Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

O'Reilly And Malkin Misinterpret California Bill About Gays In School Curriculum

Reported by Deborah - May 9, 2006

A California Bill requiring inclusion of contributions made by Gay,transgender and transexual people in history textbooks passed a Senate Education Committee hearing . Michelle Malkin and Kirsten Powers were on hand to discuss the law with O'Reilly and all three did their part to confuse viewers by distorting the facts surrounding the law. 5/8/06

Malkin called the Bill radical and dangerous claiming that teachers would not be allowed to say anything negative about any historical figure if they were gay. O'Reilly carried it to his usual extreme asking, " Teachers can't say anything about Jeffrey Dahmer? He's a gay cannibal!" Then he called it " a form of Fascism". Malkin claimed that students and parents were holding protests to keep it from passing into law.

Kirsten Powers was supportive up to a point claiming that she understood the need to provide positive role models for Gay students but she was against it because she knew some parents were uncomfortable discussing homosexuality with their kids.

Senate Bill 1437
does not forbid teachers from saying anything negative about gay, lesbian, or transexual people in history. It simply states that there should be no discrimination expressed because of their sexual orientation. The Bill is actually an ammendement to the anti discrimination law already on the books in California and there is nothing radical or dangerous about it.

Also O'Reilly and Malkin did not mention that the Bill is very clear that the curriculum should be only for an age appropriate group. Kirsten Powers may not have been aware of this fact when she objected to the law because parents would be uncomfortable. An age appropriate group would already be well aware and would benefit from this type of enlightened information.

comment: This type of distortion is unforgivable. It's no wonder that O'Reilly is losing the 24 to 54 demographic. If we care about our kids and want them to be decent adults we need to embrace an enlightened and inclusive attitude about humanity. How can O'Reilly and Malkin want to burden the next generation with all their fear of diversity and their stubborn refusal to accept human evolvement? Their comfort zone is a dark and stifling place.

Post a comment

Remember Me?

We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.