While many conservatives call for a forfeit — I mean, truce — on the social issues, the other side gleefully forges ahead using our money to indoctrinate our kids in public schools. Conservatives used to be asleep at the wheel, but now we’re just asleep. We forfeited the wheel decades ago.

It’s true that public education is public in the sense that whatever it is that goes on in our schools is paid for by the public, but, at least on sexuality issues, there is no education going on. “Progressive” agents of change are unabashedly engaging in censorship in the service of promoting their social and political interests. Their motto: “Critical thinking and intellectual diversity be damned.”

Here is a just a sampling of the “educational” activities, events, projects, and resources that our agents of change and their ideological compeers from the world of homosexual activism have introduced to our public schools during the “truce”:

• Changing the Game: the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network’s (GLSEN) new sports project “is an education and advocacy initiative focused on addressing [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] issues in K-12 school-based athletic and physical education programs” (emphasis added).
  
  
• Ally Week (GLSEN)
  
  
• GLSEN Elementary Toolkit (Read more HERE.)
  
  
• Welcoming Schools (Human Rights Campaign): “Welcoming Schools” provides “tools, lessons, and resources,” including activities and consultants to administrators and teachers that seek to normalize and affirm homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender confusion in elementary schools.
  
  
• Spirit Day (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation)
  
  
• Transgender Day of Remembrance
  
  
• National Coming Out Day (Human Rights Campaign)
  
  
• OK4U2BGAY, created by the organization H8SUX (Read more HERE.)

• National Sexuality Education Standards (GLSEN, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS et al) (Read more HERE.)
  
  
• “Do Something!” Transforming Critiques of Gender Stereotypes Into Activism” (Southern Poverty Law Center’s Educational Project, Teaching Tolerance): This series of lessons on gender confusion is intended for children in pre-school through grade 5 who, according to Teaching Tolerance, will “benefit from participating in activism because it helps them understand the socially constructed nature of gender” and “overcome the damage done by internalized gender stereotypes.”
  
  
• And last, but not least, the queen of public school political protests: the Day of Silence

The Day of Silence, which is promoted by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, takes place in middle and high schools all around the country this Friday April 20. GLSEN asks students to refuse to speak in class on the Day of Silence, which, of course, disrupts the normal course of a school day. Imagine if multiple groups were permitted to engage in this kind of political protest during the year.

GLSEN provides cards to students to give to teachers explaining the reason for their refusal to speak. In 2002, this is what the card said:

Please understand my reasons for not speaking today. I am participating in the Day of Silence, a national youth movement protesting the silence faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their allies. My deliberate silence echoes that silence, which is caused by harassment, prejudice, and discrimination. I believe that ending the silence is the first step toward fighting these injustices. Think about the voices you are not hearing today. What are you going to do to end the silence?

A few observations on this card:

• GLSEN itself called it a protest.
• GLSEN suggests that homosexuals are “silenced,” which is ironic in light of the of the primacy of homosexuality-affirmation in public education, the mainstream news media, and the arts, and the concomitant censorship of dissenting voices in most of those contexts. It is often noted that even FOX News has become increasingly silent on (if not downright supportive of) the homosexuality-affirming movement, with numerous “conservative” FOX contributors displaying an overt hostility and condescension to conservative positions on issues related to homosexuality.
• This 2002 Day of Silence card given by students to teachers challenges teachers to “do” something to “end the silence,” which, translated into plain English, means teachers are supposed to do something to eradicate moral disapproval of homosexuality.

The 2012 card now says this:

Please understand my reasons for not speaking today. I am participating in the Day of Silence (DOS), a national youth movement bringing attention to the silence faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and their allies. My deliberate silence echoes that silence, which is caused by anti-LGBT bullying, name-calling and harassment. I believe that ending the silence is the first step toward building awareness and making a commitment to address these injustices.

Think about the voices you ARE NOT hearing today.

A few observations about this newer card:

• GLSEN hopes to distance the Day of Silence from the notion of “protesting.” Instead, they’re  merely “bringing attention” to an issue.
• They have added the always useful language about “bullying,” and “name-calling.” This language shift enhances GLSEN’s ability to promote the lie that opposition to the Day of Silence constitutes support for bullying.
• They removed the presumptuous suggestion that others have a moral obligation to fight for the eradication of conservative moral beliefs—which is the ultimate end game of GLSEN.

It’s not just parents who should be opposing the Day of Silence. Every conservative taxpayer, every conservative teacher, and every conservative administrator should be coming alongside parents and working to restore integrity to public education.

First, it’s a stewardship issue. Our taxes are being used for illegitimate political purposes.

Second, students in school today are the culture-makers of tomorrow. We have a vested interest in the soundness of their education.

Third, this isn’t one isolated event. It’s one part of a large, ominous picture that includes curricular resources and activities in theater, English, and social studies classes; sex ed classes that promote liberal assumptions about homosexuality; anti-bullying programs; and countless activities created and promoted by homosexual activist organizations. Re-examine the list above and note the cacophonous sounds of “silence.”

Fourth, the rarely told truth is that many students and teachers on both the political right and left dislike intensely the Day of Silence. They hate the dissension that the Day of Silence brings to their school day. Not all liberal teachers use the classroom for political purposes. Many just want to teach their subject matter. Many teachers resent having to modify lesson plans or expectations to accommodate student silence but feel if they don’t, they will be viewed as bigots and bully-enablers.

Administrators:

Tell teachers they have no legal obligation to allow students to refuse to speak in class and that they should not permit political protests in the classroom. Communicate to parents and students that students have no legal right to refuse to speak in class and that classes will take place as usual.

Teachers:

Plan activities that involve student verbal participation and follow all normal disciplinary procedures that would apply to students who refuse to obey instructions.

Community members without students in the school:

Contact your local middle and high school administrators. Ask them if teachers are permitted to allow students to refuse to speak in class on the Day of Silence. If they permit this political protest, tell them you object to public school teachers who are subsidized by your taxes allowing instructional time to be used to promote controversial moral and political views in the classroom. Send a letter to your local press and read a prepared statement at the next school board meeting expressing the same ideas.

Parents:

Call your children’s middle and high schools today. Ask if the school is permitting teachers to allow students to refuse to speak in class on the Day of Silence. If the school says “no,” ask them how and when this will be communicated to parents, teachers, and students. It should be communicated at least several days before the Day of Silence.

If your administration does not communicate this expectation to parents, teachers, and students, call your child out of school, because it means the administration is ignoring the issue and tacitly permitting teachers to allow the silent protest to take place.

If your school administration says that teachers may permit students to refuse to speak during class, call your child out of school. Tell your administration and school board that since they are permitting instructional time to be exploited for a political protest, your child will not be in school. This will remove your child from an environment that fosters controversy, and your child’s absence will cost the district money.

Then go to your next school board meeting and lodge an unequivocal complaint.

While homosexual activism has infiltrated public schools in countless ways, the Day of Silence Walkout is is virtually the only organized effort available to parents to express their opposition to such activism. And it’s one that takes very little courage. If we continue to do and say nothing, the pro-homosexual activism increases and the children who are targets of such indoctrination become ever younger.

For more information, click here: Day of Silence Walkout.

Last week, IFI published a press release that was sent to us by Luke Montgomery announcing yet another campaign to use public schools to promote acceptance of homosexuality. The campaign is the creation of his organization, H8SUX, which previously exploited young children by having them use the F-word in a video campaign to promote affirmation of perversion.

I try to respond to as many emails as possible, even from those with whom IFI disagrees. I rarely publish my responses and had no intention of doing so when I responded to Mr. Montgomery, the founder of H8SUX . Subsequently, I thought it might be helpful to others who may find themselves falsely accused of hating those who identify as homosexual. 

One point I regret not including in my email was a response to a claim made in the H8SUX press release. The press release made the astonishing claim that “Kids are born gay, lesbian, bi and trans.”  There is no research proving such a claim, and for Mr. Montgomery to assert that as fact is not only dishonest and irresponsible, it is destructive. 

Here is the email I sent Mr. Montgomery: 

Hi Luke, 

I just read your bio, and your story is really a terrible and sad story. 

What troubles me about homosexual activists and their ideological allies is that they, like you, conflate moral propositions about behavior with hate. In so doing, you actually cultivate hatred and diminish the possibility of both discourse and relationships with people who believe differently than you do. 

I worked in a public high school writing center for eight years, until the summer of 2008. Some of my tutors identified as homosexual, and all four of my children have had friends who identify as homosexual. Their friends’ same-sex attraction and embrace of a homosexual identity had no effect on my respect for them as human beings, my appreciation of their gifts and positive characteristics, or the delight I took in their company. They knew I cared about them and enjoyed their company. I don’t agree with them on the nature and morality of homosexuality, but we had a world of other topics to talk and laugh about. 

I think their understanding of what homosexuality is ontologically is completely in error, but I’m sure they think my ontological views are in error. I think their views of the morality of volitional homosexual acts are in error; they think mine are in error. That’s what happens in a diverse world. My belief that volitional homosexual acts are not moral does not constitute hatred of those who engage in them. I don’t believe polyamorous acts are moral either, and yet I don’t hate those who identify as polyamorous. 

I have never felt hatred toward those who identify as homosexual, spoken hatefully to anyone, or treated anyone uncivilly. Those on your side will argue that expressing the view that homosexual acts are immoral is inherently uncivil or disrespectful or hateful, but they don’t apply that principle consistently. They don’t argue that their expressions of moral disapproval of volitional acts constitute incivility, disrespect, or hatred. 

The implication of the claim that moral disapproval of volitional acts constitutes hatred is that the only way any human being can demonstrate love toward or respect for other humans is to affirm all of their beliefs and all of their volitional acts, which of course, would require you to affirm all of my beliefs and volitional acts. 

The truth is that it’s entirely possible to deeply love and enjoy the company of people with whom we profoundly disagree on questions of belief and morality. People do it all the time. 

Are there people who actually hate those who identify as homosexual? Yes, but I don’t know a single one. I know of Fred Phelps and his family, but I don’t personally know a single person who hates homosexuals, even though I know many who believe homosexual acts are not moral acts. And I know many people who believe like I do who would defend at great personal cost someone who was being assaulted by bigots. 

If my belief, and the belief of some of the finest scholars working in the most prestigious academic institutions around the world (including Princeton, Yale, and Oxford), are true that homosexual acts are not moral acts, then saying so can’t be hateful. You may reject a belief in God and an afterlife, but I believe in both. Further I believe that the best exegesis shows that God loves all of his creation, but not all of our desires and acts. And among the acts He hates are homosexual acts, which He says will cost us eternal life. I know you must reject everything I’ve just said, but you know it’s what I believe. What would it mean if I told you I didn’t care what happens to you after death? Would that not be the ultimate hateful act? 

I would urge you to be more circumspect in your assumptions and your statements about hatred. I’ve experienced the kind of virulent hatred that rhetoric like yours is generating among young people. 

If you’d ever like to talk, please don’t hesitate to call or email me. And if you’re ever in the Chicago area, I’d love to meet with you. 

Sincerely, 

Laurie Higgins