They Have Rights -But Where Are Mine?

Someone please explain to me:

Why the sodomists are winning in their attempts to force their lifestyle onto society and indoctrinate our children in perversion?

Where are MY rights? Why don't I have the right to have my children protected from what offends ME?

Why is their "right" to freedom from discrimination greater than my right to NOT having them dictate the kind of society I live in?

Why is there so much tolerance over what offends THEM, and none over what offends ME?

Why am I not allowed to violate their sensitivities, but have no protection over their violating MINE?

Why do I have to adopt tolerance of all their perversions, but nothing is said about tolerating MY way of life?

As a Christian, I ask why I have to tolerate the homosexual agenda and submit to their acceptance in our schools and in every aspect of our society, but the Bible which represents MY "agenda" is banned from our schools and from every aspect of our society? Why is it that they have "rights," and I don't?

Why is society allowing the sodomist agenda to TAKE OVER while the Christian "agenda" is banned? Can anyone out there explain these things to me?


Look at this article:

Lawmakers Pass Redefinition Of 'Sex'

By Bob Unruh

In a move with national implications, California's state Senate passed a bill today that establishes a new definition for "sex," threatens references to "mom" and "dad" and could restrict the presentation of scientific evidence to students.

The newest legislation, sponsored by lesbian Sen. Sheila James Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, would ban textbooks, references, teaching aids, activities, events, discussions, posters, announcements, workbooks and anything else within the public school system from anything that "reflects or promotes bias against" homosexuality, transgenders, bisexuals or those with "perceived" gender issues. WHY isn't what I believe protected from bias???
"SB 777 is designed to transform our public schools into institutions that disregard all notions of the traditional family unit," said Karen England of the Capitol Resource Institute. "This reverse discrimination is an outright ATTACK on the religious and moral beliefs of California citizens."

References to a "mother" and "father" in any school text appear to be threatened, because they could be interpreted as "reflecting" a bias against the "Partner 1" and "Partner 2" of same-sex lifestyles. ...By creating bias against those who believe in male fathers and female mothers?
Randy Thomasson, of the Campaign For Children and Families, said it's just wrong. "SB 777 requires textbooks, instructional materials and school-sponsored activities to positively portray cross-dressing, sex-change operations, homosexual 'marriages' and all aspects of homosexuality and bisexuality, including so-called 'gay history,'" he said. Then it should be mandated that there must be textbooks, etc, positively portraying male fathers, female mothers, and the traditional family unit. If THEY have rights, WE must too.
Thomasson said the notion "of forcing children to support controversial sexual lifestyles is shocking and appalling to millions of fathers and mothers." "Parents don't want their children taught to become homosexual or bisexual or to wonder whether they need a sex-change operation. SB 777 will shatter the academic purpose of education by turning every government school into a sexual indoctrination center," he said.

The current education code's definition of "sex," is eliminated. The new "gender" definition considers "a person's gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth."

The new mandate would be enforced by the attorneys of the California Department of Education, which would sue school districts that don't comply. !!!!! This is becoming a police state with perverts becoming the new police force.
The Los Angeles district already has implemented many of the proposals in the legislation. Among the most obvious changes:

* Words such as "mom" and "dad" and "husband" and "wife" would have to be edited from all texts.

* Cheerleading and sports teams would have to be gender-neutral.

* Prom kings and queens would be banned, or if featured, would have to be gender neutral so that the king could be female and the queen male.

* Gender-neutral bathrooms could be required for those confused about their gender identity.

* A male who believes he really is female would be allowed into the women's restroom, and a woman believing herself a male would be allowed into a men's room.

A board member for the homosexual advocacy group 'Equality California' verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill. The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.

"The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance," said England. "Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools."

In Los Angeles already, she said, "boys who perceive themselves as girls may enter the girls' locker room and restroom. Teachers and school officials are required to hide the gender identity of a transgender student if the parents are unaware of what's taking place at school."

Thomasson said schools shouldn't be tools for activists with a moral agenda. "Schools need to do a much better job teaching kids reading, writing and arithmetic, not a better job advertising controversial sexual lifestyles to captive 6-year-olds," he said.
He also noted that, just as last year, two other bills also are pending: AB 394 would demand that schools distribute to students "anti-harassment" education programs, and AB 675 would give $1 million to pay for homosexual, bisexual and transsexual activists to turn 10 public schools into "sexual indoctrination centers."

Condensed from: