- The Washington Times - Wednesday, August 6, 2003

We have heard for years that one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. But have we ever heard that one generation’s internment camp is another generation’s public high school? The New York School Board, in an effort to show that homosexual kids should be treated like everyone else, has curiously rounded them all up in the Harvey Milk High School and will keep them there until graduation.

The responses have ranged from glee to shock. The glee is not just emanating from the gay community that sees this as a step forward in gay rights — it is echoing across America from the lips of heterosexuals who are sick of the gay lobby, intimidation tactics and power plays. They are tired of the double standards surrounding society’s accepted behavior of straight men, versus the failings of all restraints on a group of people defined by their appetites.

Another response to the all-gay high school echoing from the halls of compassion and conservatism is shock on a number of levels. It is hard to believe that the government is sponsoring discrimination and segregation of a segment of our society, locking them in an institution, while pretending to “protect” them from the evil heterosexual world. Where are the parents of these kids who are allowing them to be further stigmatized, stereotyped and potentially abused in a petri dish taken from the failed lab experiment of the Catholic Church?

Then you have the response from the kids who are being beaten up in schools because they are the wrong color, and beg to be sent to another school or be home-schooled. And the foreign kids who are harassed and would love to be assigned to a school with only people who think, act and look like them. And then there are the chubby kids who get their lunch money stolen, or the kids who don’t have the latest Gameboys or Nintendos and risk the wrath of their peers for being so out of touch. Should we segregate all these kids based on their shared malady and isolate them from society and let them believe that the world is made up only of like-minded people?

To allocate public funds for a school based on distinct characteristics returns us to a time before Brown vs. Board of Education and even Plessy vs. Ferguson. It is reminiscent of Nazi Germany, where people of a certain class, whether Jewish, handicapped or gay, were targeted for removal from “polite” society and eventually eliminated altogether. We are reminded of the Japanese internment camps that were established in World War II to make sure that an undesirable and potentially dangerous element of society was kept locked up, so we knew where they were and what they were doing, and would be safe from them.

So, from the myriad of mixed messages streaking across the skies on the issue of a government-sponsored all-gay high school, it is hard to determine what the gay community wants. They are acquiescing to the point that they are different and should be segregated from society for a variety of reasons, ranging from identification and access to like-minded individuals to a subliminal acknowledgment that gays are different and therefore are not easily understood or embraced by 99 percent of the nation who abide by a different set of standards and restrictions in their lives.

If gays are born this way, as they always claim, then there is not much anyone can do about this decision except cluck, feel great compassion for the kids and the lies they will endure to try and believe they are hard-wired like heterosexuals. But it also begs the question of how 1 percent of society became so incredibly powerful if they are so downtrodden and abused.

In this school, will they discuss the origins of the concept of marriage as being a Judeo-Christian covenant that God designed to be between a man and a woman? Or will they teach the kids the writings of Michelangelo Signorile in OUT magazine, (Dec./Jan. 1994) who said, “A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.” This sounds like a distinct agenda by a tiny segment of society that wants to redefine the other 99 percent in its own image. And the U.S. government and the taxpayers are going to foot the bill.

So, heterosexual America is left with a variety of responses to this new revelation of double standards and duplicity on the part of the government. They can respond like the Nazis did in World War II and say, “good riddance,” or they can demand that these children be protected by the same Constitution that protects the rest of innocent, impressionable youth in our nation, and insist that they not be used as pawns in a culture war.

Nina May is the founder and chairman of the Renaissance Women Foundation.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide