A number of stories recently have focused on gays in schools. What should be taught? And who should do the teaching? What role should students play (literally, in one case)? What are facts and what’s theology, or worse, bigotry?
The Washington Times steps back and looks at some of the larger issues, as the role of sex education in schools is debated by two of Washington’s suburban counties, Fairfax, Va. and Montgomery, Md. I usually read the Times with a jaundice eye, my radar on for biased reporting. I’m infrequently surprised. But today’s story raises at least one question I’d like answered. What’s so bad about inviting “ex-gays” to speak to students about sexuality? My guess is gay activists, who are apparently invited into classrooms, would argue that there is no such thing as an “ex-gay.” Acknowledging them may be perceived as buying into the contentious notion that sexual identity is a choice. But if someone, whether he or she by nature is a heterosexual, for a long time has had only homosexual relationships, might not the students benefit from hearing that perspective. I trust students enough to smell a heterosexual in “ex-gay” clothing. All it is is another perspective. Let students weigh it, question it, and embrace or discard it as irrelevant to their own sexual examination.
Even “data about the overall health of gay men,” which, if I’m thinking of what homophobes see as “data,” is bogus, why can’t the schools present the information as well as evidence that the data is indeed, untruthful propaganda?
Sometimes the best offense is to allow the opposition to throw its best punches. When they miss their mark, their agenda hits the mat.
That may have been the case in the fight over a student written play in Loudoun County. Many politicians couldn’t resist making an issue out of two male students faking a kiss and a line in the play directed to the audience: “Am I a little too much like you for your own comfort? Do you hate me because you see a little of me hiding in you?”
School Board member Joseph Guzman (Sugarland Run) offered the strongest denunciation of the play. He began by offering homage to the idea of “tolerance,” calling it a “worthy idea,” but he said the play showcased “sexual behavior that is designed to provoke.”
“There is absolutely no place for this in our schools,” he said. “I am disappointed that this was allowed to occur in our district … Imposing immorality seems to be encouraged.”
He added that this “kind of thing” caused many parents to pull their children from public school and place them in private or home school situations.
At-Large School Board member Tom Reed called homosexuality a “perversion,” but he conceded that other controversial works have been a part of the school curriculum for generations. He cited such works as the Greek play Oedipus Rex, which deals with incest and Shakespeare, whose plays cover a variety of controversial topics. Reed conceded that Person would not want certain books of the Bible to be portrayed on stage.
“Love the sinner, hate the sin,” Reed concluded. “I support diversity, but it does not mean encouraging, or even tolerating, perversity.”
Tolerance is a dirty word to many of the radical right. And if they are granted the right to determine what is perversity, then many heterosexuals are in trouble. Maybe the school will soon be teaching what causes hair to grow on the palms of your hands.
Again, though, it may be best if you let the radical right speak out, as Del. Dick Black (R-Sterling) [Disclosure] did in an email he sent out when he learned of — but did not see — the play.
“We started getting a flood of calls from people who were very distraught about what had taken place at the school play,” said Black. “The taxpayers pay for our schools and the taxpayers do not want homoerotic sex acts to take place on the stages of our school plays.”
In a press release, Black mocked the assertion in January’s SBHS newsletter promoting Postcards as a “show you won’t want to miss.”
“Needless to say, I was upset to find out that the show our children were not supposed to miss was one where two male students engaged in a homosexual kiss onstage and then addressed the audience saying, ‘You can’t tell me that there isn’t a little bit of me in every one of you,’” stated a press release from Black’s office.
“The idea that our public school system is being used to promote a homosexual lifestyle is disturbing,” Black said. “When Christ’s name is banned in schools, and bricks with crosses on them are removed from Potomac Falls High School until a lawsuit forces them to be put back, it makes me feel that a double standard is being placed against people of faith. We are continuously lectured on the idea that we need to keep God out of the classroom. Am I now to believe that the reason we need to keep God out is so that homosexual teachings can have free reign?” Black’s release added.
… “This was an attempt at shock value, and by addressing the audience in this manner, it crosses the line of discussion into advocacy. Parents were not only offended at the shock value of this kiss, but also for the fact that it was implied that everyone in the audience was secretly hiding homosexual feelings,” Staton wrote. “What also disturbs me is that this play was obviously approved by the faculty at Stone Bridge, which makes me question what other kinds of practices are being condoned in our public schools.”
The email promoted a response from the school board chairman, according to Loudoun Today.
The school board chairman saved his strongest criticism for Del. Dick Black (R-32), without mentioning him by name but reading from the e-mail Black sent that helped to fuel the controversy with its mass mailing to constituents telling them to voice their opposition of the play at Tuesday’s school board meeting. Andrews was blindsided further by an “action alert” about the play that originated from the church he attends regularly.
[Chairman John] Andrews said he came back from a four-day vacation to find 56 e mails and 20 voice mails on his phone at work because Black’s e-mail listed Andrews’ work number. Andrews also noted he is one of Black’s largest financial backers.
When one of your big money men are turning against you, you may have overstepped. Again, let them throw their best punches, perhaps, as in many a cartoon, a roundhouse that misses its target and lands on your own cheek.
A Fairfax County school board member, who last month criticized Fairfax schools because he wanted students to hear “the other side” was forced to issue an apology and suffer a rebuke from the School Board.
Dialogue is not going to change the minds of bigots and religious zealots that think only they have the right interpretations of the bible. Even groups, like student gay-straight alliances, which are formed to help each learn to tolerate one another, are under attack in the Virginia House (HB 2868; the language is vague enough that the bill passed unanimously, so maybe it’s no harm, no foul).
But there are many mainstream conservatives and moderate liberals who are uneasy about homosexuality. They will tolerate gays and expect them to be accorded basic freedoms and protection from discrimination. But what is promoting a lifestyle versus learning the facts?
Marriage is another issue for them. Can we truly be tolerant and protective if we deny gays the right to commit in public their life-long commitment to each other, which after all is what marriage is all about? It’s not an easy answer for some, be they Republicans or Democrats. More dialogue is fine. Somehow I don’t think the Dick Blacks of the world want that.
Conservatives have often appealed to moderate Democrats to speak out on issues. I challenge moderate conservatives to do the same on same-sex marriage.