Last week, Calif. Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law SB 48, which requires that social science instruction in California schools include the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons to the history of the state and nation. The bill had been strongly opposed by California’s Catholic bishops and the religious right. But that doesn’t automatically mean its passage was wise or that it was the right battle to pick at this time.
Immediately after the bill was signed (it’s set to take effect in the 2013-14 school year), opponents launched an effort to collect signatures for a ballot referendum to overturn it. That means another protracted and expensive battle that could very well, at the polls, result in a setback for gay rights advocates. A big reason why is that a lot of parents are likely to see the new mandate as a politically correct effort by Sacramento to placate activists representing a favored Democratic constituency, at a time when the state’s schools are having difficulty teaching the basics of reading, writing, math and history. That’s a persuasive argument to have to defend against.
The 2011 Education Week/Pew Center on the States’ Report Card on School Performance gives California schools a grade of “D-” for K-12 achievement, ranking the state 46 out of 51 states plus D.C. (The state’s overall grade, taking into account factors such as school financing and teacher credentials, is a “C,” for a somewhat better but still mediocre rank of 30.) Given this record, it’s likely the Golden State’s public schools will be as unsuccessful teaching gay history as they have been at teaching everything else, so the upside is rather minimal. The downside is to give the gay struggle for legal equality another distracting and unnecessary sideshow.
6 Comments for “Wrong Battle in California”
posted by Tom on
Why is it even a “battle”?
The history of the fight for “equal means equal” is as much a part of American and California history as was the battle for African-American civil rights.
The reason it is a battle is because hard-core social conservatives are making it a battle.
And the reason that they are making it a battle is not the “persuasive argument” they are now using, but is found in a later paragraph in the article you cite:
That’s the polite AP version. If you want to go behind the battle the AP filter, Goggle the websites of the opponents of the law — StopSB48, ConcernedParentsUnited, the Campaign for Children and Families, et al — and read the websites.
posted by JohnAGJ on
I think this new law was unwise and do not support it myself. I’m sick of these ridiculous arguments we keep having over what to teach in schools, how it should be taught, whether the kiddies should pray or say the Pledge of Allegiance, have Bible clubs or GSAs, etc., etc., etc. It’s far past time to put an end to this nonsense by instituting a national school choice program. Close every public school, or rather convert all of them to private schools, and issue vouchers to everyone. Let parents decide where to send their kids and get the government out of it as much as possible.
posted by pgbach on
Unfortunately, what you are suggesting puts our national security at risk. Children are not property. While parents have substantial rights in the rearing of their children, those rights are correctly limited, i.e., best-interest-of-the-child, etc.
There is a national security interest in educating children such that they may become functional, contributing citizens. It is a much bigger issue than the contributions of LGBT folk.
I agree, the law is unwise. However, you solution means a significant number of children will be taught the earth is 6,000 years old and are not taught basic science.
posted by CJ on
Before the modern gay rights movement (that is, before 1969), people who shaped history did not “come out.” Will they claim that Abe Lincoln and Eleanor Roosevelt were gay? You could teach how gay people were subject to execution before the moderal era, but I don’t see how that really increases gay kids self esteem.
posted by BobN on
CJ raises a good point. I think we should just drop that period of American history from, say, 1830 to 19
0090.All that race stuff is such a downer.
posted by Jimmy on
“…a lot of parents are likely to see the new mandate as a politically correct effort by Sacramento to placate activists representing a favored Democratic constituency, at a time when the state’s schools are having difficulty teaching the basics of reading, writing, math and history. That’s a persuasive argument to have to defend against.”
That they see this as politically correct is their choice. They probably view evolutionary biology similarly.
From my observation, as someone who substitute teaches in my local township public school, kids are being instructed in doing paper work, and little else. The curricula are designed for THE TE$T, not for comprehensive learning. It wasn’t like that 30 years ago.