Since Christians are sending their children to government schools—often out of necessity—where they will be taught that soul-destroying homoerotic activity is good and that disapproval of it is hateful, parents should be aware of what many liberal teachers think of them and their beliefs.

Rich Robinson, homosexual high school English teacher from Freeport High School in Freeport, Maine sends email messages to IFI in which he expresses views that many “progressive” teachers hold but are too cagey to admit publicly. Here are two that he sent to IFI recently:

1. “It is nothing short of exhilarating to see Laurie Higgins quiver in anger because a learned and caring nation says her vitriol and Indiana’s covert attempt to discriminate have been called out in grand fashion. Laurie, own your hate. State your hate. Terms like homoerotic are silly and a reflection of your infantile hurt because you just can’t get your way. Sorry, silly bigot. You just don’t get to deny others because you hate them. Welcome to a world of responsible inclusion.”

2. “Squirm Laurie squirm. Other than today and your implosion from hate, I look forward to June when, perhaps, you will, then, explode in your own version of a nuclear cataclysm brought about by a SCOTUS decision that relegates you to the ancient history of bigotry.”

Yes, nothing says “responsible inclusion” (or tolerance or respect for diversity) quite like the protests against religious liberty that took place in Indiana last week—or the email messages Robinson sends to IFI.

Unfortunately, the government is paying people like this to shape the hearts and minds of other people’s children. The government is paying people like Robinson who think the embrace of homoeroticism is evidence of learnedness and compassion to train up our children in the way they should go.

Robinson waxes indignant that I often use the term “homoeroticism” in addition to “homosexuality.” A few years ago, a homosexual activist in California became similarly enraged because in an email exchange with him I would not kowtow to his demand that I use “gay” rather than “homosexual.” Their rage illuminates the strategic and epistemic importance of language in this culture war.

A note of explanation about my choice of “homoerotic” seems in order.

The term “sexual” denotes both sexual complementarity (or sexual differentiation) and sexual reproduction:

“occurring between or involving the two sexes; reproducing by processes involving both sexes” (Random House Dictionary of the English Language),

“of, pertaining to, or designating reproduction involving the union of male and female gametes” (The American Heritage Dictionary),

“pertaining to sex as concerned in generation or in the processes connected in this” (Oxford English Dictionary)

Another definition of “sexual” pertains to “erotic activity,” but so as to avoid any confusion when discussing same-sex hanky-panky—which is inherently sterile—“homoerotic” seems a more precise and fitting linguistic choice.

The redefinition of terms by homosexual activists and their petulant demands that their terms and theirs alone be used should illuminate why we must resist their demands for linguistic conformity. Like Rumpelstiltskin, homosexuals stamp their angry little feet when their words are found out. Then, trembling with fear, thin-skinned conservatives capitulate, choosing to use the Left’s white-washing diction rather than be called names by no-name-calling, anti-bullying Rumpelstiltskins.

On Friday, April 12, a homosexuality-affirming socio-political protest is taking place at most highs schools and increasing numbers of middle schools. This protest is called the Day of Silence, and it’s sponsored by the partisan, Leftist organization, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), whose raison d’être is to exploit public schools, captive minor audiences, and legitimate anti-bullying sentiment to advance their ultimate goal of eradicating conservative moral beliefs.  Many schools even permit teachers to participate by wearing Day of Silence t-shirts or other paraphernalia.

For example, the “gay”-straight alliance at Glenbard East High School in Lombard, Illinois, PRISM, has been selling Day of Silence t-shirts to students and faculty, many of whom will be wearing them according to a school administrator. Although an announcement was made to students and teachers were invited to participate, parents were  not notified, nor is the Day of Silence identified on the school website or school calendar.

Parents should be demanding that school administrations notify all parents that the Day of Silence is taking place, that GLSEN is the sponsoring organization, that both students may be refusing to speak in class, and that teachers may be participating by wearing Day of Silence paraphernalia.

For a better sense of what is taking place within schools, click here to see a snapshot of what took place in a New York middle school four years ago:

Conservative students and teachers know full well that the Day of Silence is aimed at silencing the expression of conservative moral beliefs, which makes this annual event a day of discomfort for those who don’t affirm GLSEN’s beliefs about homosexuality.

In a recent Huffington Post article titled “I Have Come To Indoctrinate Your Children Into the LGBTQ Agenda (And I’m Not a Bit Sorry),” homosexual activist S. Bear Bergman makes clear the ultimate intent of homosexual activism—which is not to end bullying:

I am here to tell you: All that time I said I wasn’t indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie. All 25 years of my career as an LGBTQ activist, since the very first time as a 16-year-old I went and stood shaking and breathless in front of eleven people to talk about My Story, I have been on a consistent campaign of trying to change people’s minds about us…. That is absolutely my goal. I want to make your children like people like me and my family, even if that goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion. I want to be present in their emotional landscapes as a perfectly nice dad and writer who is married to another guy. Who used to be a girl (kind of)….

….That is our job: to encourage people, especially children, to think differently about a subject than they do now. To…allow the light of truth and fairness to shine in.…

At the moment, I am helping to put the finishing touches on a series of children’s books that all feature lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer kids or families. There are six books…filled with girls and women doing cool things, page upon page of kids enacting their own identities in joyous and peaceful ways…. hey have lesbian mums and gay dads and big extended queer chosen families; some are gender-independent.

…

If that makes me an indoctrinator, I accept it. Let me be honest — I am not even a little bit sorry.

A national coalition of pro-family organizations is urging parents to keep their children home from school on the Day of Silence if their school will be permitting students to refuse to speak in class or if faculty, staff, or administrators will be wearing Day of Silence paraphernalia, including t-shirts. Click here and scroll down to see all coalition partners.

Keeping children home for one day to protest the exploitation of public schools does not prevent students from being salt and light, which they can do on the other 185 days of the school year.

And keeping kids home is not directed at students who experience unchosen same-sex attraction.

Rather, keeping kids home on this one day is a protest against administrations that are allowing Leftist political events into the classroom and allowing teachers to participate. If conservatives continue in their acquiescence, pro-homosexual activism will increase and further metastasize into our elementary schools.

The next time someone points out that Millennials—including even Christian Millennials—are becoming more “gay”-affirming, we should by now know why. And it’s not because they are organically “evolving” in the direction of truth and wisdom. This particular arc of the moral universe has been deliberately bent and not toward justice.

Last Call for IFI’s Worldview Conference
featuring Dr. Del Tackett
April 10-11, 2015

CLICK HERE for Details

UGLY-HEAD-REARING ALERT

Two years ago, yet another “anti-bullying” law (HB 5290) was defeated in the Illinois Senate. It has now been resurrected by one of Springfield’s most troubling homosexual activist lawmakers, State Representative Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago) as HB 5707.

Particular Illinois lawmakers seem to believe that it’s not possible for the government to do enough to eradicate beliefs with which they disagree—including the moral, philosophical, and political beliefs of other people’s children. The beliefs these lawmakers seek to eradicate are conservative beliefs on issues related to homosexuality and gender confusion.

Cassidy’s resurrected bill is not centrally about ending bullying, which is a goal all decent people share. Illinois already has a more than ample anti-bullying law, which passed in June, 2010 and was followed up with over 100 pages of implementation recommendations that appear on the Illinois State Board of Education website.

No, this bill is centrally about using government resources to advance the non-factual Leftist assumption that conservative morals beliefs are the hateful, ignorant cause of bullying.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to contact your representative and urge him/her to oppose HB 5707.  

The last time this politically motivated bill came around, the bill’s sponsors were asked (by even some potential Democratic supporters) to include an opt-out provision that would allow students and staff members to opt-out of any presentations that would espouse non-factual beliefs about the nature and morality of homosexuality that violated their consciences. IFI agreed to remain neutral on the bill, if this wording were added:

No student or school employee shall be required to attend or participate in any anti-bullying program, activity, or assembly that infringes upon free expression or contradicts personal or religious beliefs.

Liberal sponsors of the bill refused to toss even that shard of a bone to conservatives.

Here’s an excerpt from a piece I wrote two years ago when the previous incarnation of this bill was proposed:

Cassidy stated that this additional law is needed because 3 school districts (out of over 900) have no policy and 20 do not have “adequate” bullying policy. What she failed to make clear during floor debates is that the 3 school districts that don’t have bullying policy are already in violation of existing law, so HB 5290 is unnecessary.

Furthermore, HB 5290…would do nothing about the 20 school districts that have—in Cassidy’s view—“inadequate” policy. If these 20 districts have bullying policy, they are in compliance with existing law.

To illustrate that “anti-bullying” programs that address homosexuality or gender confusion (aka “gender identity” or “gender expression”) are centrally about promoting “progressive” notions about homosexuality, just replace “sexual orientation” (a Leftist rhetorical creation) with another condition constituted by subjective feelings and volitional sexual acts.

Everyone knows that teenage girls who are promiscuous are often called ugly names. No decent person wants promiscuous girls bullied, so why don’t anti-bullying laws and school policies include promiscuity in their list of conditions for which students may not be bullied? Why don’t teachers show films in which promiscuity is portrayed positively? Why don’t schools invite speakers who affirm a sexually promiscuous identity to come talk to students about how bad it felt to be bullied in high school for their promiscuity? Why don’t they have “youth programming” in which promiscuity is affirmed? Why don’t teachers have students read and perform plays in which promiscuity is celebrated and disapproval of it is portrayed as ignorant, bigoted, hateful, provincialism—all in the service of ending bullying?

In addition to the indoctrination aspects of current “anti-bullying” efforts, there would be substantial costs associated with adopting the following recommendations in this bill:

• creating, implementing, and maintaining procedures for in-school anonymous reporting of alleged bullying incidents
• creating and implementing student “training programs,” “restorative measures,” and/or “social and emotional skill-building” exercises
• creating and implementing personnel training
• collecting, maintaining, analyzing, and reporting to the State Board of Education data related to the prevalence of bullying
• “reevaluating,” “reassessing,” “reviewing,” and “revising” (whew) school policy every two years  

Eight years ago, a purportedly “Catholic” colleague of mine in the writing center at Deerfield High School told me that she was so sure that conservative moral beliefs about homosexuality were wrong that she doesn’t think they should be allowed to be spoken in schools even as “progressive” views are espoused.

And Freeport, Maine public high school English teacher Rich Robinson said this about bullying:

Bullying happens when one feels threatened physically or emotionally….[I]f “you” cause a gay kid to feel “less than” because of his/her sexuality and the expressions [and by expressions, Robinson means volitional behaviors] that will naturally result, then I say “you” are a bully and need to be called out. This is what it means to protect kids.

In the view of “progressives,” if student A says something that makes student B who identifies as homosexual feel “less than,” then student A is a bully.

That, my friends, is what liberal lawmakers and “educators” believe and seek to impose through laws and curricula.

While you’re going about the business of opposing this bill, please ask both proponents of this bill as well as your local school administrators and board members this question:

If in a classroom or cafeteria discussion, a student were to state that homosexual attraction is disordered, or that homosexual acts are immoral, or that Illinois should not have legalized same-sex “marriage,” or that homosexual couples should not be permitted to adopt, is it possible under the wording of existing law that this student could be accused of bullying?

The question is not whether sponsors Kelly Cassidy, Greg Harris (D-Chicago), or Camille Lilly (D-Chicago) thinks it would happen, but rather whether it’s possible that it could happen.

And while you’re in a civic engagement mood, please send an email to your local high school and middle school superintendents, principals, and school board members asking these two easy-to-answer questions:

1. In the classroom, are teachers permitted to express their support for the legalization of same-sex “marriage” or adoption by homosexuals?
2. In the classroom, are teachers permitted to express their opposition to the legalization of same-sex “marriage” or adoption by homosexuals?

If they answer “no” to both questions, ask them how they communicate that message to teachers. If you get a response, please send it to IFI.

Become a monthly supporter of IFI.  Click HERE for more information.