The First Amendment Center along with BridgeBuilders and others have drafted a framework within which communities can discuss issues of sexual orientation within the public education system. The agreement is based on the idea that all viewpoints deserve to be heard and that common ground can be reached. The following organizations have endorsed the proposal:
The First Amendment Center
The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
Christian Educators Association International
American Association of School Administrators
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
BridgeBuilders
Although the document does not mention ex-gays, both PFOX and the Christian Educators Association International are claiming that it will give ex-gays a voice:
“There are a lot of voices that have been excluded like, very often, the faith community,” Laursen [CEIA executive director] notes, as well as, “very often, the ex-gay voice that says, ‘Hey, it’s a choice. We have chosen not to live that lifestyle.’ Those voices just aren’t heard.” However, he describes the guidelines that have now been developed to guide educators in this area as “empowering” for the school community.”
The seven step framework consists of:
1. Create a common-ground task force
2. Agree on civil ground rules and understand current law
3. Include all stakeholders
4. Think outside the box of “us vs. them” politics
5. Listen to all sides
6. Work for agreement on civil principles and safe schools
7. Provide education opportunities for First Amendment principles
These steps seem to be a positive direction towards eliminating some of the animosity found in the discussion of the role of sexual orientation education and representation in public schools. We should be hopeful that serious people on all sides will use this tool to address a topic that has often been rancorous and divisive. Let’s also hope that all parties involved keep in mind that the safety, education, and inclusion of all students should be their goal, and not winning skirmishes in a culture war.
I believe that there is room in society – and in public education – for all citizens, be they gay, straight, bisexual, or ex-gay, and that respect can be accorded to all provided that they use accurate, verifiable, statistically and scientifically valid information when presenting their views. I hope that during the establishment of policy that scientific evidence takes precedent over viewpoint but that no one is silenced or marginalized for dissenting belief.
I think I can speak on behalf of exgaywatch when I say that we hope for a day when the facts about sexual orientation and same-sex attraction can be presented in a non-biased non-judgmental way that allows for respect for differing religious and cultural views while maintaining freedom and equality for all persons regardless of their sexual orientation.
Timothy, I’m not trying to be sarcastic at all, but I think this area of your statement is where problems may potentially arise, “provided that they use accurate, verifiable, statistically and scientifically valid information when presenting their views.”
The ex-gay camp doesn’t currently have any of this evidence in their court, and they don’t seem to feel they need to have it to back them up. How can the debate move forward using accurate information if one or many sides doesn’t have the information?
I have to be cautious like Brady. When did the facts ever keep creationists from spouting off?
I’m going to echo Brady too. Besides not having any scientific evidence to back up their claims, the ex-gay camp has been known to use Cameroniana as well as their own false stats. Even the very way they try to wiggle around what the debate is about–speaking of lifestyle rather than orientation–shows that they aren’t interested in an honest debate. You can’t expect an honorable debate from a group that doesn’t honor honesty.
Oh there’s an easy solution for someone demanding something beyond explaining gay, straight and bisexual…(I mean, those already cover all do they not?)PFOX and Christian Educators Association International will be delighted, I’m sure, to include an equal discussion about how straight kids can just go gay if they want to. Exstraights — that would be the opposite and equal to Exgay. Kids need to know they don’t have to be straight.This will be a particularly appealing message to the girls after they hear about heterosexual domestic violence, the dangers of childbirth and the (almost nil) rate of HIV due to lesbian sex. The boys will be happy to start imagining they won’t have the burden of the old “ball and chain” and kids and college fees, but can instead live happily ever after on Brokeback Mountain.The day that PFOX agrees to an equally anti-straight message along with their anti-gay message (or a pro-gay along with a pro-straight) is the day we can believe they are seriously interested in fair and open “discussion”.OK. My sarcasm level has reached critical levels. Better stop.
Part II. (Feeling better now)But I do note that PFOX continues to peddle the lie that they “successfully sued the Montgomery County Board of Education for failing to include the ex-gay viewpoint”.They did no such thing. Montgomery County got into trouble for including religious statements in the teacher’s resources (which were never in the student curriculum in any case, despite some confusion over that by the judge). PFOX got a 10 day temporary restraining order — solely because of those religious statements. A case never actually went to trial.The judge was in fact highly critical of the “exgay discussion” that PFOX had wanted in the curriculum, and did not accept any of their claims.(I have used quote marks because very little was actually said about exgays. PFOX’s message was in fact almost exclusively an antigay diatribe.) Following emphasis mine etc:
and the part about why they got the restraining order…
Frankly I have no idea why religion had to be mentioned at all. It’s a health class. And there was never any reason for presenting only one side of religious viewpoints — that is completely unacceptable, even if it was only in the teacher’s resources and not actually presented to the students.So the lesson is:Exgay viewpoints do not need to be included, particularly given they are overwhelmingly anti-gayLeave religion out of it. Always. This, of course, means excluding every single discussion ever likely to be presented by people like PFOX…
Great comment, grantdale. Great comment.
I use what I call the “Cameron Test” to determine whether or not an anti-gay person is honest. If an anti-gay person cites Paul Cameron, he is obviously a blithering idiot unconcerned about the truth.