October 27, 2008

Yes on Proposition 8: First Lies, Then Blackmail, Now Child Exploitation

“Our children are being exploited and used as pawns to further a political cause…

“Prop 8 claims to be about families, but we’re here to say you can’t be for families by attacking our families. You can’t be for families and take these children’s innocent images and flash them not only on television statewide, but on your fund raising page. This must stop right now.”

Another Monday, another batch of ugliness and deceit from the Proposition 8 camp.

First up: The “lesbian wedding field trip ad.”

As I’ve already noted, “the Proposition 8 liars have backed off on most of their thoroughly-debunked anti-equality ‘arguments’ in favor of concentrating on the lie that the failure of Prop 8 will mandate ‘teaching homosexuality in schools.’”

The latest pro-8 TV ad uses footage of a lesbian wedding at San Francisco City Hall, with an ominous voiceover:

“Proposition 8 opponents claim gay marriage has nothing to do with school instruction. But then a public school took first-graders to a lesbian wedding calling it a teachable moment and now a liberal politician claims schools aren’t required to teach about marriage.”

Then the ad claims that teaching about marriage is required in 96% of all California schools.

Let’s take the second lie first:

The “teaching marriage in schools” lie has already been debunked countless times. In short, the only time marriage is “taught” in California schools is within the context of a broad comprehensive health education program — which is elective for each school district, not required by the state, and mandates “the active participation in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of comprehensive health education by parents, professional practicing health care and public safety personnel, and public and private health care and service agencies” before such a program is ever introduced into the curriculum — and which is far more concerned with preventing drug abuse, suicide, and unwanted pregnancies than with marriage.

Marriage is practically an afterthought, mentioned just once in the California Education Code (and again, only if a school district chooses to include a comprehensive health program):

(1) Pupils will receive instruction to aid them in making decisions in matters of personal, family, and community health, to include the following subjects: …

(D) Family health and child development, including the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood.

And, of course, nothing in the California Education Code will change based on the defeat or passage of Proposition 8.

(You can read my lengthier dissection here.)

Now, about that lesbian wedding:

First, you need to know about the school involved. Mormons for Marriage, in “Of First Graders, Field Trips and Weddings,” reveals many interesting details the Yes on 8 camp does not want you to know (bold emphasis mine):

Creative Arts Charter School is a K-8 school that focuses on an arts-integrated, project-based curriculum. Children in grades K-5 spend two years with the same teacher. Parent and family involvement in the school is “critical to school success.”

One of the guiding principles of the school is, “Respect for all community members defines our actions and our attitudes; it must never be compromised.”

The school is non-sectarian in its programs, admissions policies, employment practices, and all other operations, does not charge tuition, and does not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. Admission is for children whose ages meet the current California Education Code requirements and who reside in California. …

When children enroll at the school, families commit to volunteer 40 hours per year at the school. In addition to volunteer expectations, “every family attends Community Meetings, celebrations and social events. … Many important tasks are completed due to each family’s commitment to volunteerism. …The rich programs provided by CACS would not exist were it not for a very high level of family involvement and support.” …

Part of the Social Studies focus for first-graders includes: “In 1st grade, the students build on concepts of community explored in kindergarten, such as interdependence, group responsibilities and individual responsibilities. Concepts of cultural difference and acceptance of those differences are highlighted for each child in the classroom and families are invited to come in and share their personal traditions.”

About the Wedding Field Trip:

With all of the above in mind, take a moment to re-consider the students’ field trip.

First, the children and parents were well-acquainted with their teacher because she’d been with them throughout all of Kindergarten and because of the high level of parental involvement required at the school.

Second, the field trip was organized by a volunteer parent who wanted to surprise the teacher. Even though it was organized by a parent, permission slips were required. No children were forced to attend the wedding, in fact, at least two children remained at the school.

Third, attending such a field trip and any resulting discussions could easily be seen as a way to help the students understand cultural differences, personal traditions, interdependence and community building.

Finally, these parents chose this school for this children, and all of the parents who allowed their children to attend the wedding chose to educate their children in this way. If we don’t want schools to teach our children things we don’t believe, we shouldn’t be removing the option for other parents to teach their children things they believe, either.

Well, that certainly shoots to hell the idea the Yes on 8 camp is trying to plant in your head — that a bunch of unwitting six-year-olds were forcibly bused to a lesbian wedding in order to fulfill some insidious “homosexual indoctrination” program mandated by the state of California since the legalization of same-sex marriage.

So, what do the parents of the first-graders think about all this?

Here’s what four parents have to say, in a press release issued last night:

Outraged Parents of Children Featured in Latest Prop 8 TV Ad Demand that Commercial be Taken off the Air Immediately

Latest Campaign Gimmick Termed Exploitative and Shameless by Parents

SACRAMENTO — The parents of the two children most prominently featured in the latest multi-million dollar Prop 8 political spot today termed those ads “distasteful and exploitative” and demanded that the ads be taken off the air immediately. Both sets of parents — Laura Hodder and Matt Alexander and Jen Press and James Moore, sent two hand-delivered letters this morning. The first letter is to the Prop 8 Campaign demanding the ad be removed from its television and its Web site where it is being used as a fund raising tool. The second letter to the San Francisco Chronicle asks them to intervene on their behalf. The Prop 8 campaign manipulated video that the Chronicle has posted on its Web site.

In their letter to the Prop 8 campaign, the parents wrote: “We are absolutely outraged that you have chosen, without permission, to shamelessly hijack the images of our innocent children to promote a cause that we in no way, shape or form support. It is even more maddening that you have willfully and calculatingly edited the images of our children, with menacing music in the background, in a way that is completely contrary to their nature and harmful to them.”

The footage manipulated by the Yes campaign, without authorization from either the parents or the Chronicle, was originally captured on Oct. 10 when the children took a field trip with their classmates and several parents to share the moment of their teacher’s wedding to her longtime partner. All parents were notified well in advance of the trip which was organized by some parents, and, in fact, two families chose to have their children not participate under California’s broad opt out law.

“I’m a school principal so I know something about education and parents’ rights,” said Matt Alexander whose son, Ben, is featured in the ad. “And the opt out law is something we readily apply all the time. So, let me join every other educator in the state and ask Prop 8 to also stop lying about the opt out law.”

“This field trip was about sharing a special moment with a teacher these kids love,” said Jen Press whose daughter, Lucy, is prominently featured in the political ad. “To turn around and distort images of our children is outrageous. We’re opposed to Prop 8, but irrespective of our position, it’s wrong to use any image of children without their parents’ permission. And we think every parent in California would agree with us.”

In the letter to the San Francisco Chronicle, the parents wrote, in part:

“Our children are being exploited and used as pawns to further a political cause… We ask that you intervene immediately on our behalf and issue a cease and desist letter to the Yes on 8 campaign. If the campaign does not remove the ad, we ask that you pursue legal action against them.”

Added Jen Press: “Prop 8 claims to be about families, but we’re here to say you can’t be for families by attacking our families. You can’t be for families and take these children’s innocent images and flash them not only on television statewide, but on your fund raising page. This must stop right now.”

Click here to read the letter to the San Francisco Chronicle.(pdf)

Well, Prop 8 backers? What’s your next move? Busting kneecaps? Busting the kneecaps of six-year-olds? Nothing would surprise us now. When it’s “all for the children,” what’s a little child exploitation in the course of a such an all-encompassing, soul-winning crusade? Just a a little collateral damage in your war, that’s all.

Posted by: Sapphocrat

Permalink | |