Family Research Council launches campaign to boot Kevin Jennings from Dept of Ed.

by: Pam Spaulding

Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 12:15:00 PM EDT

[E]ducate the American people about how Jennings' dangerous views make him unfit to protect our nation's schoolchildren. "Kevin Jennings' record shows he has neither the temperament nor the ethical standards needed for public service," said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. "His history demonstrates disregard for our obligations to safeguard the health and well being of the student population. He is unfit for the post to which he's been assigned, and Secretary Duncan should withdraw his appointment at once."

Jennings and the organization he founded have been the leaders in promoting a pro-homosexual agenda in America's schools, beginning in kindergarten. His positions are extreme and narrow-minded, his rhetoric harsh and hate-filled, and his qualifications and ethical standards questionable at best. For all these reasons, Family Research Council has called upon Education Secretary Arne Duncan to withdraw Jennings' appointment. Here are some key reasons why we believe Kevin Jennings is unfit for public service.

1) Jennings' and GLSEN's concept of "safe schools" means special protections for privileged groups (especially homosexuals), rather than safety for all.

Undoubtedly the key reason why Jennings was appointed was because of GLSEN's long-standing commitment to what they call "safe schools." GLSEN has published "Model State Anti-Bullying & Anti-Harrasment [sic] Legislation." However, it protects against "harassment" only on the basis of "distinguishing characteristics" such as "race, color, national origin, sex, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, [and] religion." It does not even include the category which GLSEN itself has identified as the most common grounds for harassment: "the way they look or their body size." Why not define "harassment" and "bullying" on the basis of the nature of the actual conduct, rather than the characteristics of the victim?

Image Of Black Man Killing A White Woman Is How Mission America's Founder Describes Ed Dept Hire

by: Autumn Sandeen

Mon Jun 01, 2009 at 13:00:00 PM EDT

A conservative activist says the appointment of the founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network to head the U.S. Education Department's Office of Safe Schools is the equivalent of putting O.J. Simpson in charge of women's safety.

This is how a piece at the American Family Association's OneNewsNow is began by author Jim Brown. The piece is entitled GLSEN founder overseeing safety of nation's schools?

In the OneNewsNow piece, Mission America's founder Linda Harvey laments the hire of former GLSEN founder Kevin Jennings as the Department of Education Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools' deputy secretary -- she unfavorably compares his hiring to an African American's alleged killing of a white woman.

Do I really need to draw the parallel between Dr. George Tiller being killed after anti-abortion activists repeatedly referring to him as a "child murderer" (and "Tiller The Baby Killer") and his death to Linda Harvey's using a racially charged murder case to make a point about the Kevin Jennings' hiring at the department of Education?

Linda Harvey's speech seems to be hate speech to me, but it's protected free speech -- and it definitely should remain federally protected free speech. Yet, if Linda Harvey is attempting to use hyperbole to make her points, then her use of the form seems a bit too over the top in application. In other words, that she can freely state her ideas, but it doesn't mean that those of us who object to her particular language can't freely condemn her speech, as well as freely condemn her penchant to make statements that seem to folk like me to encourage violence.

But, what a surprise -- Mission America and Linda Harvey are against anti-bullying and hate crime legislation because Harvey considers it "thought crime" legislation:

Attempts at "speech codes" by universities are a related idea, but have produced a mountain of litigation, mostly over slurs or insults. These laws have been struck down as unconstitutional by courts throughout the country. Hate crimes laws and in schools, "anti-harassment" and anti-bullying policies based on sexual orientation, are just a back-door attempt to get the same goal accomplished: to use the force of law to elevate certain groups and individuals over others, to squash ideas and debate some find "offensive," and to thereby legitimize questionable social behavior.

I don't want to squash Harvey's speech or idea's, but expose her ideas -- especially this recent one regarding the hire of Kevin Jennings at the Department of Education -- to the light of day. It seems poignant on the day after Dr. George Tillman's murder to point out the imagery of Lind Harvey's comments; I believe comments like Linda Harvey's equating a government hire to a murder tell us where a good number of conservative "Christians" are coming from.

And, that place that these comments are coming from isn't a place of love, but instead it's pretty obvious these are coming from a place of hate.

To quote Harvey again:

There is terrorism in our midst. Even as we battle it in faraway lands, let's conduct counter-terrorism operations here on American soil as well. At stake is the integrity of nothing less than the human race itself.

And to me, it reads like she's using her free speech to advocate for anti-gay and anti-transgender violence.

But that said, perhaps I'm a little bit sensitive to hate speech after hearing the speech I heard at the Angie Zapata trial; I know hate speech sometimes gets paired with hate violence.