By Mack Rights
I’m not pretending that this is what they meant to do, but the Washington DC Public School System inadvertently offered extreme proof that homosexuality isn’t genetic. Everything we need is in a CNSNews article by Penny Starr titled, “DC Public School Official: More Than 15% of Students Identify as LGBQ”
The T in LGBTQ was purposely left out because, according to Diana Bruce, director of health and wellness for D.C. Public Schools, “We haven’t mastered the ‘T’ question yet. So hopefully soon, one day very soon, we will have a good transgender question that we feel comfortable with the responses for. Our students and I cannot wait to be able to validate their experiences with some data.”
Stop snickering in the peanut gallery. I think she’s serious.
Before I explore the implications for her data on DC high school and middle school students, I’ll point out the data on all American adults. The end of the article cites data on adults older than 18:
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) July National Health Statistics Report, the 2013 National Health Interview Surveyof adults ages 18 to 64 found that “96.6 percent of adults identified as straight, 1.6 percent identified as gay or lesbian and 0.7 percent identified as bisexual.”
The remaining 1.1 percent of adults identified as “something else” (0.2%); stated “I don’t know the answer” (0.4%); or refused to provide an answer (0.6%).
According to the CDC, a total of 2.3% of all adults aged 18 to 64 are gay, lesbian or bisexual, while a total of 1.1% don’t know or refuse to answer.
According to Diana Bruce, in the public school system of the city where our national government is located:
More than 15 percent of our high school students [regular and charter schools] identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or questioning – and that’s at the high school level. At the middle school level, about 6 percent of our students identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual, and another 8 percent identify as questioning.
Assuming that only about 2.5% of adults are gay, lesbian or bisexual (my number is generous), this means that children going to the DC public high schools are 500% more likely than adults nationally to be gay, lesbian or bisexual. Students in the middle schools are a 140% more likely than adults to be gay, lesbian or bisexual.
If homosexuality were indeed just a genetic abnormality like Down Syndrome, as the left wants us to believe, these numbers would not be so out of whack. In fact, these numbers would be lower than the 2.3% to 2.5% of American adults that define themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual. Children are much less likely than adults to have the knowledge or experience necessary to define their own sexuality. Experience and knowledge come with age. This can be seen in the fact that only 6% of middle school children defined themselves as homosexual to some extent while 15% of high school students define themselves that way. The high school students have more knowledge and experience than the middle school students. They’ve also had more alternative-lifestyle training.
It’s not a secret that today’s school systems, especially those in liberal cities, have put much more money into the promotion of the gay and bisexual lifestyles than they did in the past. Unless the homosexuals of Washington DC have been breeding like rabbits in order to pass on their genetic anomalies, expansion of programs to promote the homosexual lifestyle is the only variable that can be observed. That’s the nurture part. The nature part would be extreme breeding in the homosexual community, which we’re not seeing. This governmental experiment in nurture is the only thing different about the lives of these children and the lives of the adults that graduated from these schools in the past.
No objective scientist could come to any other conclusion than that the promotion of the alternative lifestyles, through the use of programs to curb the bullying of those living in alternative lifestyles, is recruiting children into those lifestyles. Diana Bruce was delivering her school system’s data at a US Department of Education Bullying Summit, used to curb bullying. While it might be successful at curbing bullying to an extent, it also appears to be recruiting children into the lifestyle, especially those children who would like to be better protected against bullying. There’s no other explanation for such incongruities in these data that defy all reason. If you have one, offer it. I’m open to hearing about it.
Interestingly, the DCPS survey also discovered that “during the past 12 months, 21% of LGBQ high school youth and 7% of heterosexual high school youth reported that they have been harassed on school property because someone thought they were lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.“
If I’m right about the anti-bullying program being successful at recruiting children that don’t want to be bullied into the homosexual and bisexual lifestyle, then this program is actually recruiting them into a lifestyle that makes it more likely that they will be bullied. While 21% of the LGBQ kids are harassed, only 7% of the heterosexual kids are being harassed for being thought to be LGBTQ.
In regards to bullying, let me use the same logic that Planned Parenthood uses as a reason to give twelve-year-old children condoms. Kids are going to do it whether we like it or not.
Because of this data, we know that anti-bullying programs are extremely successful at recruiting children into the gay lifestyle. If the goal is really to protect children from being bullied, wouldn’t it be better not to coax them into a lifestyle that makes it more likely that they WILL be bullied? If the gay kids are 200% more likely to be bullied than the straight kids, why are the DC schools continuing with a program that has increased the percentage of gay kids by 500%? Why aren’t parents of bullied gay kids forming a class action suit against the DC school system for turning their kids into bullied victims? Would parents tolerate a school system’s anti-rape program teaching their daughters to dress like sluts so they will be more likely to get raped- you know, so we can get the rapists of the street?
There comes a time when we ought to examine the consequences of a program and not just the intentions. Let’s do the math. If the DC schools were normal and only 2.3% of the 50,000 students were gay, lesbian and bisexual, then only 21% of the 1,150 gay kids would be harassed- that’s 241.5 bullied gay kids. However, because of this program, there are 7,500 gay kids (15% of 50,000) in the school system, meaning 1,575 gay kids have reported being harassed. I’m not saying it’s acceptable for those 241.5 gay kids to be bullied, but how does an anti-bullying program that increases that number to 1,575 bullied gay kids make sense? Call me crazy, but that’s the extreme opposite of what was supposed to happen.
But hey, I might be wrong. The homosexuals in DC might be secretly breeding like rabbits in order to spread their genes. I doubt anyone would ever catch wind of something like that.