SB 48, FAIR Education Act Referendum Not Going to Qualify

A question I've had regarding this legislation... (0.00 / 0)

If the LGBT and disabled peoples contributions were of significance, should that alone not qualify their inclusion?

It would seem to me your giving them credit for said contributions along with credit for simply "being" LGBT or disabled.  And considering most kids graduate with no understanding of how to balance a checkbook and so many other necessary life skills why are we wasting time on more of this social studies BS that 90% of the kids forget two weeks after they hear it?

I'd rather they bring back shop classes so kids would learn how to hammer a nail or measure an angle cut.  That would benefit the children far more than what this legislation proposes.

Hi. I'm Charles.  I worked my way from homelessness to a business owner.  Be what you have it in you to be!

---

by: cjackson3 @ Wed Oct 12, 2011 at 16:21:14 PM UTC

Well (0.00 / 0)

Here's the thing, textbooks are generally written for a national audience.  And if the authors can avoid controversy in Alabama by leaving out Harvey Milk, they will. This mandates inclusion for future California texts, which the textbook companies will honor.

I think?

---

by: Brian Leubitz @ Wed Oct 12, 2011 at 17:22:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not just national, Texas (0.00 / 0)

The Texas board of education (not sure the specific name of the government body, but it is a state wide body) sets the standards for text books in Texas, and since this is the largest such body in the United States, it tends to become the de facto standard for US text books.

This is an elected body, and of late tends to be extremely right-wing.

Here is in article from last year on the controversy where Thomas Jefferson was omitted from school books in Texas:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03...

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term "separation between church and state.")

They did note that Texas's influence is waning:

The board, whose members are elected, has influence beyond Texas because the state is one of the largest buyers of textbooks. In the digital age, however, that influence has diminished as technological advances have made it possible for publishers to tailor books to individual states.

---

by: CaliforniaCondor @ Wed Oct 12, 2011 at 17:51:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That still doesn't make having this a "law" necessary... (0.00 / 0)

...at least in my eyes.

CA has buying power as the most populous state.  We could ask for any additions to a text we'd like and the $ signs will make the book providers oblige.  Why wouldn't they?  I'm sure they didn't tell Texas they wouldn't supply them with creationism texts.

Must every little thing be codified into law?  Let each school district/class/teacher have a "gay day" if they wish.  Why does it have to be implemented top down with state level legislation?

And as I said earlier if a kid graduates without learning about Harvey Milk he'll be fine.  If he graduates without understanding credit, economics and the systems of capitalism and representative government that function in this country he's F'd.  Where is the clamoring to teach our children something they can use in their real day to day life?

This is another example of legislative pandering to a particular interest group.  And I have a suspicion many gays who just want to go about life roll their eyes at stuff like this.  Much as I am annoyed as a person of black ancestry every time I see Al Sharpton or Reggie Jackson up on the soapbox...

Hi. I'm Charles.  I worked my way from homelessness to a business owner.  Be what you have it in you to be!

---

by: cjackson3 @ Wed Oct 12, 2011 at 21:20:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Got a funny survey about this (0.00 / 0)

I had a robo-call last week about this law that purported to be a survey. Of course it was no such thing. Instead the recorded voice asked leading questions about whether I thought it was a good idea to introduce children to the homosexual lifestyle--or some such nonsense. I'm sure, if they bothered to listen to my responses at all (which I doubt) that they'll be horribly disappointed that a straight, old, white woman wasn't just shocked and horrified by this.

But I'm not.

I've known lots of LGBT people in my life. Other than their choice of sexual partners, I find little difference between them and my straight friends. It's been a little disorienting to have friends change gender identification. But mostly because I was embarrassed to have forgotten their new names. I'm not sure why. I forget other people's names all the time. But these felt more important.

One thing I do know about all of them is that it was very difficult for them growing up different. As the skinny, ugly girl with glasses and braces who still looked like a boy long after my classmates were becoming women, I understand a little bit of what this is like. But just a little I'm sure. If teaching kids about Harvey Milk or Dan Choi or anybody else, keeps one child from feeling bad about themselves, or keeps other children from bullying them, then I say it's worth it.

I'd love it if children graduated from school knowing more. But I don't see how this is going to affect that. I do see how it could affect an LGBT child's self esteem. I know it helps girls imagine themselves capable of being leaders to hear about other women who were.

For all those reasons, I'm all for it!

---

by: cfinnie @ Thu Oct 13, 2011 at 03:01:40 AM UTC