You knew it would come to this.  So did I.  And yet one is still surprised by the sheer boldness of it all.  From my local paper:

California public schools do an inadequate job of teaching students about gay and lesbian history, despite a 2011 law that requires schools to teach such lessons, according to a national panel of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender history scholars led by a Sonoma State University professor.

The Committee on LGBT History has proposed a revision to the state history and social studies framework that ensures kindergarten through 12th-grade students learn about LGBT figures and the roles they played in shaping society.

One Don Romesburg, chairman of the Women’s and Gender Studies Department at Sonoma State University and cochairman of the LGBT history committee, points to the 2011 “Fair, Accurate, Inclusive, and Respectful Education Act” and avers that including the explicit identification of gays in the context of teaching history is now “the law of the land.”  And he and his committee are demanding it be enforced.  The law was introduced by state senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), who says its passage

ensures that the historical contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are accurately and fairly portrayed in instructional materials by adding LGBT people to the existing list of under-represented cultural and ethnic groups already included in the state’s inclusionary education requirements.

Romesburg and his group of “scholars” have come up with a list of proposed themes and topics to be included in the California curriculum, including “Teaching second-graders about family diversity and nontraditional families” and “Fourth-grade lessons on the possibilities and motivations for same-sex relationships in Gold Rush-era California.”

Imagine the textbooks—which won’t be ready until 2015.  Think of the illustrations!

The idea that justice won’t be served until each and every fourth grader in the California public-school system knows all about “the possibilities and motivations for same-sex relationships in Gold Rush-era California” is symptomatic of a culture that has lost its collective mind.  Today’s students graduate from high school without knowing how to read, write, or think because their overseers are much more concerned with teaching them about “family diversity and nontraditional families.”

As we march down the road to oblivion, the public-school system is reverting back to its original mandate, which is socialization.  Set up to blunt the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, whose extensive educational network was seen as a subversive influence on the nation’s youth, the public-school system was envisioned as a means to inculcate the social values of obedience, subordination to the state, and—in Calvinist New England—the religious values of the surrounding community.  In our age, where traditional religion is practically outlawed, the new religion of political correctness has taken the place of the old Calvinism, with the result that fourth graders are now to be subjected to “lessons” on how often miners in Gold Rush country buggered each other.

Romesburg & Co. are making their proposals because the “Instructional Quality Commission”—an advisory body to the state board of education—apparently didn’t go far enough for these lavender Jacobins.  “We were surprised by how minimal their proposal is for inclusion,” complains Romesburg.  The commission wants to include lessons on “historic figures” and discussions of gay marriage, but this is “token,” says Romesburg.  He and his fellows won’t be satisfied until every kindergartener in the state is intimately familiar with the mechanics of sodomy.

The old-style “gay rights” movement was exclusively concerned with the depredations of the state insofar as their community was concerned: police harassment, entrapment, etc.  The Stonewall riot, celebrated by gays every year, was actually a rebellion against the New York State licensing board, which tried to close down Greenwich Village’s Stonewall Inn and other gay establishments.  Initially, at least, the idea behind “gay liberation” was that the authorities should leave people alone until and unless they started scaring the horses.

No more.  Gay activists have gone on the offensive and are consciously trying to destroy the institutions that make up “straight” society.  First and foremost among their targets: organized religion.

In Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, Donald and Evelyn Knapp, both ordained Pentecostal ministers, have a wedding chapel, The Hitching Post.  Couples who want a Christian ceremony, and a package that includes a CD with sermons on the sanctity of marriage, pay a fee, and the knot is tied.  The Knapps are now being threatened by the city with heavy fines—and perhaps even jail time—because they refuse to marry same-sex couples.  Authorities claim this is a violation of a local ordinance forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation: The Knapps’ wedding chapel is a “public accommodation,” and therefore subject to regulation.

Aren’t all churches “public accommodations”?  How long before, say, the Roman Catholic Church is charged by some big-city district attorney with “discrimination” for refusing to marry gay couples?

Once the state steps in—whether it be in the realm of education, social relations, employment, etc.—it comes down to a question of whose values are to be imposed on whom.  When homosexual behavior was socially unacceptable—and illegal—gay men and women were imposed upon.  Now that such behavior is celebrated, it is the gays who are doing the imposing.  Because that’s how statism works.