Really? You expect us to BELIEVE that?

No on 8 campaign has come out with ads that claim the Yes on 8 campaign is lying about the impact that gay marriage will have (and is ALREADY having) on public schools.

Remember the scene in the Wizard of Oz where the wizard is controlling the machine and says, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!!"

That's exactly what is happening here. Acceptance of gay marriage and gay lifestyle is being taught, not only in Massachusetts, but right here in California. (Class "field-trip", "coming out day") It's not a question of WILL it happen. It IS happening. No amount of "pay no attention to that" will make it untrue.

The other argument, nay lie, that is being put forth, is that parents will be able to "opt out" of these situations. Mmhmmm, right. Did you see the "coming out day" article?

With the way the CTA is supporting the No on 8 campaign, do we even have to wonder whether the gay special interest groups will have a problem with pushing their curriculum plans on districts across the state??

Have you seen what the CA Association of Teachers of English (CATE) came up with for their 50th Annual Convention? The theme: "Voices at the Epicenter of Change" will offer a special "Program Strand" (one of seven) entitled "LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender)." Their brochure states the following: "Explore various approaches to incorporating GLBT units into the traditional curriculum."

Also, doesn't anyone else remember the Palmdale court case from 2005 addressing this issue? Here's a little refresher:

Writing for a unanimous Ninth Circuit panel, Judge
Reinhardt affirmed. The court, noting that many courts have
upheld state actions that intrude upon parental interests, emphasized
that a parent does not have an exclusive right to control
the upbringing of his child. Like the district court, the
Ninth Circuit panel relied heavily on Brown, adopting from it
the principle that parents “have no constitutional right . . . to
prevent a public school from providing its students with whatever
information it wishes to provide, sexual or otherwise,
when and as the school determines that it is appropriate to do
so.” The court construed Meyer and Pierce as permitting parents
to determine a child’s forum of education—but not the
education within that forum—and held that the Meyer-Pierce
right “does not extend beyond the threshold of the school
door.” Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit reasoned, the school’s

actions did not impinge on any liberty interest protected by
substantive due process.

See
Fields, 427 F.3d at 1203 n.6.
21. Fields, 271 F. Supp. 2d at 1220.
22. See id. at 1222.
23. 68 F.3d 525 (1st Cir. 1995).
24. Fields, 271 F. Supp. 2d at 1223 (quoting Brown, 68 F.3d at 533).
25. See id.
26. See Fields, 427 F.3d at 1204–05 (collecting cases).
27. Id. at 1204.
28. Id. at 1205–06.
29. Id. at 1207.

The court rejected the notion that parents have a right to exercise control over the public school curriculum, holding instead that Meyer and Pierce merely permit parents to choose an alternative to public schools for their children. So essentially, unless you can afford private school or can make arrangements to home school your children, you don't have a say in what your children will or will not be taught.

Tell me again about gay marriage not being promoted or taught in the public schools? And what was that about parents having a say, or it being a "district by district" issue? Oh, and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Just keep believing what the no on 8 campaign tells you.