Told You So: VEA-NEA Say “I Do” To Same-Sex Marriage
Last week, we posted a commentary that related a breaking national news story to a previous post about two Family Life Education reforms we helped get passed and signed into law, and which took effect July 1. The national news story concerned the National Education Association convention, at which it and its member chapters — including the Virginia Education Association — considered adopting a resolution supporting homosexual marriage.
Now, it’s official. The NEA and its VEA subsidiary voted to endorse the resolution supporting national and state efforts to enact same-sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partner benefits. But the VEA Web site omits this resolution, while listing issues such as “reducing the dropout rates, properly managing charter schools, controlling infectious diseases in schools, providing resources for boosting teacher quality, protecting substitute teachers, and expanding opportunities for preschool education.”
Apparently, when VEA delegation leaders were asked to support a resolution that took no position on same-sex marriage issues, they refused, saying that teachers in Virginia know the issues the VEA is involved with and support them.
Aside from this obnoxious presumption, this means every public school teacher member of the VEA is sending his or her dues money to efforts to bring homosexual-sex marriage to our nation and commonwealth, despite the clear decisions by the General Assembly and Virginia voters to protect marriage. (Remember, homosexual marriage is banned in Virginia by statute and the constitution.)
This latest NEA/VEA absurdity follows a long history of extremist liberal advocacy. Last fall the VEA made news when it urged teachers to participate in “Obama Blue Day” and encouraged voting age students to vote for Barack Obama for president.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Pro-family teachers in Virginia have an alternative professional organization that provides similar resources as the VEA — some even better — without the embarrassing political baggage:
Virginia Professional Educators offers better insurance policies and other benefits without supporting liberal causes and candidates. In fact, it doesn’t support causes or candidates.
So, if you are a teacher who feels forced, coerced or peer-pressured to join or remain a member of the VEA, we urge you to look into VPE.
The only way to ensure the VEA is unsuccessful is to defund it. In several states, alternative teacher organizations affiliated with VPE have more members than those states’ NEA branches.
As long as teachers continue to send dues to the VEA, they will hire the 40-plus lobbyists they send to Richmond every General Assembly session (not to mention allied organizations and educrat establishment), where they undermine school choice efforts, push for higher taxes, and seek to promote abortion and destroy marriage, rather than advocate for better education.
If you are a teacher, we implore you to either demand the VEA cease to advocate for these extreme causes or join an alternative organization. Last week we wrote this about the impending vote to support homosexual marriage at the NEA convention:
Not exactly what most parents expect from teachers. Most expect them to educate their children. Not indoctrinate them. If, in fact, the NEA goes on record supporting this nonsense, we will watch with a very interested eye as to how its Virginia members treat the new FLE marriage curriculum and whether the administration enforces its implementation as the law now says.
As you can see, we’ve already started. We hope all fair minded teachers will do the same.
Dear Ms. Cobb:
I read with interest your recent posting entitled “Information Alert: VEA-NEA says ‘I Do’ to Same Sex Unions.” I hope that it is not your intention to deliberately misrepresent our position on New Business Item E. I would like to offer clarification regarding our true position.
First, New Business Item E, which was passed overwhelmingly by the almost 10,000 delegates at the San Diego Representative Assembly was not about same sex marriage per sé. Indeed, part of the language states unequivocally that the NEA recognizes that the term “marriage” has religious connotations and that same-sex marriages may not be compatible with the beliefs, values, and/or practices of certain religions. Because of its support for the separation of church and state and the right to religious freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, NEA supports the right of religious institutions to refuse to perform or recognize same-sex marriages.
We at the VEA-NEA believe that same-sex couples should have the same legal rights and benefits as similarly-situated heterosexual couples. For us, this is an issue about equal treatment under the law for our NEA colleagues as well as our students who may find themselves in the position of needing such protections.
In short, we consider this to be a human and civil rights issue. The NEA has a long tradition of being the champion for human and civil rights that goes back to supporting equal rights for women, civil rights for African Americans during Jim Crow times, and supporting the desegregation of public schools.
We at the VEA-NEA support certain principles, none of the least of which is that our society is enriched by an appreciation for the diversity of the individuals who make up that society. It is not up to any one of us to pass judgment on another based on his or her race, age, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. Indeed, we believe that our society can only be strengthened by offering respect for the rights of all individuals—even those with whom we may not agree.
The VEA-NEA is an organization that seeks justice for all and is not afraid to take controversial stands on issues of social justice when we believe that it is in the best interest of society as a whole. While we are most respectful of your right to disagree with our positions, I would offer the observation that it would be respectful on your part to at least understand and accurately portray our positions, even when you disagree with them.
Respectfully,
Kitty J. Boitnott, Ph.D., NBCT
President, Virginia Education Association
116 S. 3rd St., Richmond, VA 23219
804-658-5801 (office)
Why do you use the language of the Left? Words have meaning. Call it homosexual marriage. Or Homosexual/lesbian marriage.
Make yourself clear. Don’t cede definitions to the those would would re-define our values out of existence.
JAB -
You know we love it when you drop by. I don’t know where we have a disagreement here. I refer repeatedly to “homosexual marriage” and never use the word “gay” when refering to homosexuals. Maybe you refer to my use of “same-sex,” but I’m not aware that it is a lefty phrase. In fact, I believe it is a quite stark conveyance of the the debasement that it is. Additionally, I frequently put “marriage” in quotation marks to signal the sham that “homosexual marriage” is. I’m sure we are on the same page here, but let me know if I’m wrong.
Steve,
The admin
Well, seems to me that if it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck it is likely a duck. Anyway, just for giggles, let’s imagine that homosexual marriage was to eventually become the law of the land. Our legal system is based on precedent. If you don’t say “NO” to the homosexuals then you cannot reasonably say “NO” to the polygamy and group marriage groups out there, you cannot say NO to those who want incestuous marriage out there, you cannot say NO to those who want marriage of adults to children, and, last but not least, you cannot say NO to those who want to marry their pets and farm animals, etc. (all of whom ARE out there, waiting there turn). And there are also those who want no marriage at all to exist. And what will the NEA and VEA do then? Oh well! My wife and I homeschool our child, using a Christian curriculum. The NEA and VEA are one of several reasons why we do that. Right now, I would not even send my DOG to many of Virginia’s public schools (and somebody might try to marry him if I did, seems to me)!
I can appreciate the fact that the learned president of the VEA-NEA is in favor of equal protection under the law. I’m not sure how one is endangered by not being married. She seems to think we should permit two men to marry, or two women… but then I have to ask, why not three? Do not three homosexuals deserve the same protection under the law as two? If they are sincere, how can we deny them? How can we as a society be so closed minded as to rule out group marriage while we are changing the definition? Or how about a man and a child, or a woman and her dolphin as I saw happened in Israel of few years back?
I’m sure our friends at VEA-NEA would not be in favor of these… or at least I would hope not. So it seems that we all agree that there is a line that should be drawn in defining marriage. The question then becomes where the line should be drawn and who should draw it. Even the fruits, nuts and flakes in California rejected the homosexual marriage, why should we permit these social engineers to impose there vision of utopia on the rest of society when the traditional system, yes the one set out in the Bible, has served us well for years when it was followed. This, then, brings us to the heart of the matter… the rejection of Christian teaching and the natural law that our forefathers embedded into our constitution and government.
Interesting response from the VEA. I think we need to look closely at her term “social justice” – we nned to parse it and re-claim it. In Plato’s Republic, justice was defined along the lines of that which keeps society in equilibrium and whole. Given the spurious nature of most homosexual relations, it’s hard to believe that sanctioning anything like homosexual ‘marriage’ would make society more stable.
The fact remains that we are talking about behavior. Behavior that can and frequently does change. There is no reason for an organization to support homosexual behavior since it has measurable negative attributes. Social Justice would require us to respond by doing everything in our power to limit exposure to homosexual behavior. If you truley love the individual you act in their best interest.
The NEA-VEA speak of proudly defending the person and individual rights of everyone, but are they not the same organizations who suspend students for mentioning GOD in the classroom or wearing a crucifix on school property. And are they not the ones openly supportive of abortion rights and the legalized murder of third trimester children. Are they not the same far left (not liberal)loons who have children arrested for drawing pictures of guns or having aspirin or Tylenol in their possession.
They are not qualified to teach our children but, according to President Obama they are qualified to become supreme court justices.
All human beings are equals. It does not means that the different unions they want to enter into are equal.
This is where NEA is wrong and misguided.
Is a same sex civil union is called marriage, then what shall will call marriage ? There is no end to this
Is a man animal civil union or a 2 women and 1 man civil union want to be called marriage based on the same argument of equality and justice used by Kitty Boitnott then the VEA will have to support it.
Redefining marriage is not the ultimate purpose of the gay activist groups. It is not about equality but feels like superiority. Who give them the right to redefine marriage for the rest of the society.
When the state redefine marriage as gay marriage it will have to live with the consequences. Do not come and complain later.