Illinois Bill Orders Public Schools Teach LGBT History to Children, K-12

Lesbian couple kissing on rainbow colored LGBT steps

Last month, two bills were introduced into the Illinois state legislature. Senate Bill 3249 (submitted by state Senator Heather Steans) and House Bill 5596 (submitted by state Representative Anna Moeller) are companion bills that require history to be taught to all Illinois public school children (from kindergarten to the 12th grade) that honors and celebrates the contributions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders in American history.

If these bills become law, Illinois would become the second state, after California, to require all public school children, from kindergarten on up, to focus on the contributions of the LGBT community in their studies of American history. What exactly are seven and ten year olds learning about homosexuality in California public schools? National Review's Alexandra DeSanctis laid out the curriculum in 2016.

Oh, and by the way, California parents are NOT allowed to have their children opt out of such instruction.

The same goes for the bill in Illinois. Just take a look at HB 5596, page 4, line 14, which states: "No pupils shall be graduated from the eighth grade of any public school unless he has received such instruction in the history of the US." That is not just referring to the history of labor unions. It specifically refers to LGBT history. No one is allowed to dissent. All must be forced to comply.

The LGBT community is very upfront about their belief that it is imperative to get to the children first and teach them their ideas about homosexuality before others can influence them.

I have several questions about this latest rage in public education.

1. Why should schools be teaching this?

Isn't this why kids have parents? How is this the jurisdiction  of the almighty state and their servants (our masters apparently) in the public school systems of America? Isn't human sexuality something that parents should be dealing with?

Ah, but there's the rub ... kids are going to spend SO much more time in public schools than in conversations with their parents or in Sunday School (if they go at all), and we can't trust the bigotry of parents and their "old fashioned" ideas, you know. Instead, ideas about sexuality must be FORCED on students ... as early as kindergarten.

2. Aren't there more important subjects?

Is there NOTHING more important that we should be teaching in our schools? I thought that schools existed to teach reading, math, science, government, the arts. (Silly me.) Shouldn't we be teaching our kids logic, economics, classical literature, geography, law and government? How about citizenship? Patriotism?

No, instead we must isolate certain groups of people solely on the basis of what they did with their genitals. What other sexual orientations must we cover? The great contributions of people who were prostitutes or into sado-masochism? How about polyamory, bestiality or necrophilia or pedophilia?

Why stop with just the LGBTQ initials? Is this really what you want your children learning in school?

3. What about "show and tell"?

What kind of "show and tell" do you want in your schools? Before you laugh or think I'm out of my mind (maybe you already do), the Illinois bill, HB 5596, page 5, beginning at line 8, states: "Instruction shall reinforce that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, have a right to be treated with civil, legal, and human rights, and as full human beings above all else."

How will this be reinforced? The bill continues, "when possible, adults, including school district employees who openly identify as LGBT and other openly LGBT adults in the community that the school district may decide to consult with, should be involved in the development and delivery of this instruction at the discretion of the LGBT individuals." (Notice how parents are totally left out of the decision making here.)

I thought this was about history. But no ... the bill says that LGBT guest speakers should be allowed to come into the classroom and develop instruction on their lifestyle ... to kids of any age. Apparently, the instruction does not need to be about history so much.

Now, I'm pretty sure that it's already school policy that it's wrong to attack or harass anybody in the school. I believe we need to treat everyone with kindness and basic human decency.

Tolerance does NOT mean that we must embrace every lifestyle or sexual expression, however. Take a look at what happened at one public school where a man dressed as a drag queen showed up at a talent show:

Is this ok with you?  Why was this man's behavior inappropriate?

Here is the "Little Miss Hot Mess" Drag Queen teaching small children and asking them, "Who wants to be a drag queen when they grow up?" Besides basically raping the minds of little children, what could possibly be wrong with this?

And yet, legally, there is NOTHING prohibiting this kind of instruction from coming into YOUR kids' classroom and telling them that homosexuality, transgenderism, or bondage or bestiality or any other kind of sexual deviancy is just fine and dandy. It is THEIR sexual expression and shame on you, you bigot, if you say it is wrong or inappropriate.

So, naturally they should be allowed in your child's classroom to teach them the wonders of being a drag queen or a prostitute or someone who is into sado-masochism.

4. Is this the purpose of teaching history?

In a day and age when American school children barely know the difference between the American War for Independence and World War II, I find it strange that we must separate from history one particular group based upon who (or what) they have sex with and celebrate whatever they have done because of that preference.

Do we do celebrate George Washington because he was heterosexual? "Yes, kids, Washington was a great heterosexual leader of our country." Is that what we say in class? Washington was great because of what he did in fighting for our country and leading us as our first president, not because of what he did with his body parts below his waist. And yet, that is all the LGBT crowd seems to care about.

Sally Ride, our first woman in space, later became a lesbian. So what? How did what she did with her body parts affect her life as an astronaut and scientist and American explorer? It didn't. Her lesbianism did not make her a better scientist, did it? It turns out that she never let that be known while she was alive (sadly she passed away in 2012).

If it was not that big of a deal to her, why should we make such a big deal of it today? I am also tired of "revisionist historians" who look under every nook and cranny to try to make historical figures out to be gay. President James Buchanan was gay? Yes, of course, because he was a life-long bachelor and once shared a house with a man. Yep, that right there confirms he was a homosexual ... except it doesn't.

As for the trangenderism, I seriously wonder why we would want to take a history class and hold up people with serious delusions and mental illness as great contributors to our country. Bruce Jenner can pretend he's a girl all he wants. He has the right to wear a dress and pumps and put on make-up. But Bruce Jenner is mentally ill ... a man who thinks he is a woman is seriously delusional. He's still a male in his DNA — in every cell of his body, no matter how much makeup he puts on.

Not too long ago this disorder was called "gender dysphoria." Dr. Paul McHugh of Johns Hopkins University explained the mental disorder of "gender dysphoria."

There is so much to cover in the study of history, and it's different for each age group.

Kids in the fourth grade are just beginning to learn history. Their minds at that age (and younger too) simply do not have the capabilities of processing information about sexuality correctly. Why not just teach them about the Pilgrims and Native Americans and Colonial America? Isn't that enough?

In middle school can't we focus on important things like the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? How about the Great Depression, World War II, and space exploration?

In high school, I think students actually are old enough to handle the information that Tchaikovsky was gay and how that influenced his life. I think it's important for older teens to know that Hitler and his goons purposely targeted homosexuals for extermination along with the Jews, Gypsies, and anyone else who got in his murderous way.

But human beings can emotionally and intellectually absorb only so much at young ages, and children need to be protected from the weightier matters of human sexuality. That's what parents are for — to protect them and to teach them.

5. What about religious people who object?

What about sincere, devout Jews, Christians, or Muslims who believe that homosexuality is an abomination? Can they opt out of these classes? Not in California. And apparently not in Illinois if these bills are passed. So, apparently the people of faith are not welcome to hold their beliefs. (So much for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of conscience.)

Only the agenda of the LGBT crowd is sacred. I thought that my relationship with my kid regarding discussions about sexuality was sacred. But no, the LGBT agitators and their cronies in the state government believe it is your job simply to hand over your children to them, shut up, and let them "de-program" whatever you have taught your kids, and instead fill their minds with what they think. They need more recruits, you know.

Now, as soon as you or I disagree with the LGBT community, we are automatically labeled as "haters," "bigots," and the like. Heard it all before. For your information, yes I am a hater. I hate the idea of people taking innocent young children and confusing them about simple terms such as "male," "female," "marriage," "mother," "father," "husband," "wife," "bride," and "groom." That is for their parents to teach them as THEY see fit (whether it fits with my worldview or not). It's not the job of the school or the state.

6. Where are the parents?

When I saw that California passed a similar bill, I just wondered out loud, "where are the parents?" Out of the forty million people who live in California, most of the population just doesn't care about this? Parents just rolled over? I have not seen much pushback.

What about in Illinois? It is a different culture in Illinois. South of Chicago and Interstate 80, the state is much more rural and conservative, so it should be interesting to see what parents will do. If I lived in Illinois, I would be on the phone constantly with my elected officials in the state House and state Senate. (I do call my elected officials here in the great state of Ohio about political matters.)

Organize people to go and visit legislators in the state assembly. Band together with other people and litigate if necessary. YOU own the schools, you pay the taxes. Parents and teachers should be in charge — as they were long, long ago — not the state.

Isn't the future of your children worth it? And if you cannot stop these bills, remove your children from the public schools. "Oh I can't do that!" Can't or won't? In my state, we have plenty of options for education. Not only can you homeschool, but in Ohio homeschool families can take in up to three students who are not a part of the family.

See if your state has the same laws. Start your own school in the educational wing of your church. Look at online schools. Stop saying, "I can't." We never got to the moon by saying, "I can't." We got there because we refused to fail. If the moral, academic, and physical education of your children is that important to you ... you will refuse to fail, and you will find a way.