see their teachers don't step up to the plate when their classmate is being harassed literally to death, they are listening and they get the message that there is something wrong with those people."

The right wing are going to just love this.

Do you agree with making this a mandatory part of the curriculum?

I'm somewhat torn, mostly because I don't think gays should get preferential treatment. If things are going to shape up in this direction, then wouldn't it make sense to include things like black history?

I do believe that gays are unnecessarily censored from the history books. In college I took a course about gay and feminist history and I was shocked by the amount of material that nobody has any idea about. For example, some of the world's major inventors, world leaders, CEOs, etc. were gay and had partners, yet we never hear about them. Perhaps it is time for the revisionism to end.
 
The right wing are going to just love this.

Do you agree with making this a mandatory part of the curriculum?

I'm somewhat torn, mostly because I don't think gays should get preferential treatment. If things are going to shape up in this direction, then wouldn't it make sense to include things like black history?

I do believe that gays are unnecessarily censored from the history books. In college I took a course about gay and feminist history and I was shocked by the amount of material that nobody has any idea about. For example, some of the world's major inventors, world leaders, CEOs, etc. were gay and had partners, yet we never hear about them. Perhaps it is time for the revisionism to end.

I think identity politics is ghey. :2razz:

I don't support further politicizing education, for the sake of children, THE CHILDREN!!
 
I will not get deep into this because I do not want to offend any one person....this is STOOOPID and this kind of thing is the reason our schools graduate half retards from HighSchool that cant read a full paragraph...stop the nonesense
 
I will not get deep into this because I do not want to offend any one person....this is STOOOPID and this kind of thing is the reason our schools graduate half retards from HighSchool that cant read a full paragraph...stop the nonesense

Really, THIS is why our schools suck? :lamo
 
I'd rather they actually teach kids how to read and write and make ****ing change out of 12.72 cents when you give them 20.75 cents without asking someone or pulling out their cell phone calculator. That would be a cool trick.
 
I'd rather they actually teach kids how to read and write and make ****ing change out of 12.72 cents when you give them 20.75 cents without asking someone or pulling out their cell phone calculator. That would be a cool trick.

*brings up MS calc* :2razz:

No cell phone calc. :mrgreen:
 
Watch this.

I disagree with this. In fact, I disagree with ALL of the special distinctions of ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, or anything that MUST be included. If the individual was important, for whatever reason, include him/her. Identify his/her "characteristics" in passing. To me, it's that simple. Once you make your ethnicity, race, or sexual orientation your defining characteristic, you diminish your importance and those achievements as a PERSON. Me being Jewish is part of who I am, but it does not define me.
 
While I have no problem with gay issues being taught in school to age appropriate kids, I don't really support mandating it. I do however support this part:

But starting in the 2013-14 school year, it would prohibit districts and the California Board of Education from using textbooks or other instructional materials that reflect adversely on gay, bisexual and transgender Americans.
 
I'd rather they actually teach kids how to read and write and make ****ing change out of 12.72 cents when you give them 20.75 cents without asking someone or pulling out their cell phone calculator. That would be a cool trick.

How dare you have the same pet peeve as I do.
 
Supporters say the move is needed to counter anti-gay stereotypes and beliefs that make children in those groups vulnerable to bullying and suicide.
This got me wondering... when are they going to get around to providing social studies lessons on nerds? After all, anti-nerd stereotypes and beliefs are more prevalent and certainly more likely to be tolerated by authority figures.

Some people may even be shocked to learn that not just some, but many of the world's major inventors, world leaders, CEOs, etc. were nerdy dorks. The revisionism never seems to stop. Probably all of us were beat over the head with stories about how Issac Newton and Thomas Edison were really cool heterosexuals and were never told about those inventors who may have gay or even geeks.

I contacted a representative for California Schools and asked why no such legislation to counter anti-nerd stereotypes had been proposed. They told me that embracing and celebrating a bunch of educated intellectuals would only hurt the self esteem of their public school students.
 
I'm all for diversity being celebrated but I think kids should be taught how to read, write, perform basic math problems, and our general US history first. When they get that down, then move on to some of the other stuff.
 
I'm all for diversity being celebrated but I think kids should be taught how to read, write, perform basic math problems, and our general US history first. When they get that down, then move on to some of the other stuff.

Who said this is going to be taught before that? It makes no sense to think that.
 
Who said this is going to be taught before that? It makes no sense to think that.

I'm saying that if they can't manage to teach our kids the basics as it is, it's not really time to be looking at this as something to add to the curriculum.
 
What it even mean?
Does having an in class discussion for a few minutes satisfy the requirement? Or does it have to be something that requires its own text book?

The bill doesn't say.
SB 48 Senate Bill - AMENDED

If they want to spend some time in social studies class talking about it, hella I care. I wouldn't even care if I had kids in the CA system.

If it is its own course, I would think it was excessive.


That being said, social studies/history textbooks should do their best to present the facts about people and events. Yes, some things in the world and in history make some people uncomfortable, but there is no protection from the facts.
 
I'm saying that if they can't manage to teach our kids the basics as it is, it's not really time to be looking at this as something to add to the curriculum.

We shouldn't dumb down our schools just so they know the basics, we need to increase the rigor in our school curriculum, and if the kids don't get it they can do it over again by repeating the grade.
 
We shouldn't dumb down our schools just so they know the basics, we need to increase the rigor in our school curriculum, and if the kids don't get it they can do it over again by repeating the grade.

And when we start doing just that, I can agree with you. Until then, I don't think we need to be adding all these extra items to the curriculum. Sorry. Gay history can wait until we are cranking out more engineers and doctors.
 
And when we start doing just that, I can agree with you. Until then, I don't think we need to be adding all these extra items to the curriculum. Sorry. Gay history can wait until we are cranking out more engineers and doctors.

We should be teaching history competently, not just LGBT history, of course to teach history competently you have to include LGBT history. Nothing that should be included in our school curriculum should be considered extra, we need to demand more of our students, not less.
 
We should be teaching history competently, not just LGBT history, of course to teach history competently you have to include LGBT history. Nothing that should be included in our school curriculum should be considered extra, we need to demand more of our students, not less.

When our kids are actually learning the basics, then we can expand. Until then, gay history can wait.
 
What it even mean?
Does having an in class discussion for a few minutes satisfy the requirement? Or does it have to be something that requires its own text book?

The bill doesn't say.
SB 48 Senate Bill - AMENDED

If they want to spend some time in social studies class talking about it, hella I care. I wouldn't even care if I had kids in the CA system.

If it is its own course, I would think it was excessive.


That being said, social studies/history textbooks should do their best to present the facts about people and events. Yes, some things in the world and in history make some people uncomfortable, but there is no protection from the facts.

That is a big problem I saw too. What is gay history? The Stonewall riots, Harvey Milk and AIDS terrorizing the gay community? What else?
 
When our kids are actually learning the basics, then we can expand. Until then, gay history can wait.

But the basics are not being compromised by teaching things like this. The basics should be learned in elementary school, and they should be expanded on in middle, and high school. They should know about LGBT history, just like they should know about black history, about European history, about asian history, about all of history. We should teach our kids to think critically, and demand the best from our kids, not just expect them to know the basics and move on, that is why the school system is in the mess it is in now. We should demand more not less.
 
But the basics are not being compromised by teaching things like this. The basics should be learned in elementary school, and they should be expanded on in middle, and high school. They should know about LGBT history, just like they should know about black history, about European history, about asian history, about all of history. We should teach our kids to think critically, and demand the best from our kids, not just expect them to know the basics and move on, that is why the school system is in the mess it is in now. We should demand more not less.

The basics are already compromised as evidenced by the kinds of students we are graduating and how poorly they perform compared to the rest of the world. When we have teaching the basics up to par, then we can worry about all the extras. Gay history can wait for a bit.
 
The right wing are going to just love this.

Do you agree with making this a mandatory part of the curriculum?

I'm somewhat torn, mostly because I don't think gays should get preferential treatment. If things are going to shape up in this direction, then wouldn't it make sense to include things like black history?

I do believe that gays are unnecessarily censored from the history books. In college I took a course about gay and feminist history and I was shocked by the amount of material that nobody has any idea about. For example, some of the world's major inventors, world leaders, CEOs, etc. were gay and had partners, yet we never hear about them. Perhaps it is time for the revisionism to end.

And we actually scratch our heads and wonder why we spend more than any other nation on education but are falling behind.. ??

Tim-
 
YS...what is gay history please?
 
The basics are already compromised as evidenced by the kinds of students we are graduating and how poorly they perform compared to the rest of the world. When we have teaching the basics up to par, then we can worry about all the extras. Gay history can wait for a bit.

The reason idiots graduate is because elementary schools fail to hold most kids back for not learning the basics, due to the teaching not wanting their pass/fail rate to take a hit, not giving a damn, or not wanting to hurt the kids self esteem. Like I said, the kids should know the basics by elementary school, and if they don't know the basics, they shouldn't leave elementary schools. Middle, and High schools should expand on the basics that are taught in elementary school. This isn't about LGBT history, this is about teaching history competently, and you can't do that without teaching LGBT history. Like I said, we should demand more of our students, not less. Just teaching them the basics, and moving them out of schools is not the solution.
 
The basics are already compromised as evidenced by the kinds of students we are graduating and how poorly they perform compared to the rest of the world. When we have teaching the basics up to par, then we can worry about all the extras. Gay history can wait for a bit.

Just because some kids do not learn things does not mean they are not being taught. Quite the opposite, since many kids do in fact learn the basics.
 
Back
Top Bottom