Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, December 15, 2010 3:32:40 PM
From LATimes.com comes word that Democrat California state senator Mark Leno, representing San Francisco, is:
proposing legislation that would require textbooks used in California include "historical contributions" made by gay people.
Emphasis mine.
The hope, he said in a statement, is that information would reduce bullying of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people.
Sure, right. "Hey, normally I beat up on homos, but I won't today because our textbook points out your contributions to Hollywood." Do the bullies even
read?
We all know that kids get bullied for anything about them that deviates from the majority. It could be their red hair or for an accent or for identifying as homosexual. And some kids, bullied or not, commit suicide. Bullying and suicide are both morally unacceptable, and we should discourage both. But this isn't the way to do it.
"Most textbooks don’t include any historical information about the LGBT movement, which has great significance to both California and U.S. history," Leno said in a statement.
You mean the higher rates of mental illness, substance abuse, STIs, domestic violence? Are those the kinds of historical information you want to include?
Hey, how about we break the textbooks down into the various categories to make sure every personal trait gets noted we’ll have sections for the contributions of Christians, military veterans, gun owners, redheads, alcoholics, lefties, the double-jointed, and cutters. Oh, of course. The first four would never be pointed out.
"Streets" December 15, 2010 at 08:58 AM:
People should be judged on thier character not sexual orientation. To point out sexual orientation in history then opens the door to critizise based on sexual orientation. BAD IDEA!
Agreed.
"TrueFreedom" December 15, 2010 at 09:37 AM:
Seriously? How about this: let's find historical events that are of primary historical significance... and put those events in the textbooks. If the events happen to include gays, blacks, women, white guys, etc... then so be it.
Hey, now there's an idea.
"Does it Matter" December 15, 2010 at 10:42 AM:
Why does it matter what a persons sexual preference was in determining thier contributions to history? So does this mean we are going to now label each historical figure according to sexual preference...
"George Washington, a straight man, was the 1st president of the US"
This would be one more thing to fight endlessly about. "So-and-so should be listed as gay!" "No he shouldn't." Sheesh.
This kind of nonsense is a good example of why California is in trouble.