Does The New "No On Prop. 8" Ad LIE? Looks Like It Might

So, we have the back and forth banter of whether there should or should not be same-sex marriage in California. One side says they should be allowed. The other side, which had already spoken once when it passed Proposition 22 (by over 61% I might add,) says it shouldn't be allowed. With an amazing display of legalistic agendized acrobatics, the California courts overturned the will of the people, and went ahead with allowing same sex-marriages.

So much for NOT legislating from the bench, eh?

Okay, so now what? So now, we have Proposition 8. A million or so people signed a petition to have it put on the ballot. This one, being an actual amendment to the California State Constitution, which calls for the state to recognize ONLY traditional marriages. That being a man and a woman. Well, it's only been that way for a couple thousand years, why would it need to be changed anyways? The same-sex groups already had all the rights afforded to married couples via civil unions in California. Was it really necessary to change it?

To them, yes. Very necessary. Something about "legitimizing their status" or some such. In basic speak, forced acceptance. I won't even bother with getting into all the stuff San Francisco Mayor Newsom has been conjuring up. In a way, with a good bit of what they've been pushing for, it equates almost to an elevation of elite status over everyone else. I say almost as it depends on your perspective. Comments of "don't judge me" or "homophobes" for anything that doesn't agree with their ideals. Or my personal favorite, of which was actually used against me at one time, "homochromophobe." It had to do with my article about a transgender guy hiding his male orientation (in the guise of a female) from a convicted felon he became involved with, and ended up being murdered. I hope that killer fries for that. Ooooooo, but the crowd hated me for not idolizing that murdered teen. Make sure you read the comments for that article.

So along comes the barrage of "for & against" ads. We've all seen them. Vote yes on 8. Vote no on 8. Bumper stickers. Window acrylics. Supported by this group or opposed by that group. Yadda, yadda, yadda. But what of this NEW ad being put out by the NO on 8 crowd? It lays claim that the Pro-8'ers are "fear mongering" and that "same-sex marriage will be taught in schools" is a lie. Is it really a lie I wonder? Grab a shovel, we'll be doing some excavating.

According to California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell who is featured in this new NO on 8 ad, marriage isn't taught in California Public Schools. Period. Thereby negating the entire fear mongering of same-sex marriage being introduced to K-12 students. Shovel, shovel, shovel. Hmmm, looks like there might be a problem with Mr. O'Connell's statement. According to the California Education Code, Section 51930.(b).(2)... marriage IS taught in public schools as part of sexual health education;

(2) To encourage a pupil to develop healthy attitudes concerning adolescent growth and development, body image, gender roles, sexual orientation, dating, marriage, and family.

Uh, oh. This may not bode well for Mr. O'Connell either. It looks like this same statement is found RIGHT ON the California Department of Education website as well. Mr. O'Connell has some explaining to do. Now, it is true that schools are not "required" to teach about sex-education. But if they do, (of which 96% do, see page 5) they must adhere to the ENTIRE curriculum. Education Code (EC) 51933 specifies that school districts are not required to provide comprehensive sexual health education, but if they choose to do so, they shall comply with all of the requirements listed below. ".........Instruction shall encourage communication between students and their families and shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships."

So, if same-sex marriage is legalized, doesn't all of the above mean that it must be taught? I think it does. So, who is really lying here? The only way that Prop. 8 could eventually be considered a lie, is if EVERY school in California were to simultaneously end every form of sexual health education. No more. Nada. Zip. Zilch. We'll no longer be teaching ANYTHING about the topic, to prevent ever having to teach (normalize) same-sex marriage. But, we all know that won't happen.

Any comments Mr. O'Connell?