Author's Note: Warning: this article contains references to sexual behavior that will be offensive to sensitive individuals. Log on to www.cwfa.org for more information about this case.
Dear Bill O’Reilly:
Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Illinois, recently assigned the pornographic book “Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes” to students as young as 14 as a required reading. Somehow they didn’t expect parents to be offended by its graphic sexuality and overt racism. But, of course, they were. And that is why I am proud to report that the school has decided to make the reading “optional” over-riding the gay teacher’s original intentions.
But I hope The Factor will take a look at a few excerpts from the book and consider a segment asking what educational value the book could possibly have. For example, in one scene a man asks another to (f-bomb deleted) him and “make him bleed.” He also asks him to violently (f-bomb deleted) him and “make it hurt.”
Regrettably, there is a scene in the book where a man – in the midst of sodomizing another – notices that his condom has broken. The man being sodomized simply says “Keep it going. Infect me. I don’t care. I don’t care.” It seems clear that these students are learning something from this book. But, Bill, are they learning a good thing? Or is it something that could get them “infected?”
There are numerous scenes in this book that are just too strange to comprehend. For example, a gay man explains that his nose is really just a sex organ. Then he reaches for another man’s pants to demonstrate. It’s tough to understand how such a thing could be viewed as part of a legitimate effort to educate people sexually. It’s also tough to understand how something could be seen as promoting positive health practices.
Bill, I won’t bore (or nauseate) you with many graphic excerpts. Indeed, the 158-word book includes the “f-word” 50 times along with numerous uses of the “n-word” and “c-word.” I’m certain the book is profane enough to offend more than just some fastidious sense of squeamishness. Even the hardest of sensibilities would be offended by the interjection of strong anti-Catholic and racist rhetoric into an already sexually explicit work of violent pornography.
But aside from the more specific anti-Catholic rhetoric like “suck my (d-word deleted), Mother Teresa,” there are other more generalized anti-religious remarks like “God (f-bomb deleted) dammit to hell” and “Jesus (f-bomb deleted) this (GD deleted) thing.”
Perhaps the worst example is found in an exchange wherein a gay man says “I don’t believe in God. I think you should know that before we (f-bomb deleted) again.” After another gay man bites one of his nipples he proclaims “Oh God, Oh God, I believe, I believe.”
I called the Deerfield High School Principal twice. I have been unable to get a return phone call. Had I been given the respect of a response, I would have asked the following questions:
1. What possible educational benefit could come from assigning gay porn to students?
2. Is this literature really likely to promote tolerance of gays?
3. Does it not reinforce negative stereotypes of gays?
4. Do you think the repeated use of racial slurs like the “n-word” between angry gay lovers is good for race relations?
5. Does it not make gays look racist and, hence, intolerant?
6. Is it a good idea to encourage people to continue an act of sodomy after a condom has been broken?
7. Are you at all concerned about linking sex and violence together with such graphic language?
8. Could this possibly encourage rape?
9. What did Mother Teresa do to deserve such hostile and sexist treatment in your school’s assigned literature?
10. Are you Catholic?
Bill, since I have had no luck getting an answer from these people, I hope you would consider asking them on The Factor to explain their promotion of such despicable reading material. Arrogant public servants must be held accountable for their betrayal of the public trust. Not to mention their betrayal of our children.
Fast and Furious: Family of Slain Border Patrol Agent "Baffled" Obama's Executive Privilege Used to Protect Holder's Wife | Katie Pavlich