Posted by
TheChair on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:56:46 AM
Today's L.A. Times profiled some school board members' views on Proposition 8.
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-board18-2008aug18,0,701099.story?track=rss What I found interesting was in the last paragraph of this excerpt.
Grossmont school board member Jim Kelly, whose day job is working in insurance, said he proposed supporting the measure because "we need family-friendly schools." If same-sex marriage is allowed, then "once you start that game, why is it two people? Why can't it be more people? Why can't it be animals? You destroy the institution."
He also said he thought it was important for school boards to become involved because if gay marriage remains legal, changes in the state curriculum are certain to follow. He said the state could require that children as young as kindergartners be taught that they should support same-sex marriage.
Tina Jung, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Education, dismissed that as untrue, noting that "there is nothing in the California Education Code that requires schools to teach anything about marriage at all."
Here we have a Department of Education spokeswoman either completely ignorant of Education Code section 51890, or else she's fibbing. She's fibbing. See the post before last, below, where I showed that Section 51890 requires public schools to instruct pupils in
"the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood." What was not interesting, but boring because it was so predictable, is that the L.A. Times reporter failed to report who was telling the truth, Board Member Kelly, or Dept. of Education Spokeswoman Tina Jung.