Tag Archives: Daniel Villarreal

Lesbian public school teacher indoctrinates children as young as 4 in LGBT

Homosexual activists claim their proselytizing in schools are a way of combating bullying. But a number of homosexual activists have admitted that the movement’s goal is in fact to “indoctrinate” children into accepting the normalcy of the homosexual lifestyle.

Canadian gay activist Sason Bear Bergman, a woman who identifies as a transgender man, wrote in a March 2015 piece titled “I Have Come to Indoctrinate Your Children Into My LGBTQ Agenda (And I’m Not a Bit Sorry)”: “I am here to tell you: All that time I said I wasn’t indoctrinating anyone with my beliefs about gay and lesbian and bi and trans and queer people? That was a lie.” Bergman states she wants to make children “like us” even if that “goes against the way you have interpreted the teachings of your religion.”

Sason Bear Bergman & Daniel Villarreal

In 2011 U.S. gay activist Daniel Villarreal penned a column for Queerty.com stating that the time had come for the homosexual lobby to admit to “indoctrinating” schoolchildren to accept homosexuality:

“Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?

We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it. Recruiting children? You bet we are.

Homosexual activist Michael Swift wrote in 1987 in the Gay Community News that school children would become explicit targets for homosexual indoctrination:

We shall seduce them in your schools…They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Pete Baklinski reports for LifeSiteNews, April 20, 2015, on just such an example of a lesbian teacher’s indoctrination of children as young as four to accept homosexual and same-sex marriage.

Pam Strong, a primary grade lesbian teacher from Ontario’s Ellengate Public School, revealed in a workshop at a homosexual activist conference for teachers in April 2015, which was attended by LifeSiteNews, how she uses her classroom to convince children as young as four to accept homosexual relationships. She said, “I started in Kindergarten. What a great place to start. It was where I was teaching. So, I was the most comfortable there.”

Pam Strong

The conference, hosted by the homosexual activist organization Jer’s Vision, now called the Canadian Centre for Gender and Sexual Diversity, focused on the implementation of Bill 13 in Ontario classrooms. Bill 13, called by critics the ‘homosexual bill of rights,’ passed in June 2012 and gave students the right to form pro-gay clubs in their school, including Catholic schools, using the name Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA).

Strong, who is in an open relationship with another woman and who has been a teacher for about five years, focused her workshop on what she called the “power of conversation” for promoting LGBTQ issues in an elementary classroom, beginning with the junior kindergarten class.

She said she was reading a book King and King in the junior kindergarten class as a springboard to discuss her sexuality with the kids when she got to the part where the two princes become “married.” One of the boys in the classroom shouted: “They can’t do that! They can’t get married. They’re two boys.”

Strong recounted: “And I said, ‘Oh, yeah, yeah, they can. It’s right here on page 12.”

To which the boy replied,  “Oh, yeah, I know Mrs. Strong, but that’s just a story. That’s not real life.”

“And I said: ‘It happens in real life too. I am married to a woman. I am gay. And I am in love with my wife.”

Strong said the young children “just all kind of went silent.” She then told them: “That may seem different to you, how many of you have heard of that before?”

“Not one hand went up,” she related. “And so I said: ‘That may seem different to you, but we’re not that different. Would you like to know about what I do with my family?”

“Yeah, tell us,” she recounted the children enthusiastically saying.

“I said, you know, we take our kids to the park. I swing them on swings,” she related, telling conference attendees that she could share things she did with her own children that “mostly likely all of their families did with them.”

Then she told the children: “We laugh together. We go grocery shopping together. I read to them. I tickle them, sometimes until they scream and laugh and when they cry, I hug them until they stop.”

Strong said that at that point, the boy who had used the word ‘gay’ looked and her and said: “Well, you’re a family.”

“And I said, yeah, we are,” she related. “And off I go to the next classroom.”

Strong said that she went from “class to class to class and continued with these conversations, and they were very powerful.” She said, “All my class is very used to who I am. My family picture is very proudly in my room now. On Mondays they quite often will say, ‘What did you do with your wife?’ It’s normal in my classroom.”

ImageSome of the pro-gay children’s books Strong uses with her students.

Strong related another incident that happened last fall involving a new boy who had recently entered her grade 5 classroom and was unaware of Strong’s lesbianism. A conversation between herself and the students came up one day where it was mentioned that she was a lesbian. The new boy put his hands over his mouth and said, according to Strong: “Oh, my God, I think I’m going to puke.”

Strong said, “As I took the abuse — personally, as an individual – of those words, I also saw half of my class look at me with incredible concern. One student who was right in front of me already had tears in her eyes. And I noticed several other students who were looking at him. They were just very, very upset with this kid.”

The boy instantly became aware that “something he had said had just created this unbelievable tension in the room.” Strong said she told the boy that “I think that what you might not be aware of is that I am gay, and I am married to a woman, and my family has two moms.”

“His eyes just started darting around, and he was incredibly uncomfortable,” she related. “I looked at the other kids and I said: ‘Ok guys, what I want to ask you is: Am I upset with him?’ One little girl in my class put up her hand and said, ‘Mrs. Strong, I know you’re not upset with him, because he hasn’t had the benefit of our conversations.’ And I looked at my little friend, my ‘new’ friend, and I said: ‘But, we’re going to have one now.’”

Strong then directed her class to the board and asked them to write everything she had told them related to LGBTQ. “And my class all of a sudden popped up. ‘LGBTQ’ was on the board, ‘lesbian,’ and all the different words coming out there. And I sat back and said, ‘Let’s review.’ So, the last year and a half of ‘inclusive’ education came alive in my classroom.”

Strong told her workshop attendees that her “new little friend” is now a devoted champion of diversity. She boasted how he was the one in her class to count down the days to the pro-homosexual Day of Pink that took place earlier this month. When Strong took a photo of all the children wearing pink shirts in her classroom, she said the boy requested to be in the front.

ImageThe chart Strong uses to show her students that same-sex partnerships are the same as male-female families.

Strong said her indoctrination often doesn’t begin until months after she’d met the students. She waits for months before getting into what she called “difficult conversations” with students to convince them of the normality of her sexual preference for women. She first spends time “building a common vocabulary” in her classroom of words like “stereotype, prejudice, discrimination” so her students will be able to more readily conform to her pro-LGBTQ message. She has amassed a collection of “conversation starters” that she says helps get her started when presenting to her students the LGBTQ message. Pro-homosexual children’s books are one of her favorites.

“I use current events, news articles, advertisement are great for gender, especially with Kindergarten kids, pink and girl toys and all the rest of it. Commercials are great, I use one right now, the Honey Maid commercial.

Strong meant the 2014 “Dad & Papa” commercial depicting two male homosexuals engaged with their children in normal family activities such as making s’mores, eating dinner around the table, and walking in the park. She watches the commercial with her students up to three times, asking them to make a list of all the similarities between the homosexual-partnership and their own families. The kids notice dozens of similarities, but usually only one difference, namely that the commercial has “two dads.” Other than this, the students “could not find one thing in that commercial that was different than their own families.” In this way she convinces the kids that a homosexual-partnership is identical to a family made up of a male and female. “There was nothing left for me to teach at the end of it. It was a huge learning for some kids,” she said.

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

See also:

~Éowyn

Lesbian CNN political commentator wants her daughter to also be lesbian

A platitude about homosexuals is that they were born that way, not made. In other words, same-sex attraction is biologically-based, not a choice.

So it’s curious, to say the least, why a lesbian CNN political commentator named Sally Kohn states in a Feb. 20, 2015 Washington Post op/ed, “I’m gay. And I want my kid to be gay, too,” that she wants her daughter, Willa, to also be a lesbian.

r to l: Sally Kohn, daughter Willa, and partner Hansen

r to l: Sally Kohn, daughter Willa, and partner Hansen

Kohn presents being homosexual as a CHOICE, much like a person choosing a profession or a religion. More than that, Kohn says being homosexual is actually desirable — “an asset and a gift” — and is dismayed that her 6-year-old daughter shows every sign of being heterosexual. Here are excerpts from Kohn’s op/ed:

The idea that no one would choose to be gay is widely held — even in the gay rights movement. In the early ’90s, partly as a response to the destructive notion that gay people could be changed, activists pressed the idea of sexuality as a fixed, innate state. Scientists even tried to prove that there’s a “gay gene.” These concepts about sexual orientation helped justify the case for legal protections. The idea that folks are “born gay” became not only the theme of a Lady Gaga song, but the implicit rationale for gay rights.

[…] Until 1973, the American Psychological Association considered homosexuality a form of mental illness. And while gay-positive culture has flourished since, our aspirations haven’t kept pace. It’s more widely acceptable to be gay in America today, but that’s not the same as being desirable. In my house, though, it is.

[…] If I lived in, say, North Carolina, with an adopted son from Morocco, I’d like to think I would encourage him to be Muslim, if that’s what he chose. I’d do this even though his life would probably be easier if he didn’t. It’s also easier to succeed as a dentist than an artist. But if my daughter wants to be an artist, I’ll encourage her all the way — and work to destroy any barriers along her path, not put them up myself.

Plus, I’ve never for a single second regretted being gay, nor saw it as anything other than an asset and a gift. My parents were ridiculously supportive from Day One, and I had a great community of friends and mentors who made me feel unconditionally accepted. By the time my daughter comes of age, she’ll have even more of a support network, including two moms, for crying out loud.

More than that, though, being gay opened my eyes to the world around me. Learning that not every gay person had it as good as I did helped me realize that a lot of people in general didn’t have it as good as I did. I wouldn’t be a politically engaged human being, let alone an activist, writer and TV personality, if I weren’t gay.

[…] I want my daughter to know that being gay is equally desirable to being straight. The problem is not the idea that homosexuality could be a choice but the idea that heterosexuality should be compulsory. In my house it’s plainly, evidently not. We’ve bought every picture book featuring gay families, even the not-very-good ones, and we have most of the nontraditional-gender-role books as well — about the princess who likes to fight dragons and the boy who likes to wear dresses.

When my daughter plays house with her stuffed koala bears as the mom and dad, we gently remind her that they could be a dad and dad. Sometimes she changes her narrative. Sometimes she doesn’t. It’s her choice.

All I ultimately care about is that she has the choice and that whatever choice she makes is enthusiastically embraced and celebrated.

Time will tell, but so far, it doesn’t look like my 6-year-old daughter is gay. In fact, she’s boy crazy. It seems early to me, but I’m trying to be supportive. Recently, she had a crush on an older boy on her school bus. […] I confided in a friend who has an older daughter. […]

My friend wrote back with a slew of helpful advice, ending with a punch to my gut: “Bet it wouldn’t bother you so much if her crush was on a girl.”

She was right. I’m a slightly overbearing pro-gay gay mom. But I’m going to support my daughter, whatever choices she makes.

There is another reason why Kohn’s op/ed is disturbing: it lends support to a belief among same-sex marriage opponents that homosexuals’ hidden agenda is the recruitment of America’s children to their “lifestyle.”

Though homosexual activists and the media heap ridicule on that notion as the paranoia and bigotry of knuckles-dragging-on-the-ground troglodytes, prominent homosexuals themselves have admitted to recruitment as a goal.

In 1987, a homosexual activist named Michael Swift issued the Gay Manifesto, that was first published in the Gay Community News of Feb. 15-21, 1987, then reprinted in the U.S. Congressional Record. The Manifesto declared:

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

More recently, in 2011, queer activist Daniel Villarreal, writing in the gay advocacy website Queerty, also admitted to recruitment:

They accuse us of exploiting children and in response we say, ‘NOOO! We’re not gonna make kids learn about homosexuality, we swear! It’s not like we’re trying to recruit your children or anything.’ But let’s face it—that’s a lie. We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it. […] Recruiting children? You bet we are.

And now we have media personality Sally Kohn openly stating that “I’m gay. And I want my kid to be gay, too.”

~Éowyn

The Homosexual Manifesto of 1987

We all know how the Left portray cultural and religious Conservatives who want to preserve marriage as what it has been for centuries — the union between a man and a woman. We are knuckle-dragging troglodytes: hysterical paranoiac bigots who imagine that nefarious homosexuals have a covert agenda and are out to recruit our children.

Well, guess what?

We are right!

A year ago, I did a post on gay activist Daniel Villarreal, writing in the gay advocacy website Queerty, admitting the truth:

“They accuse us of exploiting children and in response we say, ‘NOOO! We’re not gonna make kids learn about homosexuality, we swear! It’s not like we’re trying to recruit your children or anything.’ But let’s face it—that’s a lie. We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it. […] Recruiting children? You bet we are.

It gets even worse.

Did you know that in 1987, a homosexual activist named Michael Swift actually issued a Gay Manifesto? First published in the Gay Community News of Feb. 15-21, 1987, the Manifesto was reprinted in the U.S. Congressional Record.

Here’s Michael Swift’s Gay Manifesto (Warning: shocking and offensive language):

We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.

All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.

All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.

If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.

We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man; we shall make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas. The museums of the world will be filled only with paintings of graceful, naked lads.

Our writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigueur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule, devices which we are skilled in employing.

We will unmask the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you find that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar, bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.

There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.

We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.

The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence – will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.

All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.

The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society of homoeroticism will be indulgence in the Greek passion. Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.

We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions.

We shall portray the homosexuality of the great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world. We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.

We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed, who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.

Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.

The Left insist that the Gay Manifesto was tongue-in-cheek (no pun intended) because Swift had prefaced the Manifesto with this disclaimer:

“This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.”

But as Bradlee Dean points out in his essay on the Manifesto for WND: “You decide if this is merely a satire, or if this is actually being played out in reality.”

As I was reading the Gay Manifesto, I can see how in a mere 25 years after Swift issued the manifesto, almost every one of its declarations has been achieved:

  • The Gay Manifesto vowed “We shall sodomize your sons in gymnasiums, locker rooms, seminaries, youth groups, army bunkhouses”: See Jerry Sandusky, Catholic priests’ sex abuse scandal, Boy Scouts, US military abolishes “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”.
  • “All laws banning homosexual activity will  be revoked”: See end of US military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”; homosexual “same sex” marriage in increasing numbers of states; Obama supports same sex marriage.
  • As for rewriting history, how about the ultimate rewriting of history: Jesus was gay! An example is Bob Goss, the author of Jesus Acted Up, A Gay and Lesbian Manifesto and Queering Christ, Beyond Jesus Acted Up.

H/t FOTM’s Joan W.

~Eowyn

Gay Activist: We really are out to indoctrinate your children

If you’re still sitting on the fence, in a quandary about whether there’s a homosexual agenda in America’s schools and society, wonder no more.

Queerty is a gay advocacy website that carries this self-description beneath its title: “Free of an Agenda Except that Gay One.” Wikipedia describes Queerty as “a popular online magazine covering gay-oriented lifestyle and news, founded in 2005 by David Hauslaib.” It is frequently referenced and quoted by mainstream media including the Los Angeles Times, ABC News, Entertainment Weekly, and Salon. Newsweek called it “a leading site for gay issues”.

Self-described "queer journalist" Daniel Villarreal

On May 12, 2011, writing in Queerty, Daniel Villarreal sarcastically called an anti-gay marriage group “the so-called” National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and accuses NOM of repeating “lies about indoctrinating schoolchildren that they ran in 2009.”

Villarreal then writes:

“They accuse us of exploiting children and in response we say, ‘NOOO! We’re not gonna make kids learn about homosexuality, we swear! It’s not like we’re trying to recruit your children or anything.’ But let’s face it—that’s a lie. We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it. […]

Recruiting children? You bet we are.

Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?

Remember, Prop 8 passed along age lines with the very old voting largely in favor of it. The younger generation doesn’t fear homosexuality as much because they’re exposed to fags on TV, online, and at school. And I don’t know a single lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person who wants that to stop. I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that it’s OK to be gay, that people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other, and that anyone can kiss a person of the same sex without feeling like a freak. And I would very much like for many of these young boys to grow up and start fucking men. I want lots of young ladies to develop into young women who voraciously munch box. I want this just as badly as many parents want their own kids to grow up and rub urinary tracts together to trade proteins and forcefully excrete a baby.”

+++

All that being said, it is curious why the education indoctrination Daniel Villarreal wants for our children doesn’t include the really important, absolutely essential information about gays that kids (and adults too) really need to know. I dare Villarreal to include this information in the gay curriculum! See my post, “What They’ll Never Tell You in ‘Homosexual Education’.”

~Eowyn