Print subscriber but without online access? Activate your Digital Account now.
The Hawaii Legislature’s proposed "Hawaii Safe Schools Act" claims to target bullying and harassment at schools, but it is a mechanism for imposing a pro-homosexual, state-mandated orthodoxy on students and teachers.
Board of Education Policy 2210 requires that student discussion of issues that generate opposing points of view be considered a normal part of the learning process. It mandates resources reflecting all points of view, discussions based on an objective and factual basis, and learning how to make judgments based on facts.
The proposed act would uproot this balanced policy. The problems start with its definition of bullying, including behavior that a student finds "intimidating" based on his or her "gender identity or expression [or] sexual orientation." Even worse, "harassment" includes "annoying, or alarming … expression that causes another student … to feel uncomfortable." Rather than focusing on the bullying activities (name-calling, physical aggression), the act focuses on how the victim feels and prohibits and punishes what a student feels uncomfortable about. No more BOE Policy 2210, and students suffer for it.
If two students discussing any controversial issue (such as homosexual behavior) cause another student to feel "annoyed" or even moderately "uncomfortable," then the two students could be punished for "bullying." The act thus poses a real danger to the First Amendment protected rights of such students and prohibits the learning required by BOE Policy 2210.
But the act’s drafters were not satisfied with merely censoring religious speech. Instead, they are bringing George Orwell’s "1984" to life. Orwell’s book tells of an oppressive government curing unauthorized thoughts through "reintegration" — a process of gradually breaking down one’s will until he embraces the government’s mandated orthodoxy. The act’s sponsors have adopted the book’s three stages to reintegration: "There is learning, there is understanding, and there is acceptance."
The act requires teaching on sexuality at least 45 minutes per week. Students found guilty of bullying in the process are subject to "education-focused consequences." Thus, students who express, as part of a class assignment, the viewpoint that marriage should be between one man and one woman could be subjected to "re-education" that forcibly subjects them to materials promoting homosexual behavior in an effort to persuade them to accept same-sex "marriage."
The mandatory pro- homosexual education requires students to "develop empathy and self-awareness." Students must not simply believe that homosexual behavior is OK, they must share the feelings of those who engage in homosexual practices to better understand them.
Schools are also required to "reward positive behaviors that help counter bullying." Students who organize a Day of Silence promoting homosexual behavior are rewarded by the school, while students organizing a Day of Dialogue, with a message affirming a biblical view of marriage and sexuality, are punished.
Activists promoting homosexual behavior know that learning and understanding are powerful tools. That’s why television shows for years have glorified portrayals of seemingly normal, humorous, relatable same-sex couples. If we laugh with them and relate to them, then we eventually accept their sexual behavior, too. The act follows the same pattern. Activists found something America loves (bullying prevention) and wrapped their pro-homosexual agenda in it. And many of us are again accepting it because we don’t want to be perceived as soft on bullying.
No more. We should protect all children — not just a select few — from bullying and protect them from a state-mandated orthodoxy that supports only homosexual behavior. As one federal court recently held, "Tolerance is a two-way street." Our education system must tolerate and respect student and faculty opinions that are based on different philosophies or religious tenets. Otherwise, it is no better than a schoolyard bully itself, intimidating students into submission.
77