The Left's War On Christians
See other The Left's War On Christians Articles
Title: DOE Investigates Instructor Expressing Opposition to Homosexuality (Obama's queer police)
Source:
Infowars
URL Source: http://www.infowars.com/doe-investi ... g-opposition-to-homosexuality/
Published: Dec 3, 2012
Author: Infowars.com
Post Date: 2012-12-03 13:50:00 by Hondo68
Keywords: None
Views: 49228
Comments: 65
Photo: Drab Mayko.
The Department of Education has launched a federal investigation into comments made by an ROTC instructor in an Alabama school district.
After ROTC 1st Sgt. Lynn Vanzandt told a class he opposes same-sex relationships, a 15-year old student contacted GLBT Advocacy and Youth Services. The group complained to the school on behalf of the student, according to the Christian Post.
In November, the Department of Education involved the federal government in the compliant. It wrote a letter to GLBT Advocacy and Youth Services. The federal agency informed James Robinson, director of GLBT Advocacy and Youth Services, that the department would investigate whether or not students were “subjected to a hostile environment on the basis of sex or harassment based on failing to conform to gender stereotypes.”
DOE also said it would the government will determine if the school district “retaliated against the student… by failing to respond and take action reasonably calculated to stop the peer bullying.”
In addition to DOE and the homosexual advocacy group, an atheist organization based in Wisconsin, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, has involved itself in the case. The organization emailed the school district’s superintendent and claimed Vanzandt “bullied” students and “preached” his belief that homosexuality is wrong to them.
The DOE response follows a report 2009 survey performed by the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a gay activist organization founded by former Obama administration’s Education Department official Kevin Jennings.
“Harassment and bullying are serious problems in our schools, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students are the targets of disproportionate shares of these problems,” the letter sent by Education Secretary Arne Duncan stated.
The instructor has since apologized to the students for expressing his opinion about same-sex relationships. The Freedom From Religion Foundation responded by stating that an apology isn’t enough.
The Department of education is at the forefront of homosexual advocacy in public schools. In 2011, DOE sent a letter to federally funded schools about establishing clubs on campuses, specifically Gay-Straight Alliance clubs for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students, CNSNews reported on July 8, 2011.
Poster Comment:
Obama's Education Secretary (Arne Duncan) Supports Gay High Schools. A Mitt Romney clone.
(2 images)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 50.
In addition to DOE and the homosexual advocacy group, an atheist organization based in Wisconsin, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, has involved itself in the case. The organization emailed the school district’s superintendent and claimed Vanzandt “bullied” students and “preached” his belief that homosexuality is wrong to them.
It was never about tolerance, equal rights and 'gettin along.' It has always been about controlling information, indoctrination and silencing opposing views.
It started out 20 years or so ago as "leave us alone and we will leave you alone" (close to the definition of tolerance); then it turned to "you must endorse or accept us" ; to now it is "if you don't accept us and our message, we will use the full force of government to silence you and indict you." Who is the bully now?
Notice the "friends" of the gay lobby tyrants...government and atheists. What a cozy relationship.
#4. To: redleghunter (#2)
t was never about tolerance, equal rights and 'gettin along.' It has always been about controlling information, indoctrination and silencing opposing views.It started out 20 years or so ago as "leave us alone and we will leave you alone" (close to the definition of tolerance); then it turned to "you must endorse or accept us" ; to now it is "if you don't accept us and our message, we will use the full force of government to silence you and indict you." Who is the bully now?
Notice the "friends" of the gay lobby tyrants...government and atheists. What a cozy relationship.
I love how you homophobic Bible thumpers try to twist things to suit your agenda.
Fortunately, most see through it today.
#10. To: meguro (#4)
love how you homophobic Bible thumpers try to twist things to suit your agenda.Fortunately, most see through it today.
Meguro, if you read my other posts on this subject you would know I fully support the original Oregon law. It gave all the legal equivalents to other than traditional marriage people. I support it because it also protects single moms who are trying to make a living and widows. But it was not good enough for your lobby so they had to add a 'marriage' clause to the updated Oregon bill.
#12. To: redleghunter (#10)
But it was not good enough for your lobby so they had to add a 'marriage' clause to the updated Oregon bill.
"My lobby" eh? LOL!
What's wrong with adding a marriage clause? It IS a marriage. Separate but equal? I think not. We did away with Jim Crow laws years ago.
#13. To: meguro (#12)
What's wrong with adding a marriage clause? It IS a marriage. Separate but equal? I think not. We did away with Jim Crow laws years ago.
You are doing the 'work' of the gay lobby in your statement. How? By using "Jim Crow" as a vehicle of argument to silence an opinion. Using the "hate" and "race" card is not an argument.
Marriage is defined as a union of one man with one woman. You can call your unions whatever you want, but it is not marriage as defined for centuries. Your "unions" are different and if you want the same legal priviledges you can legally fight for them. But whatever it turns out to be, it is not marriage. You cannot change an absolute.
#14. To: redleghunter (#13) (Edited)
You are doing the 'work' of the gay lobby in your statement. How? By using "Jim Crow" as a vehicle of argument to silence an opinion. Using the "hate" and "race" card is not an argument.
I'm not silencing anyone's opinion. You're free to voice it, and you are doing it right here, loud and clear. I'm bringing up Jim Crow, since your "world view" about marriage is inherently discriminatory, just as Jim Crow was.
Marriage is defined as a union of one man with one woman.
According to your world view? Your religion? What exactly?
You can call your unions whatever you want, but it is not marriage as defined for centuries.
Whether or not that's true, so what? Things change over time. We do not live in a stagnant, static vacuum. We correct social injustices in our society (such as slavery and denying women the right to vote), and we become better people as a result. Denying gays the right to marry their lovers is another such social injustice in need of correcting.
Your "unions" are different and if you want the same legal priviledges you can legally fight for them.
We're fighting for marriage, and we're winning. I know it rocks your world view, and I'm sorry about that, but that's how it goes. You're free to live your life repressed, homophobic, and ignorant, but you have no right to drag us into your flawed, myopic world view.
But whatever it turns out to be, it is not marriage. You cannot change an absolute.
Of course we can, and we are.
#17. To: meguro (#14)
But whatever it turns out to be, it is not marriage. You cannot change an absolute.Of course we can, and we are.
I have never played a piano, or conducted but I want to be called a Maestro. That is your argument. Please don't lead me to having to explain the biology here.
So please if you want to respond you should address me as Maestro.
#19. To: redleghunter (#17)
I have never played a piano, or conducted but I want to be called a Maestro. That is your argument. Please don't lead me to having to explain the biology here.So please if you want to respond you should address me as Maestro.
Open your eyes and smell the coffee, Maestro.
Gay marriage already exists in certain US states. Don't you right-wingers believe in states rights?
#20. To: meguro (#19)
Open your eyes and smell the coffee, Maestro.
Do I have to explain the details of consummation of marriage and the purpose of producing legally recognized descendants?
Marriage is not just a legal contract that allows you benefits and legal rights.
#24. To: redleghunter (#20) (Edited)
Marriage is not just a legal contract that allows you benefits and legal rights.
Your church can refuse to marry gay couples. I don't give a rat's ass because I don't belong to your church. But what if a religious institution does choose to marry gay couples?
#47. To: meguro (#24)
But what if a religious institution does choose to marry gay couples?
I would ask them all to eat their soup with a knife and see how that works.
#50. To: redleghunter (#47)
I would ask them all to eat their soup with a knife and see how that works.
So you're saying they wouldn't have that right? So you don't really support Freedom of Religion, unless its own your religion, correct?
Replies to Comment # 50.
I would ask them all to eat their soup with a knife and see how that works.
So you're saying they wouldn't have that right? So you don't really support Freedom of Religion, unless its own your religion, correct?
Try eating chicken broth with a knife and let me know how it works for you. No Japanese trickery like lifting the bowl and drinking the broth.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 50.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]