California has passed a law that requires textbook publishers to celebrate historical contributions made by homosexuals to society that also carries a strongly implied censorship clause. As with previous laws that guarded against educational materials negatively reflecting on a person because of their race, school boards are now restricted from purchasing any instructional texts that reflect adversely on homosexuals, and the parade of sexual deviants in tow, because of their sexual proclivities. Publishers must also seek out figures based on these sexual orientations, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, for inclusion into history texts as positive examples. The law, SB 48 signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown, also applies to school sponsored activities and instruction.
The thrust of this sweeping law is this: public deliberation and debate on the subject is over, and dissent will no longer be tolerated in what is become a state controlled media.
The result this law will have is easy to foresee. No publisher with a market as large as California public schools, the largest purchaser in the U.S., is going to risk millions of dollars in sales. No homosexual who was either famous or infamous will be objectively treated in the texts. From vignettes to profiles, individuals will be celebrated for their contributions that will often amount only to remaining militantly homosexual, and homosexuality is what is going to be celebrated. School children are going to be indoctrinated, and inducted into the lifestyle as never before.
This inclusion has already taken place mostly in Language Arts where history is more easily revised and even invented. Works by women, minorities, and deviants purported to represent contributions to society have been collected in anthologies for English classes; whether such contributions are small, miniscule, on nonexistent until the moment they are published for use in schools (e.g. due to the mandatory distribution of a work in a large school district, the person is now a famous author).
Purposely selecting these materials to reflect diversity has resulted in a minutia of literary works collected not on the basis of their ability to edify, but on the basis of being different, and being diverse is usually demonstrated by an attack on political and religious views that preceded or opposes them. That attack will now intensify. At large, history is going to be revised, free speech is going to be abolished, and the state view is going to prevail.
In light of the encroaching shadow of darkness falling over the land, it is appropriate here to preempt the textbook publishers with a history lesson. The following is a brief account of how the word “homophobia” became a neologism for tyranny.
In the homosexual campaign for ascendancy to privileged status under the law it is interesting to track the evolution of the word homophobia. Back in the 1980s and early 1990s the homosexuals were fresh from their victory over the American Psychological Association in having their aliment removed from DSM II as a psychological disorder. It wasn’t enough.
The claim made by the homosexual lobby for equal and indiscriminate treatment under the law was a lie. It would not be enough to censor civil discourse to prevent the expression that homosexuality was a perverse and disgusting proposition from which citizens may choose to withdraw themselves and their services from promoting. Sin is very intolerant of righteousness, and the worse the sin the greater the intolerance.
The goal was not only to silence the free expression of ideas and religious convictions; it was to extinguish the holders of those convictions by forced conversion. The previously sick set out to identify normal people as sick in order to cure them. A person intolerant of sinful behavior and who could not recognize it as good on moral grounds was diagnosed by an army of new armature psychologists as having the psychological disorder of phobia, or an unnatural and unhealthy fear of homosexuals. To twist the screw, it was claimed that the root of the fear was in a person discovering that they were a homosexual.
It was a wildly successful campaign. The only way a person could prove they did not suffer from homophobia was to quickly welcome and associate with as many homosexuals as possible. This surpassed merely accepting the lifestyle and proclaiming it to be normal and good; it translated into celebrating that lifestyle. The homosexual lobby was ecstatic, but it still wasn’t enough.
Nothing less than the complete elimination of everything and everyone that could remind the homosexual that their behavior was a sin had to be accomplished. Terrorizing churches was having its effect, and many were falling to the takeover, but activists were on the wrong side to the law. To jump the fence, homophobia had to be elevated to become a crime.
Today, homophobia no longer means fear; it means hate, and most expressions of disapproval of homosexuality are sought out for prosecution as a hate crime. It will not be enough.
As the new standard for curing society of homophobia has been elevated to a legal requirement, so too, a new standard for celebrating homosexuality must also follow. In the future, it will no longer be enough to recant; one must convert as proof of truly celebrating the lifestyle. On this course, the time is coming when the rites must be taken publicly in approved settings. It will become a part of the new curriculum for diversity classes and sensitivity training, and will be a requirement for obtaining diplomas, degrees and credentials. No one from the age of five years old and enrolled in a public school or registered at a government licensed child care facility will be exempt.
Eventually, Christian schools that do not conform to these federal regulations will lose their accreditations, and then be outlawed.
The contemporary evidence for this forced induction can be seen in the rise in the application of psychoanalytical criticism to the literary works and letters of famous figures from history. Some literary critics have gone as far as to determine that Abraham Lincoln, Jane Austen, and Jesus Christ were homosexuals. Individuals from history with outstanding character, moral standards, and even deity are particular targets to establish the perversion as a constant and estimable behavior the practice of which enables individuals to make valuable contributions to society. This psycho revisionism is an attempt to imbue the practice with the attributes of their literary victims, and these are figures who are also targeted because they cannot personally refute such nonsense today (except for the Alpha and Omega whose refutation stands in the Bible).
Actually, homosexuality flourishes in proportion to increasing societal depravity. The historical evidence that the widespread practice and acceptance homosexuality is the apex of cultural debasement, and that forced induction is the means favored to expunge any hint of witness that the practice is immoral, is best presented by the condition and fate of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The extent to which the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were given over to homosexuality was such that the Lord likened it to a loud cry “because their sin is very grievous.” (Gen 18:20). The Lord sent two angels to deliver Lot and his family out of Sodom before destroying it with a rain of brimstone and fire from heaven. The angels met Lot at the city gate at sundown, and were persuaded by him to spend the night in his house instead of in the street as they had planned.
Lot feared the abuse from the Sodomites that awaited travelers would be in store for these specimens of holiness, these masculine personages set apart for use by God, and for that reason he brought them under his roof (Gen9:8). As a resident of Sodom, Lot had been vexed by the filthy licentiousness of the wicked citizens, (2Pet 2:7) and astutely assessed the danger.
Indeed, it came to pass that while his guests had only finished dinner, and before they could retire; the polarization of good and evil had aligned the inhabitants of the whole territory into a wicked frenzy.
The homosexuals, from old men to young, had come from every quarter and surrounded Lot’s house; demanding the angels be turned over to them so that they could be sodomized. Lot interceded by offering even his own daughters to ward off the attack, but the Sodomites would have none of it; they turned on Lot himself, for calling their behavior wicked, and pressed in upon him promising to do worse to him than to his guests for having the audacity to judge them.
As the crowd pressed against Lot they also attempted to break his door down, but here the angels interceded by pulling Lot inside the house and shutting the door. There comes now, in this historical record, the most astonishing evidence of this wretched depravity of evil that makes the coexistence of good and evil mutually exclusive. The intervention of the angles included one more act; “they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great” (Gen 19:11). What does the record bear, what is the account left us as warning? Even after being struck blind, the Sodomites “wearied themselves to find the door” to induct the angels into homosexuality (Gen 19:11).
The spirit of homosexuality is nearly this pervasive today in its persecution of the righteous to the extent that it extends itself to grope in the darkness seeking to silence, or convert and induct, any with godly opposition to the sin. This latest textbook law is the declaration that California has become as Sodom, and is the groping of homosexual activists for the door of the private Christian school. What will be the effect on Christian schools when all state instructional texts carry gloss pieces on homosexuals, bisexuals, transgenders, and how will they retain their national accreditations if they don’t use those texts? The writing for those texts has already begun, and the writing for tyranny is on the wall.
