I recently wrote a blog titled “Homosexual Agenda Being Promoted In Schools,” which has received a lot of debate. There is one part of this article that I want to address in more detail. It is concerning the rewriting of textbooks to specifically include accomplishments of homosexual individuals.
This is something that the California Teachers Association is currently supporting. They are trying to get a bill passed that would require that history textbooks be rewritten to “include and highlight homosexual and transsexual historical figures.” Saying that, “Curriculum should address the common values of the society; promote respect for diversity and cooperation; and prepare the learner to compete in, and cope with a complex and rapidly evolving society.”
I have several problems with the bill and their reasons for rewriting the textbooks.
- The CTA states that homosexual’s achievements should be included because it is a “common value of the society.” Most of the country still believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. This is apparent as many states are defining marriage within state law as being between a man and a woman. So the statement that it is a “common value of the society” is just not true.
- I also do not understand how learning about homosexual’s accomplishments will help my children to “compete in” our society.
- The only thing I can agree with is that including this information may help “promote respect for diversity.” I say “may” because ultimately children’s opinions will be more influenced by their parents than what they read in a textbook.
I do not have a problem with the accomplishments of homosexual individuals being included in history textbooks. If they accomplished something historically noteworthy then they should be included. Their sexual orientation should not be an issue or even mentioned. Although I disagree with their lifestyle I have nothing against homosexuals.
The problem I have is with the rewriting of textbooks to specifically include homosexual and transsexual individuals. I feel that if their accomplishments were not noteworthy enough to be included in the first place then they should not be added just because the person is homosexual. They are effectively saying that a person who is homosexual should get special consideration because of their sexual orientation. And that because they are homosexual things are more difficult for them so their achievements are more noteworthy than other individuals who have a more traditional man – woman relationship.
In the past, history textbooks have been rewritten because of bias based on race or gender. The achievements of women were added. Before, the true accomplishments of women like Marie Curie, Amelia Earhart, and Florence Nightingale were overlooked simply because they were women and not considered to be as important as men. As the Civil Rights Movement gained recognition and status history textbooks were again rewritten to include the achievements of blacks and other racial minorities. Figures like George Washington Carver, Martin Luther King, Jesse Owens, and Rosa Parks were noted and their accomplishments shared in schools.
At this time a homosexual individual is just as likely to be included in a history textbook as any other person since race or gender are no longer an issue. Their sexual orientation should not make a difference. I don’t know whether or not George Washington Carver was married or homosexual. That does not matter. What is important, are his achievements. The real issue isn’t about recognizing homosexual individuals achievements but about promoting their lifestyle and passing it off as history.
Related Articles:
Marriage in the News: Virginia Voting
Religious Marriage versus Civil Marriage
Should the Government Have a Say in Marriage?
Defining Marriage: What about Polygamy?
Teaching the Gay Student: Keep an Open Mind