By Rev. Mark H. Creech
Christian Action League of North Carolina, Inc.
The Greeks and the Romans used to have a proverb: “Like root, like fruit,” it said. Seneca once declared that good would never grow from evil any more than a fig tree would grow an olive. Jesus once warned about “wolves in sheep’s clothing” and added that grapes could never be gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles. Jesus was referring to a certain thorn of his day known as the buckthorn, which had little black berries that greatly resembled grapes. The thistle he referenced had a flower that looked very much like a fig. But the point was relevant even to our own day. There is often a superficial resemblance between what is true and what is false.
Such is very much the case with HB 1366 – School Violence Prevention Act, legislation sponsored by Rep. Rick Glazier (D-Cumberland). The measure would require that public schools in North Carolina adopt policies to address the problems of bullying. But it is the enumerations of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” included in the bill’s definition of bullying that are problematic.
Certainly no reasonable individual would want to be complicit with bullying for any reason. At least this is what the Senate thought and stripped away all of the enumerations from the House version of the bill and sent it back to that chamber for concurrence. Nevertheless, the House voted not to concur by a 60-56 margin and Rep. Glazier vowed to get the objectionable language of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” placed back in the legislation.
The fact of the matter is no enumerations could cover all the bullying scenarios and none are needed to provide the essential protections for North Carolina’s children. At least this was the view of the North Carolina Board of Education in 2004. After considering an anti-bullying policy that initially listed 16 specific characteristics including “sexual orientation” and “gender identity/expression,” the board unanimously voted to approve the policy without the specified list.
Board of Education members steered clear of specific classifications in their policy for a number of reasons. Several were concerned that a list would cause school administrators to overlook bullying of other groups that were not on the list; and at least one member feared the classifications list would create a victim mentality in students who feel they fit the criteria.
So why insist on enumerations in the legislation? It is because there really is a hidden agenda by pro-homosexual influences.
The evil of this legislation is that it elevates “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” on the same levels with the enumerations of race, color, ancestry, national origin, gender, physical appearance, mental, physical, or sensory disability,” which clearly are immutable or unchangeable characteristics. Yet homosexuality, bisexuality, transgender, cross dressing and other alternate sexual behaviors are not immutable or unchangeable. Moreover, it would equate what is sexually perverse with the sacred – religion – which generally speaking defines such behaviors as immoral. What better way to negate the two strongest voices of criticism against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender behavior in society than to elevate an individual’s sexual preference to the same level as immutable characteristics and religion and by statute say it deserves the same recognition and protection?
Rep. Glazier (D-Cumberland), however, continues to argue the list is only necessary to protect “the most vulnerable populations.” He says the inclusion of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” are needed so that school administrators can “teach and train” students about their prejudices and biases.
Ahhh, but there is the wolf in sheep’s clothing, is it not? If this legislation should pass, it would essentially require North Carolina public schools to teach that these behaviors are normal and perfectly acceptable. Students would be taught that alternate sexual behaviors are like race, color, ancestry – something a person can’t change – and like religion – something to be revered. And the premise for this teaching and training of students would be the law itself.
How clever! This bill is not so much about protecting “all of God’s children,” as Rep. Glazier has framed it, but it’s actually a back door approach to the indoctrination of North Carolina’s children with homosexual ideology. Moreover, it would create a domino effect that not only impacts education, but also employment, housing, anti-discrimination laws and potentially North Carolina’s marriage statutes since the state doesn’t define marriage in its Constitution.
Lawmakers should not be fooled. No matter how beautiful The School Violence Prevention Act with its controversial language may be expressed, it is not a grape but a buckthorn. It is not a fig, but a thistle.
Rev. Mark H. Creech is executive director of the Raleigh-based Christian Action League of North Carolina.