Save California, Campaign for Children and Families, News Release, July 14, 2011

The press release from Save California, "Pro-Family Response to Jerry Brown's Signing of SB 48":

Sacramento, California -- One of California 's top opponents of placing "LGBT" personages in school textbooks is speaking out on the unfortunate signing of SB 48 by Gov. Jerry Brown today.

"Jerry Brown has trampled the parental rights of the broad majority of California mothers and fathers who don't want their children to be sexually brainwashed," said Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, which helped lead the opposition to SB 48. "SB 48 has no parental opt-out. The only way parents can opt-out their kids from this immoral indoctrination is to opt them out the entire public school system, which is no longer for morally-sensitive parents and their children." (Source: RescueYourChild.com and SaveCalifornia.com SB 48 veto request letter)

In 2009, a KPIX/SurveyUSA poll found that four out of five Californians did not support giving homosexual activist Harvey Milk a statewide day of significance. "With the signing of SB 48, even more California parent will be shocked to see the glorification of Harvey Milk and other homosexual-bisexual-transsexual role models in school textbooks," Thomasson said. "SB 48 is the eighth school sexual indoctrination law forcing immorality on kids in California K-12 schools. It's time for parents who love their children to match their words with deeds and do what's necessary to get them out of the immoral government schools and into the safe havens of homeschooling and church schools."

*****
"It's ridiculous that Jerry Brown says he's making history 'honest,'" Thomasson added. "The bill he signed prohibits teachers and textbooks from telling children the facts that homosexuality has the highest rate of HIV/AIDS and other STDs, higher cancer rates, and earlier deaths. These important facts about lifestyles children will being forced to admire will be omitted. And Brown calls this 'honest'? This revisionist history will actually make more children believe a lie -- that homosexuality is biological, which it's not, and healthy, which is isn't." (Source: "Not Born This Way")

Brown signed SB 48 despite it being completely unnecessary to deal with school bullies. There are existing laws that already strongly address this issue, such as: AB 1785 (2000) requires public schools to coordinate with local law enforcement to suppress and report both "hate crimes" and "hate-motivated incidents"; AB 394 (2007) requires K-12 schools to "post antidiscrimination and antiharassment policies in all schools and offices, including staff lounges and pupil government offices" and requires the State Department of Education to "display information on curricula" relating to "antidiscrimination and antiharassment" in regards to "sexual orientation" (homosexuality and bisexuality) and "gender" (cross-dressing and sex changes); ACR 82 (2010) permits participating schools - pre-kindergarten through higher education - to become official "Discrimination-Free Zones" that "enact appropriate procedures that meaningfully address acts of discrimination that occur on campus."

"These existing laws, in addition to other campus anti-bias and anti-violence laws, are certainly strong enough to quell physical and verbal bullying, rendering SB 48's broad curriculum indoctrination unnecessary even to satisfy the stated anti-bullying goals of the bill's sponsors," Thomasson said. "SB 48 is a revisionist history, sexual brainwashing bill, not an anti-bullying bill."

Continue reading.

See also, Rescue Your Child, "The Problem Facing California Public School Parents":

What your child is guaranteed in California public schools -- Because of bad laws, lack of pro-family laws, and politically-correct trends, here's what kids are guaranteed to receive in California public schools:

1. Homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination
2. Pro-abortion indoctrination, "confidential” abortion referrals and off-campus "counseling", without parental consent
3. Condom/birth control pills indoctrination and distribution without parental consent; no teaching children how to truly avoid STDs; "abstinence-only" education prohibited
4. Anti-God, pro-evolution indoctrination
5. Political correctness
6. Dumbed-down academics, less academic success, on average, than private or home school
7. Negative socialization and peer pressure
8. Less safety, on average, than private school
9. Anti-Christian indoctrination and widespread rejection of religious and moral values
10. Anti-parent sentiments

More at that link.

Facebook Exchange With Alex Knepper

Here's Alex Knepper's Facebook status at about 4:30 this afternoon:

Psychiatry is the most lamentable, malevolent, tragically destructive pseudoscience that the modern West has ever dealt with. Baseless conjecture built upon a nonsensical dualism -- and backed up by state power.

He had over thirty comments, and I added mine:

Alex: Psychiatry is indeed a medical science, based on empricism, etc. How can you seriously claim otherwise? What is your evidence?

Alex responds:

Donald, you malicious cunt. After playing into that demented, psychotic monster Swindle's vendetta and libeling me on your blog as a pedophile and accusing me of wanting to rape children, you have the gall to ask me a casual question like we're old buddies? Get the fuck out of here and don't speak to me ever again, unless it's in the form of your begging for an apology from me for the horrid way that you treated me.

I guess he's not over that whole "pedo" scandal thingy, and still lashing out pretty heavily. I responded:

If you hate me so much you would have deleted my friendship, Alex. Do so now if you choose. I "played into" it because I thought you were wrong. Have you learned anything?

Alex responds:

Deleting your friendship would be irrelevant; my Facebook is public and anyone can post on my statuses.

What have I learned, though? I've learned that I cannot trust that creepy middle-aged men like you won't be snooping on forums for young ...people to try to destroy a college kid's reputation. There's something infinitely creepier about a middle-aged man snooping into a 19/20-year-old's posts on a gay forum advertised for people aged 14-25 than a 20-year-old having (legal) sex with a 16-year-old, which you were so appalled by. (By the way, since you worship psychiatry, I should note that the DSM-IV says that all of my attractions are completely normal.)

I also have a lostpainting account on a Britney Spears forum, breatheheavy.com/exhale. Would you like to go investigate that, too? Since you're so obsessed with digging into my private (that is: non-political, non-public) life.

If Swindle thought the material was troubling, he should have first approached me with it in private for an explanation and discussion, like any normal person would do. Instead, his -- and your -- first reaction was to think "What a great blog post! Let's write about it and take him by surprise so we can try to ruin him!" That shows your true intentions, and it reveals you for the monstrous, morally-bankrupt piece of shit you are. The fact that you are old enough to be my father only compounds the creepiness. I spend countless hours every week feeling miserable about you people's horrific smears and how they have affected my life. It's like being raped over and over again. I'd rather have been raped, in fact, than have been subject to such a hit job.

My response:

I didn't investigate you, Alex. You're lashing out pretty hard here. At the time, I commented on the debate as a friend. We had had some pretty decent exchanges, and I had no vendetta.

Alex responds:

You may just possibly be more deranged than Swindle if you thought that your post was 'friendly.'

My response:

Go pull up the post and link it. I didn't investigate you, and I said that we indeed had had exchanges. That's not true?

Alex responds:

...You said that I was a "pedophile posing as a conservative," that I was fired in a "pedophilia scandal," that I promote "man-boy" sex, and that I "have contempt for the rights of the most vulnerable." All because I had legal sex with som...eone four years younger than I am.

It's a real mystery as to why I'd take offense to that, isn't it?

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/pedophile-posing-as-conservative-alex.html

....

Here's you: "Alex Knepper has protested ad nauseum that he's within his legal right to engage in sexual intercourse with a 16 year-old boy. And while that may be so (depending on the state, incidently),"

Um, yes, Donald, I follow the laws OF... THE STATE I LIVE IN. Not sure about you.

"there are no exceptions for adult sexual intercourse with 8 year-old children."

This is completely true but also completely fucking irrelevant, given that the guy I had sex with was sixteen and not eight.

My response:

I still stand by the argument, Alex. I think most folks were concerned with a higher law, a moral standard, which many thought you'd crossed.

And that was it. No further responses from Alex Knepper. I gather he wants to protect the cocoon of denial he's built up to justify his pursuit of adolescent boy sex. He still digs Justin Bieber, that's for sure:

UPDATE (8:40pm): Alex updates the thread with this:

Deleting this shit at my mom's request; you've caused enough anxiety to me; no need to torture her, too.

Well, how about that? Alex's mom monitors his Facebook threads? That's something else? Maybe she should have been monitoring some of those man-boy chat threads, and perhaps I wouldn't be having an exchange like this.