California Group to Fight 'Sexual Indoctrination' Laws in Court
By: Administrative Account | Source: CNSNews.com
October 17, 2007 8:56AM EST

By Randy Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor
October 17, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - The head of a pro-family organization in California said on Tuesday that his group is mounting a legal effort to overturn pro-homosexual measures signed into law last weekend by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger before they can have a negative impact on the state's educational system and religious community.

"Apparently, the governor now feels the freedom to favor the pro-homosexual message and to disregard conservative voters and traditional values," Ron Prentice, chief executive officer of the California Family Council, told Cybercast News Service.

Prentice called Schwarzenegger's decision to approve the measures "puzzling," because he vetoed similar legislation last year. (The governor did not explain his decision, nor did his office return calls from Cybercast News Service seeking comment.)

As a result, "we have no security that any bill that comes to him next year promoting homosexuality" will be prevented from becoming law, said Prentice.

Therefore, the organization will challenge SB 777, the California Student Civil Rights Act, which was passed by the legislature to "update specific anti-discrimination provisions that are scattered throughout the state's education code."

To accomplish this, for instance, the legislation replaces "sex" as defined as "the biological condition or quality of being a male or female human being" with "gender," which is "a person's gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth."

The new law also adds the category of "sexual orientation," which is explained as "heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality."

Finally, the measure states: "No teacher shall give instruction nor shall a school district sponsor any activity that promotes a discriminatory bias because of a characteristic" identified in the law.

The homosexual advocacy group Equality California (ECQA) described the legislation as protecting students "from harassment and bullying in public schools by making sure teachers and school administrators fully understand their responsibilities to protect youth."

But as Cybercast News Service previously reported, the Campaign for Children and Families (CCF) responded that the measure is nothing more than "sexual indoctrination."

"SB 777 will result in reverse discrimination against students with religious and traditional family values," said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for the conservative Capitol Resource Institute. "The terms 'mom and dad' or 'husband and wife' could promote discrimination against homosexuals if a same-sex couple is not also featured."

"Parents want the assurance that when their children go to school, they will learn the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic - not social indoctrination regarding alternative sexual lifestyles," said Turney.

The other new law being contested by the California Family Council is AB 14, the Civil Rights Act of 2007, which bans discrimination in government services based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

"Combined with three other nondiscrimination bills that were signed into law during the past four years, the Civil Rights Act of 2007 gives Californians the most comprehensive civil rights protections in the nation," according to Equality California.

However, CCF President Randy Thomasson said the law could adversely affect churches that operate state-funded social service programs.

"It's the height of intolerance to punish individuals, organizations, businesses and churches that have moral standards on sexual conduct and sexual lifestyles," said Thomasson. "This is another insensitive law that violates people's moral boundaries."

Prentice agreed, stating that AB 14 could have a serious impact on "businesses, non-profit organizations or corporations that do not abide by the state's definition of sexual orientation."

'The scary part'

Last weekend, Schwarzenegger also signed into law the Safe Place to Learn Act (AB 394), which requires schools to post "anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policies in all schools and offices, including staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms."

With the first bill, "all public school instruction and activities" must "positively portray transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality to children as young as kindergarten," said the CCF in a statement. And the second bill infringes "upon the moral conscience of business owners, churches, and nonprofit organizations."

However, Schwarzenegger did veto AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, which would have made it legal for "two unmarried persons of the age of 18 years or older, who are not otherwise disqualified," to marry.

"As I stated in vetoing similar legislation in 2005, I am proud California is a leader in recognizing and respecting domestic partnerships," the governor said in a veto statement. "I support current domestic partnership rights and will continue to vigorously defend and enforce these rights."

But in 2000, "the voters approved Proposition 22, a challenge to which is currently pending before the California Supreme Court," he said. "The people of
California should then determine what, if any, statutory changes are needed in response to the Court's ruling."

Proposition 22 prevents the state of California from recognizing homosexual marriages performed outside the state.

Mona Passignano, state issues analyst for the conservative group Focus on the Family Action, told Cybercast News Service on Tuesday that "right now, marriage is still safe, marriage is still protected" in that state, but when the court rules on Proposition 22 next year, "we'll have a much better view as to where exactly we stand on marriage in California."

Regarding the legislation Schwarzenegger signed into law last weekend, Passignano said she believes most of them will be challenged in court "because the way they're written, it's not really clear what they mean."

"The scary part is that California courts tend to be fairly liberal, so just from past history, we can expect that we're going to get some fairly liberal rulings" on these issues, she said. "At some point, these will start affecting churches in general and Christians in particular.

"It may come to a point where Christian families may have to pull their children out of public school," Passignano added.

Make media inquiries or request an interview with Randy Hall.

Subscribe to the free CNSNews.com daily E-brief.

E-mail a comment or news tip to Randy Hall.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

Email this Article

Printer Friendly Version