Our world is changing drastically day by day. What once was unheard of (having an African American president, dating someone of the same sex, surgically changing your anatomy) is now considered apart of life. California especially is no stranger to change. My tactical hypertext focuses on SB 48: The FAIR Act, which uses all social science curriculum, including history books and other instructional materials, to teach children as young as five not only to accept but also to endorse transgenderism, bisexuality, and homosexuality.
Don’t get me wrong, I am a fan of change. I think change is good…but to a certain extent. I don’t view SB 48 as a smart direction of change. Instead, I see it as threat to parents, teachers, and especially children. I have gathered data both for and against SB 48, but have concluded that SB 48 should be revised to keep LGBT studies out of course material in grades K-8 and should not force students to learn the material. My reasons behind my argument are that children in grades K-8 are to young to comprehend this dense material, that this should be a situation controlled by parents, not the government, and that this is ultimately a moral issue.
In my bibliography and works cited, I’ve used two separate sources that both argue for and against SB 48. I did so to show both sides of the argument and to clearly state why I disagree with the argument for SB 48 and why I agree with the arguments made against the Act. I also include sources dealing with child development, the mindset of children in grades K-8, and information on morality to further support my argument that this is an unfair Act.
Literature Review
Our world is changing drastically day by day. What once was unheard of (having an African American president, dating someone of the same sex, surgically changing your anatomy) is now considered apart of life. California especially is no stranger to change. My tactical hypertext focuses on SB 48: The FAIR Act, which uses all social science curriculum, including history books and other instructional materials, to teach children as young as five not only to accept but also to endorse transgenderism, bisexuality, and homosexuality.
Don’t get me wrong, I am a fan of change. I think change is good…but to a certain extent. I don’t view SB 48 as a smart direction of change. Instead, I see it as threat to parents, teachers, and especially children. I have gathered data both for and against SB 48, but have concluded that SB 48 should be revised to keep LGBT studies out of course material in grades K-8 and should not force students to learn the material. My reasons behind my argument are that children in grades K-8 are to young to comprehend this dense material, that this should be a situation controlled by parents, not the government, and that this is ultimately a moral issue.
In my bibliography and works cited, I’ve used two separate sources that both argue for and against SB 48. I did so to show both sides of the argument and to clearly state why I disagree with the argument for SB 48 and why I agree with the arguments made against the Act. I also include sources dealing with child development, the mindset of children in grades K-8, and information on morality to further support my argument that this is an unfair Act.